Jump to content

D&C 19:18-19


Scottie

Recommended Posts

Help me understand how verse 18 fits into the LDS modalist view of the Godhead?

God is a title. You have 3 Gods that are God. It is complicated.

Link to comment

I'm just not seeing the same interpretation as you scottie.

To me, it seems like Christ is saying that there is no Being in the universe greater than 'God'-God being used as a title. It seems He uses the term to show the depth of His condescenion to save us and to highlight that the suffering was no little matter-not to assert Himself as greater than God the Father.

Verse 19 especially doesn't support your interpretation that Christ had just said He was greater than God the Father to me, He clear is subordinate to Him and does not believe Himself to be co-equal to His God.

Link to comment

D&C 19:18-19

You need to take in context of verses 16 and 17:

"For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I"

"All" and "they" are the children of God who have entered bodies of flesh and blood. Christ is the "greatest of all" the children of God that have entered bodies of flesh and blood.

Link to comment

Whenever I see the word "God," I always try to keep the following in mind:

In A Reassessment of Biblical Elohim, Joel S. Burnett (Ph.D., Biblical and Near Eastern Studies) points out that the Hebrew

Link to comment

God as a title is fine, but in this verse, Jesus goes beyond simply using the title of God. He elevates Himself to the same level as God the father (the greatest of all).

What is the trinitarian model if not this? If you were to alter verse 18 to make it trinitarian, how would you change it?

Link to comment

God as a title is fine, but in this verse, Jesus goes beyond simply using the title of God. He elevates Himself to the same level as God the father (the greatest of all).

What is the trinitarian model if not this? If you were to alter verse 18 to make it trinitarian, how would you change it?

He is elevating His divinity to the same level of the divinity of God the Father, not Himself.

To illustrate-I'm a mother. My mother is also a mother. I'm not more of a mother than she is-she's not more of a mother than i am. In fact, no one can be more of a mother or a greater (as in quantity) mother than another mother.

However, that doesn't mean that i see my mother and my neighbor's mother as equals-they ARE equal in one sense, of course, but they would never be equal to me. It doesn't mean that i see myself and my mother as equals either. In many ways, i remain subordinant to her and always will.

We can understand the use of the word 'God' the same way we understand the use of the word 'mother'.

:P

Link to comment

What is the trinitarian model if not this? If you were to alter verse 18 to make it trinitarian, how would you change it?

Every single time I've tried to articulate the 'trinitarian model' to a friend who subscribes to it, I've been told that I had it wrong; therefore, far be it from me to attempt to impose something I clearly don't grasp on verse 18. If I tried, it would inevitably result in semi-mocking farce. Nevertheless, there is nothing in verse 18 which contradicts an LDS view of the Godhead. From the very beginning, according to Abraham, Christ has been the one 'like unto God.' He, like His Father, is 'the greatest of all.' That He has repeatedly submitted His will to the Father's does in no way negate his greatness. There's a reason the 'Word was God.'

Link to comment

God as a title is fine, but in this verse, Jesus goes beyond simply using the title of God. He elevates Himself to the same level as God the father (the greatest of all).

No, He is the greatest of all God's children. As in Abraham 3:19, "And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all."

Link to comment

No, He is the greatest of all God's children. As in Abraham 3:19, "And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all."

I agree. This is certainly another valid interpretation.

Link to comment

Scottie, I am not sure why you say that verse 19 is an example of Mormon modalism, or modalism (also known as Sabellianism) at all. Modalism/Sabellianism teaches that God is one person manifesting in three different modes (thus "modalism"). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism There are passages in the Book of Mormon that could be interpreted as consistent with modalism. But verse 19 differentiates the Father and Son, which is more consistent with Tritheism or Trinitarianism.

Link to comment

God as a title is fine, but in this verse, Jesus goes beyond simply using the title of God. He elevates Himself to the same level as God the father (the greatest of all).

What is the trinitarian model if not this? If you were to alter verse 18 to make it trinitarian, how would you change it?

1. Christ clearly separates Himself from the Father -- "Not my will, but Thy will be done".

2. He is one with the Father, John 17:19-23.

3. He has, to take a modern phrase, power of attorney -- Heb 1:1-2.

When you say, Trinitarian, yes, we teach the Trinity in that they are one, but we reject the teaching of one substance. Christ also taught that a man and woman would be "one flesh" at marriage, but clearly they are not one substance.

Christ was indeed God, but they are not one substance.

Hope that helps. Trinitarian, but not Triune.

Link to comment

To illustrate-I'm a mother. My mother is also a mother. I'm not more of a mother than she is-she's not more of a mother than i am. In fact, no one can be more of a mother or a greater (as in quantity) mother than another mother.

However, that doesn't mean that i see my mother and my neighbor's mother as equals-they ARE equal in one sense, of course, but they would never be equal to me.

So in what way could you say that you are the "greatest Mother of all" without it reflecting on your mother.

Link to comment

So in what way could you say that you are the "greatest Mother of all" without it reflecting on your mother.

Well, first, if you are using that phrase to match what Christ said, it needs to be remembered that Christ didn't say He was the 'greatest God of all'. He said He is 'God, the greatest of all'.

Second, i don't know that i could say i was the greatest mother or all wihtout it reflecting on my mother. But i could say i was 'Mother, the greatest of all' without doing such.

If i was using the word 'mother' as a title and implying that the title of mother was 'the greatest title of all' then obviously it does not mean that i'm a better mother than my mother. It means that there is nothing i could be above being a mother, and that there is nothing anyone could be above being a mother-that there is no higher state of being.

And using the word in such a way implies that my mother is also the 'greatest of all' because she is also a mother.

Does that make sense? It's late and i think i'm rambling....

Link to comment

In verse 18, it appears to be a very trinitarian view of the godhead. Jesus is referencing Himself as God. And, not just God, but "God, the greatest of all". The LDS Jesus that I learned about would never place Himself above God, which is exactly what He did by saying he is the greatest of all.

You have to view it all in context. Jesus introduced Himself in the New World as the "God of Israel" and "the God of the whole world." He is one with the Father and the Holy Spirit. He speaks not only for Himself, but for the Father and the Holy Spirit.

The New Testament largely speaks of them as being separate, however, Christ's divinity also is strongly taught in the New Testament scriptures.

Link to comment

Scottie, the early revelations are full of this kind of stuff. But I'm a little surprised this is the portion of D&C 19 you wanted to talk about. To me, the part where he says the language of eternal torment was all a big misleading ploy to scare people into obedience is much more interesting. :P

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...