LDS: Did God 'create' Jesus?

[ParkerD]

God said “let there be light”, and there was light. Doesn’t seem like a process to me. When God speaks his words become reality. I don’t know where you ever got the idea that God organized existing “intelligences” to create human beings. Only God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is eternal, everything else is created. Parker, I mean no offense here, but you wonder why the rest of Christianity does not consider Mormons to be Christians? Ideas like this do not help the cause.

SteveVH,

Indeed they don’t, and that is totally fine with me, as I assume you have become aware.

Occasionally, I have asked Catholics to explain their belief in the First Cause and creation from nothing, and how they explain that the First Cause doctrine does not lead to the conclusion that–

If God is omnipotent and omniscient, then He had all power and all knowledge at all points in eternal time, and therefore all subsequent effects from the First Cause were directly or indirectly brought about by the First Cause. This would make God responsible for all effects, starting from a blank space and inserting within that blank space all entities that come to occupy that space.

(You can note, of course, that LDS knowledge of intelligences existing for eternity backwards in time, means that the above contradiction no longer follows.)

 

[KathleenGee]

Parker,

God created all creatures through His Word willing it. The Word is Jesus Christ through which all was created.

Each creature has its own nature and intelligence and its freedom to be.

God is the beginning and end of everything, He is one in nature, substance and essence.

When God revealed His name to Moses and that name, I am Who am, means God is always faithful to us. So, He did not abandon people to false priests after the death of the last apostle. He does not change. God is the Unmoved Mover.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,

God created all creatures through His Word willing it. The Word is Jesus Christ through which all was created.

Each creature has its own nature and intelligence and its freedom to be.

God is the beginning and end of everything, He is one in nature, substance and essence.

When God revealed His name to Moses and that name, I am Who am, means God is always faithful to us. So, He did not abandon people to false priests after the death of the last apostle. He does not change. God is the Unmoved Mover.

Kathleen,
I think you have not understood what I wrote about First Cause and blank space and omniscience and omnipotence. But I realize you have explained what you have been taught.

As far as priests, it would seem that the Jews would have just as much cause to say that God did not and will never abandon His people, and that because of that they could say there could be no such thing as “false priests”, as your assertion. But I realize that logic works for you, and that’s OK–that logic just doesn’t happen to work for me.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Jews know they cannot have priests without their temple.

The Jews have always been God’s chosen and He is faithful to His promises. He has never abandoned them and we owe them our respect and a particular type of respect because they gave us Sacred Scripture, they have their own history of success, suffering and failure and renewal, they have given us the Psalms which are the spirituality of the Old Testament, and most of all, they have given us our Savior and Messiah, Jesus.

I guess I do not really understand then your idea of omnipotence…but we are to remain faithful to the understanding that has been handed down to us and empowered by the Holy Spirit.

 

[ParkerD]

…
I guess I do not really understand then your idea of omnipotence…but we are to remain faithful to the understanding that has been handed down to us and empowered by the Holy Spirit.

Kathleen,
I realize that you are “to remain faithful to the understanding…handed down…”

Since I’m not in that position, I can think about things like “omnipotent” and “omniscient” and “creation from nothing” and “First Cause” and plumb the depths of thought on those subjects.

“Omnipotent” means “all powerful” with no limitations whatsoever.

“Omniscient” means “all knowing” with no limitations whatsoever, including no limitations of time or space.

God is all powerful and all knowing. This means He knew, for example, that Satan was going to rebel before that happened.

If a person concludes that God is omnipotent, omniscient, started the universe from nothing, and was the First Cause of all creation, then that logically means that God created Satan giving Satan the exact attributes that would logically lead to his (Satan’s) rebellion.

If a person moves along that logic path, then that would mean God was the First Cause of that particular effect and all the subsequent effects (because He is all-knowing about those subsequent effects). It means He didn’t cause the subsequent effects, but that by knowing they were going to happen and by having created the angel who fell through the choices that angel made but had the attributes given to that angel by God through creation, God placed into effect the circumstance that brought Satan into being and thus enabled the subsequent effects to happen. (In other words, leaving Satan out of creation would lead to no rebellion by such an angel. But leaving Satan in, eventuates the situation wherein Satan rebelled by the choice he made because he had the precise qualities he had.)

(I think a computer programmer can understand what I am trying to explain in words, but perhaps few others can.)

By that same logic path, effects that are less than desirable by the creations of God, such as poor (sinful) choices made by human beings, were not only fore-known by Him, but were placed into effect by His creation since He was omnipotent and omniscient at the point in time of the Creation and gave them the precise attributes they (we) have.

But I’m not saying that is how things are. I am saying that is how things aren’t–that instead, the way things really are is:

God “organized” intelligences who were already in existence, gave them life as spirits, then allowed them to choose with the full intent that through their choices they could both “show who they really are” by their choices, and “become what they really had the potential to become” if there was a Savior in the plan so that they could repent of wrong choices and grow above and beyond making wrong choices and into making right choices through experiential knowledge and through repentance. Satan made the ultimate wrong choice of not even accepting the plan to begin with–the plan of coming to this earth, and the plan of having a Savior to redeem us from sin (through His atoning grace and through our repentance) and to raise us from death by our resurrection.

 

[flyonthewall]

Interjecting here…it would be nice if the charity concept were to be reciprocated. I do not think that the LDS position regarding the Catholic Church being “apostate” and the official position that Christ abandoned our Church so as to allow JS to lead believers 1800 years later is all that respectful or charitable and it darn sure isn’t true. I am not trying to interfere with the polite interaction here but don’t you have to… sooner or later…challenge a lie?

I believe the charity concept is more than reciprocated on the part of LDS. While we understand that there are many Christian faiths out there and all have a portion of the truth, large or small, they still are Christian.
There are Catholics on this board that deny us our Christianity. So which is less charitible? The side that states that you don’t have the complete gospel? or the side that states you don’t even have the right God?
One thing I see over and over again is that critics use double standards but are blind to it because it favors themselves. This is a Catholic board so the majority of posters are Catholic, and of course they disagree with non-catholic faiths. But if you criticize another faith, use the same standard on your own to see how it lines up…you may be surprised.

 

[campeador]

Campeador,

I assure you first off that I had never heard of Lactantius, nor do I plan to study up on his writings. When you read a FAIR article you may on occasion find certain authors who have sought to build a bridge between the writings of ancient times and how they might fit in with LDS beliefs or even with current Catholic beliefs. This does not mean the LDS approach the study of the Bible or of other scriptures in that way, at all. So as far as I’m concerned, no need to defend or refute Lactantius.

The Book of Abraham is in the Pearl of Great Price. Abraham had a knowledge of astronomy and of knowledge hidden from the world. But granted, his writings are not on an elementary level–more like Isaiah’s writings.

Maybe you could seek out some of the writings of Truman Madsen or of Hugh Nibley, if you want a scholarly approach to the idea of the intelligences being eternal. The word “organized” would be synonymous with the word “made” or “produced” within the context of how LDS view the divine Son of God in relationship to His Father in Heaven, but it is to be understood as “made from an intelligence” or “brought forth from an intelligence” and not “created from nothing”. It is also essential if one desires to understand LDS doctrine on this subject, to understand that Firstborn means exactly that, and the time frame was before what we look at as our “eternity” since we know nothing about what it was to be an “intelligence” and from our perspective, our “eternity” began when we were made into spirits. Christ was already God the Son, the Firstborn, at that point when we were made (or “organized”) into spirits.

So Christ, as Jehovah, was the Firstborn and then became the Creator. He will also be the Finisher. Thus, He is Alpha (First) and Omega (Last).

So, Jesus was an “intelligence” with no body or spirit until at some point in time, God had relations with an unknown goddess, the product of which was not a human being, but a “spirit” that somehow was infused with Jesus’ “intelligence”? And God gave this “spirit” by virtue of his “firstborn”-ness the ability to create all things? And Jesus is the called the Alpha because he is the first sibling, and not because he is the Eternal, Immutable, and Omnipotent God of the Universe?

 

[Miriam1947]

Please correct me if I am wrong.

My understanding is that the LDS teach that there is no Trinity as Christians believe.

I believe in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Ghost) as One.

But they teach that there are three separate gods.
God the Father, another god the son, another god the holy spirit. So three separate godheads. And that they pray only to God the father.

Yes?

 

[ParkerD]

So, Jesus was an “intelligence” with no body or spirit until at some point in time, God had relations with an unknown goddess, the product of which was not a human being, but a “spirit” that somehow was infused with Jesus’ “intelligence”? And God gave this “spirit” by virtue of his “firstborn”-ness the ability to create all things? And Jesus is the called the Alpha because he is the first sibling, and not because he is the Eternal, Immutable, and Omnipotent God of the Universe?

Campeador,
No, no, and no.

God the Father organized the intelligences. One can call it a “birth” and the scriptures say Jesus is the Firstborn. That does not mean anything about what you associate with a mortal birth. We don’t know the process, nor the means of that organization. But if the scriptures say He is the Firstborn, then that would mean God wants us to understand that Jehovah is the Firstborn, and that God’s word choice is as much as He wanted us to understand about how Jehovah (Jesus) came to be.

It is important also to understand that Jesus, as an intelligence, possessed the innate qualities that enabled Him to be perfectly perfect. He already had those qualities as an intelligence. He brought them with Him into His sphere as a Spirit–as the Firstborn Son of God, in the Spirit.

God the Father and His Son are both omnipotent, and are One in mind, will, purpose, love for all truth, love for all of us, and love for the freedom of choice that allows us to grow by making choices and dealing with the consequences of our choices.

 

[ParkerD]

Please correct me if I am wrong.

My understanding is that the LDS teach that there is no Trinity as Christians believe.

I believe in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Ghost) as One.

But they teach that there are three separate Gods.
God the Father, another God the Son, another God the Holy Spirit. So three separate Godheads. And that they pray only to God the Father.

Yes?

Miriam,
No.

One Godhead, as Paul wrote about. They are One, as Jesus said in His intercessory prayer. They are three separate and distinct Persons, with One divine will and a Oneness of love for us.

But yes, the LDS pray only to God the Father, in the name of Jesus Christ as He Himself taught to do. Jesus did not teach for us to pray to Jesus, nor to pray to any other entity than to Heavenly Father, “Our Father which are in Heaven.”

 

[zaffiroborant]

Campeador,
No, no, and no.

God the Father organized the intelligences. One can call it a “birth” and the scriptures say Jesus is the Firstborn. That does not mean anything about what you associate with a mortal birth. We don’t know the process, nor the means of that organization. But if the scriptures say He is the Firstborn, then that would mean God wants us to understand that Jehovah is the Firstborn, and that God’s word choice is as much as He wanted us to understand about how Jehovah (Jesus) came to be.

So human beings are not truly the “literal offspring” of heavenly parents then.

It is important also to understand that Jesus, as an intelligence, possessed the innate qualities that enabled Him to be perfectly perfect. He already had those qualities as an intelligence. He brought them with Him into His sphere as a Spirit–as the Firstborn Son of God, in the Spirit.

So Satan also, as an intelligence, had all the innate qualities that enabled him to be the rebellious force for evil that he is. He brought those same qualities with him as a spirit when he was embodied by God and set loose on the world.

God the Father and His Son are both omnipotent, and are One in mind, will, purpose, love for all truth, love for all of us, and love for the freedom of choice that allows us to grow by making choices and dealing with the consequences of our choices.

Twice before in posts here I’ve been struck by how The Holy Spirit is often left out of these descriptions/conversations:shrug:

 

[campeador]

Campeador,
No, no, and no.

God the Father organized the intelligences. One can call it a “birth” and the scriptures say Jesus is the Firstborn. That does not mean anything about what you associate with a mortal birth. We don’t know the process, nor the means of that organization. But if the scriptures say He is the Firstborn, then that would mean God wants us to understand that Jehovah is the Firstborn, and that God’s word choice is as much as He wanted us to understand about how Jehovah (Jesus) came to be.

It is important also to understand that Jesus, as an intelligence, possessed the innate qualities that enabled Him to be perfectly perfect. He already had those qualities as an intelligence. He brought them with Him into His sphere as a Spirit–as the Firstborn Son of God, in the Spirit.

God the Father and His Son are both omnipotent, and are One in mind, will, purpose, love for all truth, love for all of us, and love for the freedom of choice that allows us to grow by making choices and dealing with the consequences of our choices.

Jesus came to be? Either He always was or He came to be… Which one is it?

Jesus as an “intelligence” could not be perfectly perfect. Only God is perfectly perfect, and Jesus wasn’t God as an 'intelligence".

Parker, I’m sure you will correct me if I’m wrong, but The LDS God is not the immutable God of the Bible.
“For I am the Lord, and I change not: and you the sons of Jacob are not consumed." Malachi 3:6

“Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today: and the same for ever. Be not led away with various and strange doctrines. For it is best that the heart be established with grace, not with meats: which have not profited those that walk in them.” Hebrews 13:8-9

“Every best gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change nor shadow of alteration.” James 1:17

“In the beginning, O Lord, you founded the earth: and the heavens are the works of your hands. They shall perish but you remain: and all of them shall grow old like a garment: And as a vesture you shall change them, and they shall be changed. But you are always the selfsame, and your years shall not fail.” Psalm 102:26-28

Nor does it seem that the LDS God is eternal, having first been an ‘intelligence’ and not a God at all.

 

[BartBurk]

Jesus came to be? Either He always was or He came to be… Which one is it?

Jesus as an “intelligence” could not be perfectly perfect. Only God is perfectly perfect, and Jesus wasn’t God as an 'intelligence".

I don’t know why the LDS couldn’t believe that Jesus was God as an intelligence. That he went through stages to become human flesh would not contradict that he might have always been God before going through those stages. And if we really want to go out on an LDS limb, what if God’s pre-mortal “wife” was the Virgin Mary? I don’t believe that of course – I’m Catholic.

 

[pismopal]

I believe the charity concept is more than reciprocated on the part of LDS. While we understand that there are many Christian faiths out there and all have a portion of the truth, large or small, they still are Christian.
There are Catholics on this board that deny us our Christianity. So which is less charitible? The side that states that you don’t have the complete gospel? or the side that states you don’t even have the right God?
One thing I see over and over again is that critics use double standards but are blind to it because it favors themselves. This is a Catholic board so the majority of posters are Catholic, and of course they disagree with non-catholic faiths. But if you criticize another faith, use the same standard on your own to see how it lines up…you may be surprised.

Catholics cannot “deny your Christianity”…LDS theology does this unequivocally. The official definition of a motorcycle is (among other details) a vehicle with 3 or less wheels. Christianity also has a definition and in order to qualify as such, a body of believers. must adhere to certain basic beliefs. Mormons are out side of this definition by their own choice, not ours. You are welcome to come inside the body of Christian believers anytime you want but you can’t have it both ways. I see nothing uncharitable about this and I don’t see anything hard to understand about it. If you like to be identified as a Christian…why would you leave?

 

[campeador]

I don’t know why the LDS couldn’t believe that Jesus was God as an intelligence. That he went through stages of progression to become human would not contradict that he might have always been God before going through those stages.

Except that God is Immutable. He does not change nor go through stages. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Amen.

 

[BartBurk]

Except that God is Immutable. He does not change nor go through stages. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Amen.

Obviously, Jesus went through a change when he became flesh. That’s the same type of change the LDS could believe he went through when he went from intelligence to Spirit to flesh. It just took a few more steps for him to become human than we as Catholics understand. That doesn’t mean his status as God changed as he went through those stages.

 

[campeador]

**Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. **Hebrews 13:8

 

[ParkerD]

Obviously, Jesus went through a change when He became flesh. That’s the same type of change the LDS could believe He went through when He went from intelligence to Spirit to flesh. It just took a few more steps for Him to become human than we as Catholics understand. That doesn’t mean His status as God changed as He went through those stages.

BartBurk,

Thanks! I think you have understood what I have been trying to communicate, and have explained it well. I sincerely appreciate your explanation here.

 

[ParkerD]

If we believe as Christians that "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever"(Hebrews 13:8) then He could not have gone through a change.

Campeador,
So then you are saying that Jesus did not have a birth where He gained a physical body which He did not previously have? That Mary didn’t really bear the Son of God? That Luke 2 is allegorical or some such? And that Jesus was not resurrected, since that would mean He had “changed”?

 

[BartBurk]

If we believe as Christians that "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever"(Hebrews 13:8) then He could not have gone through a change.

What do you think happened when Jesus became a man? The LDS believe that in order to become a man with flesh you started out as an intelligence, became a Spirit and then received a body of flesh. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t fully God as he went from intelligence to Spirit to man. I think you are purposely missing my point. And that is why the entire Jesus as brother of Satan is completely misunderstood by non-Mormons – they fail to realize that in LDS thought Jesus was already God during his pre-existence as he went though the steps necessary in LDS thought to become a man. There is never any idea in LDS thought that Satan was ever on an equal footing with Jesus.