Learning to become a god

organgrinder

Well-known member
Ralf asked a question on the missionaries telling the truth thread as to whether the famous Snow couplet said “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become” was a reference to learning how to become a god. He actually accused Bonnie who posted the quote of saying something Ralf said she said. I then posted the following from the teaching of Joseph Smith, prophet, seer and revelator president of the LDS church:

“Here, then, is eternal life—to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God,... by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power” (Teachings: Joseph Smith, 221).

Now my questions are:

1. Is this still being taught?

2. Where is the training manual(s) on this?

3. Has Ralf, BOJ, Dberrie or any other Mormon on here pursued this learning how to become gods?
 
Ralf asked a question on the missionaries telling the truth thread as to whether the famous Snow couplet said “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become” was a reference to learning how to become a god. He actually accused Bonnie who posted the quote of saying something Ralf said she said. I then posted the following from the teaching of Joseph Smith, prophet, seer and revelator president of the LDS church:

“Here, then, is eternal life—to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God,...
Why would any human want to be a king to God?
 
As for a manual, I recommend Search These Commandments, c. 1984.

"Be careful in presenting this material that you don't bring God down to man's level. Our objective is to perfect ourselves and raise our level to his exalted place."

Search These Commandments, c. 1984, p. 158

I also recommend Gospel Principles, Chapter 47 (available online)

"Latter-day Saints see all people as children of God in a full and complete sense; they consider every person divine in origin, nature, and potential. Each has an eternal core and is “a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents.”1 Each possesses seeds of divinity and must choose whether to live in harmony or tension with that divinity. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people may “progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny.”2 Just as a child can develop the attributes of his or her parents over time, the divine nature that humans inherit can be developed to become like their Heavenly Father’s.
"The desire to nurture the divinity in His children is one of God’s attributes that most inspires, motivates, and humbles members of the Church. God’s loving parentage and guidance can help each willing, obedient child of God receive of His fulness and of His glory. This knowledge transforms the way Latter-day Saints see their fellow human beings. The teaching that men and women have the potential to be exalted to a state of godliness clearly expands beyond what is understood by most contemporary Christian churches and expresses for the Latter-day Saints a yearning rooted in the Bible to live as God lives, to love as He loves, and to prepare for all that our loving Father in Heaven wishes for His children."

I don't see a date for the above paragraphs, but they seem to be steering away from proclaiming potential godhood. Will they go so far as to abandon the teachings of Joseph Smith?
 
Last edited:
I don't see a date for the above paragraphs, but they seem to be steering away from proclaiming potential godhood. Will they go so far as to abandon the teachings of Joseph Smith?
Why would they be abandoned? From the very essay you linked:

"Each possesses seeds of divinity and must choose whether to live in harmony or tension with that divinity. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people may 'progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny' (quoted from The Family: A Proclamation to the World)."
 
Yes.

Janice already linked the essay "Becoming like God" from the LDS website.


The scriptures.


Anyone who has chosen to follow the Savior's example and His Gospel are on that pursuit.
Where is Christ’s gospel does it say you have to be married and become exalted to live with God?
 
Why would they be abandoned? From the very essay you linked:

"Each possesses seeds of divinity and must choose whether to live in harmony or tension with that divinity. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people may 'progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny' (quoted from The Family: A Proclamation to the World)."
So... specifically what is the "how to"? What have you personally been taught on this.
 
Where is Christ’s gospel does it say you have to be married and become exalted to live with God?
This seems to be a tangential topic. However, D&C 132 covers the marriage question...and exaltation IS living with God (Philippians 2:9, 1 Peter 5:6).

Yes, I know you do not accept latter-day scripture...so try Matthew 19:4-8, 18:18. If you bring up Matthew 22:30, I'll be disappointed...since He is talking about "in the Resurrection". His millennial reign must occur before that time.
 
This seems to be a tangential topic. However, D&C 132 covers the marriage question...and exaltation IS living with God (Philippians 2:9, 1 Peter 5:6).

Where in D and C 132 did God give Smith leave to marry other men's wives, while they were still married to their first husbands?

Philippians 2:9 is about Jesus Christ and how God exalted Him after His Resurrection:

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

Is God going to give US the "name that is above every name" and have all in heaven and in earth bow down before us???

Here is the 1 Peter verse, in context:

5 In the same way, you who are younger, submit yourselves to your elders. All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because,

“God opposes the proud
but shows favor to the humble.”[a]
6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. 7 Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you.

This has nothing to do with being exalted to gods in the highest level of the CK after death.
Yes, I know you do not accept latter-day scripture...so try Matthew 19:4-8, 18:18. If you bring up Matthew 22:30, I'll be disappointed...since He is talking about "in the Resurrection". His millennial reign must occur before that time.
Matthew 19:4-8 has nothing to do with exaltation, but is about how God created us male and female.

Hate to disappoint you, but I am an amillennialist--the 1000 year reign in Revelation is symbolic of a long, complete period of time, since it is a multiple of 10, which is a number denoting completeness. The entire passage it is in is symbolic. We are in it, now. But that is for another board. I do explain it here:


But yes, in the Resurrection from the dead, there will be no marriage. That doesn't mean we won't know our spouses in heaven, but our relationship will have changed.

There are not three levels of heaven or three levels of the kingdom of Heaven. Those who are in Christ Jesus when He comes again will go to the kingdom--one--that God has prepared for us. As it says in Matthew 25--"34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world."

ONE kingdom--not three. Bye.
 
Last edited:
So... specifically what is the "how to"? What have you personally been taught on this.
Have you not read your Bible? ?

Try being humble (Matthew 18:3-4, 23:12), baptized (Matthew 3:15, Mark 16:16, John 3:5), suffer with Christ (Romans 8:17, 1 Peter 4:13), or have charity (Matthew 19:21, Colossians 3:14).

However, I suggest you simply following these teachings (Luke 10:25-28, John 14:15).
 
Have you not read your Bible? ?

Try being humble (Matthew 18:3-4, 23:12), baptized (Matthew 3:15, Mark 16:16, John 3:5), suffer with Christ (Romans 8:17, 1 Peter 4:13), or have charity (Matthew 19:21, Colossians 3:14).

However, I suggest you simply following these teachings (Luke 10:25-28, John 14:15).
Where are building temples in which to perform occultic ceremonies, in order for the participants to keep a temple recommend for the rest of their lives, so they can be exalted to godhood mentioned in these verses?

But how do we obtain eternal life in heaven with Jesus Christ? By grace through faith in HIM. CF John 3:16, Eph. 2:8-9, Rom. 6:23, et. al.
 
This seems to be a tangential topic. However, D&C 132 covers the marriage question...and exaltation IS living with God (Philippians 2:9, 1 Peter 5:6).

Yes, I know you do not accept latter-day scripture...so try Matthew 19:4-8, 18:18. If you bring up Matthew 22:30, I'll be disappointed...since He is talking about "in the Resurrection". His millennial reign must occur before that time.
Matt 22:30..... 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
Is this not speaking of the pre tribulation resurrection that happens just prior to the rapture of the Church?

There is a second resurrection which happens later on...after the thousand year reign of Christ. Rev 20:11-15
 
Have you not read your Bible? ?

Try being humble (Matthew 18:3-4, 23:12), baptized (Matthew 3:15, Mark 16:16, John 3:5), suffer with Christ (Romans 8:17, 1 Peter 4:13), or have charity (Matthew 19:21, Colossians 3:14).

However, I suggest you simply following these teachings (Luke 10:25-28, John 14:15).
I do read my Bible, and nowhere does it say we are to learn how to become gods, nor does it say so in the passages you submitted..
 
This seems to be a tangential topic. However, D&C 132 covers the marriage question
That’s not the Bible. I asked where in Christ’s gospel does it say you have to be married and exalted to live with God.

...and exaltation IS living with God
In mormonism, exaltation means becoming a God.

(Philippians 2:9,
That’s about Christ being exalted by God, not you.

1 Peter 5:6).
Being lifted up is not the same thing.

Yes, I know you do not accept latter-day scripture...so try Matthew 19:4-8,
So Adam and Eve were married. God instituted marriage on earth. Says nothing about being a requirement for living with God. And says nothing about becoming a God.

Says nothing about marriage and becoming a God being necessary to live with God.

If you bring up Matthew 22:30, I'll be disappointed...since He is talking about "in the Resurrection". His millennial reign must occur before that time.
So? Nothing in God’s word, the Bible, backs up the mormon doctrine.
 
@Gordon Do you have a biblical verse or translation for "Seeds of divinIty" that agree with Isaiah 43:10? The Bible never refers to created beings as "Gods/gods in embryo."

Isaiah 43:10
10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.

Psalm 90
2Before the mountains were born
or You brought forth the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting
You are God.

Please tell us why Mormons prefer Joseph Smith's lies to God's words in the Bible. WHY?
 
Hello, Gordon.... Welcome to CARM.
It's gotten stale in this forum, and it's nice to see some fresh fish.

Anyone who has chosen to follow the Savior's example and His Gospel are on that pursuit.

That's completely false, of course.
There are millions of Christians (and billions, if you go back in time) who "follow the Savior's example and His gospel", who are NOT "on that pursuit" of "learning to become gods".

First of all, most of us have no DESIRE to "become gods".

Secondly, the Savior (I'm assuing you mean Jesus, right?) never gave us the "example" of "learning to become gods". And this a huge contradiction in Mormonism.

Jesus is not "a man who learned to become a god" (as per the Lorenzo Snow couplet).

Jesus is GOD, who became man:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [...] 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Phil. 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

So if anything, Jesus "learned to be a man", not "example" of "learning to become gods".

You cannot "learn" to become a "god".
"God" is not some "occupation" that you to to college to learn.

It's simpliy someone's nature.

You don't "learn" to "become god".
You don't "learn" to "become a horse".
You don't "learn" to "become a butterfly".

And to borrow from your own condescension, I'll be disappointed if you to 2 Pet. 1, since it doesn't help your case:

2Pet. 1:4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.

This isn't saying that we each get our own "divine natures", but simply that we partake in God's nature. It's still His nature, not ours. He is still God, we're not.
 
Why would they be abandoned? From the very essay you linked:

"Each possesses seeds of divinity and must choose whether to live in harmony or tension with that divinity. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people may 'progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny' (quoted from The Family: A Proclamation to the World)."

Well, I'm sorry to have to tell you, but we do NOT hve "seeds of divinity", and don't have any "divine destiny".

We are not gods, we are humans.
We are CREATIONS of God, not "children" of God.

We are the pots to the clay potter.
We are not the potter's "sons".
God CREATED Adam and Eve.
He didn't "beget" Adam and Eve.

God has only one (innate, natural) "Son of God", and that is Jesus. And even Jesus wasn't "born" from God, (or from Heavenly Mother's womb), Jesus has existed eternally, just as the Father has.

The rest of us, ONLY if we become Christians, BECOME "sons" of God, and that by ADOPTION, not by "nature":

Rom. 8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
Gal. 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Eph. 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

And notice in Rom. 8:15 that Christians recieve adoption, and we, along with Jesus, cry, "Abba, Father" to God the Father. It is God the Father who adopts us, not Jesus.
 
This seems to be a tangential topic. However, D&C 132 covers the marriage question...and exaltation IS living with God (Philippians 2:9, 1 Peter 5:6).

Hello again, Gordon... I have found in my 30+ years studying Mormonism that Joseph Smith was basically a "negative barometer" for Biblical truth. It's almost like he went out of his way to be the exact OPPOSITE of Christianity.

And he messed up regarding marriage in SO many ways.

Your first error here is in not realizing that Phil. 2:9 isn't a general teaching about mankind, it is SPECIFICALLY referring to Jesus. Jesus ORIGINATED as God, and the whole point Paul was making was that Jesus voluntarily left his station as God, and "condescended" to become a man, a servant, dying a humiliating death on the cross. Paul's point is that Jesus, who was by nature God, suffered the ULTIMATE humility by becoming a man, and we are to follow His example of humility.

And so Jesus here did not "progress" to become God, He ALREADY WAS God, and the Father merely restored Him to the status he had originally (contrary to the Lorenzo Snow quote).

1 Pet. 5:6, however, is about the exaltation of sinners, so at least you got one thing right:

1Pet. 5:6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you,

But this says nothing about "marriage" being some sort of "requirement" for exaltation. And the form is idea for that, if that was what Peter had meant. He could have written something like:

1Pet. 5:6 Get married, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you,

But Peter never wrote that.
And we have to wonder why.

Further, while marriage is recognized as a "good" thing (it is how we obey God by replenishing the Earth), it is not regarded as the "ideal" situation. Marriage was given as a CONSOLATION for those who did not have the willpower to state chaste:

1Cor. 7:1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

Note also that the call for "each man should have his OWN wife, and each woman her OWN husband" is one of the many prohibitions of what Mormons call, "plural marriage".

1Cor. 7:6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.
1Cor. 7:8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is
better to marry than to burn with passion.

1 Cor. 7:38 So then he who marries his betrothed does well, and he who refrains from marriage will do even better.

Now, Mormons believe in "marriage for time and eternity". But that simply demonstrates that Mormons are ignorant of the Bible, as the Bible plainly teaches that marriage ENDS at death:

Rom. 7:1 Or do you not know, brothers —for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
1Cor. 7:39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

So since marriage ends at death, "marriage for eternity" doesn't exist. And that's why widows (and widowers) and remarry, since their first marriage ended by the death of their spouse. But if someone marries while their current spouse is still alive, that makes them an adulterer.

Yes, I know you do not accept latter-day scripture...so try Matthew 19:4-8, 18:18.

Yes, Matt. 19:4-8 is a good passage about marriage, but it doesn't each "eternal marriage". Marriage ends at death, and it is a sin to terminate it prior to that. As for 18:18, are you serious?!

Matt. 18:18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

First of all, there's no reason to ASSUME that this is about "marriage", and there's nothing in the verse to assume that it teaches anything about marriage being "eternal". If you had bothered to read the passage, the CONTEXT is about approaching a brother about a sin, and confronting with him, even to the point of excommunicaiton if he refuse to repent.

If you bring up Matthew 22:30, I'll be disappointed...since He is talking about "in the Resurrection". His millennial reign must occur before that time.

I'm not sure what your point is, here, and nobody cares if you choose to feel "disappointed".

Matt. 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

We've already established that marriage ends at death, so this is simply confirming that there remains no further oppotunity for "being married" in heaven.

So "marriage for eternity" is false and anti-Biblical.
And "plural marriage" is false and anti-Biblical.

And the other thing Mormonism gets wrong is making boys "deacons" at 12-14, and making them "elders" at 18.

Biblically, both those offices require the person to be (1) married, (2) have children, (3) own a home (to be able to show hospitality):

Titus 1:5 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— 6 if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. 7 For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, 8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined.

1 Tim. 3:12 Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. 13 For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
 
Where in D and C 132 did God give Smith leave to marry other men's wives, while they were still married to their first husbands?

D&C 132 is a piece of work.
The intro refers to "eternal lives", which really rubs me the wrong way.

But basically, as I read it, it seems to be saying that God can give men plural wives, and if that's the case, it's not adultery. It's only adultery if God didn't give you your plural wives.

It also says that God gave Hagar to Abraham as his "wife" (not his concubine), and so it was a blessed union. And of course, this completely misses the point of the story, since God promised that Abraham would see his seed, and Abraham lost faith, which is why Sarai gave him Hagar to have children through. And of course the children of the promise (Isaac and his progeny) were blessed, while Hagar's children were not, as they represented the results of not trusting God.

Hate to disappoint you, but I am an amillennialist--the 1000 year reign in Revelation is symbolic of a long, complete period of time, since it is a multiple of 10, which is a number denoting completeness. The entire passage it is in is symbolic. We are in it, now. But that is for another board. I do explain it here:

Yeah... I figured out a while back that numbers in the Bible were very rarely literal. So we're supposed to believe that the reign is exactly 1000 years, and not 999 or 1001? Same with "a day is as a thousand years"? God's sense of time exactly matches our measure of length of time our Earth goes around our Sun? And the most obvious is forgiving someone 70x7 times (with 7 also being a number for perfection). I think most people understand that we still have to forgive, even at time 491 and 492.
 
Have you not read your Bible? ?

Insults and condescension do not befit someone who claims the name of Christ.

You may be ignorant of the fact that we have fewer Scriptures than you, and so we have more time to read the Scriptures we do have. You have more to read, and so you don't have the time to read the Bible to the depth that we do. And it shows, since the Bible refutes Mormonism on just about every page.

Try being humble (Matthew 18:3-4, 23:12), baptized (Matthew 3:15, Mark 16:16, John 3:5), suffer with Christ (Romans 8:17, 1 Peter 4:13), or have charity (Matthew 19:21, Colossians 3:14).

So this is almost like some sort of "checklist":

To be exalted, one must:
[_] be humble (how humble?)
[_] be baptized;
[_] suffer with Christ (how much?)
[_] have charity (how much?)

These seem to be INCREDIBLY vague requirements.
But let's talk about them...

Humility:

Do you want to understand what humbled me? At one point I realized how great and immense God was, and how holy He is. Combined with how great a sinner I am, and how much grace God gave me to save me despite my sins, that was INCREDIBLY humbling.

Contrast that with the idea that God is merely an "exalted man", who used to be like I am, and that I can one day become a god like him, that's not "humbling", that's food for PRIDE.

Baptism:

True Christians recognize that baptism is a command of God, and that's why we are baptized. But we also recognize that baptism doesn't contribute to our "salvation" or "exaltation". We get baptized because we love and obey our Lord, not because doing so will contribute to our "exaltation".

Regarding your proof-texts, they are quite pathetic, and demonstrate your ignorance of the Bible. Matt. 3:15 is not about us being baptized, it's about Christ needing to be baptized "to fulfill all righteousness". We are saved because of CHRIST'S righteousness, not because of our own.

John 3:5 isn't even about "baptism". Your first clue would be in the fact that the word, "baptism" is nowhere found in the entire account between Jesus and Nicodemus. Jesus was teaching Nic about the need to be "born again", and Nic was confusing spiritual birth with physical birth, and "born of water" refers to physical birth, referring to the amniotic sac breaking during labour ("my water broke!"):
John 3:4 ... his mother’s womb ...
John 3:5 ... born of water ...
John 3:6 ... born of the flesh ...

And I've done a great deal of study on Mark 16 as well. And aside from the fact that Mark 16:9-20 is a later addition, and not original to Mark, even if you accept it as Scripture, it does NOT teach that water baptism is "required for salvation". Translating the verse into a logic "truth table", the only combination the verse does NOT address is, "believe but not baptized", and that is the key combination which would prove whether baptized is "required" for salvation or not.

Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Notice that it NOWHERE says, "whoever is not baptized willi be condemned".

However, I suggest you simply following these teachings (Luke 10:25-28,

I'm glad you brought that up, because I was going to bring it up myself, since it's something I ask of all Mormons:

Luke 10:25 ... what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”​
27 And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God
with all your heart and
with all your soul and
with all your strength and
with all your mind, and
your neighbor as yourself.”

So do you think you've obeyed this commandment, Gordon?
Have you loved God with ALL ALL ALL of your heart?
Have you loved Him with ALL your soul?
With ALL your strength?
With ALL your mind?

I have great difficulty believing that.
But perhaps you can explain it to us.

And another question is that the BIBLE teaches that we are to love God with all our heart/soul/mind/strength.

But Mormonism teaches that we are to love God with all our heart/might/mind/strength (D&C 4:2)

So why did Mormonism remove "love God with all your soul", and replace it with, "love God with all your might"? Especially since "might" and "strength" are synonyms?

John 14:15).

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep ("τηρήσατε") my commandments. (KJV)
John 14:15 “If you love me, you will keep ("τηρήσετε") my commandments. (ESV)

There are three textual variants for the term, "keep" here:
τηρήσετε (future indicative, "you will keep")
τηρήσατε (aorist imperative, "keep!")
τηρήσhτε (aorist subjunctive (cf. John 15:10), "you should keep")

Now, since you're a Mormon, let's assume you believe the KJV rendering is the true rendering:

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. (KJV)​

I've never understood how LDS understand this verse, since none of them will tell me. First of all, it doesn't say anything about being "saved", it's about "loving" Christ. Mormons seem to think it says something like "If you want to be saved, you need to keep my commandments". But that is NOT what it says.

At face value, it says that if one (already) loves Christ, that love will express itself by your keeping of the commandments. It's like a chorus that Christians sing:

"They will know we are Christians by our love, by our love;
They will know we are Christians by our love."​

That's why I believe the ESV is the more correct rendering:

John 14:15 “If you love (present) me, you will keep (future) my commandments. (ESV)​

If you presently love Christ, that love will express itself by keeping the commands going forward, into the future.
 
Back
Top