Question regarding Mormon views on God

  • Thread starter Thread starter cbelarski
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cbelarski

Guest
My unserstanding is that LDS doctrine teaches that God and Jesus are seperate exaulted men and not one in the same. Is this correct? If so, which one does LDS doctrine teach was talking to the Old Testament prophets?
 
You are correct - LDS consider Son and Father two separate persons.

Jehovah of the Old Testament or LORD is Jesus Christ of the New.

"Knowing the distinction between LORDand Lord helps us understand the story of Hannah and Eli in 1 Samuel 1:1–28 [1 Sam. 1:1–28]. In verse 11, Hannah makes a vow with the LORDfor a child. Then when Eli, the high priest, accuses her of being drunk (v. 14), Hannah says, “No, my lord.” Her use of lord shows her reverence for the high priest. Her calling upon the LORD shows her pleading with Jehovah. When we understand the distinctions between LORD, Lord, and lord, we can see what publishers have done. We can find Jesus Christ in the Old Testament by substituting Jehovah for LORD whenever it appears. Then something wonderful happens. Jehovah, who is Jesus Christ, appears from beginning to end of this great book as the God of the Old Testament. 3

The Savior’s ministry on earth did not begin with His birth. He is “the eternal I AM,” the Lord God Omnipotent who appeared to the patriarchs and prophets of old, who delivered Israel from Egypt, who gave the law on Sinai, and who guided and inspired the righteous prophets, priests, seers, judges, and kings of the Old Testament."

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=c4278c6a47e0c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Never did ask how LDS handle Psa 110:1
"Psa 110:1 ¶ [A Psalm of David.]] The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. "
Here, Jehovah YWHW is speaking to Christ. A lovely JW text as well.
 
jw2lds2catholic said:
You are correct - LDS consider Son and Father two separate persons.

Jehovah of the Old Testament or LORD is Jesus Christ of the New.

"Knowing the distinction between LORDand Lord helps us understand the story of Hannah and Eli in 1 Samuel 1:1–28 [1 Sam. 1:1–28]. In verse 11, Hannah makes a vow with the LORDfor a child. Then when Eli, the high priest, accuses her of being drunk (v. 14), Hannah says, “No, my lord.” Her use of lord shows her reverence for the high priest. Her calling upon the LORD shows her pleading with Jehovah. When we understand the distinctions between LORD, Lord, and lord, we can see what publishers have done. We can find Jesus Christ in the Old Testament by substituting Jehovah for LORD whenever it appears. Then something wonderful happens. Jehovah, who is Jesus Christ, appears from beginning to end of this great book as the God of the Old Testament. 3

The Savior’s ministry on earth did not begin with His birth. He is “the eternal I AM,” the Lord God Omnipotent who appeared to the patriarchs and prophets of old, who delivered Israel from Egypt, who gave the law on Sinai, and who guided and inspired the righteous prophets, priests, seers, judges, and kings of the Old Testament."

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=c4278c6a47e0c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Never did ask how LDS handle Psa 110:1
"Psa 110:1 ¶ [A Psalm of David.]] The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. "
Here, Jehovah YWHW is speaking to Christ. A lovely JW text as well.
Click to expand...
So LDS believe that they are two seperate “persons” to each have an independant human body?
 
Cat_Herder said:
Yes :bigyikes:
Click to expand...
We beleive that the Father has a body of flesh and bone, as does His Son, now in His resurrected body, yes.

Something about Genesis, and us having been 'created in [His] image."

and there is no ‘yikes’ about that.

Our beliefs are what they are. Would you be all that happy with me, Cat Herder, if I said something like, oh…“Catholics believe that Mary was a virgin all her life and didn’t die!..:bigyikes: ??”

If you want others to treat your beliefs with respect, then it would be a good idea to treat others the same way.

"m just sayin’, is all.
 
Wow, do the LDS claim to have scriptural reference for this teaching? By scripture, I do not mean “modern revelation”.
 
:nope: That is beyond :juggle:

I just don’t see how they can believe all that…“stuff”

That “modern revelation” is in the Doctrines and Covenants. Therefore it is doctrine, unless they have a new revelation, saying that it is no longer so.
 
dianaiad said:
We beleive that the Father has a body of flesh and bone, as does His Son, now in His resurrected body, yes.

Something about Genesis, and us having been 'created in [His] image."

and there is no ‘yikes’ about that.
Click to expand...
Except the need to explain, say, the Big Bang.
 
cbelarski said:
Wow, do the LDS claim to have scriptural reference for this teaching? By scripture, I do not mean “modern revelation”.
Click to expand...
Yes.
Gen. 1: 27 (Moses 2: 27) God created man in his own image.
Gen. 5: 1 God created man, in the likeness of God made he him.
Gen. 9: 6 in the image of God made he man.
Gen. 18: 33 Lord went his way, as soon as he had left communing.
Gen. 32: 30 I have seen God face to face.
Ex. 24: 10 they saw the God of Israel, there was under his feet.
Ex. 31: 18 (Deut. 9: 10) written with the finger of God.
Ex. 33: 11 Lord spake unto Moses face to face.
Ex. 33: 23 thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not.
Num. 12: 8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth.
Matt. 3: 17 a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son.
Matt. 4: 4 every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Matt. 17: 5 a voice out of the cloud.
Luke 24: 39 for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
John 14: 9 he that hath seen me hath seen the Father.
Acts 7: 56 the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
Rom. 8: 29 predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son.
2 Cor. 4: 4 Christ, who is the image of God.
Philip. 2: 6 who, being in the form of God.
Philip. 3: 21 our vile body . . . fashioned like unto his glorious body.
Col. 1: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God.
Heb. 1: 3 the express image of his person.
James 3: 9 men which are made after the similitude of God.
1 Jn. 3: 2 when he shall appear, we shall be like him.
Rev. 22: 4 they shall see his face.

…and it would be more polite, given that there actually ARE Mormons who post here, to ask one of us directly what our beliefs are.

Diana, being unusually curmudgeonly and testy this evening.
 
dianaiad said:
We beleive that the Father has a body of flesh and bone, as does His Son, now in His resurrected body, yes.

Something about Genesis, and us having been 'created in [His] image."

and there is no ‘yikes’ about that.

Our beliefs are what they are. Would you be all that happy with me, Cat Herder, if I said something like, oh…“Catholics believe that Mary was a virgin all her life and didn’t die!..:bigyikes: ??”

If you want others to treat your beliefs with respect, then it would be a good idea to treat others the same way.

"m just sayin’, is all.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute…there was nothing disrespectful! Cat Herder simply answered my question with a link to back up the answer. If you consider a face of shocking suprise to be disrespectful maybe you are a little too sensitive. It is a piece of your doctrine that is VERY different from the Catholic theology of the Holy Trinity, and to all Christian denominations that could be received as shocking. Does not mean your belief is being “disrespected”…m just sayin’, is all.
 
Diana, the original question was posted at 6:07, and you did not reply until 8:13. Now, obviously, you cannot sit at a computer 24/7. There are others who can answer questions just as well as you: just because they are not LDS really doesn’t matter, so long as the responses are accurate.

Why don’t you just relax into one of your more friendly moods?
 
LongJourney said:
:nope: That is beyond :juggle:

I just don’t see how they can believe all that…“stuff”

That “modern revelation” is in the Doctrines and Covenants. Therefore it is doctrine, unless they have a new revelation, saying that it is no longer so.
Click to expand...
Yes. I am aware of your opinion, LJ.

However, is it too much to ask that you…and others here, remember that very real people believe LDS doctrine, and it would be a good idea to treat them, and their doctrines, with a tad bit more respect?

Disagreement? OF course, IF you agreed, you’d be LDS…criticism and disagreement is what debate forums are for; to debate and to learn. NOT to disparage and mock.

But I would ask you to, for instance, go look at my posts regarding Catholic Marian doctrine, most of which I disagree with. Have I even once used emoticons like :juggle: or :bigyikes: or treated those beliefs with even the tiniest bit of disrespect?

Do you really think that Jesus would approve?

I mean, if only because mocking other people’s beliefs is not the most effective method in the world to get the believers to change their minds.
 
cbelarski said:
My unserstanding is that LDS doctrine teaches that God and Jesus are seperate exaulted men and not one in the same. Is this correct? If so, which one does LDS doctrine teach was talking to the Old Testament prophets?
Click to expand...
Yes, Mormons believe that the Father and the Son are both exalted men, with bodies of flesh and bones, and that the God of the Old Testament, Jehovah, is the same person as Jesus Christ.

I think we also need to be clear on what you mean by “one in the same”. In traditional Christianity, the Father and the Son are not the same Person. I’m actually currently reading a Mormon book called “A Marvelous Work and a Wonder”, which makes this very common error. Trinitarians believe that the Father and the Son are the same Being, however, we do not believe that they are the same Person, which would be a heresy known as Modalism. The problem with this terminology is that today, we tend to use “Person” and “Being” interchangeably, however we must realize that the Trinity doctrine was defined over 1000 years ago, in a non-English speaking world, and we are thus using translations of Greek/Latin words, and Trinitarians therefore are not using “Being” and “Person” interchangeably as we would today.

So, my main point in this regard is that Trinitarians believe, as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as various Ecumenical Councils, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, who are not each other, and when we say that they are “one in the same” (if we do at all, as I do not like that phrase unless further clarification is provided, as it is vague), we mean that they are of the same nature, but they are not the same Person, which is a heresy.
 
There are times that I prefer emoticons over words. You, on the other hand, seem to prefer words. Just individual differences. I think it is a cultural thing.

Yes, we regard those differences in belief to be shockingly— different. Do you regard “Jesus was only a prophet, and nothing else?” to be shockingly different? 🤷
I mean, if only because mocking other people’s beliefs is not the most effective method in the world to get the believers to change their minds.
Click to expand...
This is not mocking, it is only expressing shock and surprise. Unless God performs a miracle, your mind will never be changed.
 
dianaiad said:
…and it would be more polite, given that there actually ARE Mormons who post here, to ask one of us directly what our beliefs are.

Diana, being unusually curmudgeonly and testy this evening.
Click to expand...
Uh, he started a thread asking a question, and therefore the Mormon posters are free to answer the question (which was not directed to non-Mormons only)…
 
jw2lds2catholic said:
You are correct - LDS consider Son and Father two separate persons.

Jehovah of the Old Testament or LORD is Jesus Christ of the New.

"Knowing the distinction between LORDand Lord helps us understand the story of Hannah and Eli in 1 Samuel 1:1–28 [1 Sam. 1:1–28]. In verse 11, Hannah makes a vow with the LORDfor a child. Then when Eli, the high priest, accuses her of being drunk (v. 14), Hannah says, “No, my lord.” Her use of lord shows her reverence for the high priest. Her calling upon the LORD shows her pleading with Jehovah. When we understand the distinctions between LORD, Lord, and lord, we can see what publishers have done. We can find Jesus Christ in the Old Testament by substituting Jehovah for LORD whenever it appears. Then something wonderful happens. Jehovah, who is Jesus Christ, appears from beginning to end of this great book as the God of the Old Testament. 3

The Savior’s ministry on earth did not begin with His birth. He is “the eternal I AM,” the Lord God Omnipotent who appeared to the patriarchs and prophets of old, who delivered Israel from Egypt, who gave the law on Sinai, and who guided and inspired the righteous prophets, priests, seers, judges, and kings of the Old Testament."

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=c4278c6a47e0c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Never did ask how LDS handle Psa 110:1
"Psa 110:1 ¶ [A Psalm of David.]] The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. "
Here, Jehovah YWHW is speaking to Christ. A lovely JW text as well.
Click to expand...
Hello and thanks for citing sources.

I am assuming that all Catholics completely understand that Jehovah from the Old Testament is Jesus Christ, before He came to earth. (I didn’t know that until just recently, which I was glad to find out about.)

As far as Psalms 110:1, the Savior Himself quoted that verse and used it to show that the Christ of the Jewish prophecies was Jehovah. He thus was very comfortable using that verse to testify Who He was.
 
dianaiad said:
Yes.
Gen. 1: 27 (Moses 2: 27) God created man in his own image.
Gen. 5: 1 God created man, in the likeness of God made he him.
Gen. 9: 6 in the image of God made he man.
Gen. 18: 33 Lord went his way, as soon as he had left communing.
Gen. 32: 30 I have seen God face to face.
Ex. 24: 10 they saw the God of Israel, there was under his feet.
Ex. 31: 18 (Deut. 9: 10) written with the finger of God.
Ex. 33: 11 Lord spake unto Moses face to face.
Ex. 33: 23 thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not.
Num. 12: 8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth.
Matt. 3: 17 a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son.
Matt. 4: 4 every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Matt. 17: 5 a voice out of the cloud.
Luke 24: 39 for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
John 14: 9 he that hath seen me hath seen the Father.
Acts 7: 56 the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
Rom. 8: 29 predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son.
2 Cor. 4: 4 Christ, who is the image of God.
Philip. 2: 6 who, being in the form of God.
Philip. 3: 21 our vile body . . . fashioned like unto his glorious body.
Col. 1: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God.
Heb. 1: 3 the express image of his person.
James 3: 9 men which are made after the similitude of God.
1 Jn. 3: 2 when he shall appear, we shall be like him.
Rev. 22: 4 they shall see his face.

…and it would be more polite, given that there actually ARE Mormons who post here, to ask one of us directly what our beliefs are.

Diana, being unusually curmudgeonly and testy this evening.
Click to expand...
What is confusing to me about the LDS doctrine is that even if you buy into the LDS theology that these old testament quotes are to be taken literally and without contextual interpretation, I was told earlier that the LDS doctrine is that the LORD of the old testament is Jesus. So it seems to me that based on this and the LDS theology of God and Jesus being seperate “persons” most of what you are referencing just proves that Jesus had/has a body???
 
I read that Mormon’s also believe Jesus and Satan are brothers…both son’s of God and one was good and the other rebelled and was bad. Is that why we say the creed and stress “the ONLY son of God”?
 
LongJourney said:
Diana, the original question was posted at 6:07, and you did not reply until 8:13. Now, obviously, you cannot sit at a computer 24/7. There are others who can answer questions just as well as you: just because they are not LDS really doesn’t matter, so long as the responses are accurate.

Why don’t you just relax into one of your more friendly moods?
Click to expand...
LJ…you know me much better than to say something that silly. Of course it matters! 😉

You know by now that I’m a bit of a fanatic obsessive about this; if you want to know what a religion teaches, you go to the believers, NOT to non-believers, and especially not to people who are actively anti–or to ex-members.

My comment was to the way the question was phrased; yes, I’m testy, but c’mon; the OP (and followup post) was not addressed to Mormons…and made it rather clear that Mormons were not welcome to answer. He didn’t ask 'What do you believe?" He asked everybody else what they (Meaning those wierd Mormons) believed. This poster also (as did others) poisoned the well by telling us that we can’t explain why we believe this using scriptures that WE accept as valid.

Big. Red. Flag.

Isn’t that a bit like requiring Catholics to explain why they believe in this or that thing–without using Holy Tradition? It’s assinine. I absolutely agree that if I am going to try to prove to YOU that something we believe is ‘True,’ then I am restricted to those things we both consider to be authoritative–like those scriptures that are in the bible; the same goes for Catholics who want to prove to Protestants (or us…) that any certain doctrine is “True.”

However, to simply show what they ARE, and why we (and Catholics, for that matter) believe something, then those extra-biblical sources are important. They are part of our beliefs, our faith and our culture. If someone wants to know what Mormons and Catholics actually believe, then they ARE going to have to be willing to look at Holy Tradition—and the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price–what modern prophets have to say. They certainly don’t have to agree with what is said, or accept those sources as authoritative, but they DO have to accept that those sources are important to the folks who believe them.

…and I’ll bet you anything you like that this poster would much rather accept what you have to say than what I do. Been there, done that, using the t-shirt to clean paint brushes.

Diana, ticked off.
 
cbelarski said:
What is confusing to me about the LDS doctrine is that even if you buy into the LDS theology that these old testament quotes are to be taken literally and without contextual interpretation, I was told earlier that the LDS doctrine is that the LORD of the old testament is Jesus. So it seems to me that based on this and the LDS theology of God and Jesus being seperate “persons” most of what you are referencing just proves that Jesus had/has a body???
Click to expand...
What I find interesting is that these verses are being cited as evidence that God the Father is corporeal (has a body), since those verses come from the LDS Topical Guide entry on “God, Body of-Corporeal Nature”, and that the “us” in Genesis 1:26 (“Let us make man in our image”) refers to both the Father and the Son. The problem here is that at this point, the Son did not yet have a body, since He did not incarnate on this earth yet (since this is during the Creation). So, how can this verse be used as proof of the Father having a body, when the verse is supposed to be the Father talking to the Son, and the Son did not yet have a body?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top