How do the Mormons do it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Captain_America
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Parker, lets just break this down into specifics. Please answer the following, if you don’t mind:

Do you believe:
  1. That God is not a partial God? Yes or no.
That is a rather poor way to word a question since to answer “yes” or “no” doesn’t make clear what I would be meaning. God is not a partial God–correct.
  1. That God is not a changeable being? Yes or no.
God is not a changeable being–correct.
  1. That God is unchangeable from eternity to all eternity? Yes or no.
From my perspective and yours, yes.
  1. That God is the same yesterday, today and forever? Yes or no.
From my perspective and yours, yes.
  1. That in God there is no variableness, neither shadow of changing? Yes or no.
From my perspective and yours and from the standpoint of faith in and knowledge of Him, yes.
  1. That God was once as we are now? Yes or no.
No, unless you include “the same as Jesus Christ Himself was once as we are now” (which I don’t consider to be a true statement since He was never “as we are now”, other than that He looked and ate like a mortal person but He was perfect and He was God the Son).
Thank you
.

Have a good evening.
 
Calling it “a mystery” does not make it a reasonable thing to believe. It just means that you can’t explain it but have chosen to believe it anyway and try to justify it by giving it a special label.

**

You realize, don’t you, that these are not the only choices?
Why not use my entire quote.
Jesus used a lot of material objects to describe Himself–He said, “I am the Light.” “I am the Door.” “I am the Shepherd.”
But He never said, “That light is Me.” “That door is Me.” “That shepherd is Me.”
However, He did say, “That Bread is Me. That Wine is Me.”
(Thank you Cat)
Of course hosts will look the same and have the same characteristics. It’s called a mystery.
You either believe Christ or you think he is a liar.
Your choice.
And yes those are your choices.

gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=John+6

35Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread [3] the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 Jesus [4] said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.

The Words of Eternal Life
60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. 67 So Jesus said to the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” 68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” 70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” 71 He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.

So, how much do you believe of what Jesus said? 36 verses just here to tell you to eat His flesh and drink His blood or you have no life in you.

Tell me, is he nuts, is he a liar? Or is He God?, and He is telling you the Truth.
 
That is a rather poor way to word a question since to answer “yes” or “no” doesn’t make clear what I would be meaning. God is not a partial God–correct.

God is not a changeable being–correct.

My response: Then explain how God was once man and then became God as LDS believe? That is a pretty big change for not being a changeable being…

No, unless you include “the same as Jesus Christ Himself was once as we are now” (which I don’t consider to be a true statement since He was never “as we are now”, other than that He looked and ate like a mortal person but He was perfect and He was God the Son).

My response: .The little couplet does not say, “As man is, Jesus once was…” I am pretty sure it says “as man is, God once was…” It seems pretty disingenuous to try to change it to Jesus Christ as the LDS Church backs away from old doctrine.

.
 
Hi Parker,

I was wondering if you could clarify something that you wrote. It’s okay if you can’t get to my question right away, since you are likely responding to a few other questions as well.

You wrote that Jesus…“was never “as we are now,” other than that He looked and ate like a mortal person but He was perfect and He was God the Son.”

Catholic teaching is such that we believe that Jesus possesses fully the nature of God and the nature of man, and that He is both true God, and true man.

How does this compare to LDS teaching? From what you wrote, it would seem that LDS teaching is that Jesus was not fully human. Maybe I’m reading that wrong, though.
 
Hi Parker,

I was wondering if you could clarify something that you wrote. It’s okay if you can’t get to my question right away, since you are likely responding to a few other questions as well.

You wrote that Jesus…“was never “as we are now,” other than that He looked and ate like a mortal person but He was perfect and He was God the Son.”

Catholic teaching is such that we believe that Jesus possesses fully the nature of God and the nature of man, and that He is both true God, and true man.

How does this compare to LDS teaching? From what you wrote, it would seem that LDS teaching is that Jesus was not fully human. Maybe I’m reading that wrong, though.
Hi, Denise, good evening,

The words “as we are now” can be taken to mean Jesus was not perfect, since none of us is perfect and we are in the here and now.

If a person clarifies that Jesus was “fully human” by having the potential to sin, then I certainly agree with that when He walked on the earth as Immanuel, God with us. He made choices where He totally and completely disregarded or had any thought of being tempted by any kind of temptation whatsoever. That is not like us–we are tempted just as He was subject to temptation; He was perfect–we aren’t. He also suffered with sicknesses and pains, so that He might “succor” us through His perfect compassion, so He was fully human in that respect also and yet fully God in that He carried the horrible burden not only of humankinds’ sins but of their sicknesses and pains and heartaches also.
 
Hi, Denise, good evening,

The words “as we are now” can be taken to mean Jesus was not perfect, since none of us is perfect and we are in the here and now.

If a person clarifies that Jesus was “fully human” by having the potential to sin, then I certainly agree with that when He walked on the earth as Immanuel, God with us. He made choices where He totally and completely disregarded or had any thought of being tempted by any kind of temptation whatsoever. That is not like us–we are tempted just as He was subject to temptation; He was perfect–we aren’t. He also suffered with sicknesses and pains, so that He might “succor” us through His perfect compassion, so He was fully human in that respect also and yet fully God in that He carried the horrible burden not only of humankinds’ sins but of their sicknesses and pains and heartaches also.
Thanks for the clarification. 🙂 I think I understand now that you were referring to “as we are now” as meaning to have the potential to sin. My understanding of Church teaching (Catholic Church), is that He was and is like us in everything except sin. I think that He was, though, tempted in the desert, by Satan. How much temptation He experienced, according to Catholic teaching, I don’t know.

I could be wrong, but I don’t recall that He suffered with sicknesses and pains, except during His agony in the garden, scourging at the pillar, being crowned with thorns, carrying His Cross, and then suffering the Crucifixion. I think it is Catholic teaching that He chose to fully experience the excruciating pain that went along with the Passion, and this was of course done out of His great love for us.
 
Jesus, in Mormon teaching, is a demigod (though Mormons will never phrase it this way), with wide speculation among its members that Jesus is genetically the son of the God they call Heavenly Father.

From lds.org:

“There was in Palestine a couple, Joseph and Mary. They lived in Nazareth. They had traveled, evidently, from Nazareth to Bethlehem in order to pay a tax that had been decreed by the Roman Emperor. That was the ostensible purpose. She, heavy with child, traveled all that distance on mule-back, guarded and protected as one about to give birth to a half-Deity. No other man in the history of this world of ours has ever had such an ancestry—God the Father on the one hand and Mary the Virgin on the other.”
 
Jesus, in Mormon teaching, is a demigod (though Mormons will never phrase it this way), with wide speculation among its members that Jesus is genetically the son of the God they call Heavenly Father.

From lds.org:

“There was in Palestine a couple, Joseph and Mary. They lived in Nazareth. They had traveled, evidently, from Nazareth to Bethlehem in order to pay a tax that had been decreed by the Roman Emperor. That was the ostensible purpose. She, heavy with child, traveled all that distance on mule-back, guarded and protected as one about to give birth to a half-Deity. No other man in the history of this world of ours has ever had such an ancestry—God the Father on the one hand and Mary the Virgin on the other.”
RJ,

The quote by J Reuben Clark is indeed an interesting quote, no doubt one that you will use for the rest of your life.

But what I would like to understand, is if you think Christ had genes, and DNA, at all–and if so, where those genes came from?
 
RJ,

The quote by J Reuben Clark is indeed an interesting quote, no doubt one that you will use for the rest of your life.

But what I would like to understand, is if you think Christ had genes, and DNA, at all–and if so, where those genes came from?
ParkerD, I have been contemplating the value of responding to your posts, for the mere fact, that you’ve already been taught that God the Father is Spirit, and so, the idea of DNA and genes is irrational.

Jesus Christ was conceived via a miracle. I understand the Mormon propensity to assign scientific explanations to miracles, but that is not how Christians understand miracles.

As long as Mormons deny and obscure their own teachings, you better believe I’m going to use LDS sources to bring clarity.
 
ParkerD, I have been contemplating the value of responding to your posts, for the mere fact, that you’ve already been taught that God the Father is Spirit, and so, the idea of DNA and genes is irrational.

Jesus Christ was conceived via a miracle. I understand the Mormon propensity to assign scientific explanations to miracles, but that is not how Christians understand miracles.
RJ,

So is this saying that Jesus Christ didn’t have genes or DNA?
 
RJ,

So is this saying that Jesus Christ didn’t have genes or DNA?
Think rationally ParkerD. Jesus is fully human and fully divine. Where did He get his human nature from? …Mary.

Jesus is fully divine because HE IS GOD. He didn’t inherit His divine nature through genetics, HE IS divine nature.
 
Think rationally ParkerD. Jesus is fully human and fully divine. Where did He get his human nature from? …Mary.

Jesus is fully divine because HE IS GOD. He didn’t inherit His divine nature through genetics, HE IS divine nature.
RJ,

So are you saying He had no genes, or that He had “half genes” or a half genetic component of His body by “getting his human nature from Mary”?
 
RJ,

So are you saying He had no genes, or that He had “half genes” or a half genetic component of His body by “getting his human nature from Mary”?
Jesus, fully human, fully divine.

DNA from Mary.
 
Jesus, in Mormon teaching, is a demigod (though Mormons will never phrase it this way), with wide speculation among its members that Jesus is genetically the son of the God they call Heavenly Father.

From lds.org:

“There was in Palestine a couple, Joseph and Mary. They lived in Nazareth. They had traveled, evidently, from Nazareth to Bethlehem in order to pay a tax that had been decreed by the Roman Emperor. That was the ostensible purpose. She, heavy with child, traveled all that distance on mule-back, guarded and protected as one about to give birth to a half-Deity. No other man in the history of this world of ours has ever had such an ancestry—God the Father on the one hand and Mary the Virgin on the other.”
So if this particular Mormon teaching says that Jesus is a half-diety, supposedly the son of the Virgin Mary and God the Father, do you know how the Holy Ghost (Holy Spirit) would fit the scenario, according to what Mormonism teaches? If memory serves, Sacred Scripture (NT) says that it was the Holy Ghost who overshadowed Mary, not God the Father.

Are there possibly different teachings in Mormonism regarding this, since Mormonism seems a bit fractioned into various sects?
 
Miriam,

Thanks. So is this saying that there was no male genetic contribution within Jesus’ genes–that all His genes came from His mother?
His human nature was from Mary. That does not mean he was not male. He was perfectly capable of generating his own Y chromosome. He was fully human, he would have the mix of chromosomes he needed.

He is, after all, GOD.
 
That is a rather poor way to word a question since to answer “yes” or “no” doesn’t make clear what I would be meaning.

God is not a partial God–correct.

God is not a changeable being–correct.

From my perspective and yours, yes.

From my perspective and yours, yes.

From my perspective and yours and from the standpoint of faith in and knowledge of Him, yes.

No, unless you include “the same as Jesus Christ Himself was once as we are now” (which I don’t consider to be a true statement since He was never “as we are now”, other than that He looked and ate like a mortal person but He was perfect and He was God the Son).

Have a good evening.
If someone would have asked me these questions, the first 5 would be answered “yes”, with no equivocation or explanation. The 6th would have been answered “no”, again with no equivocation or explanation.

Truth is not dependent upon one’s perspective. Does God’s existence depend upon our perspective? Does he not exist if we take the atheist’s perspective? No, he exists regardless of their perspective. The same is true of the questions I asked, which, as you know, are based upon the BoM and the King Follett Discourse, both of which you are obligated to believe even though they are contradictory statements made by the same man who claims to be a prophet.

God is either unchangeable from eternity to all eternity or he is not. God is either the same yesterday, today and forever or he is not. And God was either once a man as we are now, or he was not. Those questions cannot be answered with “well it depends on how you look at it”. They are either true or they are not and certainly do not depend upon one’s perspective in order to be truthfully answered.

In my opinion, Mormon theology is a theology of confusion requiring, in many cases, a complete suspense of the gift of human reason which is replaced instead by feelings which are given first place in priority in determining truth. This discussion is a prime example of this. I find it an extraordinary psychological phenomenon, actually.

God bless.
 
So, how much do you believe of what Jesus said? 36 verses just here to tell you to eat His flesh and drink His blood or you have no life in you.
Thirty-six verses from a book of myths and legends. Do you really think this is proof of anything? The Mormons have their book of myths and legends too - which they believe just as sincerely as you believe yours. Are their beliefs true just because they are written in a book?
Tell me, is he nuts, is he a liar? Or is He God?, and He is telling you the Truth.
I suppose it’s possible that he was any or all of the above. Most likely, however, he was none of the above. It’s much more likely that he was a mythical character.
 
Thirty-six verses from a book of myths and legends. Do you really think this is proof of anything? The Mormons have their book of myths and legends too - which they believe just as sincerely as you believe yours. Are their beliefs true just because they are written in a book?

**

I suppose it’s possible that he was any or all of the above. Most likely, however, he was none of the above. It’s much more likely that he was a mythical character.
Well as an agnostic you don’t believe. That’s fine. It’s a shame that you are missing out on something so beautiful.

We may or may not meet after death.
 
Miriam,

Thanks. So is this saying that there was no male genetic contribution within Jesus’ genes–that all His genes came from His mother?
How would you expect us to know this Parker? And why, specifically, is it important to you? What is it you’re trying to understand or get at?

The technical term for what Catholics believe about the human/divine nature of Jesus is called the hypostatic union and was defined by the first Council of Ephesus. There’s a lot of information on this site about the council and Christ’s human/divine nature. But I don’t think you’re going to find within that information a discussion or conjecture on Christ’s DNA.

When you have a question about Catholicism here’s a tip - when you go to www.catholic.com instead of clicking on the Forum link, click on the Faith link at the top of the page. Look at the top left for the Quick Search box and type in your question. You’ll find a huge wealth of knowledge on this site - much of which has the imprimatur of the Church. When you see that at the bottom of an article you know it’s not just someone’s opinion or guess or what they think, it’s sanctioned church teaching. Give it try with your questions about Jesus’s human nature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top