LDS: Jesus always God?

[ParkerD]

Then I’ll ask again, this time in a grammatically correct fashion (get off my back, people, it was late!):

1. To whose will was Heavenly Father obedient when he was on an earth?
2. But according to the passage PaulD quoted, the Bible is “full” of that idea:
3. So Joseph Smith not only thought this belief was scriptural, but that the Bible was “full” of it. I’d hate to think you’re misrepresenting LDS theology, Parker.

Cradle2Grave,

1. I don’t consider that He was needing to be obedient other than to truth because He loves truth. He could obey truth without having a divine Person to answer to other than Himself because of His love for truth, light, goodness, wisdom, and unconditional love in action.

I have noted that Jesus had a different role in that He was obedient to His Father and to His Father’s will even though He knew perfectly well what to do in obedience to laws of truth and light and perfect, unconditional love; because Jesus was also setting the example for us to follow, and it would have been contrary to that example for Him to teach that He was obeying truth without also being perfectly willing to follow His Father’s will, and did that perfectly. He was double-teaching by doing this. Jesus, always the perfect Teacher, is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and Light of the world.

1. The Bible certainly teaches that we are invited to become “sons of God”, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that we are offspring of God who can become “joint heirs” with Jesus Christ. So I don’t disagree with Joseph Smith’s statement in this one talk he gave where he made that statement, but he didn’t elaborate enough to settle questions about the concept and it was never voted upon as either scripture or as a teaching that is settled doctrine.
2. Again, if and when it were to be presented as either scripture or as a teaching or formal statement that is unitedly voted upon by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles and then presented to Church members, then it will be settled doctrine and can be considered “LDS theology”.

 

[theidler]

Parker,

I am reading pretty astute and thorough responses to your on going posts…

Your presentations are typical of Mormon prosletyzers and apologists…deflective, endless word games taking on convoluting meanings, denying teachings and then providing us your own.

I don’t keep tally and notes on your answers, but I am beginning to wonder if and how many times you have deviated from your deflections considering the number of posts you have on CAF…

Since I have been here, many Catholics have given you pretty substantial answers, including the Gospel of Christ Himself…

So you believe, really believe, that although Jesus Christ is God, Joseph Smith trumps His teachings?

The first and greatest gift of entering into the Life of God through Christ is communion here on earth, this communion, peace and good will. The next sign that are the 7 gifts of the Holy Spirit that prove we are living in divine sonship with the Lord. And the other sign that we are living as adopted sons and daughters of God is being faithful to the gospel.

Nothing can take the place of a good, clean conscience and peace in one’s soul.

The three points in a man’s soul that contradict the presence of the Holy Spirit are Pride, Power and Greed…and I always see Mormon temples placed next to or within the most affluent and caucasian communities…

Well said Kathleen. I am not sure how the doctrines and history of Mormonism are even remotely defensible. Talk about having your work cut out for you.
To me, my feelings about the whole thing are still pretty much right in line with Mark Twain’s.

 

[KathleenGee]

Well, …

We have the Church who interprets what is necessary and authentic. But the Church is also open to Biblical studies where Catholics can form them with certain themes, such as feminist Biblical studies…they are private studies for personal embellishment, but these same participants – as Church – must be faithful to the Church’s interpretation.

However, when you get different interpretations of the same word, and you are going out into different realms, then the one constant is Jesus Christ.

Is our understanding of meanings of words faithful to the Eternal Word, Jesus Christ???

Two many deviating meaning of words, thoughts causing fracture in the understanding of faith that we have witnessed in Judeo Christianity, even to the point of contradicting our other reflections…it can be said there is some kind of error at work in the whole exercise that is not bearing witness to the truth and spirit of Jesus Christ.

 

[KathleenGee]

One of the great things being Catholic, and you are an active participant if you go to daily Mass, is the lives of the saints down through the ages, hearing their stories for the homily and seeing how their witness was reflected in the same spirit of faith as the liturgical readings.

It is even better as these feast days come during the liturgical year with all the different seasons and symbols…all works to proclaim Jesus Christ in the witness of faith…all have different charisms and works that we can imitate and aspire to…but the one constant that doesn’t change is Christ.

 

[Pepband_Mom]

Janderich

I notice the billboard campaign in my city and the I am mormon.org card (with happy faces) my daughter received from her friend; sorry I just couldn’t help noticing another poster who happens to show up to share the*“restored gospel”*.

I pray the Holy Spirit will convict you of the Way, the Truth and the Life; The Real I Am Who Am who 'knows of no other" god; The Unchanging, Omniscient, All-Knowing, All-Loving God vs. a Smith, Young & friends engineered imposter.

Continuous Catholic/LDS discussion is dwarfed by the notion of LDS males’ impending “Godhood”, the 800 lb. GORILLA in the ROOM. Funny, LDS gentlemen tend to dodge, deflect, NO, RUN FROM THAT QUESTION. Janderich are you or aren’t you going to be a god? I invite you to be honest as it is *fair game *to discuss, is it not? At the end of the day, what does it matter though if your goal is godhood?

 

[theidler]

Janderich

I notice the billboard campaign in my city and the I am mormon.org card (with happy faces) my daughter received from her friend; sorry I just couldn’t help noticing another poster who happens to show up to share the*“restored gospel”*.

I pray the Holy Spirit will convict you of the Way, the Truth and the Life; The Real I Am Who Am who 'knows of no other" god; The Unchanging, Omniscient, All-Knowing, All-Loving God vs. a Smith, Young & friends engineered imposter.

Continuous Catholic/LDS discussion is dwarfed by the notion of LDS males’ impending “Godhood”, the 800 lb. GORILLA in the ROOM. Funny, LDS gentlemen tend to dodge, deflect, NO, RUN FROM THAT QUESTION. Janderich are you or aren’t you going to be a god? I invite you to be honest as it is *fair game *to discuss, is it not? At the end of the day, what does it matter though if your goal is godhood?

I might be wrong, but I think the notion of godhood has been brought up already…
The fact is, Mormonism uses many of the similar terms that Christianity does, but it has nothing in common with it whatsoever. I find it so bizarre that Mormons wish to be considered Christians by Protestants, Orthodox, and Catholics, when they consider them as apostates. Why not simply hold themselves as a completely different religion altogether???

 

[ParkerD]

But that’s the point, we do take the place of God if you are right. We go to our own planet and rule there as if there is no other gods anywhere. Do you worship or acknowledge God the Father’s God? Mormons usually say that we do not need to worry about this higher being and should only really focus on our God. So, our God would have taken the place of the higher God in our lives instead of being like the angels and always pointing back to the very first God.

I also am awaiting clarification as to whether you believe there ever was a self-sufficient being who was the first God, or if you believe there is an infinite regress of gods.

A. Heuchler

Heuchler,

First, we don’t “go to our own planet and rule there”. For those who become joint heirs with Jesus Christ, who created this world, then they are made “ruler over many things”, but they also join “with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to go no more out” and thus the Celestial city is where those who are made “rulers” dwell.

They are made “kings and priests” unto God, meaning He is still the Almighty, Supreme governing One, and those who have become one with Him and with Jesus Christ through Christ’s atoning grace and through their repentance, never stop being one with Them. They don’t suddenly leave Their presence nor leave Their influence. They have truly become “joint heirs” and become “one with Them,” eternally.

Second, we don’t know what it will mean as compared with this life, for those who are mortal people on other worlds. There are definitely differences as compared with this world. Jesus saves many other people on many other worlds than this world, yet He only lived His life on earth here on this one. Those in other worlds created by Jesus would of course learn to have faith in Jesus Christ and in His atoning grace, and would pray to God the Father just as Jesus taught to do in this world. I expect that spirit children will pray to God the Father, and will learn about Jesus Christ as their Savior when they take a mortal tabernacle on the earth where they live. They will have scriptures that pertain to the world they live on.

As far as your final question, I don’t feel the need to know the answer to that question, and feel also that to be impatient about not knowing the answer means I would be “counseling” the Lord, rather than seeking wisdom from Him according to His timetable, not mine. It is not my place to know the answer to that question–not something to fear wondering about, but there is plenty to learn that God has placed within our learning sphere to learn and increase in understanding as well as application of the knowledge. I am comfortable that the scriptures have given adequate knowledge to come to know God and Jesus Christ, whom He sent, through studying those, through living a life following the truths He taught, and through seeking the testimony of fire born by the witness of the Holy Ghost.

 

[ParkerD]

What does ‘meaningful’ have to do with existence?..

Everything, as far as I’m concerned. I am grateful for and rejoice in having a meaningful existence, where learning is juxtaposed with experiencing opposition rather than having a “free ride”.

 

[Heuchler]

Heuchler,

First, we don’t “go to our own planet and rule there”. For those who become joint heirs with Jesus Christ, who created this world, then they are made “ruler over many things”, but they also join “with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to go no more out” and thus the Celestial city is where those who are made “rulers” dwell.

They are made “kings and priests” unto God, meaning He is still the Almighty, Supreme governing One, and those who have become one with Him and with Jesus Christ through Christ’s atoning grace and through their repentance, never stop being one with Them. They don’t suddenly leave Their presence nor leave Their influence. They have truly become “joint heirs” and become “one with Them,” eternally.

Second, we don’t know what it will mean as compared with this life, for those who are mortal people on other worlds. There are definitely differences as compared with this world. Jesus saves many other people on many other worlds than this world, yet He only lived His life on earth here on this one. Those in other worlds created by Jesus would of course learn to have faith in Jesus Christ and in His atoning grace, and would pray to God the Father just as Jesus taught to do in this world. I expect that spirit children will pray to God the Father, and will learn about Jesus Christ as their Savior when they take a mortal tabernacle on the earth where they live. They will have scriptures that pertain to the world they live on.

As far as your final question, I don’t feel the need to know the answer to that question, and feel also that to be impatient about not knowing the answer means I would be “counseling” the Lord, rather than seeking wisdom from Him according to His timetable, not mine. It is not my place to know the answer to that question–not something to fear wondering about, but there is plenty to learn that God has placed within our learning sphere to learn and increase in understanding as well as application of the knowledge. I am comfortable that the scriptures have given adequate knowledge to come to know God and Jesus Christ, whom He sent, through studying those, through living a life following the truths He taught, and through seeking the testimony of fire born by the witness of the Holy Ghost.

Ah thank you for the clarification. But you still rule other worlds without giving any glory to our original God just as God the father has not been giving any of the glory to his first God seeing as he only tells us to care about him and him alone. If Mormonism is true, it seems like God the Father doesn’t care about his God and never gives glory to him. This is in comparison to Christ who always gave glory to God the Father always showing that he was where people should really look. Why isn’t this the same with God the Father? Why doesn’t He ever show that the real glory resides with His God through whom He is able to do everything like Jesus does?

 

[Telstar]

1. I don’t consider that He was needing to be obedient other than to truth because He loves truth. He could obey truth without having a divine Person to answer to other than Himself because of His love for truth, light, goodness, wisdom, and unconditional love in action.

I have noted that Jesus had a different role in that He was obedient to His Father and to His Father’s will even though He knew perfectly well what to do in obedience to laws of truth and light and perfect, unconditional love; because Jesus was also setting the example for us to follow, and it would have been contrary to that example for Him to teach that He was obeying truth without also being perfectly willing to follow His Father’s will, and did that perfectly. He was double-teaching by doing this. Jesus, always the perfect Teacher, is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and Light of the world.

Since Jesus is the “the Way, the Truth and the Life”, as well as the “Light of the World”, are you saying that the Father was somehow obedient to Jesus? That’s what you seem to be saying here, which proposes a rather strange dichotomy.

What do you think Jesus actually meant when He said that He was “the Way, the Truth and the Life”? What was He referring to by making that statement?

I don’t know about Jesus “double-teaching”, but you certainly seem to be doing some fancy double-speaking in your run-on sentences. :ehh:

1. The Bible certainly teaches that we are invited to become “sons of God”, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that we are offspring of God who can become “joint heirs” with Jesus Christ. So I don’t disagree with Joseph Smith’s statement in this one talk he gave where he made that statement, but he didn’t elaborate enough to settle questions about the concept and it was never voted upon as either scripture or as a teaching that is settled doctrine.

When Joseph Smith first started to create his religion, and was still writing the original version of the D&C, did he have to propose each and every one of them to some kind of ‘council’ to be voted on, before he could declare them to be ‘doctrine’, even though he claimed that they came directly from the “mouth of God”? What about the command to Emma about his polygamy, that he added, later?

1. Again, if and when it were to be presented as either scripture or as a teaching or formal statement that is unitedly voted upon by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles and then presented to Church members, then it will be settled doctrine and can be considered “LDS theology”.

What was the process for approving doctrine before there was ever an established hierarchy in the church? Didn’t Joseph Smith just declare it to be true, and everyone else just had to accept it because he was believed to a prophet? Why would there be any question about this particular point that he certainly seemed to be so sure about? Did Moses ever need to call together a council, to have the people approve of his commands that came from God? Why would the LDS church be any different concerning the commands of their prophets?

 

[KathleenGee]

THeidler…

Yes that is a shared observation…they consider us ‘apostate’, but want to be recognized as fellow Christians…strange bedfellow relationship…

It is getting to the point for me that I would rather just ask the Mormon men here to let it go, and join us, – get into the straight talk, call a spade a spade…It’s been going on for 2,000 years and is pretty much self-restoring because the Holy Spirit is at work.

Some of my most favorite priests were those who ‘called a spade a spade’, straight shooters…

 

[ParkerD]

Ah thank you for the clarification. But you still rule other worlds without giving any glory to our original God just as God the father has not been giving any of the glory to his first God seeing as he only tells us to care about him and him alone. If Mormonism is true, it seems like God the Father doesn’t care about his God and never gives glory to him.

Heuchler,

If God the Father has a Father and is One with His Father, then that relationship is precisely like the relationship between Jesus Christ and God the Father. Jesus worshiped God the Father, and taught us to do so also. God the Father could certainly and would certainly “care about” and “worship” His Father if He was not the “very first God” as you put the earlier question. He can do things and we not know about them–goes without saying. He gives us what we need, what is for our best good, for us to make choices about progressing, and it is always going to be on His timetable or when we digress from His timetable then we digress from making progress in learning in the eternal sense.

This is in comparison to Christ who always gave glory to God the Father always showing that he was where people should really look. Why isn’t this the same with God the Father? Why doesn’t He ever show that the real glory resides with His God through whom He is able to do everything like Jesus does?

The children of Israel were to look unto the “rock from whence they were hewn”, unto the rock of their salvation, and look upon the raised brazen serpent that was a symbol of the Savior, Jesus Christ, at the point in time when they were being stung with poison. They were to look to Jesus Christ for their salvation and as their example, and we have that same position in our lives.

Jesus is the only way to God the Father, and Jesus taught this. “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” is what He taught. So we don’t bypass Jesus Christ–we look to Him as the “author and finisher of our faith”. God the Father gave these roles to Jesus Christ, giving Him full authority and “all power”. (“All power is given unto me” is what Jesus said.)

If the scenario were true about God the Father having a Father, then it would be the situation that “all power was given unto Him” eons of time before this world was created, and then through Him, all power was and is given unto Jesus Christ in the pre-mortal spirit world and again before His ascension with His resurrected body, as He said.

The Son becomes the center of focus for regaining the Father’s presence, including all our trust being placed in Him.

 

[couponfit]

Hi, Dcana,

Merry Christmas to you also, and great peace for the New Year.

Latter-day Saints use the expression, “God,” “God the Son”, or “the Son of God”, and not the other lower case version you had in parenthesis whenever referring to Jesus Christ as God.

Jesus being literally the Son of God, with power over death because He was the Son of God and thus possessed the power within Himself to resurrect Himself and to give up His own life through death when it was time through His own voluntary act, was God when He was born of Mary. His literal Father was God the Father, through Mary’s conception by the power of the Holy Ghost sanctifying her body to carry in her womb the Son of God, having conceived Him through miraculous divine means since she was a virgin and remained a virgin then and until after He was born.

Jesus had been God omnipotent in the pre-mortal world where He offered to come to this earth to be our Redeemer and Savior. He was omniscient and omnipotent and in full accord with Father in Heaven in all ways, during the time beginning when He was the “First Born” in the spirit and all the time after that, but came to earth as a baby with a veil over His memory and with the learning process a part of His life on earth. He “increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” He “waxed strong in spirit”. So that would mean He wasn’t “equal in all ways to His Father” in terms of omniscience as a baby or a toddler. But by the time He was twelve years old, He possessed greater wisdom and understanding than the most learned of the learned Jewish scholars. No question that He learned faster than any other person on earth has ever learned, by a huge magnitude of difference.

He was worshiped by the wise men who came to the place where He was at about age two, and both Anna and Simeon also showed that they knew He was the promised Messiah and the light of the world when they saw Him soon after He was born. If one of us had been there and were familiar with the Biblical prophecies about Him and about His birth, then no doubt we would have felt the same desire to worship Him as did the wise men. It was a totally righteous act to do so.

But that is not to say that Jesus possessed “infinite wisdom” at that point in His life on earth as a baby and a toddler. He “increased in wisdom” (Luke 2:52), so that means He experienced a learning process from the time He was a baby up through some time before age thirty when He began His actual public ministry, but learned faster and with perfectness in that learning as compared with any other person on earth, each of whose learning is very imperfect and much more gradual.

I hope this has answered your questions.

I’d like to add onto this, that Christ had to deal with sinners, who had finite minds and explain to them that which was new: Heaven. Imagine how hard it must really be to explain something to someone that I they could never comprehend or accept. Further, Christ’s own divinity was not completely clear to all, meaning that every day people spoke to Christ and accepted him as a man in many instances, some even saw him as a false prophet or a con artist. I used to use the think that Jesus learned! I think a better more explicit explanation is that Jesus interacted with those who learned and grew and regressed and repressed.

Christ often spoke in parables! He often dealt with people of different faiths and levels of faith, and he was patient in most instances, and definitely could be persuaded or was at least flexible to each person he dealt with.

 

[ParkerD]

Since Jesus is the “the Way, the Truth and the Life”, as well as the “Light of the World”, are you saying that the Father was somehow obedient to Jesus?

No, not at all.

What do you think Jesus actually meant when He said that He was “the Way, the Truth and the Life”? What was He referring to by making that statement?

That He is the only way to learn to know the Father and to regain the presence of the Father.

What was the process for approving doctrine before there was ever an established hierarchy in the church? Didn’t Joseph Smith just declare it to be true, and everyone else just had to accept it because he was believed to a prophet? Why would there be any question about this particular point that he certainly seemed to be so sure about? Did Moses ever need to call together a council, to have the people approve of his commands that came from God? Why would the LDS church be any different concerning the commands of their prophets?

Moses did indeed seek the vote of the people as commanded by God to do.

Joseph Smith prepared the scriptures that were voted upon by the people as to whether they were being accepted to be the word of God. This was part of the revealed process, and means the people learn that they have a responsibility to listen, pray about the teachings, confirm their truth through the Holy Ghost bearing witness, and then living by the truths they have voted to accept.

 

[JHow]

…If the scenario were true about God the Father having a Father, then…

God would not be God if there was some other god before him.

 

[ParkerD]

I’d like to add onto this, that Christ had to deal with sinners, who had finite minds and explain to them that which was new: Heaven. Imagine how hard it must really be to explain something to someone that I they could never comprehend or accept. Further, Christ’s own divinity was not completely clear to all, meaning that every day people spoke to Christ and accepted him as a man in many instances, some even saw him as a false prophet or a con artist. I used to use the think that Jesus learned! I think a better more explicit explanation is that Jesus interacted with those who learned and grew and regressed and repressed.

Christ often spoke in parables! He often dealt with people of different faiths and levels of faith, and he was patient in most instances, and definitely could be persuaded or was at least flexible to each person he dealt with.

Great post:thumbsup:

 

[ParkerD]

God would not be God if there was some other god before him.

JHow,

Jesus, Jehovah, gave the Ten Commandments to Moses and the children of Israel. This is one of the reasons the Jews didn’t accept Christ as their Savior, and became so upset when He said He is “I AM”.

It makes more sense to me that “before me” isn’t talking about a time sequence, but is talking about having central focus on Jesus Christ, the “author and finisher of our faith”.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Janderich

I notice the billboard campaign in my city and the I am mormon.org card (with happy faces) my daughter received from her friend; sorry I just couldn’t help noticing another poster who happens to show up to share the*“restored gospel”*.

:

Hey Mom, you might want to pay some extra attention to the friend that gave the card to your daughter. It appears to be rather standard procedure for LDS to proselytize other peoples children behind their backs. On a pro LDS board I’ve read the “testimony” of 4 or 5 LDS who are happy they were encourage to sneak around, and these testimonies are cheered on by those who were raised in the church. Other boards for former LDS also have tales of those who were proselytized as a teens behind their parents backs, the only difference is, on those boards the action is condemned.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

Cradle2Grave,

1. I don’t consider that He was needing to be obedient other than to truth because He loves truth. He could obey truth without having a divine Person to answer to other than Himself because of His love for truth, light, goodness, wisdom, and unconditional love in action.

Got it. So Heavenly Father was not obedient to anything other than “truth” while he was on an earth.

However, I do believe that the Father is a glorified, exalted Man of Holiness who lived on an earth and was obedient just as Jesus Christ was perfectly obedient.

Got it. So Jesus Christ was not obedient to Heavenly Father while he was on this particular earth. He was only obedient to “truth.”

I have noted that Jesus had a different role in that He was obedient to His Father and to His Father’s will even though He knew perfectly well what to do in obedience to laws of truth and light and perfect, unconditional love;

Got it. So Jesus Christ was obedient to Heavenly Father while he was on this particular earth.

However, I do believe that the Father is a glorified, exalted Man of Holiness who lived on an earth and was obedient just as Jesus Christ was perfectly obedient.

Got it. So Jesus Christ was not obedient to Heavenly Father while he was on this particular earth. He was only obedient to truth.

… because Jesus was also setting the example for us to follow, and it would have been contrary to that example for Him to teach that He was obeying truth without also being perfectly willing to follow His Father’s will, and did that perfectly. He was double-teaching by doing this. Jesus, always the perfect Teacher, is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and Light of the world.

Got it. So Jesus Christ was obedient in a different way than Heavenly Father was when they were both on their respective earths.

However, I do believe that the Father is a glorified, exalted Man of Holiness who lived on an earth and was obedient just as Jesus Christ was perfectly obedient.

Got it. So Jesus Christ was obedient in the same way that Heavenly Father was obedient when they were both on their respective earths.

1. The Bible certainly teaches that we are invited to become “sons of God”, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that we are offspring of God who can become “joint heirs” with Jesus Christ. So I don’t disagree with Joseph Smith’s statement in this one talk he gave where he made that statement,

Got it. The Bible “certainly teaches” what Joseph Smith was saying. And you don’t disagree with it.

but he didn’t elaborate enough to settle questions about the concept and it was never voted upon as either scripture or as a teaching that is settled doctrine.

Got it. Joseph Smith’s statement was not based on scripture, and you don’t believe it.

1. Again, if and when it were to be presented as either scripture or as a teaching or formal statement that is unitedly voted upon by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles and then presented to Church members, then it will be settled doctrine and can be considered “LDS theology”.

Got it.

One last thing, then:

As I had noted, that talk occurred in 1844, and it would need to be explained in terms of Joseph Smith’s other teachings that God the Father is the Supreme Ruler of the universe,

Would you mind telling me upon what day and year it was when Joseph Smith specific teachings that “God the Father is the Supreme Ruler of the universe” were presented either as scripture or as a teaching or formal statement? And upon what day and year were Joseph Smith specific teachings that “God the Father is the Supreme Ruler of the universe” voted upon by the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles? And upon what day and year were they then presented to Church members?

Thanks.

 

[Telstar]

No, not at all.

OK, but your references to the Father obeying the “truth” and the “light” were a little confusing to me, especially with your last comments referring to Jesus in that way.

That He is the only way to learn to know the Father and to regain the presence of the Father.

That’s somewhat different and a bit more simplistic than how I see it. You basically just described what He meant by being the “way”, in one sentence.

IMHO, the “Way” refers to Jesus being the Way of God. He is the only ‘way’ for any of us to get to Heaven, and we all need to follow His Way, first and foremost (He also said that He was the ‘door’ that we all must enter through, to receive eternal life). So, Jesus is the only way to ever reach God. But, He is also the embodiment of the Way of God in the sense that His whole life is a perfect example of the way that God deals with all mankind, through His kindness, gentleness, tenderness, mercy, and most of all through His great love for all of us. That’s the same way that He wants us to follow Him, by doing all that He did for our fellow man.

The “Truth” means that He is, literally, the embodiment of the Truth of God. When the Bible speaks of the Truth, it is always referring to Jesus in some capacity, the same way it refers to Him as being the Word of God. If we don’t have Jesus, then we can’t possibly have the real truth. If we don’t follow Him, then we don’t follow the real truth.

The “Life” means that Jesus is the eternal Life of God, in this world as well as in the next. Even while He walked the earth, He was the true embodiment of Eternal Life. Unless He had freely laid down His life for our salvation, no one in this world could have ever taken it from Him. Without Him in us, we will never have eternal life in us. We get His eternal life in us through the Holy Eucharist.

Moses did indeed seek the vote of the people as commanded by God to do.

For everything he said or did as a prophet, that God commanded him to do? I’d appreciate it if you could elaborate with some Bible passages. I’m not so sure that he called for a vote every time God commanded him to do something, especially when he was pronouncing the plagues on Egypt. I don’t recall him calling for a vote from anyone about that, or about the Ten Commandments that God gave to him. I recall something about them being etched in stone, even though he broke the tablets when he found the Israelites worshiping the golden calf because they had already broken them by their own actions.

Joseph Smith prepared the scriptures that were voted upon by the people as to whether they were being accepted to be the word of God. This was part of the revealed process, and means the people learn that they have a responsibility to listen, pray about the teachings, confirm their truth through the Holy Ghost bearing witness, and then living by the truths they have voted to accept.

He did that for every single doctrine in the D&C? Was there always a unanimous vote to accept it all? Did they ever reject any doctrine that he personally proposed to them as being the command of God?