Jump to content

Jesus vs Jesus Debate


Proverbs

Recommended Posts

I'm done with college for a little while and Rhinomelon made some comments I'd love to see him try to back up. (I still love you though man heh.)

The Jesus of Christendom and the Jesus of LDS belief are two very distinct individuals. If an LDS wishes to claim his Jesus is the same as mine he can. But I take issue with the statement and would like to see the evidence.

The above quote by Rhinomelon is a rewording of an earlier quote by me in which I was talking about Vishnu and God the Father. He didn't say that to be mean spirited but to point out what he thought of as a similiarity in arguements.

For that reason I would like to see how he believes that Jesus as outlined in LDS scriptures is a _distinct_ individual and not the same being with different traditions surrounding them in LDS and Mainstream Christian beliefs..

Peace,

Adam

Link to comment

I see a difference between saying Baptists and Mormons, etc., believe certain different things about God or Jesus; and saying, point blank, that Mormon or Baptist or Quaker or whatever beliefs, are unBiblical and don't meet the requirements to be considered Christian.

The first statement does not reveal whether one is superior to the other; the second does, as any Mormon or other Christian so labeled, would protest.

Link to comment

My personal feelings is that well, we really do make distinct individuals of Jesus because you get distinct individuals within the NT. You get a bunch of Christologies, and people can basically and pick and choose qualities here and there while obscuring other qualities shown in other parts of the Bible that don't go with the chosen qualities that were already picked. And then on top of it, we personalize our Jesus in a variety of ways personally.

I don't think that's so bad. We are human so we aren't going to really grasp His fullness even if we had everything we needed to make such a portrait, we get glimpses, not full portraits from our canons. We feel so close and personal with Jesus as different types of Christians(Mormons included), we "see" him on a level that reflects this closeness.

Some people argue that's the strength in Christianity-that the Jesus figure can mean so much to so many different people and in different ways.

Link to comment

Oops, looks like I lit a fire and jumped in the pot! Again. :P

My lunch break is over (I had to spend it at my desk, which explains the higher volume of blabbing from me over the last hour or so), but let me just outline some biggies.

First, a quick definition in terms. When I refer to Jesus, I am not simply talking about the historical figure, but also about the attached beliefs that go with it, such as the nature of the incarnation, the purpose of Jesus' life and ministry, and beliefs about Jesus after his ascension. It includes the historical information, but I cannot limit myself to it and still consider myself a follower of Christ.

So some big beliefs that I see as mutually incompatible. Hmmm...

The nature of the incarnation is one. I see the Son becoming flesh as a unique event, as God is not flesh and bone by nature.

The role of the Son before the incarnation would probably be one, but I have not really studied that in depth as of yet.

The atonement, what it did and didn't do would be one. I don't see it as bringing simple resurrection for everyone, but much more. The teachings of Christ on the grace of God, and on the assurance of eternal life I see lacking in LDS belief. As I was discussing with Zakuska a while back, there is little or nothing of a past tense to salvation in LDS belief, i.e. "You have been saved." But Jesus spoke several times in this very manner.

The relation of Jesus to us is another, although I've encountered a great diversity of LDS opinions on this issue. Are we to worship Jesus? Some LDS say no, saying that we are to worship the Father through the Son, not worshipping the Son or praying to him. Also, the teaching that Jesus is pretty much just like us, even in his preexistent birth. The only big difference there is that Jesus was born first, at least from what I can see. In my beliefs the differences are much sharper. Jesus was unique, not one brother among many.

In a way this is a very global issue, in terms of our respective faiths, because LDS believe that all their teachings ultimately stem from direct revelations of Christ himself. Since many unique LDS teachings differ greatly from mainstream Christian ones, that plays a part. How can the Jesus I believe in and follow be saying such wildly different things to the LDS church, if they are pretty much the same?

Anyway, this is just for starters. This is a topic I don't really get into much, as it is kind of pointless. I was just using it on the other thread because I see many LDS getting worked up over the "different Jesus" thing.

Do you think it's possible (or even advisable) to separate Jesus from our beliefs about him, from a faith point of view?

Gotta get going, thanks for the thread! Take care, Prov. <_<

Link to comment

I'll never forget what Bruce Hafen said when lecturing to the missionaries in my mission. He read an anti-mormon leaflet that said that Mormons don't believe in the exact same God they do. His response to that was " well thank goodness we don't otherwise what would be the need for a restoration?" I think the idea that the true notion of God's character was lost and polluted and thus needed to be restored fits in perfectly with the doctrines of the church. Though that has nothing to do with what qualifies someone as a christian.

Link to comment

Thanks for the response. *stokes fire* Warm yet? heh :P

Even with our beliefs and traditions around Jesus being different it is still the same individual. They are not distinct entities. We have different beliefs about him we think he did X and you go no he just did X etc.

It's not like I picked up a puppy and walked over to you and say "Hey this is your Dog" and you go "No.. my Dog is sleeping out back". It's not like that they are not distinct and seperate entities.

It is more like both of us having a photocopy of a picture and say you spill a little coffee on yours, and I spill a little milk on mine so they are both slightly blemished. And I go "Hey I have that picture too" and you go "Sorry mine has a blotch here and there, they are not a picture of the same thing". Bottom line? It's the same picture.

Take care bro,

Adam

Link to comment
The nature of the incarnation is one. I see the Son becoming flesh as a unique event, as God is not flesh and bone by nature.

Verses? LDS can show the Gods (Father and Son) to be flesh and bone out of the Bible. Besides having no explicit verses saying God is not flesh and bone, nonLDS Chrisitians have no verses at all to gainsay LDS doctrine.

As I was discussing with Zakuska a while back, there is little or nothing of a past tense to salvation in LDS belief, i.e. "You have been saved." But Jesus spoke several times in this very manner.

He spoke on no such terms. I think the best you can come up with here are a couple of verses regarding physical healing rather than actual salvation in the kingdom of God.

Rather, Jesus spoke of salvation in the kingdom of heaven as a future event to occur after your own death.....Matt. 10: 22, Matt. 24: 13, Mark 13: 13, Mark 16: 16, etc. etc.

Any doctrine that saves someone before death contradicts these and other verses. Hence, any present tense verse is a requirement for salvation rather than a promise of immediate salvation.

The relation of Jesus to us is another, although I've encountered a great diversity of LDS opinions on this issue. Are we to worship Jesus? Some LDS say no, saying that we are to worship the Father through the Son, not worshipping the Son or praying to him.

LDS doctrine is clear and Biblical (Matthew 6:9). Jesus is a God and Gods deserve worship. However, because we clearly don't pray to Jesus, worshipping Jesus is not the same as worshipping a second God. If you read the Gospel Principles manual and the Guide to the Scriptures, you will clearly see this.

Also, the teaching that Jesus is pretty much just like us, even in his preexistent birth. The only big difference there is that Jesus was born first, at least from what I can see. In my beliefs the differences are much sharper. Jesus was unique, not one brother among many.

As we have already shown in another thread, the Bible leaves plenty of room for the doctrine that we are literal spirit children of God and it clearly states that we are the same type of being. Biblical Theosis is further proof as well.

Anyway, I'm sure Rhino knows all this. I just wish there was more BVC in presenting the nonLDS view. The virtual absence of it only confirms my contention that most nonLDS Christian doctrines do not exist in the Bible.

Anyway, this is just for starters. This is a topic I don't really get into much, as it is kind of pointless. I was just using it on the other thread because I see many LDS getting worked up over the "different Jesus" thing.

It doesn't bother me. I still believe it's generally all the same God with regard to varying world religions and it's all the same Jesus with regards to LDS Christianity vs. nonLDS Christianity. We simply apply different attributes and properties and only one of us can be right (else God is a liar and a respector of persons).

Link to comment
Verses? LDS can show the Gods (Father and Son) to be flesh and bone out of the Bible. Besides having no explicit verses saying God is not flesh and bone, nonLDS Chrisitians have no verses at all to gainsay LDS doctrine.

We have plenty, you just choose to ignore them when they are brought to your attention. Believe me, if I had so little to go on, I'd be LDS by now! :P

He spoke on no such terms. I think the best you can come up with here are a couple of verses regarding physical healing rather than actual salvation in the kingdom of God.

Actually, you are correct. At least from what I remember. Now that I think about it, I was thinking of Jesus' words in John regarding salvation, but those were in the present tense. However, Jesus didn't always speak in the future tense regarding salvation.

I was thinking about Paul's words about salvation in the past tense. Which doesn't mean that past tense salvation doesn't exist, mind you. That's just something for another thread.

Anyway, if I were to post BVC (book, verse, chapter, right?) about my beliefs, would you actually take it seriously? I'm actually wondering. Sometimes you can seem pretty dismissive when anything contrary to your already-established position is brought up. That's just the way I see it, anyway.

Even with our beliefs and traditions around Jesus being different it is still the same individual. They are not distinct entities. We have different beliefs about him we think he did X and you go no he just did X etc.

When one speaks of a "different Jesus", I believe the beliefs must be included. I am using the term as Paul did in 2 Corinthians 11. When he speaks of a "different Jesus", he does not mean a different person. Rather, the historical person of Jesus is inextricably bound to the gospel and its doctrines. It's not like people were following him saying, "No, don't follow that Jesus, that son of Joseph and Mary! Follow this one, born in Rome, the son of Bob and Amy, who died by drowning for your sins!" These false teachers were using the same historical figure, but were corrupting the true gospel. Paul calls this a "different Jesus".

Also, I think auteur55's comments are well put. Since the rest of Christianity is apostate and corrupt anyway, why make a big deal about what we think about "your Jesus"?

Just my thoughts. Take care, everyone <_<

rhino "flamebroiled" melon

Link to comment

According to 2 Corinthians 11:4, there is "another Jesus":

"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him."

There is a huge difference between the LDS "Jesus", and the "Jesus" of the Bible.

For example, the Bible says that Jesus created the "Heaven of Heavens, with all their host".

"Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee." Nehemiah 9:6

Former President Wilford Woodruff identified the "Heaven of Heavens as the place of pre-existence where the great War in Heaven was fought:

Link to comment

Former, those are nice quotes.

But I fail to see a difference between Nehemiah's Heaven of Heavens and Bro. Woodruff's or Bro. Sills' Heaven of Heavens.

Surely they are talking about the same place?

Rhino, the quote about "another Jesus" is certainly relevant to your argument. But Paul would have given a double-take to the modern Protestants' misuse of his phrasing to imply totally different personages between their Jesus and the Mormon Jesus.

He simply means "wrong" preaching. :P Why make this argument more convoluted?

Beowulf

Link to comment

I seem to remember Dan Peterson and Stephen Ricks addressing this same tired out polemic in there Book : Offenders For A Word, How Anti-Mormons Play word Games To Attack The Latter Day Saints pages 149-151. The response by Former does not address the Peterson/Ricks response to the critics who bring up this same argument/criticism adinfinentum. The "Other Jesus" scriptures that are presented to us by Paul are addressing the "gnostic" "docetic" view of THE LORD OF LIFE by certain heretic teachers and Christians in the N.T. . And Non LDS Christians as with FormerLDS hold the same gnostic/docetic view in regards to GOD THE FATHER. In His Debt, Tanyan, The LDS JEDI.

Link to comment

I do not judge what each Mormon believes in their heart, because that is not my place, but speaking strictly in regards to doctrine I have to say the LDS Jesus is different than the Jesus whom I know. My Jesus was not a polygamist; in fact, He was never married. My Jesus is not a Heavenly Mother's baby boy -- He is an infinite being. My Jesus did not need to "progress" by coming to earth -- He was already infinitely powerful, sitting at the right hand of the Father. My Jesus is not the spirit brother of Beelzebub. My Jesus, as a man, was conceived by the Holy Spirit unto the virgin Mary, NOT as the result of sexual relations between Mary and God.

The LDS Church officials say things about Jesus which are not in the Bible. It also makes Jesus look quite foolish.

Link to comment

Brent,

There is only one LORD Jesus Christ whom I am speaking of and that is the same LORD who is the Savior in Protestantism, Mormonism, and Catholicism.

As far false messiah's how about David Koresh? Didn't he think he was a messiah? (Correct me if I am wrong please.)

Link to comment
Brent,

There is only one LORD Jesus Christ whom I am speaking of and that is the same LORD who is the Savior in Protestantism, Mormonism, and Catholicism. 

As far false messiah's how about David Koresh? Didn't he think he was a messiah? (Correct me if I am wrong please.)

I agree there is one Lord and Savior, and that same Savior is shared between many Protestants, Catholics and Mormons. However, LDS officials in the past (and in the present to some extent) have distorted the nature of Christ in a way that makes Him look very foolish. Answer me this- do you believe Christ was a polygamist?

Link to comment
I agree there is one Lord and Savior, and that same Savior is shared between many Protestants, Catholics and Mormons. However, LDS officials in the past (and in the present to some extent) have distorted the nature of Christ in a way that makes Him look very foolish. Answer me this- do you believe Christ was a polygamist?

I do believe that Jesus was married. If he had more then one wife I do not know and will not speculate. I have other things to worry about :P I'll ask Him when we meet again someday. And I have read what past leaders in the church have said and they are welcome to their position.

Peace,

Adam

Edit: Clarified.

Link to comment
...as God is not flesh and bone by nature.

Where are you getting this from? How are you making such a claim?

The atonement, what it did and didn't do would be one. I don't see it as bringing simple resurrection for everyone, but much more.

It didn't 'simply', nor soley, bring about universal resurrection. It allowed us all to be able to return to our Father again, which was impossible before the Atonement.

The teachings of Christ on the grace of God, and on the assurance of eternal life I see lacking in LDS belief. As I was discussing with Zakuska a while back, there is little or nothing of a past tense to salvation in LDS belief, i.e. "You have been saved." But Jesus spoke several times in this very manner.

Perhaps there is a difference in understanding of the word 'grace' here. I would consider the Father sending his Son to be crucified a huge act of grace, as well as his mercy and forgiveness for those who humble themselves and repent. However, I do not see it as a means of a 'free ride'.

As for 'past-tense salvation', I will refer to having your calling and election made sure - that is a guarantee, if you will. While references of these in the NT are up to debate and interpretation, I would not use them as a solid fact base - which appears to be your case.

Also, the teaching that Jesus is pretty much just like us, even in his preexistent birth. The only big difference there is that Jesus was born first, at least from what I can see. In my beliefs the differences are much sharper. Jesus was unique, not one brother among many.

Who teaches that he is pretty much just like us? He was QUITE different. First, he was the only perfect person. Second, he was G-d in the flesh. Third, he had the pure love of Christ, which I will say NO MAN has even come close to in mortal life. There are many more, but those are some HUGE differences. Yes, he IS our brother, but he is our Lord. I wouldn't just walk up to him and say "hey bro.", but will rather fall at his feet, and as BRM states, 'wet his feet with my tears' in worship.

How can the Jesus I believe in and follow be saying such wildly different things to the LDS church, if they are pretty much the same?

Nothing Christ said is in ANYWAY different then as it is now. The versions you have chosen to believe of them seem to be, though.

Link to comment

The whole Jesus vs. Jesus question is, of course, a simple propaganda device used by certain people to portray the 'Mormons' as weird, non-conforming, or perhaps even cultists (which most people associate with dancing naked around stone idols at midnight on the solstice, or some such). The whole idea is to marginalize the church and its members by trying to deceive people into believing that we are something that we are not.

The problem with this approach is that in much of the US, at least, (and in a growing part of the US, at that), that members of the church who actually attend meetings outnumber those who attend meetings of all other churches combined. Granted, this reflects the increasing secularization of America, but it is also at least partly a result of the corrosive effect of preaching a gospel based on hating members of other sects rather than having something positive to offer themselves.

In the end, attempts to protect their turf by marginalizing the 'Mormons' are likely to cause a serious backlash. Most people are too intelligent to want to bother hearing such arguments, recognizing that they are founded in bigotry and ignorance. If all you want for your congregation are the gullible and mean-spirited, then I guess you can continue to use the Jesus vs. Jesus argument. But those who do so should realize that this will probably condemn their own churches to the periphery of the development of Christianity -- a mere footnote in the history of the preparation of the world for the return of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...