LDS: Jesus is the "son" of God?

[Catholic_Dude]

Our belief is that Jesus Christ is seperate from the father and is the literal Son of God physically. We don’t care about how God the Father had sex but its clear he is the only one who is the literal Son of God.

How do you answer the question about Adam being created from the dust of the ground (ie no sex of any kind)? And how do you answer this in light of the fact Luke 3 calls Adam the “son of God”?

 

[BDawg]

How do you answer the question about Adam being created from the dust of the ground (ie no sex of any kind)? And how do you answer this in light of the fact Luke 3 calls Adam the “son of God”?

Hi CD,

Personally, I think the “dust of the ground” bit is a metaphor for evolutionary processes. Believing that God used evolution is permissible in Mormonism, as well as Catholicism.

 

[BDawg]

I understand what you mean by different ways “God’s DNA” could have been “implanted”, my point (the Catholic view) is that the fundamental issue has not changed much. The idea of God having DNA and even spreading that DNA is a “real issue” because it impacts just who/what God is. For example, sexual reproduction is a function of created material beings, it is not how God creates. If God is codependent on a “wife” in order to create then the concept of God as almighty and creator of the universe is greatly distorted. You cannot be “almighty” and codependent. Further, God is perfect and whole, things like DNA, blood, pee, etc cannot be taken away from Him nor can they be separate and distinct “parts” of Him. The Theological ramifications are very significant and make the difference between a pagan god or the One True God, mixing up the two is blasphemy by definition.

Hi CD,

I agree that this is the real heart of many issues between Catholics and LDS. Do you want to discuss that, instead?

 

[PaulDupre]

Hi CD,

Personally, I think the “dust of the ground” bit is a metaphor for evolutionary processes. Believing that God used evolution is permissible in Mormonism, as well as Catholicism.

I agree with you on that.

 

[gentlefaith]

Do you know of official lds documents that say these things or is this stuff that they dont talk about? Is this required belief for a mormon?

Many are unaware? Whats the logical conclusion then for them? .

the LDS church does not encourage questions, it’s is not that they don’t care, they are taught to believe without question. if you question, your faith is lacking and you need to pray more, if it becomes an issue you can get disfellowshipped for asking. Most born and bred Mormons never give a thought to asking any questions. there are incredibly good people in the LDS church and they follow their faith devotedly

people like me who ask why… well i am not a mormon anymore.

 

[BDawg]

the LDS church does not encourage questions, it’s is not that they don’t care, they are taught to believe without question. if you question, your faith is lacking and you need to pray more, if it becomes an issue you can get disfellowshipped for asking. Most born and bred Mormons never give a thought to asking any questions. there are incredibly good people in the LDS church and they follow their faith devotedly

people like me who ask why… well i am not a mormon anymore.

I have never understood why many people who leave a particular faith (not just the Mormons) have to act like all the people who stay in the faith are poor, deluded sheep who can’t think for themselves. Could it be possible that some of these people do question their faith, and have found answers that satisfy them? Could it be possible that two rational people might come to opposite conclusions, given the same evidence?

I have to admit that I’ve listened to a few Mormons talk about their former religions in that manner, and I admired them at the time. Now they leave a bad taste in my mouth, because I recognize that most of them are just like the ex-Mormons who talk that way about us. The truth is that most of these people are weak-minded suck-ups who don’t really have the intellectual horsepower under the hood to wade through complicated issues in a rational manner. But they want to be seen as Galileo-type martyrs, who suffered for insisting on the TRUTH.

 

[mjf001]

I have never understood why many people who leave a particular faith (not just the Mormons) have to act like all the people who stay in the faith are poor, deluded sheep who can’t think for themselves. Could it be possible that some of these people do question their faith, and have found answers that satisfy them? Could it be possible that two rational people might come to opposite conclusions, given the same evidence?

I have to admit that I’ve listened to a few Mormons talk about their former religions in that manner, and I admired them at the time. Now they leave a bad taste in my mouth, because I recognize that most of them are just like the ex-Mormons who talk that way about us. The truth is that most of these people are weak-minded suck-ups who don’t really have the intellectual horsepower under the hood to wade through complicated issues in a rational manner. But they want to be seen as Galileo-type martyrs, who suffered for insisting on the TRUTH.

I disagree. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone who holds themselves up as a martyr. Here’s the problem. Objectively speaking, there can only be one truth. Either LDS theology is true or Catholicism is true. They can not both be true. There may be pieces of the truth found in one or the other, but pieces of the truth does not mean the theology as a whole is true. In my opinion, the preponderance of the evidence is weighed heavily against the LDS position. I left the LDS faith because I didn’t believe it was true. When I found my faith in God, again, I never even gave the LDS faith a second look. I felt it was a lie. I started RCIA simply to learn more about the Catholic faith. I had no intention of actually joining. But during the course of RCIA with the questions which were answered in RCIA, and my private reading, primarily the Internet, the Catechism of the Catholic church, and the Bible, I found the answers I was looking for. I no longer had to ignore science, rational thought, or secular history, and the things I was asked to take on faith, the Trinity, the Virgin Birth, etc. were not an overwhelming obstacle.
I was not weak minded or sucking up to anyone. I was looking for the truth, it took a long time because I was told to stay away from the Church which actually answered my questions and made the world make a little more sense. A place where faith and reason were not at odds, but in harmony.****

 

[zerinus]

zerinus;1515219:

Here is a major difference between LDS theology and the Catholic one. We believe that Jesus was not the only one who existed before He was born. We believe that ALL

mankind existed before they were born. Thus in this respect there is no difference between Jesus and the rest of mankind.

Hi again Zerinus,
WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAT???

If you would, can you please try and explain this a bit better for me. ( where, if it is, in the BoM that this is taught and explained)

Thanks ( as always ) for your time in responding

God bless,
Carl

First of all this is an ancient thread. It is nearly two years old! Somebody likes diging up old threads, and bumping them up to the top. But to answer your question: One of the distinctive features of LDS Church is the belief in the pre-existence. We believe that just as life will not end in death, it did not begin at birth either. We believe that the spirits of all men were created by God in the pre-existence before they were born into mortality. Mortality is a testing ground in which we prove our faithfulness to God; and after that we pass on to grater glories. There are numerous references in LDS scripture that teach that doctrine. Here are some:

D&C 93:

23 Ye were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is Spirit, even the Spirit of truth

---

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. . . .

D&C 138:

56 Even before they were born, they, with many others, received their first lessons in the world of spirits and were prepared to come forth in the due time of the Lord to labor in his vineyard for the salvation of the souls of men.

Moses 3:

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air;

Moses 6:

51 And he called upon our father Adam by his own voice, saying: I am God; I made the world, and men before they were in the flesh.

Abraham 3:

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;

23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.

We believe that this doctrine is also contained in the Bible, although other Christians might interpret them differently so as to avoid that interpretation:

Num. 16:22 (27:16) God of the spirits of all flesh
Job 38:7 all the sons of God shouted for joy
Eccl. 12:7 the spirit shall return unto God who gave it
Jer. 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee
Zech. 12:1 Lord … formeth the spirit of man within him
John 9:2 who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind
Acts 17:28 poets have said, For we are also his offspring
Rom. 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate
Eph. 1:4 chosen us in him before the foundation of the world
Heb. 12:9 subjection unto the Father of spirits
Jude 1:6 angels which kept not their first estate
Rev. 12:7 Michael and his angels fought against the dragon

Origen and many other early Christian theologians also believed in the pre-existence; but it never caught on in the Christian world, and the belief gradually died out. Modern LDS scripture, however, teaches that that doctrine was indeed correct.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I see what you are saying but the problem is still there. Even if it wasn’t physical relations the idea that God’s DNA mixed with Mary’s DNA to create Jesus still seems to be what you believe, except you don’t claim how God’s DNA “got there”. Catholics believe such a notion is blasphemous and a misunderstanding of the nature of God (eg no DNA). If you don’t believe it was literal relations then how can you also argue it was literal “begetting”?

Who says anything about DNA. You are bringing up DNA. We do not know how Jesus’ body was formed in the womb. The Bible teaches that Jesus was to be born of the “seed of David”. That may mean that He inherited all of His DNA from that line. We simply do not know. None of these things discounts the fact that Jesus was literally the Son of God in the flesh, because He was born by the miraculous intervention of God, and not through human intercourse—DNA or no DNA. That is the only thing that we know for sure about it. Nothing further has been revealed about how Jesus was conceived and born. The Bible teaches that Jesus was called the Son of God by virtue of the fact that He was born by divine intervention, and not by the natural process:

Luke 1:

35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Jesus was called the Son of God because that is how He was born—DNA or no DNA.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I understand what you mean by different ways “God’s DNA” could have been “implanted”, my point (the Catholic view) is that the fundamental issue has not changed much. The idea of God having DNA and even spreading that DNA is a “real issue” because it impacts just who/what God is. For example, sexual reproduction is a function of created material beings, it is not how God creates. If God is codependent on a “wife” in order to create then the concept of God as almighty and creator of the universe is greatly distorted. You cannot be “almighty” and codependent. Further, God is perfect and whole, things like DNA, blood, pee, etc cannot be taken away from Him nor can they be separate and distinct “parts” of Him. The Theological ramifications are very significant and make the difference between a pagan god or the One True God, mixing up the two is blasphemy by definition.

See my previous post.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Hi CD,

Personally, I think the “dust of the ground” bit is a metaphor for evolutionary processes. Believing that God used evolution is permissible in Mormonism, as well as Catholicism.

I am not too sure about that one"

zerinus

 

[BDawg]

I am not too sure about that one"

zerinus

Hi Z,

Sure about what?

 

[BDawg]

I disagree. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone who holds themselves up as a martyr. Here’s the problem. Objectively speaking, there can only be one truth. Either LDS theology is true or Catholicism is true. They can not both be true. There may be pieces of the truth found in one or the other, but pieces of the truth does not mean the theology as a whole is true. In my opinion, the preponderance of the evidence is weighed heavily against the LDS position. I left the LDS faith because I didn’t believe it was true. When I found my faith in God, again, I never even gave the LDS faith a second look. I felt it was a lie. I started RCIA simply to learn more about the Catholic faith. I had no intention of actually joining. But during the course of RCIA with the questions which were answered in RCIA, and my private reading, primarily the Internet, the Catechism of the Catholic church, and the Bible, I found the answers I was looking for. I no longer had to ignore science, rational thought, or secular history, and the things I was asked to take on faith, the Trinity, the Virgin Birth, etc. were not an overwhelming obstacle.
I was not weak minded or sucking up to anyone. I was looking for the truth, it took a long time because I was told to stay away from the Church which actually answered my questions and made the world make a little more sense. A place where faith and reason were not at odds, but in harmony.****
Hi mj,

I never said that everyone who leaves a religion is one of those people I described. And naturally, if you leave a religion, it would most of the time be because you don’t believe it anymore. As I implied in my previous post, I think it is possible for a reasonable person to come to the conclusion that the LDS Church is false, and that the RCC is true (or vice versa). There are complicated issues involved.

Rather, I was talking about people who can’t recognize that fact of life, and have to paint all the adherents of their former faith as mindless sheep. Are you one of those people?

 

[zerinus]

Hi Z,

Sure about what?

I personally don’t believe that the Darwinian theory of Evolution (i.e. the development of higher life forms from lower ones through millions of years of evolutionary process and natural selection) is compatible with LDS doctrine—neither is it a proven scientific fact. I assume that is what you meant in your previous post.

zerinus

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I don’t think you can explain religious ideas using science. It’s ridiculous to talk about DNA and evolution when we are speaking about God. Faith comes from the heart, not from the mind. Nobody can be sure of what heaven consists of, or how God created the world, etc. I don’t think the Bible should be taken literally, most of it is very poetic. What people should be getting out of the Bible and their religion is how to live righteously and lovingly and with their hearts turned toward God, who is beyond human comprehension.

I don’t so much difference between Mormons and Catholics on their beliefs. Neither understands the Virgin birth of Jesus, nor how it occured. But we both believe that Jesus is the Son of God who was born of the Virgin Mary.

 

[ibkc]

I don’t so much difference between Mormons and Catholics on their beliefs.

To put it bluntly, if you really don’t think there’s much of a difference, then you know very little about either Mormonism or Catholicism.

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

First of all this is an ancient thread. It is nearly two years old! Somebody likes diging up old threads, and bumping them up to the top. But to answer your question: One of the distinctive features of LDS Church is the belief in the pre-existence. We believe that just as life will not end in death, it did not begin at birth either. We believe that the spirits of all men were created by God in the pre-existence before they were born into mortality. Mortality is a testing ground in which we prove our faithfulness to God; and after that we pass on to grater glories. There are numerous references in LDS scripture that teach that doctrine. Here are some:

D&C 93:

23 Ye were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is Spirit, even the Spirit of truth

---

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. . . .

D&C 138:

56 Even before they were born, they, with many others, received their first lessons in the world of spirits and were prepared to come forth in the due time of the Lord to labor in his vineyard for the salvation of the souls of men.

Moses 3:

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air;

Moses 6:

51 And he called upon our father Adam by his own voice, saying: I am God; I made the world, and men before they were in the flesh.

Abraham 3:

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;

23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.

We believe that this doctrine is also contained in the Bible, although other Christians might interpret them differently so as to avoid that interpretation:

Num. 16:22 (27:16) God of the spirits of all flesh
Job 38:7 all the sons of God shouted for joy
Eccl. 12:7 the spirit shall return unto God who gave it
Jer. 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee
Zech. 12:1 Lord … formeth the spirit of man within him
John 9:2 who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind
Acts 17:28 poets have said, For we are also his offspring
Rom. 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate
Eph. 1:4 chosen us in him before the foundation of the world
Heb. 12:9 subjection unto the Father of spirits
Jude 1:6 angels which kept not their first estate
Rev. 12:7 Michael and his angels fought against the dragon

Origen and many other early Christian theologians also believed in the pre-existence; but it never caught on in the Christian world, and the belief gradually died out. Modern LDS scripture, however, teaches that that doctrine was indeed correct.

zerinus

Hi again my new friend Zerinus,

AS always, I do kindly appreciate your time in responding.

I have digested it and would offer a sincere ( JUST DON"T GET IT ). I fully realize ( as evident by you and your " other Morman posters " that you indeed do have a strong belief and a seeming great knowledge of Mormonism that you generously share with guys like me ( Thanks )

I would also add : ( no disrespect intended ) and ( I am NOT judging you due to th fact that I am in NO position to judge, quite the contrary, I am broken just like the rest of us, if not more so)

I not only DON"T GET THE WHOLE DOCTRINE , but I also DON’T GET how reasonable, educated, thought provoking people such as yourself, can be SO LOCKED DOWN and defend with such absolute certainty, the real and historic " issues " that sorround the VERY BIRTH of the faith. ( does not make sense to me)

( I am truly sorry if that was offensive, it WAS NOT DIRECTED AT YOU OR THE OTHER MORMAN MEMBERS of this site.
I do appreciate ALL the information that is available to me on this site.

I DO APPRECIATE YOUR
( knowledge of Mormanism )
( warm responses to me )
( undeniable defense of your faith )
( genuine willingness to respond as a Mormon )
( devoutness )
( sharing with guys like me )

Hope this came across as genuine and honest,

God bless,
Carl

 

[zerinus]

Hi again my new friend Zerinus,

AS always, I do kindly appreciate your time in responding.

I have digested it and would offer a sincere ( JUST DON"T GET IT ). I fully realize ( as evident by you and your " other Morman posters " that you indeed do have a strong belief and a seeming great knowledge of Mormonism that you generously share with guys like me ( Thanks )

I would also add : ( no disrespect intended ) and ( I am NOT judging you due to th fact that I am in NO position to judge, quite the contrary, I am broken just like the rest of us, if not more so)

I not only DON"T GET THE WHOLE DOCTRINE , but I also DON’T GET how reasonable, educated, thought provoking people such as yourself, can be SO LOCKED DOWN and defend with such absolute certainty, the real and historic " issues " that sorround the VERY BIRTH of the faith. ( does not make sense to me)

( I am truly sorry if that was offensive, it WAS NOT DIRECTED AT YOU OR THE OTHER MORMAN MEMBERS of this site.
I do appreciate ALL the information that is available to me on this site.

I DO APPRECIATE YOUR
( knowledge of Mormanism )
( warm responses to me )
( undeniable defense of your faith )
( genuine willingness to respond as a Mormon )
( devoutness )
( sharing with guys like me )

Hope this came across as genuine and honest,

God bless,
Carl

Thank you for sharing with us your skepticism of Mormonism. However, let me assure you that as an educated person, I have no difficulty at all in accepting all aspects of Mormon doctrine, including the pre-existence. Indeed, in all honesty I can say that I have not a shadow of doubt in my mind that they are true. Hope that helps.

zerinus

 

[majick275]

Thank you for sharing with us your skepticism of Mormonism. However, let me assure you that as an educated person, I have no difficulty at all in accepting all aspects of Mormon doctrine, including the pre-existence. Indeed, in all honesty I can say that I have not a shadow of doubt in my mind that they are true. Hope that helps.

zerinus

have you even taken your A levels yet?

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

Thank you for sharing with us your skepticism of Mormonism. However, let me assure you that as an educated person, I have no difficulty at all in accepting all aspects of Mormon doctrine, including the pre-existence. Indeed, in all honesty I can say that I have not a shadow of doubt in my mind that they are true. Hope that helps.

zerinus

Hi again Z,

Sounds like you were offended ( sorry ) ( atleast I was honest )

Your welcome for my skepticism. ( though you should be thanking JS for the skepticism ). Allow me to assure you that as a slightly educated person, I have severe problems accepting most aspects of Mormon doctrine, especially the very Birth of it.
I can honestly say that there are so many shadows in my mind that it would not resemble a distant cousin of " truth ".
have serious reservations that will help.

God bless,
Carl