LDS: Did God 'create' Jesus?

[KathleenGee]

The Bible tells us not to listen to false angels. There is no Moroni in the Bible.

St. Michael says ‘Who is like unto God?’…and Scripture states Adam and Eve were tempted to become as gods.

Everything about glorification and progression and exaltation is placing and assuming one’s place separate from God, or wanting to be like Him. It is not clear and comes across as rationalizing, and rejecting all the insights and theological reflections we have shared as Christians. To deny historical documents but believe in teachings or revelations from an unknown angel so many years after the life of Christ, and the lives of priests and Christians within Salvation History behooves me.

The Eucharist is the answer to this seeking of union with God…Christ gave Himself to us through the Eucharist, His death on the Cross, His resurrection and glorification in heaven.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD:

These are your doctrinal sources. I don’t recall any of those sources in the Bible.

Miriam,
Zaffiroborant had asked for LDS specific sources. But here is a good Biblical source:

1 John 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

This is a response on another forum from a former Mormon to a Mormon poster:

Th*en perhaps you will share which of these is which:

1. Mormons believe in many, many gods.
2. Mormons believe that Jesus Christ was created and not eternally God.
3. Mormons believe that the gods breed in heaven in order to create additional spirit children.
4. Mormons believe polygamy is STILL practiced in heaven.
5. Mormons believe they can qualify to become gods with their own planet, wives and worshippers.

OK, which of those statements are TRUE …?*

1. Mormons believe in One God in the same sense that that term is used in the scriptures and in the sense of being One as Christ prayed in His great intercessory prayer. So, your answer is “no”.

1. This thread has covered that topic. Jesus really is the Only Begotten Son and the Firstborn, and from our (Biblical, God-given) perspective was and has been “eternally God”–so your answer is “no”.

1. Definite “no”, but there is marriage in heaven. Marriage is about a totally unselfish relationship, including love and deep mutual understanding and affection.

1. In the same way that Jacob had more than one wife, the answer is “yes” but that applies only for certain points in time on the earth or for a second marriage after a woman had died.

1. Mormons believe in marriage in heaven, in the opportunity to receive a joint throne with Jesus Christ, and that participating in Creations of earths will be a part of having eternal joy as families. This earth we live on is not the only earth in the universe. The Father and the Son will always be the center of worship and adoration.

 

[ParkerD]

… or wanting to be like Him. It is not clear and comes across as rationalizing, and rejecting all the insights and theological reflections…

KathleenGee,
Those would be the theological reflections that reject the following plain and clear teachings:

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

Revelation 3: 21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

Revelation 21: 7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Zaffiroborant,
Here is the support, straight from pure doctrinal sources:

Moses 1:6 And I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the similitude of mine Only Begotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the Savior, for he is full of grace and truth; but there is no God beside me, and all things are present with me, for I know them all…
32 And by the word of my power, have I created them, which is mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth.
33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.

Moses 2:1 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto Moses, saying: Behold, I reveal unto you concerning this heaven, and this earth; write the words which I speak. I am the Beginning and the End, the Almighty God; by mine Only Begotten I created these things; yea, in the beginning I created the heaven, and the earth upon which thou standest.

Moses 5:9 And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will.
• • •
57 For they would not hearken unto his voice, nor believe on his Only Begotten Son, even him whom he declared should come in the meridian of time, who was prepared from before the foundation of the world.

Moses 6:52 And he also said unto him: If thou wilt turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice, and believe, and repent of all thy transgressions, and be baptized, even in water, in the name of mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth, which is Jesus Christ, the only name which shall be given under heaven, whereby salvation shall come unto the children of men, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, asking all things in his name, and whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be given you.

D & C 76:13 Even those things which were from the beginning before the world was, which were ordained of the Father, through his Only Begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, even from the beginning;…

25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,…

Alma 5: 48
48 I say unto you, that I know of myself that whatsoever I shall say unto you, concerning that which is to come, is true; and I say unto you, that I know that Jesus Christ shall come, yea, the Son, the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace, and mercy, and truth. And behold, it is he that cometh to take away the sins of the world, yea, the sins of every man who steadfastly believeth on his name.
Alma 9: 26
26 And not many days hence the Son of God shall come in his glory; and his glory shall be the glory of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace, equity, and truth, full of patience, mercy, and long-suffering, quick to hear the cries of his people and to answer their prayers.

I think you may have noticed when I responded to BartBurk that I had not thought in much depth about the differentiation between “Only Begotten Son in the flesh” and “Only Begotten Son”. I had thought I was making it clear, and if not then I hope I am making it clear to you now that I believe the words as given in the scriptures–the Bible as well as those cited above–give true doctrine, and the words “in the flesh” are not included and thus there is a differentiation that means more than “in the flesh.” The words mean exactly what they say.

As far as Zipporah, anyone who simply goes to the internet looking for religious truth is going to be “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine” and until anyone in that kind of situation sincerely seeks the voice of the Good Shepherd and the confirming influence of the Holy Ghost, then nothing I would write in this forum would help them past a smidgen and they would still be “carried about with every wind of doctrine” until such time as they stopped using the internet as their source.

Reminder to other readers: please, when reading words that are sacred language talking about God and His Son, do so with reverence toward using those words–I assume most feel that reverence but it is hard to convey in a conversation without the personal voice being heard by the reader. Peace to all.

But it doesn’t explain how The Father can have an “Only Begotten Son” when we are all (you, me, Jesus, Snefru, and so on) spirit sons and daughters of Heavenly Parents. Unless it is like Mike Reed suggests, on a thread on the MADB on this very subject, that it is a title given to one who fills a position. If you would like to read what your fellows have said on the subject you can find the thread here

 

[ParkerD]

But it doesn’t explain how The Father can have an “Only Begotten Son” when we are all (you, me, Jesus, Snefru, and so on) spirit sons and daughters of Heavenly Parents. Unless it is like Mike Reed suggests, on a thread on the MADB on this very subject, that it is a title given to one who fills a position. If you would like to read what your fellows have said on the subject you can find the thread here

Zaffiroborant,

Thanks kindly. I honestly have never spent time reading a MADB conversation, so that was a “first”.

I think they (including Mike Reed, although his insights were unique and very helpful–I had already thought about the use of “only begotten son” in relation to Isaac) could have decided that the full meaning of the differentiation between the other “spirit children” of Father in Heaven and His Only Begotten Son, Jehovah, has not been revealed and perhaps that could be because the question was never asked by a modern prophet, or if asked was left as an unanswered question.

I think it minimizes the Greatness and uniqueness of Jehovah to merely assume that the words “in the flesh” are often added because that is the intended understanding. I think if that had been the intended understanding about His uniqueness as the Only Begotten Son, it would have been conveyed directly in the scriptures, yet no scriptural passage uses those words or even hints that that is the differentiation–so it is far more than being the Firstborn and being the Perfect Son and the Only Begotten “in the flesh” and the foreordained Redeemer.

I also think BartBurk’s citing of the scriptural phrase “are begotten sons and daughters unto God” was a key point that seems to have been overlooked by the MADB folks as they discussed this topic.

Again, thanks. I appreciate your having taken the interest to add the additional comment and the link.

 

[SteveVH]

1. This thread has covered that topic. Jesus really is the Only Begotten Son and the Firstborn, and from our (Biblical, God-given) perspective was and has been “eternally God”–so your answer is “no”.

Parker, I find this to be a very curious statement. God’s nature is not dependant upon man’s “perspective” or knowledge. I think you are skirting the issue here. Our knowledge of the nature of God comes to us through the revelation of His only Word, Jesus Christ. “I and the Father are one”. “When you have seen me, you have seen the Father.”

John tells us that “God is love.” Love cannot exist unless there is an object of that love. There must be a lover and a beloved. God is love because God is a family. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father, and the love between the Father and the Son is so real, so intense, that this love constitutes another Person altogether. This has been so from eternity. The Father is eternally the Father. The Son is eternally the Son. The Holy Spirit is eternally the Holy Spirit, without beginning and without end. The fact that we cannot wrap our minds around it does no make it any less true. God did not become a Father. He has always been Father because the Son has always been the Son. He was never not the Father and Jesus was never not the Son.

Being made in God’s image and likeness, the human family follows this same pattern. A man and a woman become one flesh and the result of that love between them is another Person, so real that you have to give it a name nine months later. The difference is that we are creatures, we are not “eternal”. We had a beginning, at the moment of our conception. We, being creatures, "become". God, as He revealed early on, IS. His name is I AM, not “I HAVE BECOME”.

 

[BartBurk]

Zaffiroborant,

I also think BartBurk’s citing of the scriptural phrase “are begotten sons and daughters unto God” was a key point that seems to have been overlooked by the MADB folks as they discussed this topic.

I have tried to get Mormons to consider what that verse in D&C 76 means for many years. I wish they would consider the implications of that verse for their understanding of the Father and the Son and even “Heavenly Parents”. This verse may be one of the most important verses for the LDS to consider as they look at early Mormonism and how absolutely orthodox Mormonism was in the beginning. I think it invalidates many of their later conclusions and am a little surprised they seem to intentionally overlook what it is saying.