Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
marineland

Christ at the premortal council

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

My questions aren't attacking your position, but I'm asking for clarification because some things aren't making sense to me.

I have zero sense that you're attacking anything or anyone. My question was solely meant to clarify my answer. If Jesus can be fully like us and fully divine at the same time, then saying that God was/is like us doesn't require the Father having been any less divine than Jesus. Does that make sense?

Edited by Hamba Tuhan

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I haven zero sense that you're attacking anything or anyone. My question was solely meant to clarify my answer. If Jesus can be fully like us and fully divine at the same time, then saying that God was/is like us doesn't require the Father having been any less divine than Jesus. Does that make sense?

Ok, sorry if I misread the way you were reading me :) 

I guess my question might be this: was God the Father different than Jesus prior to the Father's exaltation? It seems like he must have been different, because if he was like we are now, it seems like we are different than Jesus when he was on the earth. Does that question make sense?

God prior to exaltation = the same as us now

Jesus on Earth = not the same as us now

So God prior to exaltation = not the same as Jesus on Earth

When did Jesus receive his exaltation?

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

You're going to have to provide a better reference than that, Robert. I reckon one could argue that Christ wasn't fully fully divine until after His resurrection, but that's not what we mean by the term. 

Nothing has been decided until that crucial Divine Council is held.  That is what the Book of Abraham describes.  Only afterward could Divine Investiture of Authority take place.  You have no indication that it took place beforehand.  Of course, the collapse of diachronic time may be entailed in what we see in the Temple, as well as in real life, which could throw a wrench into any calculus.

Quote

Of course! In part, that is what makes God God. Being the greatest of all and lacking any external oversight, He could make any choice He would, but He doesn't. That in no way means we have to worry that He might. He is a fit object of our faith.

The kenosis ("emptying") of himself of all power was the characteristic way in which the NT poses the matter (Philipp 2:7).  Jesus could not use any divine power to assist him in his confrontation with death, even though the moment of death liberated Him completely from human frailty.  He had to be fully able to feel the same temptation any of us feel, and to have the same potential to fail.  Otherwise his victory would be hollow and his atonement valueless.

Edited by Robert F. Smith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Jesus on Earth = not the same as us now

I don't know what to make of this statement. I can't think of any being more like us all than the mortal Jesus. He experienced everything we experience: temptation of every kind, hunger, thirst, fatigue, pain. He was 'like us in all things but sin'. But then, despite having no sin in Himself, he offered Himself a ransom for all mankind, making himself intimately familiar with the consequences of sin as well. I know what it's like to be me, and you know what it's like to be you, but Jesus knows -- intimately! -- what it's like to be both you and me ... and every other human to ever live on this planet.

Quote

When did Jesus receive his exaltation?

According to Peter and Paul, it was after the Crucifixion and Resurrection:

Quote

This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear ... Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

 

Quote

The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

 

Quote

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name ...

 

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That is what the Book of Abraham describes.  Only afterward could Divine Investiture of Authority take place.  You have no indication that it took place beforehand.

I'm unsure what obscure point you are trying to make here. Please feel free to quote verses from Abraham that you're alluding to. I'm happy to go by John 1:1-2 and similar passages.

Quote

He had to be fully able to feel the same temptation any of us feel, and to have the same potential to fail.  Otherwise his victory would be hollow and his atonement valueless.

Absolutely. (I genuinely don't understand why you keep repeating a point I've never disagreed with.) But that doesn't mean we couldn't place 100 per cent faith in Him from the beginning! Like the Father, He had and has every degree of agency. And like the Father, He will never use that agency to violate His promises to us -- of that we can be completely confident. We made choices in the pre-existence based on that confidence, and we were not wrong.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Generally speaking, the scion or heir to a throne does not become coregent until formal investment.  That he is the heir is already known and well understood due to his being the First Born.  However, as such he is no different otherwise from the rest of us -- a spirit child of his Father and our older Brother.  As with King Mosiah II, he cannot be coregent until the ceremony is held, the occasion being King Benjamin's speech -- during which Mosiah II's investiture took place.

Satan was upset and wanted to be the legal heir (Only Begotten), managing to convince a third of the host of heaven.  This was a big deal.

I am not quite sure what you are implying here. God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son... 

Every scripture you will find on the subject identifies Yeshua as the only begotten Son from the beginning.

Scripture also shows He was Yehovah Elohim from the beginning with the Father. However, there is no scripture to identify Him as the Most High Power. Luke says He would be called the Son of the Most High. You will probably recall my belief that Yeshua was El Shaddai. This would explain the term Elim used in the Tanakh. He was one of the Powers from the beginning. When I say beginning, I am using the scripturally accurate use as the beginning of the land or earth rather than the beginning of the universe. So during the whole of Yeshua's reign in this world, He has been "coregent" with the Father, but was not yet legal heir to the title of Father. He was the Father in the sense of being His legal agent. I think you have to agree that Yeshua is/was different from the rest of us. 

Perhaps you are referencing the scripture from D&C? 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I am not quite sure what you are implying here. God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son... 

Every scripture you will find on the subject identifies Yeshua as the only begotten Son from the beginning.

Scripture also shows He was Yehovah Elohim from the beginning with the Father. However, there is no scripture to identify Him as the Most High Power. Luke says He would be called the Son of the Most High. You will probably recall my belief that Yeshua was El Shaddai. This would explain the term Elim used in the Tanakh. He was one of the Powers from the beginning. When I say beginning, I am using the scripturally accurate use as the beginning of the land or earth rather than the beginning of the universe. So during the whole of Yeshua's reign in this world, He has been "coregent" with the Father, but was not yet legal heir to the title of Father. He was the Father in the sense of being His legal agent. I think you have to agree that Yeshua is/was different from the rest of us. 

I see no reason to understand Jesus as different from the rest of us, except in his position as legal heir from the time of his spiritual birth.  He is our elder brother.  The term Only Begotten refers to his earthly birth by God and Mary, which means that he is uniquely born as a human son of God the Father and Mary.  However, the same phrase applies to his diachronic status as legal heir from the time of his spiritual birth.  The same phrase is used of Isaac, son of Abraham, in which case he is Abraham's legal heir.

El Shaddai is merely an epithet identifying God as "God of Shadday," a Twin-Mountain geographical location near Haran.  Jesus/Yeshua merely means "Salvation."  Yahweh means "He who creates that which comes into existence."  These are titles rather than names, and can be borne by whichever person plays that role at the time.  Jesus merely fulfills the same roles his Father filled earlier.  God so loved the world that He sent his Legal Heir.

3 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Perhaps you are referencing the scripture from D&C? 

Which Scripture?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm unsure what obscure point you are trying to make here. Please feel free to quote verses from Abraham that you're alluding to. I'm happy to go by John 1:1-2 and similar passages.

Abraham 3:21-28

Quote

I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen.  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; 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.  And there stood one among them that was like unto God [Jesus], and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;  And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.  And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me [Jesus]. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me [Satan]. And the Lord said: I will send the first.  And the second was angry, and kept not his first estate [Satan]; and, at that day, many followed after him.

In other words, the decision was made at the Divine Council depicted here, and Jesus was selected/called to do the job.  Instead of Satan.  God the Father is here referred to as God and Lord.

5 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Absolutely. (I genuinely don't understand why you keep repeating a point I've never disagreed with.) But that doesn't mean we couldn't place 100 per cent faith in Him from the beginning! Like the Father, He had and has every degree of agency. And like the Father, He will never use that agency to violate His promises to us -- of that we can be completely confident. We made choices in the pre-existence based on that confidence, and we were not wrong.

If everything is known beforehand, what would be the point of the whole exercise of Earthlife?  Just to go through a simulation?  The third who followed Satan did not have to go with him.  That free choice was not predestined.  If Jesus had failed, the disaster would have been total.  Trust and faith carried us through, but the real possibility of failure had to be present.  And we are not out of the woods yet just based on our own performance in this Earthlife.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Trust and faith carried us through, but the real possibility of failure had to be present.

But couldn’t that be our failure rather than Christ’s failure?  Why couldn’t we be as certain of Christ’s part as we were of the Father’s since we would have had eternity to learn the value of Christ’s word and covenant?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I see no reason to understand Jesus as different from the rest of us, except in his position as legal heir from the time of his spiritual birth.  He is our elder brother.  The term Only Begotten refers to his earthly birth by God and Mary, which means that he is uniquely born as a human son of God the Father and Mary.  However, the same phrase applies to his diachronic status as legal heir from the time of his spiritual birth.  The same phrase is used of Isaac, son of Abraham, in which case he is Abraham's legal heir.

El Shaddai is merely an epithet identifying God as "God of Shadday," a Twin-Mountain geographical location near Haran.  Jesus/Yeshua merely means "Salvation."  Yahweh means "He who creates that which comes into existence."  These are titles rather than names, and can be borne by whichever person plays that role at the time.  Jesus merely fulfills the same roles his Father filled earlier.  God so loved the world that He sent his Legal Heir.

So typical to apply a temporal meaning to the scriptures. So either the Father told the one day old infant who you say was like the rest of us "thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee" or it just doesn't really mean anything. It is an oath. It is the beginning of a spiritual relationship. It is a spiritual legal begottenness rather than an earthly physical one. To me it is like saying the temple will give you blessings. No it won't. It was a building which God destroyed. It was mandated to be built to teach heavenly things which instead the Jews used to enrich themselves, and fight over the position of high priest. Yes, I do agree that God so loved the world that He sent His legal heir.... whom He had already chosen as His heir. That is the point. He wasn't chosen when He came out of Mary....God had already decided to send Him. See Abraham.... but you are welcome to keep trying to spin it. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, RevTestament said:

So typical to apply a temporal meaning to the scriptures. So either the Father told the one day old infant who you say was like the rest of us "thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee" or it just doesn't really mean anything. It is an oath. It is the beginning of a spiritual relationship. It is a spiritual legal begottenness rather than an earthly physical one. To me it is like saying the temple will give you blessings. No it won't. It was a building which God destroyed. It was mandated to be built to teach heavenly things which instead the Jews used to enrich themselves, and fight over the position of high priest. Yes, I do agree that God so loved the world that He sent His legal heir.... whom He had already chosen as His heir. That is the point. He wasn't chosen when He came out of Mary....God had already decided to send Him. See Abraham.... but you are welcome to keep trying to spin it. 

I pointed out that Jesus was the first born spiritual son and heir to God the Father, our elder brother.  I pointed out that Jesus was born as the human son of God the Father and Mary -- the only one so begotten -- which merely continued his status as heir.  Either you don't understand that, or you are rejecting it as "spin."  At the Divine Council in Heaven, God the Father selected Jesus over Satan as the Master Planner.  Jesus kept his First Estate.  Satan did not, and many followed after him.

God the Father said:

Quote

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.  And there stood one among them that was like unto God [Jesus], and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;  And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.  And the Lord [God the Father] said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me [Jesus]. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me [Satan]. And the Lord [God the Father] said: I will send the first.  And the second was angry, and kept not his first estate [Satan]; and, at that day, many followed after him.  Abr 3:23-28

God the Father makes his decision at that Council, and he selects his first born heir.  Only then does formal divine investiture of authority take place.

Edited by Robert F. Smith

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Calm said:

But couldn’t that be our failure rather than Christ’s failure?  Why couldn’t we be as certain of Christ’s part as we were of the Father’s since we would have had eternity to learn the value of Christ’s word and covenant?

We shouted for joy when the decision was made.  Later, the veil was drawn over our eyes, and we have had to find our way in this life by other means.  Easy certainty isn't one of those means.  It's a struggle.  Because we are fallible, Jesus must not be fallible.  Otherwise his sacrifice would have no value.

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Abraham 3:21-28

Mate, the passage you keep quoting in an attempt to support your view that the premortal Jesus was no different to the rest of us points out unambiguously that the premortal Jesus 'was like unto God'. Even more clearly, it notes that there was 'one among them that was like unto God' (emphasis added). In other words, amongst all of our Father's spirit children, Jehovah was uniquely divine. On this point, all scripture speaks with one voice.

Quote

If Jesus had failed, the disaster would have been total.  Trust and faith carried us through ...

Exactly. Trust and faith in Him. He possessed as much agency as we do, but, unlike the rest of us, he could be trusted fully to fulfil His divine mission. This is not about foreknowledge; it's about faith. We exercised faith in the future (to us) work of the Saviour before we were born in the same way that mortal Eve and Adam exercised faith in the future work of the Saviour ... and in the same way that we now exercise faith in the completed work of the Saviour. And Jesus, uniquely, was and is a worthy object of that trust and faith. No other child of our Heavenly Father was 'like unto God'. No other child of our Heavenly Father was worthy or able to redeem all mankind. No other child of our Heavenly Father deserved to be an object of our faith or adoration in the premortal world.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Mate, the passage you keep quoting in an attempt to support your view that the premortal Jesus was no different to the rest of us points out unambiguously that the premortal Jesus 'was like unto God'. Even more clearly, it notes that there was 'one among them that was like unto God' (emphasis added). In other words, amongst all of our Father's spirit children, Jehovah was uniquely divine. On this point, all scripture speaks with one voice.

The premortal Jesus was born a spirit child to God the Father just like the rest of us.  He was the first born and the heir.  We were not.  He was not invested with divine authority until the Divine Council had been held and the decision made on the replies by him and by Satan.  The textual sequence is clear, and God the Father is called Yahweh/Lord.  A coregency ceremony must then be held -- before the titles of the Father are applied to the One Like the Son of Man.

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Exactly. Trust and faith in Him. He possessed as much agency as we do, but, unlike the rest of us, he could be trusted fully to fulfil His divine mission. This is not about foreknowledge; it's about faith. We exercised faith in the future (to us) work of the Saviour before we were born in the same way that mortal Eve and Adam exercised faith in the future work of the Saviour ... and in the same way that we now exercise faith in the completed work of the Saviour. And Jesus, uniquely, was and is a worthy object of that trust and faith. No other child of our Heavenly Father was 'like unto God'. No other child of our Heavenly Father was worthy or able to redeem all mankind. No other child of our Heavenly Father deserved to be an object of our faith or adoration in the premortal world.

Exactly.  You're preaching to the choir here, Hamba.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

He was not invested with divine authority until the Divine Council had been held and the decision made on the replies by him and by Satan.  The textual sequence is clear, and God the Father is called Yahweh/Lord.  A coregency ceremony must then be held ...

The textual sequence is clear. There was one among us who was like unto God before the divine council. The Word was with God in the beginning. And so on. All of this talk about a 'coregency ceremony' and Jesus being just like us probably makes sense in your head, but it's not in any authoritative source, and your scripture quotes from Abraham only make that fact more obvious. I feel like I'm having a discussion with a trinitarian who keeps handing me Bible verses without realising that 'trinity' doesn't even appear in any of them.

Quote

Exactly.  You're preaching to the choir here, Hamba.

You're the one who attempted to correct me on this point. Multiple times. I have no clue why, but I'm glad we've at least got that sorted!

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The textual sequence is clear. There was one among us who was like unto God before the divine council. The Word was with God in the beginning. And so on. All of this talk about a 'coregency ceremony' and Jesus being just like us probably makes sense in your head, but it's not in any authoritative source, and your scripture quotes from Abraham only make that fact more obvious. I feel like I'm having a discussion with a trinitarian who keeps handing me Bible verses without realising that 'trinity' doesn't even appear in any of them.

You are either not reading the text, or you are rejecting it. I was very surprised that I had to quote it to you, but now I see that you have a problem with the Book of Abraham.  That you think this is about Bible verses and the Trinity is rather odd, since I did not argue that at all.

8 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

You're the one who attempted to correct me on this point. Multiple times. I have no clue why, but I'm glad we've at least got that sorted!

You at first preached that it was a done deal, which it could not be.  Jesus had to be able to fail, and had to empty himself of all divinity for his sacrifice to be efficacious.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I was very surprised that I had to quote it to you, but now I see that you have a problem with the Book of Abraham. 

I have no problem with the Book of Abraham. I do have a problem with people reading personal interpretations into any book of scripture and then quoting verses therefrom in support of their personal interpretations. By all means, quote Abraham where the text states that Jesus was just like us before the divine council. Or where it states that he only started being like unto God following a coregency ceremony. I'm quite capable of reading such verses once you quote them.

Quote

That you think this is about Bible verses and the Trinity is rather odd, since I did not argue that at all.

It was a comparison, Robert. People use those all the time in an attempt to explain things in familiar terms. They are often signaled by the use of the words like or as. I used like.

Quote

You at first preached that it was a done deal, which it could not be.

My 'preaching' has been consistent from the very beginning. Yes, God has agency. That is the background acknowledgement in all of this. But when He says He is going to do something, it's as good as a done deal. That's what allows us to have faith in Him and His promises. It's one of the most important traits that (currently) sets us apart from all three members of the Godhead. If you, for example, had stood up in the divine council and promised to be our saviour, we would have been fools to place our trust in you.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/2/2019 at 11:13 AM, RevTestament said:
On 9/2/2019 at 9:05 AM, marineland said:

 

This is by no means the current church-wide view, but I believe Yeshua was begotten as the unique Son before this world. That is He was already chosen by the Father for the task, and came into this world as the only begotten Son.

I am one who believes that Jesus earned his status to become the Only Begotten, and Lucifer was close behind him in works, but apparently for more selfish reasons. There is probably much more to the story than has come down to us through the terse details in our scriptures.

Glenn

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I have no problem with the Book of Abraham. I do have a problem with people reading personal interpretations into any book of scripture and then quoting verses therefrom in support of their personal interpretations. By all means, quote Abraham where the text states that Jesus was just like us before the divine council. Or where it states that he only started being like unto God following a coregency ceremony. I'm quite capable of reading such verses once you quote them.

Once again you fail to quote what I actually said, attributing to me a ridiculous notion for the 3rd or 4th time, and carefully ignoring my main point.  You are rejecting the BofA text sequence and content, not about the regular practice in church and state of formal investiture at the appropriate time (Elizabeth I was not queen until formally crowned and invested).  Perhaps you would like to show me wherein any calling or election is not formally entered into in the LDS Church.

Being impressive ("like God" "like the Son of Man") is not the same as actually being that figure.  That is why God the Father is termed Lord (Yahweh) in that BofA passage, and not Jesus.  He cannot be set apart and ordained until that final decision is made in Council (God the Father as Lord-Yahweh said: "I will send the first").  You have ignored and rejected those crucial passages based solely on Jesus' prophetic status as the first born and legal heir -- which you wrongly assume makes him God before the fact.  An ordinance must always take place.  The LDS Church and Kingdom of God is a kingdom of specific ordinances.  Without them nothing takes place.

4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

It was a comparison, Robert. People use those all the time in an attempt to explain things in familiar terms. They are often signaled by the use of the words like or as. I used like.

You would have done better to go back and read the Book of Abraham verses instead of going into a derail.  I was well aware that you were using a comparison to ignore my actual points.

4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

My 'preaching' has been consistent from the very beginning. Yes, God has agency. That is the background acknowledgement in all of this. But when He says He is going to do something, it's as good as a done deal. That's what allows us to have faith in Him and His promises. It's one of the most important traits that (currently) sets us apart from all three members of the Godhead. If you, for example, had stood up in the divine council and promised to be our saviour, we would have been fools to place our trust in you.

At least your final comment is correct, Hamba, the rest (preceding) reading somewhat like a Calvinistic tract.  Are you even attempting to take into account Philipp 2:7 (the kenosis)?

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/2/2019 at 6:05 AM, marineland said:

I started reading the "Jesus Christ and the Everlasting Gospel Teachers Manual".

In Lesson 2, on page 7, it states

To further emphasize these truths, display and read aloud the following 
statement by Elder Jeffrey R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles:
"[Jesus Christ] was apparently the only one sufficiently humble and 
willing in the premortal council to be foreordained to [bring about the
infinite Atonement]" ("The Atonement of Jesus Christ," Ensign, Mar. 2008, 
35).  At the first organization in heaven we were all present and saw the 
Savior chosen and appointed and the plan of salvation made, and we 
sanctioned it (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith [2007],
209).

It then poses a question but leaves it up for discussion.

What do you think you knew about Jehovah that would have led you to sustain 
His call and appointment as our Savior and Redeemer?

Do you think the spirits knew Jesus was a God or did this council occur at
a time when Jesus had not yet become a God?

Thanks

Tony

Jehovah was already God, just as we were, in the sense that all of us were already being the same kind of being as our Father in heaven.  The kind of being we refer to as God.  So it was't about what kind of being, or what species, he was.  It was more about whether or not he could actually do what he said he could do, which would be to actually come down here and do what he did while giving our Father the glory for it.  Jehovah only did what our Father wanted him to do.  That doesn't sound so terribly difficult for anyone of us who is sufficiently humble and aware of what our Father wants us to do.  All he had to do was avoid being so stupid that he would do whatever he wanted to do even if it wasn't a good thing for him to do.  Everything our Father wants us to do is right and good and anyone with a sufficient degree of intelligence would make the same choice as our Father would in that situation.  Sadly, though, a lot of us make stupid choices, or at least have done so, and thus we need a Savior to atone for our stupid choices.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/2/2019 at 7:01 PM, MiserereNobis said:

Ok, sorry if I misread the way you were reading me :) 

I guess my question might be this: was God the Father different than Jesus prior to the Father's exaltation? It seems like he must have been different, because if he was like we are now, it seems like we are different than Jesus when he was on the earth. Does that question make sense?

God prior to exaltation = the same as us now

Jesus on Earth = not the same as us now

So God prior to exaltation = not the same as Jesus on Earth

When did Jesus receive his exaltation?

Our understanding of what it means to be exalted is to have a resurrected body and an eternal spouse.  So our understanding is that Jesus would not have been exalted until after he was resurrected and had been sealed to a wife.

He was already the same kind of being as our Father in heaven, though, when he was born as a spirit child, male, to his parents in heaven.  And yet there was no beginning for him, or for any of us either, because we are all a perpetuation of our species which has existed forever and ever.  There never was a first one of us and there never will be a last.  We are eternal, and the only thing that we can do anything about is to choose to be either good or evil, which in itself is based on whether we are and are going to be either less or more intelligent than some other one of us.  To be evil is basically to be stupid, and to be good is to act intelligently.  Our Father, for example, is as good as our kind of being can possibly be and thus he has and acts with the highest degree of intelligence that any of us can possibly have.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Ahab said:

So our understanding is that Jesus would not have been exalted until after he was resurrected and had been sealed to a wife.

It appears that there is disagreement on this among the LDS.

I suppose this is an area where there is no authoritative LDS dogma so each can believe one's own?

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

It appears that there is disagreement on this among the LDS.

I suppose this is an area where there is no authoritative LDS dogma so each can believe one's own?

Pretty much. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

I suppose this is an area where there is no authoritative LDS dogma so each can believe one's own?

Not entirely. If you read chapter 3 in the Jesus Christ and the Everlasting Gospel Teacher Manual, you will find the following 'dogmas':

  • 'Because it was certain that Jesus Christ would complete the Atonement, its effects were already in place in the premortal world. He is thus referred to as “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”' (emphasis original).
  • Quotes from Neal A. Maxwell and Bruce R. McConkie demonstrate that Jehovah possessed 'unique attributes in the premortal world'. In fact, 'Students should understand that in the premortal world, Jehovah surpassed the composite capacities and achievements of all Heavenly Father’s children' (emphasis original).

These two points alone clarify much that some have attempted to muddy in the above discussion and are official Church doctrine.

Moreover, in a different General Conference address, Elder Maxwell also preached the following regarding the premortal Saviour (ellipsis original):

Quote

My only regret is that what follows is apt to be the verbal equivalent of a child’s enthusiastic finger painting—because my tongue cannot tell all I know. Even so …

I testify that in our first estate Jesus was the incomparable individual among all our Father’s spirit children. He helped to prepare this planet for us and led—not pushed—us from our premortal post. I thank him for the untold things he did, across the ages of that first estate, to prepare perfectly for his unique role—while I was doing so very much less.

Nowhere in scripture or in the words of modern prophets is Jesus merely one amongst many of our Heavenly Father's children, nor is He ever just the first amongst equals. He is always unique in attributes, surpassing the sum total of all the rest of mankind, making Him indeed 'like unto God'. And His future atoning sacrifice was 'certain', thereby making Him fit for our faith and devotion then as now. In fact, the lesson cited above recommends instructors conclude by 'encouraging students to think about how knowing about the Savior’s premortal ministry and unique attributes can help them to have greater love for and faith in Him'.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, Ahab said:

Our understanding of what it means to be exalted is to have a resurrected body and an eternal spouse.  So our understanding is that Jesus would not have been exalted until after he was resurrected and had been sealed to a wife.

I agree with this.  Christ was not exempt from the same laws and commandments that everyone else has to follow.  He received the same exact ordinances everyone has to and followed the same steps to exaltation.

He just had additional laws specific to his role and received their corresponding blessings.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...