LDS beliefs about Jesus Christ?

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

The context uses the word “glory”, which to most people familiar with the Bible would be a word having to do with the next life, not this one. He also was writing specifically about the resurrection, which means that which will happen after we die and after the spirit world.

A wish of peace to all.

I do not think that to most people familiar with the Bible the use of the word “Glory” inherently refers to the afterlife. However, most people familiar with language know that Celestial means heavenly and terrestrial means Earthly (as in extraterrestrial meaning from beyond Earth). Glory as used hear seems to mean degree of brightness, brilliance, prominence.

You do not affirm this passage means what you say because it is what it reads in context, for that interpretation is not inherent in it. You cannot conclude it reading the passage in context, or by associating it with any of paul’s other writings. In fact, to afffirm that you must ignore some of Paul’s other writings and the words of Jesus.

You affirm it because have been taught this passage as evidence of Joseph Smith’s teachings on this matter your whole life. Yet Joseph Smith’s teachings are neither based on this passage, nor included in its context. It requires modification and selective recitation to apply it to the LDS doctrine of three degrees of Eternal Glory.

Consider:
1 Corinthians 15:35-57

Paul Introduces the Question-How do the Dead Rise, and What Will Their Bodies be Like?:
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?

Death is but Transition -mortal state compared to seed, immortal to full-grown plant:
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.

Different Creatures have Different Kinds of Bodies:
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.

Heavenly Creations have Different Bodies from Earthly Creations:
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the GLORY of the celestial is one, and the GLORY of the terrestrial is another.

Different Heavenly Objects Differ Amongst Each Other–some creations are greater, or more glorified than others:
41 There is one GLORY of the sun, and another GLORY of the moon, and another GLORY of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in GLORY.

Returns to Seed Analogy in v. 36-38, and applies various adjectives to mortal and immortal state:
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in GLORY: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Compares State of men as created and as redeemed (note that verse 46 clearly rules out a spiritual existence before mortality):
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

Jesus is that Second Spiritual State of Man, the New Adam:
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

As Our Terrestrial Bodies Carry the Traits of Adam (Flesh and Blood, Corruptibility, Mortality) Our Resurreected Celestial Bodies will Carry the Traits of Christ:
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Resursive Inclusion to Clarify that in the Day of Judgment Some Will be Spared Death, but they Still Must Change:
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Back to Main Topic, Conclusion of the Answer to the Question posed in v. 35
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Answer: The Change comes through Christ Alone, and the resurrection will make us like him.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

I assume you have asked a question, and if not it should have been a question.

“World to come” would mean the spirit world where there is still learning going on preparatory to our resurrection. After our resurrection, there will still be learning going on also, as Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught.

So the “advantage” has to do with a readiness for learning and a readiness for gaining greater faith, which means the person “arrives” sooner on the “ladder” of knowledge to additional wisdom and insight and faith–but since others “arrive” later, there will still be the oneness of all having “arrived” once they attain exaltation if they have been worthy of that through covenant keeping and through the Savior’s atoning grace.

There is also the “advantage” of being able to help in the Father’s work through teaching others, so it is not the kind of self-centered process that your statement or question seemed to imply.

Perhaps I should refresh your memory on the reference:

Doctrine & Covenants 130
18Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.
19And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.

It specifies this as the state after the resurrection. It specifies that it refers to individuals, not groups (Celestial, Terrestrial, telestial). In fact as I recall what I was taught in the MTC among other places, in LDS interpretation “this life” means the whole second estate, which includes the spirit world between death and resurrection. If that is something else that has changed in the last five years, it is still valid for this passage, bescause the passage defines itself that way.

Mormonism presents a competitive eternity, where some are better advantaged for progress than others. Isn’t that part of the idea of having multiple wives? More prolific eternal increase? Those inheriting the Terrestrial kingdom are those specifically lacking in diligence or will to compete, as they may even be fully endowed and compliant Mormons, but have not been valiant. Isn’t that still LDS doctrine?

 

[Tony888]

I think the point of her phrasing is to not acknowledge a uniquely LDS source as valid scripture, even as disregards your shamelessly subjective, biased, and incomplete exegesis.

Peter J
If you are going to be insulting, please support your insults

• what is wrong with referencing LDS doctrine on an LDS topic?
• how was my referencing metaphor and independent bible commentary ’shamelessly subjective, biased, and incomplete exegesis’?

 

[Peter_John]

Peter J
If you are going to be insulting, please support your insults

• what is wrong with referencing LDS doctrine on an LDS topic?
• how was my referencing metaphor and independent bible commentary ’shamelessly subjective, biased, and incomplete exegesis’?

:slapfight:
You are cherry picking your sources, interpretations, and methods to suit a foregone conclusion. For example affirming that the Revelation regarding Kolob is only a metaphor is inconsistent with how it has been interpreted and applied for more than 170 years.

See my understanding was that having your own planet was a metaphor for having you own Solar Sytem, or having your own Galaxy, or maybe even your own universe someday.

If you believe that this use was only intended as a metaphor I must again must ask how long you have been LDS?

 

[Tony888]

:slapfight:
You are cherry picking your sources, interpretations, and methods to suit a foregone conclusion. For example affirming that the Revelation regarding Kolob is only a metaphor is inconsistent with how it has been interpreted and applied for more than 170 years.

See my understanding was that having your own planet was a metaphor for having you own Solar Sytem, or having your own Galaxy, or maybe even your own universe someday.

If you believe that this use was only intended as a metaphor I must again must ask how long you have been LDS?

Ohh Peter,
When don’t we select arguments that make our point? Instead of being insulting, you could have responding with additional points that you felt were valid.

LDS speakers understand Kolob as a metaphore. I’ve also seen teaching that explicitly compare the concept of God giving us a planet in the next life with with the reference in John, that God will provide us with a mansion(sorry, link is not handy now)

I don’t deny that there are LDS who think the reference to Kolob is literal. The fact that they thought it was a planet where God lives just confirms they completely misread the scripture. (It’s a Star near God’s throne).

There are many Christians that imagine God providing them with a physical mansion in the next world, as their reward. I obviously think it is a metaphore but see no harm in their literal interpretation of scripture (same for LDS and planets).

 

[Peter_John]

Ohh Peter,
When don’t we select arguments that make our point? Instead of being insulting, you could have responding with additional points that you felt were valid.

LDS speakers understand Kolob as a metaphore. I’ve also seen teaching that explicitly compare the concept of God giving us a planet in the next life with with the reference in John, that God will provide us with a mansion(sorry, link is not handy now)

I don’t deny that there are LDS who think the reference to Kolob is literal. The fact that they thought it was a planet where God lives just confirms they completely misread the scripture. (It’s a Star near God’s throne).

There are many Christians that imagine God providing them with a physical mansion in the next world, as their reward. I obviously think it is a metaphore but see no harm in their literal interpretation of scripture (same for LDS and planets).

If Kolob is literally a star near God’s throne, it is not just a metaphor. It is a literal belief with metaphorical applications, as are all the statements of God creating and poulating worlds without number.

We frame our arguments to make specific points, but we must consider the totality of the perspectives, and we cannot cherry pick data out of context. When you draw a reference from LDS scripture, it is insufficent to just look at what the Church teaches about it today. There is an entire history of exposition on these references, often preached from the pulpit in general conferences, or published in lesson manuals. These need consideration as well in order to present the data in context.

 

[KathleenGee]

Tony,

What were you associated with before you became a Mormon???

 

[CEM5]

During a recent conversation, someone I know claimed that LDS are not Christians. (I know that this is a common belief among non-LDS, but bear with me). I questioned this, because as I understood it, LDS believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that he is Christ and Redeemer. This other person claimed that the LDS do not believe in Christ, that they believe he was a prophet and a great man, but not the true Christ.

I have never read the Book of Mormon, so I didn’t really feel confident arguing. The other person claims that the Book of Mormon has conflicting messages from the Bible and that it states that Jesus was not the Savior.

I’m still pretty sure he was wrong. And (name removed by moderator)ut from LDS would be appreciated.

Hi there,

Even though Mormons state that Christ is the Son of God, and believe He is the Redeemer, their understanding of this belief is not that of the Traditional, true, teaching. They believe that God the Father has a human body of flesh and bone and that God the Father came and had actual physical sex with Mary to impregnate her. This belief is in stark contradiction to the Biblical teachings of the Gospel. The Mormons also believe that God the Father is one god, that Jesus, the Son, is another, separate god, and that the Holy Spirit is a third god. They do not believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity. They believe in three separate “gods” and that one day, Mormons of good standing, will also become a god and inhabit their own planet and with their wife, have spirit children for all eternity, thus populating their own planet where they will be worshipped as the “god” of their own planet.

Because they do not believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, of ONE God, (Father, Son and Holy Spirit = ONE GOD, not three individual gods), they are called PSEUDO CHRISTIANS (False Christians).

The Vatican has not recognized Mormons as Christians, and does not recognize their baptisms as valid.

blessings,
CEM

 

[CEM5]

… but that means they will have the kingdom of Heaven as angels in their resurrection if they lived righteous lives and kept repenting from their sins during their life.

So it’s not a bad thing–it just means they choose for themselves, as you say, “service to Him” rather than choosing to obey the commandment to “multiply and replenish the earth”–so indeed they will be able to do that forever, happily and joyfully, as an angel in Heaven.

Hi ParkerD,

No human will ever become an angel in heaven. Angels are separate creations from humans. Angels were created to serve humans and were created before us. When we die, our corporeal bodies return to the “dust” of the earth, whereas our eternal souls are immediately judged (at the time of death) and we either go to hell, or heaven, (and those on their way to heaven, but not yet purged – or purified – of venial sins, go to purgatory. See 1 Cor 3).

We will also judge the angels one day.

When Scripture, via Jesus’ words, tells us we will be as the angels, Jesus is refering to the fact that in heaven angels neither die nor are given in marriage. No sex or marriage in heaven!! Therefore, we will be “as the angels” are: never die (eternal life in heaven with God) and no marriage or sex.

peace of Christ,

 

[Peter_John]

During a recent conversation, someone I know claimed that LDS are not Christians. (I know that this is a common belief among non-LDS, but bear with me). I questioned this, because as I understood it, LDS believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that he is Christ and Redeemer. This other person claimed that the LDS do not believe in Christ, that they believe he was a prophet and a great man, but not the true Christ.

I have never read the Book of Mormon, so I didn’t really feel confident arguing. The other person claims that the Book of Mormon has conflicting messages from the Bible and that it states that Jesus was not the Savior.

I’m still pretty sure he was wrong. And (name removed by moderator)ut from LDS would be appreciated.

AS a former Mormon, I have come to recognize the issue in these terms. I consider individual Mormons as Christian, but I consider the faith a Christian heresy – it would equate to being an Arian or Manachean in early Christianity – both of which had a huge following. The Vatican did not address the issue of whether or not Mormonism shared fellowship with Christianity, as defined by a valid baptism, until 2001. When it took up the question it ruled in the negative.

Mormons my find this a foregone conclusion, but such is not the case. While Mormonism has rejected every other denomination as invalid as a foundational assumption of its own existence, the Holy See tries to be as inclusive as possible. Most Mormons may not realize that the Vatican recognizes as valid almost every Christian denomination’s baptism. Its rejection signifies much about the place of Mormons in Christianity. Of course, despite their members concerns about being called Christian, their general view is that the question is not are Mormon’s Christian, but in the wrods of Truman G. Madsen, “Are Christian’s Mormon?”

 

[ParkerD]

…In fact, to afffirm that you must ignore some of Paul’s other writings and the words of Jesus.

You affirm it because have been taught this passage as evidence of Joseph Smith’s teachings on this matter your whole life…

Peter John,

Just for the record, I neither ignore Paul’s other writings nor ignore the words of Jesus.

I also find that I learn new, important concepts by reading the Bible each time I read it, because I am a new person through new life experiences and hence through having more understanding, and through the Holy Ghost who testifies of truth and thus teaches as someone reads if they are seeking the Holy Ghost sincerely as they read, and if they have the gift of the Holy Ghost particularly but not exclusively.

When we are resurrected, we will have resurrected “bodies” with “glory”. It is a simple concept.

A sincere wish of peace to all.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Peter John,

Just for the record, I neither ignore Paul’s other writings nor ignore the words of Jesus.

I also find that I learn new, important concepts by reading the Bible each time I read it, because I am a new person through new life experiences and hence through having more understanding, and through the Holy Ghost who testifies of truth and thus teaches as someone reads if they are seeking the Holy Ghost sincerely as they read, and if they have the gift of the Holy Ghost particularly but not exclusively.

When we are resurrected, we will have resurrected “bodies” with “glory”. It is a simple concept.

A sincere wish of peace to all.

From Catholic.org
I underlined the important aspects of the word Glory, regarding your conversation. Hope it helps (All Glory to God) …His Glory, where all Glory comes from.
http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=5201

“This word has many shades of meaning which lexicographers are somewhat puzzled to differentiate sharply. As our interest in it here centres around its ethical and religious significance, we shall treat it only with reference to the ideas attached to it in Holy Scripture and theology.
In the English version of the Bible the word Glory, one of the commonest in the Scripture, is used to translate several Hebrew terms in the Old Testament, and the Greek doxa in the New Testament . Sometimes the Catholic versions employ brightness, where others use glory. When this occurs, the original signifies, as it frequently does elsewhere, a physical, visible phenomenon. This meaning is found for instance in Ex., xxiv, 16: "And the glory of the Lord dwelt upon Sinai "; in Luke, ii, 9, and in the account of the Transfiguration on Mount Thabor. In very many places the term is employed to signify the witness which the created universe bears to the nature of its Creator, as an effect reveals the character of its cause. Frequently in the New Testament it signifies a manifestation of the Divine Majesty, truth, goodness or some other attribute through His incarnate Son, as, for instance, in John, I, 14: "(and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth "; Luke, ii, 32, "A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel "; and throughout the prayer of Christ for his disciples, John 17 .

Continued…

 

[catholic-rcia]

Here too, as elsewhere, we find the idea that the perception of this manifested truth works towards a union of man with God. In other passages glory is equivalent to praise rendered to God in acknowledgment of His majesty and perfections manifested objectively in the world, or through supernaturalrevelation : “Thou art worthy, O Lord our God, to receive glory, and honour, and power: because thou hast created all things”, Apoc., iv, 11**: “Give glory** to the Lord, and call upon his name”, Ps. Civ, 1 (cf. Ps. Cv, I).
The term is used also to mean judgment on personal worth, in which sense the Greek doxa reflects the signification of the cognate verb dokeo : "How can you believe, who receive glory one from another: and the glory which is from God alone, you do not seek?" John, v, 44; and xii, 43: "For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God ".

Lastly, glory is the name given to the blessedness of the future life in which the soul is united to God : “For I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come”, Rom., viii, 18. "Because the creature also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God ", ib., 21. The texts cited above are representative of multitudes similar in tenor, scattered throughout the sacred writings.

Glory - Encyclopedia Volume - Catholic Encyclopedia - Catholic Online

This word has many shades of meaning which lexicographers are somewhat puzzled to differentiate sharply. As our interest in it here centres around its ethical and religious significance, we shall treat it only with reference to the ideas attached to it in Holy Scripture and theology. I. ...

www.catholic.org

 

[Peter_John]

Ohh Peter,
When don’t we select arguments that make our point? Instead of being insulting, you could have responding with additional points that you felt were valid.

LDS speakers understand Kolob as a metaphore. I’ve also seen teaching that explicitly compare the concept of God giving us a planet in the next life with with the reference in John, that God will provide us with a mansion(sorry, link is not handy now)

I don’t deny that there are LDS who think the reference to Kolob is literal. The fact that they thought it was a planet where God lives just confirms they completely misread the scripture. (It’s a Star near God’s throne).

There are many Christians that imagine God providing them with a physical mansion in the next world, as their reward. I obviously think it is a metaphore but see no harm in their literal interpretation of scripture (same for LDS and planets).

Now that I have had time to better review this response, it opens with exactly the sort of thing to which I referred:

You ask, “When don’t we select arguments to make our point?” That is not what I said you were doing. I said you were “cherry picking your sources, interpretations, and methods to suit a foregone conclusion.” What I describe means taking material out of context intentionally to prove a point regardless of what the evidence acyually indicates.

 

[Peter_John]

From Catholic.org
I underlined the important aspects of the word Glory, regarding your conversation. Hope it helps (All Glory to God) …His Glory, where all Glory comes from.
http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=5201

“This word has many shades of meaning which lexicographers are somewhat puzzled to differentiate sharply. As our interest in it here centres around its ethical and religious significance, we shall treat it only with reference to the ideas attached to it in Holy Scripture and theology.
In the English version of the Bible the word Glory, one of the commonest in the Scripture, is used to translate several Hebrew terms in the Old Testament, and the Greek doxa in the New Testament . Sometimes the Catholic versions employ brightness, where others use glory. When this occurs, the original signifies, as it frequently does elsewhere, a physical, visible phenomenon. This meaning is found for instance in Ex., xxiv, 16: "And the glory of the Lord dwelt upon Sinai "; in Luke, ii, 9, and in the account of the Transfiguration on Mount Thabor. In very many places the term is employed to signify the witness which the created universe bears to the nature of its Creator, as an effect reveals the character of its cause. Frequently in the New Testament it signifies a manifestation of the Divine Majesty, truth, goodness or some other attribute through His incarnate Son, as, for instance, in John, I, 14: "(and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth "; Luke, ii, 32, "A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel "; and throughout the prayer of Christ for his disciples, John 17 .

Continued…

The word “Glory” is used something like 420 times in the Kings James version of the Bible, the only version most Mormons will use. Paul uses it with more density – and perhaps even more times than anybody else.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

Just for the record, I neither ignore Paul’s other writings nor ignore the words of Jesus.

I also find that I learn new, important concepts by reading the Bible each time I read it, because I am a new person through new life experiences and hence through having more understanding, and through the Holy Ghost who testifies of truth and thus teaches as someone reads if they are seeking the Holy Ghost sincerely as they read, and if they have the gift of the Holy Ghost particularly but not exclusively.

When we are resurrected, we will have resurrected “bodies” with “glory”. It is a simple concept.

A sincere wish of peace to all.

In that case show me how your interpretation of the passage I broke down means what you say it does rather than what it seems to mean in light of Paul’s other writings. Show me how your interpretation can come from just reading the Bible.

 

[catholic-rcia]

The word “Glory” is used something like 420 times in the Kings James version of the Bible, the only version most Mormons will use. Paul uses it with more density – and perhaps even more times than anybody else.

Thanks for that.

I cannot think of the word Glory and not think about God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I give thanks and praise to God for allowing us to share in His Glory through Christ. I was nothing, because of God I became something, where nothing becomes something and knows it. Pretty cool gift right? (to be created and then loved by our Creator)

If I were to use symbols to explain Gods Glory I would use the Sun, how it brings light and warmth to the world, life giving. Without the Sun we would die. As to myself I would be like the moon that has no light of its own, no glory of its own. Only when the light from the sun shines on it does it appear to be glorious. And it is glorious only because the light of God shines upon it.

This is how I have come to know my own relationship with Jesus. He sustains me by giving me His life in me. Without Him there would be nothing. And I am not speaking about nothing as if it were somehow something. (Nothing)

All Glory is Gods alone, we share in it.

 

[Stephen168]

[ Long before our God began his creations, he dwelt on a mortal world like ours, one of the creations that his Father had created for him and his brethren. He, with many of his brethren, was obedient to the principles of the eternal gospel. One among these, it is presumed, was a savior for them, and through him they obtained a resurrection and an exaltation on an eternal, celestial world. Then they gained the power and godhood of their Father and were made heirs of all that he had, continuing his works and creating worlds of their own for their own posterity—the same as their Father had done before, and his Father, and his Father, and on and on. With these things in mind, W. W. Phelps, in a hymn, asks the question:

“If you could hie to Kolob
In the twinkling of an eye,
And then continue onward
With that same speed to fly,
D’ye think that you could ever,
Through all eternity,
Find out the generation
Where Gods began to be?”
](http://lds.org/new-era/print/1971/04/people-on-other-worlds?lang=eng&clang=eng)

 

[KathleenGee]

Tony has only been a Mormon for a year, so he is not aware of all of its teachings throughout the years.

 

[Peter_John]

Tony has only been a Mormon for a year, so he is not aware of all of its teachings throughout the years.

I started getting that sense with his assertions that some of the revised beliefs are what the Church has always taught. I actually have to give him high points for taking on such an aggressive apologetics role so early on. I am going to hold to calling him on shortcuts to critical thinking though. That can help him with anything.