dberrie2020
Super Member
Jesus was God who became man not a man who became God. Even the Book of Mormon teaches that
Seeing the LDS believe Jesus Christ was the God of the OT--that would be a moot point.
What do Mormons believe?
- Thread starter Aaron32
- Start date
Seeing the LDS believe Jesus Christ was the God of the OT--that would be a moot point.
Janice Bower
Well-known member
All Mormon gods were men who became gods according to your prophet Joseph Smith.
King Follett Sermon
God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by His power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with Him, as one man talks and communes with another.
In order to understand the subject of the dead, for consolation of those who mourn for the loss of their friends, it is necessary we should understand the character and being of God and how He came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see.
These ideas are incomprehensible to some, but they are simple. It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did; and I will show it from the Bible.
I wish I was in a suitable place to tell it, and that I had the trump of an archangel, so that I could tell the story in such a manner that persecution would cease forever. What did Jesus say? (Mark it, Elder Rigdon!) The scriptures inform us that Jesus said, as the Father hath power in himself, even so hath the Son power—to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious—in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. Do you believe it? If you do not believe it you do not believe the Bible. The scriptures say it, and I defy all the learning and wisdom and all the combined powers of earth and hell together to refute it. 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, the same as all gods have done before you, namely, 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. And I want you to know that God, in the last days, while certain individuals are proclaiming His name, is not trifling with you or me.
Last edited:
dberrie2020
Super Member
Jesus Christ was the God of the OT before He became man on this earth. Jesus Christ appeared to have a process whereby He received a fulness of His inheritance:
Hebrews 1:1-9---King James Version
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
That seems to indicate God the Son, as the appointed Heir--inherited all things at some point--which was confirmed by His God.
brotherofJared
Well-known member
Nope. The words become or became are not found in that passage at all. Try again.
Aaron32
Well-known member
If that's true why did he say:Jesus was God who became man not a man who became God. Even the Book of Mormon teaches that
"Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God" (Matt 19:17)?
Could it be in that same light that Mormons are saying all men are essentially gods, or children of God, seeking to return to their Heaven Father?
Theo1689
Well-known member
Are you reading that as Jesus claiming that He WASN'T "good"?
Jesus is here pointing out that He IS God, and in fact, Scripture affirms that He has been God from eternity, prior to the incarnation.
Nope.
First of all, you IGNORE the plethora of passages which teach that ONLY ONE GOD EXISTS.
Secondly, the fact that we are all sinners proves that we are NOT "essentially gods".
Third, "essentially gods" is NOT equivalent with "children of God".
Fourth, the fact that human sinners become "children of God" through ADOPTION (Rom. 8:15, Gal. 4:5, Eph. 1:5) shows that being "children of God" doesn't mean "essentially gods".
Aaron32
Well-known member
No, I'm reading that he didn't acknowledge his goodness came from Himself.
But that's not what it says. He did not acknowledge himself as God, just as a Son of God.
He did nothing of Himself. (John 5:30) He didn't come in His own name, but in the name of His Father. (John 5:44)
And you ignore passages that illustrate other "gods" exist. So what?
If Psalms 82 teaches us anything, it shows "gods" can be good or evil.
Do "gods" create themselves? No.
Well, if "gods" are defined as beings that have the ability to judge and have dominion, (which is how I'm using the term) then I disagree.
"gods" can be children of Heavenly Father or children of the devil. (John 8:44)
The Prophet
Well-known member
Was Jesus GOOD or BAD?
Aaron32
Well-known member
He was good, he just didn't attribute the goodness originating from Himself.
Theo1689
Well-known member
First of all, I remember you commenting VERY recently that you wanted me to stop replying to you. Even though that's not for you to control, it seems that continuing to interact with me is a strange way of trying to get me to stop responding to you.
But whatevs...
That's not what the text says.
Jesus didn't say, "There's none good but one, that is, the Father".
He said, "There's none good but on, that is, God".
And since Jesus IS God...
Wrong again.
He never in that passage doesn't have Jesus calling himself, "Son of God".
And even if it did, being "Son of God" makes Him God.
And none of that denies that Jesus has been God from eternity.
No, I don't.
YOU have continued to IGNORE all the passages which teach only one God exists.
But I've ADDRESSED John 10:34/Ps. 82:6 in detail, REPEATEDLY.
And I've ADDRESSED 1 Cor. 8:5, in detail, REPEATEDLY.
There's only one "Psalm" 82.
Do you say, "Let's turn to HYMNS 37"?
Then you just called Jesus a liar, since He taught God is GOOD, not "evil".
Those who were "evil" in Ps. 82 were NOT "gods", they were only human sinners who wielded the authority of God.
That's why Jesus is uncreated.
AND FYI, only ONE god exists.
Then you are RE-defining the term.
There's your error.
(You're welcome.)
Wrong again.
John 8:44 doesn't call them "gods".
But whatevs...
That's not what the text says.
Jesus didn't say, "There's none good but one, that is, the Father".
He said, "There's none good but on, that is, God".
And since Jesus IS God...
Wrong again.
He never in that passage doesn't have Jesus calling himself, "Son of God".
And even if it did, being "Son of God" makes Him God.
And none of that denies that Jesus has been God from eternity.
No, I don't.
YOU have continued to IGNORE all the passages which teach only one God exists.
But I've ADDRESSED John 10:34/Ps. 82:6 in detail, REPEATEDLY.
And I've ADDRESSED 1 Cor. 8:5, in detail, REPEATEDLY.
There's only one "Psalm" 82.
Do you say, "Let's turn to HYMNS 37"?
Then you just called Jesus a liar, since He taught God is GOOD, not "evil".
Those who were "evil" in Ps. 82 were NOT "gods", they were only human sinners who wielded the authority of God.
That's why Jesus is uncreated.
AND FYI, only ONE god exists.
Then you are RE-defining the term.
There's your error.
(You're welcome.)
Wrong again.
John 8:44 doesn't call them "gods".
Theo1689
Well-known member
Then you make Jesus a liar (once again).
He said "there is none good but one, that is, God"
You're saying, "There are MANY who can be good, they just have to have it originating from God".
But that is NOT what Jesus said.
Aaron32
Well-known member
So, you reply to a response that wasn't directed to you, and then you simply expect me to what...ignore you?
Actually, I'd love to correspond with you, just stop with the personal attacks.
En Hakkore and deberrie showed an excellent example of what the discourse should be like. That's what I want.
Where does Jesus specifically call himself God?
The only clear declaration that I'm aware of is that he is the "Son of God".
Correct. Not in that passage. I'm referring other other passages in general.
But to be "Son of" something, would be there would have to be something he proceeded from...outside Himself.
I'm glad we agree.
Then I'm confused.
No, I haven't. I've clearly stated that the passages in the OT are directed to Israel, and are not universal.
Well, I would have responded to your most recent thread, but you un-invited me because I guess I'm not reasonable or charitable enough, and yet you keep challenging my responses.
Yeah, I'm not referring outside the context of idols, so that's different.
Lol!
Jesus used Ps. 82 to justify calling himself a "Son of God"!
If they weren't actually "gods', then was Jesus using the scripture out of context?
Or was Jesus saying he was just a person who wields the authority of God?
Just as Joseph Smith taught, the spirits of men are uncreated.
I'm just defining it as the Bible defines it.
If the children of Gods aren't gods, what are they? Not really children.
dberrie2020
Super Member
The Biblical writers might agree with you, Theo:
Psalm 82:1-6---English Standard Version
1God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
2 “How long will you judge unjustly
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
they walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
6 I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
dberrie2020
Super Member
The scriptures do testify God the Son did inherit all things from His God, as the Heir--which means He did not possess all things until some point:
Hebrews 1:1-9---King James Version
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
dberrie2020
Super Member
Where I came from--the term "gods" is plural--which means two or more:
Psalm 82:1-6---English Standard Version
1God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
2 “How long will you judge unjustly
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
they walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
6 I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
En Hakkore
Well-known member
As in all religious traditions, beliefs among Mormons fluctuate from member to member as they interpret the myriad of available sources for their personal theologies. With respect to Latter-day Saints, primary sources would include the 'Standard Works' and revelations conveyed by their living prophet. Secondary sources would include books from respected members (Talmage, McConkie, etc.) and various church-sponsored publications, as well as non-written sources such as other members' testimonies. There will inevitably be some things most, if not all, Mormons believe (ie. Joseph Smith was a prophet of God) and areas where there is some fluidity in belief. The above sketch presents a vast trove of resources for Mormon belief, all but the biblical portions of the 'Standard Works' deriving from those who self-identify as Latter-day Saints. As an academic, I would add to the above scholarly works about Mormonism, both by LDS scholars and non-member scholars. Among the latter would be Douglas J. Davies' An Introduction to Mormonism published by Cambridge University Press (2003). He refers to "two pillars" of Mormonism: Joseph Smith's reputed vision and "the plan of salvation", about which he writes:
[it is] a phrase running through LDS belief [that] provides a prime frame within which Mormon theology is best understood, because it gives relatively little priority to any single doctrine. In theological terms the plan of salvation is a kind of doctrine of doctrines. In terms of the study of religion it is the overarching myth that embraces all aspects of belief and of ritual, providing them with their ultimate reference point. (3-4)
Do you consider the above a fair evaluation of what is core to Mormon beliefs (the first vision and the plan of salvation) and the sources noted legitimate?
Kind regards,
Jonathan
dberrie2020
Super Member
That isn't true--Joseph Smith, and the LDS believe Jesus Christ was God before He came to earth as a man.
Aaron32
Well-known member
Yes. I would say that's a fair evaluation.
Theo1689
Well-known member
Exactly the same reason why I respond to your posts. So stop whining when I respond to my posts. And stop whining about not wanting me to respond.
You're the one with the constant personal attacks, Aaron.
So work on your own glass house before you start throwing stones.
Then start behaving like them.
It's not difficult.
(Or maybe for you, it is.)
Irrelevant.
Paul called him God, Peter called him God, Thomas called him God, John called him God, Luke called him God, etc. etc. etc.
Still irrelevant.
Of course you are.
Because you aren't interested in understanding.
Yes, you have.
You haven't "exegeted" the passages at all, you simply made a broad and sweeping and self-serving claim, that is NOT borne out by the context.
I didn't "uninvite" you, so stop pretending to be the victim.
All I did was mention my personal preference that you didn't respond.
I have no control over refusing others to respond to ANY post.
Wrong again.
He used Ps. 82 to condemn the Pharisees.
Ps. 82 is an imprecatory Psalm.
No, of course not.
Ps. 82 was an imprecatory Psalm against the unjust human judges.
And Jesus used it to condemn the Pharisees.
That is not a teaching of Jesus.
No, you're not.
So if an Asian couple adopts a Black baby, the baby "becomes" Asian?!
Sorry, that is NOT how adoption works.
Theo1689
Well-known member
Yes, Mormonism is inherently contradictory.