LDS: Did God 'create' Jesus?

[campeador]

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”?

Parker, you can deny the clear words of the Holy Bible if you wish.

 

[BartBurk]

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.

You’re welcome. I’m just not sure LDS really believe that Jesus was always God. I seem to remember Bruce R. McConkie saying that at some point in his pre-existence Jesus progressed to become a God. That would be problematic from a Catholic point of view. I’ve never seen anything in recent official LDS literature that would claim that Jesus was always God. It would be an easy thing for LDS to claim Jesus was always God based on LDS scriptures, but they seem to be hesitant about doing it.

 

[campeador]

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.

Are you denying that God is Immutable? If so, please offer some Scripture or other texts to prove your point. I’m not sure where Satan enters this conversation except to maybe sidetrack it.

I think you are purposely missing my point.

 

[BartBurk]

Parker, you can deny the clear words of the Holy Bible if you wish.

I haven’t seen him deny anything from the Bible. You just seem unwilling to understand what he is trying to say. You haven’t answered our assertion that Jesus went through a physical change when he became man. Mormons also believe Spirit to have physical properties so in Mormon thought when Jesus went from intelligence to Spirit he went through a physical change just as he went through a physical change when he was born on earth. The closest thing to a Catholic understanding of Spirit in LDS vocabulary would probably be “intelligence.” It’s not hard to understand that from a Mormon point of view Jesus could have been fully God as an intelligence and remained that way through both his spiritual organization in the pre-existence and his physical birth on earth.

 

[BartBurk]

Are you denying that God is Immutable? If so, please offer some Scripture or other texts to prove your point. I’m not sure where Satan enters this conversation except to maybe sidetrack it.

I think you are purposely missing my point.

If immutable means that Jesus never received a physical body, I am denying it. But I am sure that is not what it means.

 

[ParkerD]

You’re welcome. I’m just not sure LDS really believe that Jesus was always God. I seem to remember Bruce R. McConkie saying that at some point in his pre-existence Jesus progressed to become a God. That would be problematic from a Catholic point of view. I’ve never seen anything in recent official LDS literature that would claim that Jesus was always God. It would be an easy thing for LDS to claim Jesus was always God based on LDS scriptures, but they seem to be hesitant about doing it.

BartBurk,

Thanks again for your involvement in this conversation, and the insights you bring as well as your straightforward way of explaining.

Here are a couple of quick quotes from an apostle who passed away last year and one still living. I located them through a brief search on lds.org. I will try and research a more thorough answer, including looking up what Bruce R McConkie might have said (though I don’t always agree with everything he has written or said), later tonight. The current quotes, followed by a link to their source:

Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin

“Jesus is the Firstborn Son of our Heavenly Father in the spirit and the Only Begotten Son of God in mortality. He is a God, one of the three in the Godhead. He is the Savior and Redeemer of the human race. In a pre-mortal council at which we were all present, He accepted our Father’s great plan of happiness for His children and was chosen by the Father to give effect to that plan. He led the forces of good against those of Satan and his followers in a battle for the souls of men that began before this world was formed. That conflict continues today. We were all on the side of Jesus then. We are on the side of Jesus today” (Ensign, November 1996, 71).

Elder Richard G. Scott

“Jesus Christ possessed merits that no other child of Heavenly Father could possibly have. He was a God, Jehovah, before His birth in Bethlehem. His Father not only gave Him His spirit body but Jesus was His Only Begotten Son in the flesh. Our Master lived a perfect, sinless life and therefore was free from the demands of justice. He was and is perfect in every attribute, including love, compassion, patience, obedience, forgiveness, and humility. His mercy pays our debt to justice when we repent and obey Him. Even with our best efforts to obey His teachings we will still fall short, yet because of His grace we will be saved ‘after all we can do’ [2 Ne. 25:23]” (Ensign, May 1997, 53).

Source:

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=a3959527730eb010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Thanks again, BartBurk

 

[BartBurk]

BartBurk,

Thanks again for your involvement in this conversation, and the insights you bring as well as your straightforward way of explaining.

Here are a couple of quick quotes from an apostle who passed away last year and one still living. I located them through a brief search on lds.org. I will try and research a more thorough answer, including looking up what Bruce R McConkie might have said (though I don’t always agree with everything he has written or said), later tonight. The current quotes, followed by a link to their source:

Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin

“Jesus is the Firstborn Son of our Heavenly Father in the spirit and the Only Begotten Son of God in mortality. He is a God, one of the three in the Godhead. He is the Savior and Redeemer of the human race. In a pre-mortal council at which we were all present, He accepted our Father’s great plan of happiness for His children and was chosen by the Father to give effect to that plan. He led the forces of good against those of Satan and his followers in a battle for the souls of men that began before this world was formed. That conflict continues today. We were all on the side of Jesus then. We are on the side of Jesus today” (Ensign, November 1996, 71).

Elder Richard G. Scott

“Jesus Christ possessed merits that no other child of Heavenly Father could possibly have. He was a God, Jehovah, before His birth in Bethlehem. His Father not only gave Him His spirit body but Jesus was His Only Begotten Son in the flesh. Our Master lived a perfect, sinless life and therefore was free from the demands of justice. He was and is perfect in every attribute, including love, compassion, patience, obedience, forgiveness, and humility. His mercy pays our debt to justice when we repent and obey Him. Even with our best efforts to obey His teachings we will still fall short, yet because of His grace we will be saved ‘after all we can do’ [2 Ne. 25:23]” (Ensign, May 1997, 53).

Source:

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=a3959527730eb010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Thanks again, BartBurk

First of all, the LDS don’t understand what begotten means. When the scriptures call Jesus the Only Begotten they are talking about what happened to him in eternity. He was begotten, not made. They are not talking about what happened to Jesus when he was born to the virgin Mary. Begotten in eternity means He was exactly as His Father from all eternity – there never was when Jesus didn’t exist as fully God. You might want to look at C.S. Lewis’ explanation in “Mere Christianity” which is much better than mine. It’s explained in the chapter “Making and Begetting.” Neither of the two above quotes from the LDS leaders addresses the LDS understanding of Jesus’ eternal existence as God prior to his existence as man. If the LDS could say that Jesus existed eternally as fully God before going through the process of becoming a man they could at least have a somewhat tenuous hold on orthodoxy. But they are unwilling to say that Jesus was begotten from all eternity as God by his Father. They always have to couch it as “the only begotten in the flesh.” The qualification of “in the flesh” leaves LDS somewhat short of a Christian understanding of Jesus. If they were willing to admit that he was begotten of God as fully God outside of the bounds of space and time (in other words, eternally begotten) we might begin to have a mutual agreement about the Godhead.

 

[SteveVH]

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.

The Person of Jesus has never changed. That divine Person chose to take on human flesh, yet remained the second Person of the Trinity. He had this identity from eternity. The LDS view is that Jesus was not always Jesus, but was organized from intelligence to spirit to …? The implication was that Jesus became God through some sort of progression or evolution. This directly contradicts Christian doctrine which holds that Jesus was God, whole and entire, from all eternity.

 

[BartBurk]

The Person of Jesus has never changed. That divine Person chose to take on human flesh, yet remained the second Person of the Trinity. He had this identity from eternity. The LDS view is that Jesus was not always Jesus, but was organized from intelligence to spirit to …? The implication was that Jesus became God through some sort of progression or evolution. This directly contradicts Christian doctrine which holds that Jesus was God, whole and entire, from all eternity.

While I agree with you, it is possible the LDS could come to the conclusion from the LDS scriptures that Jesus was God and then went through the necessary steps that all of us in LDS thought needed to take to become a man. If the LDS would look at their scriptures a little more closely they would find that Jesus is the Eternal God and still maintain the rest of their theology without contradicting the orthodox understanding of the Trinity. They unfortunately choose not to do this. They could choose to assert that Jesus’ Divine Person never changed.

 

[BartBurk]

This is what Bruce R. McConkie had to say on the subject:

He is the First born of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre existent state. Mormon Doctrine, p. 129

God the second is the Redeemer, and his great, infinite and eternal work is to ransom men from the temporal and spiritual death which was brought into the world by the fall of Adam. He is the Savior of the world, the Redeemer of man. He was the firstborn spirit child of the Eternal Father, and in that premortal life he advanced and progressed until he “was like unto God.” (Abr. 3:24). He served under the Father, using Deity’s power to create all things. Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie, p. 375.

I quote McConkie because he is the most authoritative person I can find on this subject. I can’t find anyone in Mormonism with any authority contradicting him.

 

[SteveVH]

This is what Bruce R. McConkie had to say on the subject:

Quote:

He is the First born of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre existent state. Mormon Doctrine, p. 129

I truly apologize, but I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. If you are trying to make a case for consistency, concerning the nature of Jesus, within the framework of the LDS doctrine of progression, I would not argue with you. But the only real consistency is error. The Christian doctrine is that of an eternal being, without beginning or end. The very essence of the Blessed Trinity is family. God is family; Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and God is eternal, therefore, Jesus, as the only Son of God is eternally the only Son of God and did not progress from a lesser state to a divine state.

His choice to take on flesh was just that; a choice. A choice made for the salvation of us wretches here on earth. A choice made for no other reason than His unfathomable love for us. He did not have to take on flesh and undergo his passion and sacrifice in order to progress to some higher state of being. He did it for us, period. He has always been and will always be God, the Almighty, the Creator of all that is. He cannot become more perfect; He has never been able to become more perfect because He is, has always been and forever will be Perfection itself.

 

[BartBurk]

BartBurk;7294821:

This is what Bruce R. McConkie had to say on the subject:

Quote:

Quote:

I truly apologize, but I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. If you are trying to make a case for consistency, concerning the nature of Jesus, within the framework of the LDS doctrine of progression, I would not argue with you. But the only real consistency is error. The Christian doctrine is that of an eternal being, without beginning or end. The very essence of the Blessed Trinity is family. God is family; Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and God is eternal, therefore, Jesus, as the only Son of God is eternally the only Son of God and did not progress from a lesser state to a divine state.

His choice to take on flesh was just that; a choice. A choice made for the salvation of us wretches here on earth. A choice made for no other reason than His unfathomable love for us. He did not have

to take on flesh and undergo his passion and sacrifice in order to progress to some higher state of being. He did it for us, period. He has always been and will always be God, the Almighty, the Creator of all that is. He cannot become more perfect; He has never been able to become more perfect because He is, has always been and forever will be Perfection itself.

Obviously, I agree with you. The LDS position on the way Christ became a man does not have to be a problem either if that is the way God works. Unfortunately, the LDS authorities seem to reject the notion of Jesus always being God. I suspect there are some LDS members who accept that idea even as their church rejects it. If they are reading their scriptures in an orthodox way they could get an orthodox answer. The Community of Christ has many of the same scriptures and accepts the Trinity while also accepting the Mormon scriptural teaching on pre-existence.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH;7295800:

Obviously, I agree with you. The LDS position on the way Christ became a man does not have to be a problem either if that is the way God works. Unfortunately, the LDS authorities seem to reject the notion of Jesus always being God. I suspect there are some LDS members who accept that idea even as their church rejects it. If they are reading their scriptures in an orthodox way they could get an orthodox answer. The Community of Christ has many of the same scriptures and accepts the Trinity while also accepting the Mormon scriptural teaching on pre-existence.

If God is eternal; Father, Son and Holy Spirit, it means that one cannot progress to attain that state. That is the reason that the LDS hold the doctrine of progression, even for Jesus. It means that they can do the same thing. It means that they have fallen for the first lie ever told to mankind; “ye shall be as gods”.

There is a huge difference in the Christian view of “becoming like God” and the Mormon view. In the Catholic faith we believe that we will become, and are, the adopted sons and daughters of God, and that we will share in the divine life of the Holy Trinity; the beatific vision. The difference is that we believe that we are creatures and will always remain creatures, even with our glorified bodies in heaven. God will always be the Creator, and we will spend eternity in worship of Him. When our focus is the glory that we may attain, rather than the glory to be given to God, we are in trouble.

 

[ParkerD]

First of all, the LDS don’t understand what begotten means. When the scriptures call Jesus the Only Begotten they are talking about what happened to him in eternity. He was begotten, not made. They are not talking about what happened to Jesus when he was born to the virgin Mary. Begotten in eternity means He was exactly as His Father from all eternity – there never was when Jesus didn’t exist as fully God. You might want to look at C.S. Lewis’ explanation in “Mere Christianity” which is much better than mine. It’s explained in the chapter “Making and Begetting.” Neither of the two above quotes from the LDS leaders addresses the LDS understanding of Jesus’ eternal existence as God prior to his existence as man. If the LDS could say that Jesus existed eternally as fully God before going through the process of becoming a man they could at least have a somewhat tenuous hold on orthodoxy. But they are unwilling to say that Jesus was begotten from all eternity as God by his Father. They always have to couch it as “the only begotten in the flesh.” The qualification of “in the flesh” leaves LDS somewhat short of a Christian understanding of Jesus. If they were willing to admit that he was begotten of God as fully God outside of the bounds of space and time (in other words, eternally begotten) we might begin to have a mutual agreement about the Godhead.

Bart Burk,
Thanks for pointing out a subject I was quite unfamiliar with as to the distinction made by those such as C.S. Lewis.

The LDS scriptures certainly support that the “Only Begotten Son” was so from the beginning, and not just from the time of His gaining a physical body. He was the Only Begotten Son during His time in the pre-mortal life as the Spirit Son of God who was Jehovah.

I tend to agree that the distinction is important, in that the Only Begotten Son of God, Jehovah, had absolute qualities no other spirit had, and I can comprehend that some of those qualities were inherited by virtue of His being “the Only Begotten Son” in the spirit. He was the only perfect Spirit in the pre-mortal realm where we associated with Him. He was supremely gifted by divine inheritance as well as by His own innate goodness from His intelligence.

I disagree with Lewis’ description that about the time frame of the Son being the Son versus the time frame of the Father being the Father–since that does not possibly flow from the logic of “Begotten”.

But again, thanks for raising an area that I was glad to gain more familiarity with, to understand others’ beliefs better.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Bart Burk,
Thanks for pointing out a subject I was quite unfamiliar with as to the distinction made by those such as C.S. Lewis.

The LDS scriptures certainly support that the “Only Begotten Son” was so from the beginning, and not just from the time of His gaining a physical body. He was the Only Begotten Son during His time in the pre-mortal life as the Spirit Son of God who was Jehovah.

I tend to agree that the distinction is important, in that the Only Begotten Son of God, Jehovah, had absolute qualities no other spirit had, and I can comprehend that some of those qualities were inherited by virtue of His being “the Only Begotten Son” in the spirit. He was the only perfect Spirit in the pre-mortal realm where we associated with Him. He was supremely gifted by divine inheritance as well as by His own innate goodness from His intelligence.

I disagree with Lewis’ description that about the time frame of the Son being the Son versus the time frame of the Father being the Father–since that does not possibly flow from the logic of “Begotten”.

But again, thanks for raising an area that I was glad to gain more familiarity with, to understand others’ beliefs better.

But aren’t all spirit’s “begotten” by heavenly parents?

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Here is another quote from that same source:

"***In December 2007 the Church issued the following press release on this issue:

Like other Christians, we believe Jesus is the divine Son of God. Satan is a fallen angel.
As the Apostle Paul wrote, God is the Father of all. That means that all beings were created by God and are His spirit children. Christ, however, was the only begotten in the flesh, and we worship Him as the Son of God and the Savior of mankind.***"

Notice how they first want to attach themselves to other Christians ("Like other Christians, we believe…") and then go on to contradict the Christian meaning. This is very typical.

I’ve read through every post by LDS members on this thread and I’m still not clear on what their position is. Either the Son of God is eteral like the Father, or He is not. From the LDS position, I cannot even confirm that they believe the Father is eternal.

And by eternal I mean without beginning or end. Not eternal as in continuing from a beginning point into a future lasting an eternity. As I understand it, all human beings are eternal in this second sense, but only God is eternal in the first sense.

It seems that a fair answer would be one that is easy to explain and defend. I see no such answer supporting the LDS position. I really wish there was a clear answer to respond to.

Peace,
Robert

 

[ParkerD]

This is what Bruce R. McConkie had to say on the subject:

Quote:
He is the First born of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre existent state. Mormon Doctrine, p. 129
Quote:
God the second is the Redeemer, and his great, infinite and eternal work is to ransom men from the temporal and spiritual death which was brought into the world by the fall of Adam. He is the Savior of the world, the Redeemer of man. He was the firstborn spirit child of the Eternal Father, and in that premortal life he advanced and progressed until he “was like unto God.” (Abr. 3:24). He served under the Father, using Deity’s power to create all things. Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie, p. 375.

I quote McConkie because he is the most authoritative person I can find on this subject. I can’t find anyone in Mormonism with any authority contradicting him.

Bart Burk,

Thanks for these quotes. They are fairly consistent with others I read as I looked at this subject, except that the following quote by Ezra Taft Benson gives a different connotation and highlights the “unchangeable” nature of Christ:

"In his Lectures on Faith, the Prophet Joseph Smith listed six divine attributes of God that men must understand in order to have faith in Him. The Book of Mormon bears constant witness that Christ possesses all these attributes.

First, God is the Creator and upholder of all things. King Benjamin said, “He created all things, … he has all wisdom, and all power.” (Mosiah 4:9.)

Second, God is distinguished by the excellency of His character, His mercy, long-suffering, and goodness. Alma testified that Christ is “full of grace, equity, and truth, full of patience, mercy, and long-suffering.” (Alma 9:26.)

Third, God changes not. Mormon revealed that “God is not … a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.” (Moro. 8:18.)

Fourth, God cannot lie. The brother of Jared declared, “Thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.” (Ether 3:12.)

Fifth, God is no respecter of persons. Mormon testified that “God is not a partial God.” (Moro. 8:18.)

Sixth, God is a God of love. Of this divine attribute Nephi wrote that the Lord “doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world, even that he layeth down his own life.” (2 Ne. 26:24.)"

I would merge the ideas of Christ’s “unchangeable” attribute and the idea expressed by Bruce R McConkie, and accept those as conveying the same idea: Christ had an unchangeable nature at every point in eternity, of doing the exactly right thing. For me, the idea that He grew “from grace to grace” in His pre-mortal life, before we were spirits, does not contradict that He is unchangeable. He learned and grew by observation of Heavenly Father and by observation of the sphere of existence where He was. It would seem He brought an innate ability to learn extremely quickly and thus “was like unto God” when we knew Him from the very first instant that we did know Him.

 

[ParkerD]

But aren’t all spirit’s “begotten” by heavenly parents?

Zaffiroborant,

I have read that term used in LDS teachings, but I think there is a distinction that can be drawn that I haven’t seen that really does extend to the term “Only Begotten Son”, since those words are used in describing Christ during His pre-mortal life. So I really do appreciate this conversation–to have gained a new perspective.

 

[JeanMichel]

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.

Steve are you saying you actually understand the process of creation? Or is it that you choose not to ask for clarification beyond saying, “God said” and so that is all that is needed to know. What Mormons have done is attempt to offer a deeper, but still shallow, explanation for the process of creation.

I see such a forced straining on specific words; never seeking understanding. Jumping from one point to the next. Never responding to comments where similarities exist and then to continues drive-by posts from those with an axe to grind. The reality is that the world of Christianity call Catholics and Mormons both cults. Pot meet kettle.

At the end of the day, when both Catholics and Mormons kneel down to pray. They pray to God in the name of the Son. They both place their entire hope for salvation in Christ.

Now, why do we fight like the spawn of hell?

 

[BartBurk]

Bart Burk,

Thanks for these quotes. They are fairly consistent with others I read as I looked at this subject, except that the following quote by Ezra Taft Benson gives a different connotation and highlights the “unchangeable” nature of Christ:

"In his Lectures on Faith, the Prophet Joseph Smith listed six divine attributes of God that men must understand in order to have faith in Him. The Book of Mormon bears constant witness that Christ possesses all these attributes.

First, God is the Creator and upholder of all things. King Benjamin said, “He created all things, … he has all wisdom, and all power.” (Mosiah 4:9.)

Second, God is distinguished by the excellency of His character, His mercy, long-suffering, and goodness. Alma testified that Christ is “full of grace, equity, and truth, full of patience, mercy, and long-suffering.” (Alma 9:26.)

Third, God changes not. Mormon revealed that “God is not … a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.” (Moro. 8:18.)

Fourth, God cannot lie. The brother of Jared declared, “Thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.” (Ether 3:12.)

Fifth, God is no respecter of persons. Mormon testified that “God is not a partial God.” (Moro. 8:18.)

Sixth, God is a God of love. Of this divine attribute Nephi wrote that the Lord “doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world, even that he layeth down his own life.” (2 Ne. 26:24.)"

I would merge the ideas of Christ’s “unchangeable” attribute and the idea expressed by Bruce R McConkie, and accept those as conveying the same idea: Christ had an unchangeable nature at every point in eternity, of doing the exactly right thing. For me, the idea that He grew “from grace to grace” in His pre-mortal life, before we were spirits, does not contradict that He is unchangeable. He learned and grew by observation of Heavenly Father and by observation of the sphere of existence where He was. It would seem He brought an innate ability to learn extremely quickly and thus “was like unto God” when we knew Him from the very first instant that we did know Him.

God never had to learn to be God. God is just God. I appreciate Ezra Taft Benson’s talk and suspect he was much closer to the truth than McConkie. Benson was also an admirer of C. S. Lewis from what I understand. Perhaps his time in the Eisenhower administration did him some good since I understand J. Willard Marriott and Billy Graham were good friends and that Benson had contact with Graham through him. You have shown from the Book of Mormon there is no reason to accept McConkie’s idea. I don’t think there is any way to square McConkie’s idea with what is taught in the Book of Mormon. Of course Joseph Smith’s King Follet sermon suggests that God had to learn to be God. It would have saved the Mormons a lot of trouble if he had never given that sermon as well as the one in the temple grove area he gave right before he was shot.