Jesus from LDS point of view

[RebeccaJ]

The missionaries that stopped by this summer said that Jesus is God.

And then I think one of them said that Jesus is A God.

I didn’t get to read the whole thread, but it doesn’t seem like this is the case for the LDS on here.

What IS the teaching on Jesus from the POV of LDS?

God, A God, or not?

A God.

 

[ffg]

Thank you.

 

[Tarquin]

My church;s doctrine is, using your words, “solid and unchanging”. What individual members or General Authorities may say when they give talks MAY vary with some part of the doctrine and that is their view of the doctrine they are speaking about (or they do not understand basic teachings) That does not change the doctrine.

Then how on earth does anyone know doctrine, if the primary speakers for church doctrine “do not understand basic teachings”!? I suppose all one is left to rely on is one’s own subjective feelings - what doctrines sound appealing to you personally, which ones seem exciting and get the adrenaline flowing, which ones are so alien to your customs that just hearing them makes you feel a bit nauseous, which ones remind you of the comfort of home and hearth, a nice warm cuddly feeling, and which ones remind you of painful events from your past. Crumbly pillars. God should have provided something more reliable. Listen, “What individual members or General Authorities may . . . vary . . . or they do not understand basic teachings.” - Why even have “General Authorities” including “Prophets,” then, since you have made them equally fallible, equally unauthoritative, as “individual members.”

Maybe they understand the basic teachings just fine. Maybe the ones that don’t understand are those who defend them when they teach false doctrines.

President Wilford Woodruff declared, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray." Is that statement of Wilford Woodruff true or false? Is David Whitmer’s testimony regarding what Joseph Smith said after the failure of one of Smith’s prophecies true or not true: “Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil….”

 

[JMM1957]

Then how on earth does anyone know doctrine, if the primary speakers for church doctrine “do not understand basic teachings”!? I suppose all one is left to rely on is one’s own subjective feelings - what doctrines sound appealing to you personally, which ones seem exciting and get the adrenaline flowing, which ones are so alien to your customs that just hearing them makes you feel a bit nauseous, which ones remind you of the comfort of home and hearth, a nice warm cuddly feeling, and which ones remind you of painful events from your past. Crumbly pillars. God should have provided something more reliable. Listen, "What individual members or General Authorities may . . . vary . . . or they do not understand basic teachings." - Why even have “General Authorities” including “Prophets,” then, since you have made them equally fallible, equally unauthoritative, as “individual members.”

Maybe they understand the basic teachings just fine. Maybe the ones that don’t understand are those who defend them when they teach false doctrines.

President Wilford Woodruff declared, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray." Is that statement of Wilford Woodruff true or false? Is David Whitmer’s testimony regarding what Joseph Smith said after the failure of one of Smith’s prophecies true or not true: “Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil….”

If one spends any amount of time reading about the early days of the Mormon church, of which there is much well documented information, you will immediately see that the days of Joseph Smith and the Three Witnesses were full of controversy. The Three Witnesses were eventually all excommunicated from the LDS church, due mainly to disputes either with Joseph Smith and/or doctrinal issues. In later years some of them even questioned what they saw as the Witnesses to the golden plates/Book of Mormon. Way too much chaos and confusion going on in an organization supposedly trying to “restore” the Gospel.

 

[CourtingTex]

Then how on earth does anyone know doctrine, if the primary speakers for church doctrine “do not understand basic teachings”!? I suppose all one is left to rely on is one’s own subjective feelings - what doctrines sound appealing to you personally, which ones seem exciting and get the adrenaline flowing, which ones are so alien to your customs that just hearing them makes you feel a bit nauseous, which ones remind you of the comfort of home and hearth, a nice warm cuddly feeling, and which ones remind you of painful events from your past. Crumbly pillars. God should have provided something more reliable. Listen, "What individual members or General Authorities may . . . vary . . . or they do not understand basic teachings." - Why even have “General Authorities” including “Prophets,” then, since you have made them equally fallible, equally unauthoritative, as “individual members.”

Maybe they understand the basic teachings just fine. Maybe the ones that don’t understand are those who defend them when they teach false doctrines.

President Wilford Woodruff declared, “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray." Is that statement of Wilford Woodruff true or false? Is David Whitmer’s testimony regarding what Joseph Smith said after the failure of one of Smith’s prophecies true or not true: “Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil….”

The Lord will not allow his authorized servants, the Presidents of the Church, to lead the church astray… He is the head of the church so that these men who serve as President are always with in mind, what the Lord would have done in behalf of his church and gospel.

I have a conviction of that and nothing on the forums will not change that conviction through the Holy Ghost.

 

[JMM1957]

The Lord will not allow his authorized servants, the Presidents of the Church, to lead the church astray… He is the head of the church so that these men who serve as President are always with in mind, what the Lord would have done in behalf of his church and gospel.

I have a conviction of that and nothing on the forums will not change that conviction through the Holy Ghost.

This sounds so Catholic.

 

[CourtingTex]

This sounds so Catholic.

If you are referring to Pope Francis/others, I am happy that reality is similar with Catholicism.

 

[JMM1957]

If you are referring to Pope Francis/others, I am happy that reality is similar with Catholicism.

The problem though, is that there are many other churches out there today that make the same claim about being led by the Holy Spirit to understand the truth of the Gospel, and as Catholics, we know that they all cannot be led by the same Spirit of Truth, because their teachings and doctrines are not in harmony with each other. There can only be one true church, God is not a God of confusion. Jesus promised that His Church would never be overcome by Satan, meaning that the true Church would be in continuous existence from the time of the Apostles. The LDS use the teachings of mortal man to make the Word of God void. You simply cannot put aside the words of Jesus in Matthew 16:18, and replace them with the contradictory words of a mortal man, and build a restored church on them.

 

[CourtingTex]

The problem though, is that there are many other churches out there today that make the same claim about being led by the Holy Spirit to understand the truth of the Gospel, and as Catholics, we know that they all cannot be led by the same Spirit of Truth, because their teachings and doctrines are not in harmony with each other. There can only be one true church, God is not a God of confusion. Jesus promised that His Church would never be overcome by Satan, meaning that the true Church would be in continuous existence from the time of the Apostles. The LDS use the teachings of mortal man to make the Word of God void. You simply cannot put aside the words of Jesus in Matthew 16:18, and replace them with the contradictory words of a mortal man, and build a restored church on them.

Your view is totally wrong. We are not a Protestant church. We are the restored church, where the continuing revelation (meaning heaven is not closed from receiving the will of the Lord). Your words of “a mortal man” makes it clear to me you know nothing about how the Lord calls his servants to fulfill duties in his church ----- these men did not choose themselves to hold his holy priesthood (generally how it works among every priest, bishop, archbishop, cardinal, to Pope Francis himself) The Apostles called by Jesus Christ did not call themselves and so it is with Brethren in my church today.

Regarding the true church, I have had a conviction that it is my church since I left Catholicism years ago.

 

[JMM1957]

Your view is totally wrong. We are not a Protestant church. We are the restored church, where the continuing revelation (meaning heaven is not closed from receiving the will of the Lord). Your words of “a mortal man” makes it clear to me you know nothing about how the Lord calls his servants to fulfill duties in his church ----- these men did not choose themselves to hold his holy priesthood (generally how it works among every priest, bishop, archbishop, cardinal, to Pope Francis himself) The Apostles called by Jesus Christ did not call themselves and so it is with Brethren in my church today.

Regarding the true church, I have had a conviction that it is my church since I left Catholicism years ago.

I realize you are not Protestant, it doesn’t matter though. As a church of the Restoration movement, you still need to deal with Matthew 16:18, which you refuse to do. Trying to find other Bible verses to supersede Matthew 16:18 will not work, God cannot contradict Himself. Matthew 16:18 can only be understood one way, Satan will not overcome Christ’s true Church, ever. The LDS teach that it was overcome… a contradiction.

 

[CourtingTex]

I realize you are not Protestant, it doesn’t matter though. As a church of the Restoration movement, you still need to deal with Matthew 16:18, which you refuse to do. Trying to find other Bible verses to supersede Matthew 16:18 will not work, God cannot contradict Himself. Matthew 16:18 can only be understood one way, Satan will not overcome Christ true Church, ever. The LDS teach that it was overcome… a contradiction.

This talk about the Restoration movement ----- we are the Restored church, emphasis on the word The. If others are part of this movement that you speak of, fine for them.

Obviously you can group us with these groups. I lose no sleep over folks such as yourself who are driven to dismiss or discredit my church. The Lord spoke of folks like you, warning folks like me to watch out for those whose only purpose is to stop the work of the God through his restored church, trying to stop his authorized servants so nothing you or others say to dismiss our efforts will stop the work of God.That is my conviction.

When I have answered Matthew 16:18, you were not pleased with my reply because it does not validate Catholicism’ view of who you profess to be. Your arrogance because you are the Catholic church does not work on me at all, further convincing me why I left years ago.

You can say a host of other things to try to show me otherwise, etc ---- you are wasting your time. Catholicism and your doctrine and me will not be on the same page again.

 

[JMM1957]

Your view is totally wrong. We are not a Protestant church. We are the restored church, where the continuing revelation (meaning heaven is not closed from receiving the will of the Lord).** Your words of “a mortal man” makes it clear to me you know nothing about how the Lord calls his servants to fulfill duties in his church ----- these men did not choose themselves to hold his holy priesthood (generally how it works among every priest, bishop, archbishop, cardinal, to Pope Francis himself) The Apostles called by Jesus Christ did not call themselves and so it is with Brethren in my church today.**

Regarding the true church, I have had a conviction that it is my church since I left Catholicism years ago.

And neither do servants of the CC call themselves, that is why we say it is “a calling”.

 

[JMM1957]

This talk about the Restoration movement ----- we are the Restored church, emphasis on the word The. If others are part of this movement that you speak of, fine for them.

Obviously you can group us with these groups. I lose no sleep over folks such as yourself who are driven to dismiss or discredit my church. The Lord spoke of folks like you, warning folks like me to watch out for those whose only purpose is to stop the work of the God through his restored church, trying to stop his authorized servants so nothing you or others say to dismiss our efforts will stop the work of God.That is my conviction.

When I have answered Matthew 16:18, you were not pleased with my reply because it does not validate Catholicism’ view of who you profess to be. Your arrogance because you are the Catholic church does not work on me at all, further convincing me why I left years ago.

You can say a host of other things to try to show me otherwise, etc ---- you are wasting your time. Catholicism and your doctrine and me will not be on the same page again.

Just to save me time looking back in all the posts for your response, if you gave one, kindly tell me again what that verse means to you?

 

[CourtingTex]

And neither do servants of the CC call themselves, that is why we say it is “a calling”.

Appreciate the correction.

Bishops, Sunday School teachers, Relief Society presidents and all the local wards jobs are callings in our church (folks serve for a period of time and then are released to be called to do something else)

 

[JMM1957]

This talk about the Restoration movement ----- we are the Restored church, emphasis on the word The. If others are part of this movement that you speak of, fine for them.

Obviously you can group us with these groups. I lose no sleep over folks such as yourself who are driven to dismiss or discredit my church. The Lord spoke of folks like you, warning folks like me to watch out for those whose only purpose is to stop the work of the God through his restored church, trying to stop his authorized servants so nothing you or others say to dismiss our efforts will stop the work of God.That is my conviction.

When I have answered Matthew 16:18, you were not pleased with my reply because it does not validate Catholicism’ view of who you profess to be. Your arrogance because you are the Catholic church does not work on me at all, further convincing me why I left years ago.

You can say a host of other things to try to show me otherwise, etc ---- you are wasting your time. Catholicism and your doctrine and me will not be on the same page again.

Sorry, duplicate post

 

[JMM1957]

Just to save me time looking back in all the posts for your response, if you gave one, kindly tell me again what that verse means to you?

Just to give you a hint, you need to research what “the gates of hell” meant during the time of Jesus, what is the connection between that definition and how it relates to what Jesus said about the future of the true Church.

 

[Horton]

Just to give you a hint, you need to research what “the gates of hell” meant during the time of Jesus, what is the connection between that definition and how it relates to what Jesus said about the future of the true Church.

Since this question has been played out in another thread I’d like to get back to the original question. How do the LDS explain the contradiction of how a never married Jesus Christ is exalted to the highest level of LDS heaven but to be exalted to that level all men must be married?

Please note it is the contradiction I want explained, not a debate on whether Jesus was married or not.

 

[Tarquin]

First of all, I am not a paid spokesperson for the church who can answer or refer to official sources about your question. I believe in Jesus and know he is the son of God. I do not believe that Jesus was ever married and my understanding of the scriptures and what the ancient prophets, again the scriptures and what the modern prophets have said which is nothing about Jesus being married.

Again, you may not believe Jesus was married, but several of your early prophets seem to have. It may not be official doctrine today, or ever, I don’t know, but it clearly was taught by some leaders at one time in the earlier days of your church.

Regarding this issue — as I said if some members believe this matter about Jesus being married ---- that is their choice. That is not the doctrine of the church.

I am amazed at the denial that Jesus was married. It has been a while, but when I was listening to various missionary lessons, and listening carefully in various classes, and talking with Mormons at work and at school, it was perfectly clear that at that time Mormons believed that Jesus was married to at least three women. Now it’s like Mormons never heard of such a thing and think it’s heresy and blasphemy. What incredible mutability the Mormon Church has. I agree with Marie5890 that Mormons seem to take a “cafeteria” approach to doctrine.

 

[Tarquin]

If individual members, whether General Authorities or not, in General Conference in April or October or other opportunities to speak, DOES NOT mean what they say is doctrine and is to be accepted is not how I come to understanding of doctrine by the Holy Ghost. The church is clear on how one can come to a knowledge of what the church professes.

Again, I fail to see the need of General Authorities if they give undoctrinal teachings, and if true doctrine is discernible through the Holy Ghost independently of what General Authorities say.

If individual members, whether General Authorities or not, in General Conference in April or October or other opportunities to speak, DOES NOT mean what they say is doctrine and is to be accepted is not how I come to understanding of doctrine by the Holy Ghost. The church is clear on how one can come to a knowledge of what the church professes…

Jesus Christ was the son of God, the only prefect being ever. Your view about exaltation and Jesus ---- who are you or I, I submit, to decide about Christ. My priority is following Christ every day and modeling my life.

Who are “you or I” to decide about Christ? You answered the question in your previous post – we are justified in deciding about Christ by virtue of being told by the Holy Ghost, since we cannot rely on the General Authorities because, as you said earlier, the fact that they say something is no indication of whether it is doctrine (true) or not.

 

[CourtingTex]

I am amazed at the denial that Jesus was married. It has been a while, but when I was listening to various missionary lessons, and listening carefully in various classes, and talking with Mormons at work and at school, it was perfectly clear that at that time Mormons believed that Jesus was married to at least three women. Now it’s like Mormons never heard of such a thing and think it’s heresy and blasphemy. What incredible mutability the Mormon Church has. I agree with Marie5890 that Mormons seem to take a “cafeteria” approach to doctrine.

Speaking for myself only (I recommend making contact with church headquarters for a church response) that if individual believe this notation that Jesus was married — those individual members believe such. If those have a “cafeteria” approach, that those folks only.

It is not the view of the doctrine of the church