Another Mormon Question - Jesus as Savior?

[MelanieAnne]

Hi Allweather & LittleDeb ~

From this last post, it is apparent that Zerinus is not truly capable of responding to you, not necessarily because he is incapable, but because the theology he believes in is insufficient to allow him to give a reasoned reply.

Let us, in charity, “let him off the hook” for now and pray for him to have greater discernment. Surely these exchanges, if they have touched his intelligence at all, have kicked up some questions there. Let those questions roll around for awhile. Giving up Mormonism is a very big deal, you don’t just give up your religion, you give up an entire lifestyle and many, if not most, of your friends, regardless of what their official policy is, that is how it actually works. I’ve also personally witnessed this among my friends. Wrestling with these issues is hard. So if Zerinus seems defensive, that may be why.

And while we are praying, we can also thank God that ours is a religion that actually makes sense, that doesn’t have to hide its history or doctrine, and is a religion that we share with some of the greatest minds in human history. We are so lucky to be able to be in that group, let us pray for those who are struggling.

 

[Phil12123]

This is trash. This kind of trash will get you nowhere. Your question was how do we account for the Isaiah passages affirming the existence of one true God, and I explained it to you. Now you are trying to shift your ground to something else.

Fine, let’s go back to the Isaiah passages. Each one of them is spoken by, or quoting, “the LORD,” as in Is. 45:5: “I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me…” In the KJV when the divine name (YHWH or Yahweh or Jehovah) is mentioned, it is in all caps, as “LORD.” Now, according to Mormon theology, LORD or Jehovah is JESUS, so it is JESUS saying, “there is none else, there is no God beside me,” NOT the Father.

See Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, p. 392:
s185.photobucket.com/albums/x291/Phil12123/?action=view&current=McConkie–p392.jpg

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

We believe that the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct and separate personages. We believe that the Father is the one Supreme Being Whom we, the gods, and the angels in heaven worship. He is the God whom Jesus worships; and He is the God whom Jesus commanded us to worship—as per the scriptural references already given. This is what is taught in LDS scripture:

So what you have in Isaiah is the distinct and separate personage known as Jehovah or Jesus saying HE is the only God and there is no God (not “god” but “God”) beside HIM. He isn’t worshipping the Father or any other “God” because there IS NO OTHER GOD! Explain that with honest "scriptural reasoning, analysis, and exegesis."

 

[Allweather]

Hi Allweather & LittleDeb ~

From this last post, it is apparent that Zerinus is not truly capable of responding to you, not necessarily because he is incapable, but because the theology he believes in is insufficient to allow him to give a reasoned reply.

I agree, he is incapable of doing what he said he was fully capable of doing. This is how he put it:

"“I believe that my theological position is biblical; and I believe that I am can defend that position convincingly through scriptural reasoning, analysis, and exegesis.”" Zerinus

I’m with you, Melanie. I will pray for Zerinus beginning today. I’m sure there’s a reason he can’t stay away from CA. It couldn’t possibly be because he expects to harvest converts here. So it must be because he is being drawn to the Catholic faith. I will hope for the best for him.

 

[Paul_G]

Oh, and btw, while you’re looking for that ONE verse in the Book of Mormon that shows a plurality of gods, you might also consider the following verses there, and do some honest exegesis of them:

Alma 11:
26 And Zeezrom said unto him: Thou sayest there is a true and living God?
27 And Amulek said: Yea, there is a true and living God.
28 Now Zeezrom said: Is there more than one God?
29 And he answered, No.
30 Now Zeezrom said unto him again: How knowest thou these things?
31 And he said: An angel hath made them known unto me.
44 Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but every thing shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil.

Ether 2:
7 And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people.
8 And he had sworn in his wrath unto the brother of Jared, that whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fullness of his wrath should come upon them.

When one interprets the Book of Mormon as to the nature of the Godhead with their own definitions they may well claim that it looks much like what you are suggesting. However the Book of Mormon, takes much the same position of the 1st century writers who claim that is but one true God, and one Lord Jesus Christ, for example “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” (1 Cor. 8:4–6.) Like Amulek, Paul declared that there is only one God—the Father. But he also testified of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the position of the 1st century Christian writers it is also the position taken in the Book of Mormon

Paul

 

[MelanieAnne]

When one interprets the Book of Mormon as to the nature of the Godhead with their own definitions they may well claim that it looks much like what you are suggesting. However the Book of Mormon, takes much the same position of the 1st century writers who claim that is but one true God, and one Lord Jesus Christ, for example “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” (1 Cor. 8:4–6.) Like Amulek, Paul declared that there is only one God—the Father. But he also testified of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the position of the 1st century Christian writers it is also the position taken in the Book of Mormon

Paul

From what we have heard so far from other Mormons, the Mormon belief is that Jesus is a Demi-God ~ the product of a Human (Mary) mating with God (as you would say, Heavenly Father). As such, Jesus is not God, but something less. Are you saying that you dispute this? Because others have given us this information as “Mormon Doctrine”.

If you do dispute it, please provide a complete explanation. Thank you.

 

[Paul_G]

From what we have heard so far from other Mormons, the Mormon belief is that Jesus is a Demi-God ~ the product of a Human (Mary) mating with God (as you would say, Heavenly Father). As such, Jesus is not God, but something less. Are you saying that you dispute this? Because others have given us this information as “Mormon Doctrine”.

If you do dispute it, please provide a complete explanation. Thank you.

“Demi-God” interesting perspective, I haven’t heard this description yet. How does this fit with the discussion at hand of Alma 11?

Paul

 

[zerinus]

Fine, let’s go back to the Isaiah passages. Each one of them is spoken by, or quoting, “the LORD,” as in Is. 45:5: “I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me…” In the KJV when the divine name (YHWH or Yahweh or Jehovah) is mentioned, it is in all caps, as “LORD.” Now, according to Mormon theology, LORD or Jehovah is JESUS, so it is JESUS saying, “there is none else, there is no God beside me,” NOT the Father.

See Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, p. 392:

So what you have in Isaiah is the distinct and separate personage known as Jehovah or Jesus saying HE is the only God and there is no God (not “god” but “God”) beside HIM. He isn’t worshipping the Father or any other “God” because there IS NO OTHER GOD! Explain that with honest “scriptural reasoning, analysis, and exegesis.”

Isaiah’s writings are poetic. They are pure poetry, and intensely so. In poetry, much poetic license is used such as hyperbole, allegory and symbolism, as well as a highly emotive style of language that one would not normally use when one wishes to express oneself in accurate prose. Jehovah was the God of the Hebrews. He was the God whom the Hebrews knew, who spoke to them through their prophets. He was the God who talked to Moses, appeared to them on Mt Sinai, led them out of captivity to the Promised Land, and addressed them through their prophets. The prophecies of Isaiah that we are considering are simply designed to impress on the Israelites, through a highly charged, emotive, poetic style of language, that the idols which they were so prone to worship throughout their history are nothing, and that Jehovah is the only God they need to worry about. The context of all the passages that I had referenced makes that clear. No further theological significance need be attached to these passages.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

When one interprets the Book of Mormon as to the nature of the Godhead with their own definitions they may well claim that it looks much like what you are suggesting. However the Book of Mormon, takes much the same position of the 1st century writers who claim that is but one true God, and one Lord Jesus Christ, for example “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” (1 Cor. 8:4–6.) Like Amulek, Paul declared that there is only one God—the Father. But he also testified of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the position of the 1st century Christian writers it is also the position taken in the Book of Mormon

Paul

Paul, I agree that interpretations are what lead to error.

How do Mormons cope with the fact that the Hebrews and Christians are in agreement as to the unity of God? Where, in the Mormon view, did the Hebrews and Christians start getting it wrong?

 

[Paul_G]

Fine, let’s go back to the Isaiah passages. Each one of them is spoken by, or quoting, “the LORD,” as in Is. 45:5: “I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me…” In the KJV when the divine name (YHWH or Yahweh or Jehovah) is mentioned, it is in all caps, as “LORD.” Now, according to Mormon theology, LORD or Jehovah is JESUS, so it is JESUS saying, “there is none else, there is no God beside me,” NOT the Father.

See Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, p. 392:
s185.photobucket.com/albums/x291/Phil12123/?action=view&current=McConkie–p392.jpg

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x291/Phil12123/McConkie--p392.jpg

So what you have in Isaiah is the distinct and separate personage known as Jehovah or Jesus saying HE is the only God and there is no God (not “god” but “God”) beside HIM. He isn’t worshipping the Father or any other “God” because there IS NO OTHER GOD! Explain that with honest “scriptural reasoning, analysis, and exegesis.”

Taken in context, this scripture teaches covenant Israel that Jehovah (Jesus Christ) is sovereign as far as eternal salvation is concerned. No other being exists by whom Israel or the rest of the world can gain salvation.

The key issue here is Israel’s recurrent temptation to worship false gods. Moses and other prophets of ancient Israel had declared to the people that Jehovah was the only true and living god. In that day, however, as in other periods of history, each region had its local deities, and it was customary to honor each one with idols, shrines, and rites. The Israelites often succumbed to the temptation to participate in these rites—to their own spiritual harm and to their detriment as a covenant people.

Isaiah 44 and 45 make it clear that it is both foolish and wrong for Israel to “set up the wood of [a] graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save.” (Isa. 45:20.) Such a god could neither protect them physically nor bless and redeem them spiritually. Only Jehovah could and can do that. The only God for Israel is Jehovah. Israel is his peculiar people; they belong to him by covenant and have a special mission. To fulfill that mission, the children of Israel, then and now, need to worship the God of Israel with all their hearts, minds, and strength. ( Matt. 22:37.)

The God of Israel is Jehovah. He speaks for and by the power of the Father. With the Holy Ghost, these two divine beings constitute the Godhead—the only true object of worship for mankind. “Our Godhead consists of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,”

Paul

 

[MelanieAnne]

“Demi-God” interesting perspective, I haven’t heard this description yet. How does this fit with the discussion at hand of Alma 11?

Paul

I am Catholic, so Alma is not scripture to me. But half God/half Human is a generic explanation for Demi-God, and has been referenced within this thread. Perhaps you would like to read the entire thread?

Since you are quoting scripture that is acknowledged by you, but not by any Catholic on this, a Catholic forum, perhaps you might want to quote Biblical Scripture to support any belief you have. Unless you cannot support your views any other way. In which case, I believe the argument of Zerinus falls without substance.

 

[Phil12123]

When one interprets the Book of Mormon as to the nature of the Godhead with their own definitions they may well claim that it looks much like what you are suggesting. However the Book of Mormon, takes much the same position of the 1st century writers who claim that is but one true God, and one Lord Jesus Christ, for example “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” (1 Cor. 8:4–6.) Like Amulek, Paul declared that there is only one God—the Father. But he also testified of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the position of the 1st century Christian writers it is also the position taken in the Book of Mormon

**When Joseph Smith, Jr. first concocted the Book of Mormon, he had more or less orthodox views of God, that is, that there is only ONE God and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constituted that One God. There are some verses that he wrote that teach the Son IS the Father, or that the Son is the Father and the Son. So his early views of God included God’s Oneness to the extreme, with almost no distinction of Persons in the Godhead. But at least there was only ONE God.

It was not until shortly before his death in 1844, a dozen years after the Book of Mormon was written, that his view of God changed to include a plurality of Gods and the idea that God was once a man who progressed to become God and that worthy Mormons can repeat that process and become gods themselves over other earths whose inhabitants would worship those exalted Mormons as gods.

The whole thing is so contrary to the Bible and any 1st century writers that there can really be no comparison.**

 

[Paul_G]

Paul, I agree that interpretations are what lead to error.

How do Mormons cope with the fact that the Hebrews and Christians are in agreement as to the unity of God? Where, in the Mormon view, did the Hebrews and Christians start getting it wrong?

I am wondering if it is not a forced agreement. Yes indeed the Hebrews claimed but one God, who LDS profess to be Jesus who is under the authority and spoke for his Father and his God (Jesus’ words). What I see is that the form and nature of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost in an attempt to conform to the Hebraic model have been changed by an act of intellectual redefinition of the Godhead. Some how having one God with 3 personalities conforms to being monotheistic, but does it really, I wonder.

Paul

 

[Phil12123]

Taken in context, this scripture teaches covenant Israel that Jehovah (Jesus Christ) is sovereign as far as eternal salvation is concerned. No other being exists by whom Israel or the rest of the world can gain salvation.

The key issue here is Israel’s recurrent temptation to worship false gods. Moses and other prophets of ancient Israel had declared to the people that Jehovah was the only true and living god. In that day, however, as in other periods of history, each region had its local deities, and it was customary to honor each one with idols, shrines, and rites. The Israelites often succumbed to the temptation to participate in these rites—to their own spiritual harm and to their detriment as a covenant people.

Isaiah 44 and 45 make it clear that it is both foolish and wrong for Israel to “set up the wood of [a] graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save.” (Isa. 45:20.) Such a god could neither protect them physically nor bless and redeem them spiritually. Only Jehovah could and can do that. The only God for Israel is Jehovah. Israel is his peculiar people; they belong to him by covenant and have a special mission. To fulfill that mission, the children of Israel, then and now, need to worship the God of Israel with all their hearts, minds, and strength. ( Matt. 22:37.)

The God of Israel is Jehovah. He speaks for and by the power of the Father. With the Holy Ghost, these two divine beings constitute the Godhead—the only true object of worship for mankind. “Our Godhead consists of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,”

Are you saying the God of Israel is Jehovah (Jesus) but the God of everyone else is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? I am trying to follow you here and I’m not sure that I do. When Mormonism makes three separate gods of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, what you say sounds like only the Son (Jesus or Jehovah) is the God of Israel. So, who are the other two the Gods of, if they’re separate and Isaiah excludes them?

 

[MelanieAnne]

I’m trying to make sense of this too. Mormon missionaries, who were presumably trained in the faith, told me that Jesus = Jehovah of the Old Testament. Hence, I would think from that, according to Mormon Doctrine Jesus = The God of this World.

Or not. Because they WORSHIP “Heavenly Father”, which is someone else.

I even heard Mormon missionaries musing (now, I know this is not doctrine, OK?) as to whether, once they were the “Gods” of their own “worlds” whether or not they would be called upon to be sacrificed in the same way as Jesus was. They said that they wouldn’t really want to be crucified, but…

So, which is it? Is it God, the Heavenly Father? or Jesus (sometimes and sometimes not described as a Demi-God) that is worshiped? And who the heck IS the God of Earth?

Am I the only one that is getting confused here?

 

[Paul_G]

I am Catholic, so Alma is not scripture to me. But half God/half Human is a generic explanation for Demi-God, and has been referenced within this thread. Perhaps you would like to read the entire thread?

Yes, I know what the term means, I have not heard of LDS using that term in reference to our Saviour

Since you are quoting scripture that is acknowledged by you, but not by any Catholic on this, a Catholic forum, perhaps you might want to quote Biblical Scripture to support any belief you have. Unless you cannot support your views any other way. In which case, I believe the argument of Zerinus falls without substance.

The Book of Mormon is indeed not Catholic approved, however it was referenced by a Catholic poster to support his own argument I quote “…the Book of Mormon that shows a plurality of gods, you might also consider the following verses there, and do some honest exegesis of them:…”. If you examine my post you will see that I cited the writings of Paul.

Since we have not dialogued in any great amount you may not be aware that I do not call on the Book of Mormon to support my thoughts as a rule, The New Testament is sufficient enough.

Paul

 

[Phil12123]

I’m trying to make sense of this too. Mormon missionaries, who were presumably trained in the faith, told me that Jesus = Jehovah of the Old Testament. Hence, I would think from that, according to Mormon Doctrine Jesus = The God of this World.

Or not. Because they WORSHIP “Heavenly Father”, which is someone else.

I even heard Mormon missionaries musing (now, I know this is not doctrine, OK?) as to whether, once they were the “Gods” of their own “worlds” whether or not they would be called upon to be sacrificed in the same way as Jesus was. They said that they wouldn’t really want to be crucified, but…

So, which is it? Is it God, the Heavenly Father? or Jesus (sometimes and sometimes not described as a Demi-God) that is worshiped? And who the heck IS the God of Earth?

Am I the only one that is getting confused here?

**No, I’m sure you’re not the only one confused by Mormon theology. Ordinarily, the Mormon missionaries never get into becoming gods, etc. They like to hook their converts with other more benign things such as Family Home Evening, etc. Becoming gods is just not in the training manual for them (that’s my guess, anyway).

When you challenge them on WHO is the God of this earth, they may say “Heavenly Father” but then that leaves Jesus/Jehovah and the Holy Ghost out looking for another earth to have as theirs, I guess. It is all confusing and we know that God is not the author of confusion. The enemy is.
**

 

[Phil12123]

The Book of Mormon is indeed not Catholic approved, however it was referenced by a Catholic poster to support his own argument I quote “…the Book of Mormon that shows a plurality of gods, you might also consider the following verses there, and do some honest exegesis of them:…”. If you examine my post you will see that I cited the writings of Paul.

Well, we know that the Book of Mormon does NOT show a plurality of gods. It is strictly monotheistic. The plurality came a dozen or more years later.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Yes, I know what the term means, I have not heard of LDS using that term in reference to our Saviour

The Book of Mormon is indeed not Catholic approved, however it was referenced by a Catholic poster to support his own argument I quote “…the Book of Mormon that shows a plurality of gods, you might also consider the following verses there, and do some honest exegesis of them:…”. If you examine my post you will see that I cited the writings of Paul.

Since we have not dialogued in any great amount you may not be aware that I do not call on the Book of Mormon to support my thoughts as a rule, The New Testament is sufficient enough.

Paul

It would be a mistake to believe I was answering you unless I have quoted you.

Having said that ~

Demi-God was mentioned within this thread, not necessarily by a Mormon, but someone who challenged one. My suggestion to you would be, no matter how tempting it might be to respond right away, to read the entire thread before doing so. (Just a friendly suggestion!)

I post in response to specific threads and/or portions thereof.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Well, we know that the Book of Mormon does NOT show a plurality of gods. It is strictly monotheistic. The plurality came a dozen or more years later.

If you are counting ALL the posters to this thread then, NO, we don’t ALL KNOW THAT.

Some of us DO know that there is no plurality of Gods. SOME of us know that God is One.

And we know this DESPITE the Book of Mormon, which, in any event, we do not view as “scripture”, but instead see as an invention by Joseph Smith. (With all due respect to Mormons.)

 

[LittleDeb]

I suppose if you had been a member of the LDS Chruch for 34 years and hadn’t know what is in the first page of the Book of Mormon, then I shouldn’t expect anything better than that from you.

zerinus

You have me confused with someone else. I have been Catholic for all 36 of my 36 years of life. I have just grown up and lived around many LDS for 33 of those years. I knew that was on the first page of the BoM. Please see my post #11. But now it is official. I put my request in writing and yet an LDS still won’t answer!

Please be more respectful. It appears rude when that is your reply to an honest question.