God's only son

[ronald_g_w]

Hi, Ronald, good to “see” you.

I ran a search on “sons of God” in the OT, And came up with this interesting passage. What is the LDS take on it? (emphasis mine.)

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Gen 6:1-5 (KJV)

Our take:

The Haydock commentary on the Douay-Rheims Bible (the DR is the Catholic translation, made at about the same time as the King James) says:

2 “The sons of God”… The descendants of Seth and Enos are here called sons of God from their religion and piety: whereas the ungodly race of Cain, who by their carnal affections lay grovelling upon the earth, are called the children of men. The unhappy consequence of the former marrying with the latter, ought to be a warning to Christians…

This commentary says the “sons of God” in Job 38:7 are the Angels.

I look forward to your answer.

God bless you,

Ruthie

RUTHIE

3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

WHAT YOU THINK ?

 

[Ruthie]

3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

I can see how you would think it means “he, like Me, is flesh.”

But the phrase “for that he also” is translated from *one *word in Hebrew, which has more than one meaning: “also, moreover, yea” (NASB Greek-Hebrew Dictionary, H1571) Other translations don’t use “also.” The RSV says “for he is flesh…”

Here’s Young’s Literal Translation:
“And Jehovah saith, `My Spirit doth not strive in man—to the age; in their erring they are flesh:’ and his days have been an hundred and twenty years.”

Over to you!

God bless you,

Ruthie

 

[ronald_g_w]

I can see how you would think it means “he, like Me, is flesh.”

But the phrase “for that he also” is translated from *one *word in Hebrew, which has more than one meaning: “also, moreover, yea” (NASB Greek-Hebrew Dictionary, H1571) Other translations don’t use “also.” The RSV says “for he is flesh…”

Here’s Young’s Literal Translation:
“And Jehovah saith, `My Spirit doth not strive in man—to the age; in their erring they are flesh:’ and his days have been an hundred and twenty years.”

Over to you!

God bless you,

Ruthie

Ruthie
Thanks for your thoughts and comments will mul them over
I have some more for you
We understand & believe that it is clear that Jesus had a premortal existance!
John 1:1-5 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…”
John 16:28-33 "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father… "
John 17:4-5 “…O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.”
In 1 Peter 1:18-20 “…Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, …” we see that Jesus was foreordained before the foundation of the world, we also read in Ps 89:27 Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth and in Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. ( Firstborn ? of who or what?) In Col 1:15 we read “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” (Creature ?)
Now I want to bring back Job 38:7 “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” I know that you say that sons = angles, but I beg to differ and say that they are sons in the preexistance with Jesus. Having said this I want to look at Prov.8:22-31 Jesus is stating that he was from everlasting - the begining - before the earth was, now lets look at V 30 “Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;” God looks on Jesus as a delight as any father would on a son who honnored him ? Then we come to V 31 “Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth;(who’s earth?) and my delights were with the sons of men.” From this I read that Jesus is in the preexistance with the sons of men and not angles as you have put it. Acts 17:28 “For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring” Jesus being the Firstborn.

 

[ronald_g_w]

Hi Ruthie
Would the following statement be correct?

At the conclusion of her last physical embodiment, Mary experienced a bodily Ascension without passing through the change called death. In the Catholic Church Pope Pius XII proclaimed this fact as a dogma of faith, calling it the Assumption of Mary into Heaven.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hi Ruthie
Would the following statement be correct?

No, it is incorrect and inaccurate.

At the conclusion of her last physical embodiment,

This implies that Mary had previous ‘physical embodiments’ and that she existed as a spirit/soul being before being encapsulated in physical flesh. That is wrong. First, we don’t believe in reincarnation. Second, Mary - as well as all other human persons - was created at the moment of her conception. At that moment, her soul and body were created together.

Mary experienced a bodily Ascension

Mary didn’t experience an ascension. Mary was assumed - body and soul - at the end of her earthly life.

without passing through the change called death.

Whether she died or not is not part of the dogma of the Assumption. The Church is silent on this point.

In the Catholic Church Pope Pius XII proclaimed this fact as a dogma of faith, calling it the Assumption of Mary into Heaven.

This at least is correct.

 

[ronald_g_w]

No, it is incorrect and inaccurate.

This implies that Mary had previous ‘physical embodiments’ and that she existed as a spirit/soul being before being encapsulated in physical flesh. That is wrong. First, we don’t believe in reincarnation. Second, Mary - as well as all other human persons - was created at the moment of her conception. At that moment, her soul and body were created together.

Mary didn’t experience an ascension. Mary was assumed - body and soul - at the end of her earthly life.

Whether she died or not is not part of the dogma of the Assumption. The Church is silent on this point.

This at least is correct.

Mary was assumed - body and soul - at the end of her earthly life.

I am not understanding what u mean by assumed.

adopted in order to deceive; fictitious; pretended; feigned: an assumed name; an assumed air of humility; taken for granted; supposed:

Is it accepted that Mary’s physical body ascended to heaven

 

[JMJ_coder]

I am not understanding what u mean by assumed.

Is it accepted that Mary’s physical body ascended to heaven

To ascend means you go by your own power, to be assumed means to be taken by someone else’s power.

Jesus ascended into Heaven, Mary was assumed (by the power of God).

 

[ronald_g_w]

To ascend means you go by your own power, to be assumed means to be taken by someone else’s power.

Jesus ascended into Heaven, Mary was assumed (by the power of God).