Was Jesus The Son Of God Before The Earth Was Created?

[coolrok7]

The point being that it is not taught in the Lutheran confessions, what Elder McConkie said/represented at BYU in 1984.

What people do/say as individuals is not the point I'm arguing here.

[Spammer]

He was begotten but uncreated.   He is related as a Son and begotten BUT uncreated.

 

OK.

 

Think about those words.  How can there be a person described as a "Son" who is not a son?  He might be a son figuratively or symbolically but not a "real" son in any sense if he also has those other attributes.

 

The definitions of the words do not match- but of course it is a "mystery" and so you get to say anything paradoxical you like.   

 

Whether the terms I used are sense or nonsense depends on your paradigm and initial assumptions.  If you begin, as we do, with the unprovable (using logic and discourse) assumption that God is immaterial, One and also Three, then what we mean by Jesus being both Son and Unbegotten makes perfect sense.  If you begin with the unprovable (using logic and discourse) assumption that nothing immaterial exists, then it makes no sense. We employ language used by those within our tradition who shared my assumptions and to whom God has revealed Himself interiorly.  That's where all of our theology comes from.  Within our paradigm, it all makes perfect sense. We're comfortable with paradoxes.  The words used refer to our belief in a reality and kind of life that's outside of time.   In our tradition a theologian is exclusively defined as someone who has had that direct experience and speaks from the experience. We don't consider people who earn university degrees in theology or write about theology using philosophy to be theologians.  True theologians are exemplified by the only three individuals to whom we grant the title 'Theologian': John the Theologian (the Apostle John); Gregory the Theologian (St. Gregory Naziaznus); and St. Symeon the New Theologian.  A true theologian necessarily and inevitably speaks about their experience of the divine using words that make no sense outside of any time-bound paradigm, but they attempt to do so anyway. They do so by trying only to use language that describes what God is not, not what God is.  Our theology is apophatic.  Ultimately, the hearer is invited to "Taste and See" for themselves.  That's the only way.  That's why we use the word Mystery so frequently, just so no one makes the mistake of mistaking the language for the reailty.  

 

None of this works for you, I get it.  You have different assumptions and an incompatible paradigm.  Our paradigm is time-bound and contingent, same as any other, but it includes a belief that contact with the reality beyond time is possible nevertheless.  Belief that God is the one besides whom there is no other is foundational.  It's the basis for the language used within the our paradigm.  The language is indefensible outside the paradigm, just as LDS terminology is indefensible outside of yours.  We all see through a glass darkly, and the contours of every paradigm tie back to unprovable assumptions. Yours, as well as mine, the same as any other.  I was only trying to define and clarify what we believe, not defend it.  No paradigm can be defended using discourse and logic, including Mormonism, Protestantism, atheism, Buddhism, what have you, because the terms and concepts used only make sense from within a particular paradigm.  It just so happens that my tradition rests on an assumption unprovable except through direct experience that the God that dwells outside of time can break in and provide a direct experience unmediated by language and contingency.  We believe that there are men and women who have had this experience and we seek to experience it for ourselves by following their methodology.  That's our paradigm.

 

Yes, I know, deflationary theory says an experience that transcends language and concept is impossible.  No matter. Deflationary theory is also just words.  We believe what we believe anyway on the testimony of those who claim to have had that kind of experience and used contingent language to try to describe it.  I know deflationary theory is most consistent with Mormonism.  No matter. I don't care.  Orthodoxy works for me. Mormonism doesn't.  That's all that counts, anyway.  If you assume an immaterial God and have spiritual experiences, then God is immaterial. If you assume a material God and have spiritual experiences, then God is material, no matter what deflationary theory says about the possibility of experiencing something immaterial. Assuming God is material works for you; the opposite assumption works for me.  In the LDS tradition, only one person has claimed to have had the experience of the material God revealing Himself to him as material, Joseph Smith, who used language to describe his experience. Many people have had spiritual experiences from within that paradigm, you included.  It didn't work for me.  In our tradition, we have many people who claim to have had the experience of the immaterial God revealing Himself to them as immaterial.  These are the saints who have experienced theosis and described it using language. I seek to acquire the same experience. It works for me. For now, it's keeping me from being an atheist.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Spammer

[Avatar4321]

Why has this post been ignored?

How long are we waiting for this answer?

[Calm]

The point being that it is not taught in the Lutheran confessions, what Elder McConkie said/represented at BYU in 1984.

What people do/say as individuals is not the point I'm arguing here.

Please quote where he said/represented that it was taught in all or the standard Lutheran confessions.

Are all Lutheran confessions identical?

[coolrok7]

I'm a Christian (specifically of the Missouri Synod tribe, yes Evangelical in the way I would explain) answering what I've been asked to answer (for myself not others).

I'm not personally responsible for what others believe/say/do.

When I repeated what McConkie stated, it was his own comment concerning Protestants in general I'm assuming, not a specific Synod necessarily.

[Calm]

Again, please quote exactly what he said rather than offering your paraphrase of who he was talking about.

[Calm]

Came across this rather nice Lutheran pastor and thought of this thread:
 

"We don't treat people, who have been seriously picked on, in that way," said Chris Duckworth, pastor of New Joy Lutheran Church in Westfield. "We know better than that. We are better than that."

He was irked by the advertisement in the weekly Current publications in Carmel, Westfield and Zionsville, viewing it as a disparaging diatribe against Mormonism — and not a constructive way to talk about different faiths.

"If my Mormon brother says he's a Christian, I'll accept his word at that," Duckworth said. "We might disagree in theology or have differences in opinion about what core tenets of Christianity are. But I'm not going to deny him the right to call himself what he or she in their faith believe they are."

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/07/14/mormon-temple-christian-opponents/30167063/

[Anakin7]

    calmoriah this reminds me of a question I asked a local Lutheran pastor if Mormons were Christian several months ago, his reply that we were christian but Hetrodox, Christian but with some theological problems that he saw we had. I can accept that kindness voice of opinion. 

 

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

             Anakin7

[Anakin7]

  calmoriah  even Charlottee Pardee the Director of EXMFJ in Orange county Calif [ Where coolrok7 volunteers at times from my understanding] told me that she believed that despite Mormonism, there will be some Mormons in Heaven.

 

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

             Anakin7

Edited July 17, 2015 by Anakin7

[Vance]

 

Whether the terms I used are sense or nonsense depends on your paradigm and initial assumptions.  If you begin, as we do, with the unprovable (using logic and discourse) assumption that God is immaterial, One and also Three, then what we mean by Jesus being both Son and Unbegotten makes perfect sense.  . . . We employ language used by those within our tradition who shared my assumptions and to whom God has revealed Himself interiorly.  That's where all of our theology comes from.   . . . That's why we use the word Mystery so frequently, just so no one makes the mistake of mistaking the language for the reailty.  

 

I must say, it is nice to see someone admit that it is an assumption.

 

Yes, I know, deflationary theory says an experience that transcends language and concept is impossible.  No matter. Deflationary theory is also just words.  We believe what we believe anyway on the testimony of those who claim to have had that kind of experience and used contingent language to try to describe it.  I know deflationary theory is most consistent with Mormonism.  No matter. I don't care.  Orthodoxy works for me. Mormonism doesn't.  That's all that counts, anyway.  If you assume an immaterial God and have spiritual experiences, then God is immaterial. If you assume a material God and have spiritual experiences, then God is material, no matter what deflationary theory says about the possibility of experiencing something immaterial. Assuming God is material works for you; the opposite assumption works for me.  In the LDS tradition, only one person has claimed to have had the experience of the material God revealing Himself to him as material, Joseph Smith, who used language to describe his experience. Many people have had spiritual experiences from within that paradigm, you included.  It didn't work for me.  In our tradition, we have many people who claim to have had the experience of the immaterial God revealing Himself to them as immaterial.  These are the saints who have experienced theosis and described it using language. I seek to acquire the same experience. It works for me. For now, it's keeping me from being an atheist.

 

The problem I see with the concept that God is "immaterial" is the fact that when the term "immaterial" was first coined both breath and wind were also considered "immaterial".  It is unfortunate that as scientific knowledge changed breath and wind from immaterial to material, the theology was not updated to be consistent. 

[Bobbieaware]

I must say, it is nice to see someone admit that it is an assumption.

 

 

The problem I see with the concept that God is "immaterial" is the fact that when the term "immaterial" was first coined both breath and wind were also considered "immaterial".  It is unfortunate that as scientific knowledge changed breath and wind from immaterial to material, the theology was not updated to be consistent.

Taking the idea that air was once considered to be immaterial even further: as you most likely know, there is widespread agreement among physicists that the mass of the universe is mostly composed of so-called "dark matter," a mysterious and illusiive substance that is considered to be as real as any other form of matter, yet dark matter has not thus far actually been observed or conclusively poven to exist.

[Avatar4321]

I must say, it is nice to see someone admit that it is an assumption.

 

 

The problem I see with the concept that God is "immaterial" is the fact that when the term "immaterial" was first coined both breath and wind were also considered "immaterial".  It is unfortunate that as scientific knowledge changed breath and wind from immaterial to material, the theology was not updated to be consistent.

Interesting considering The Spirit is the same word as breath/wind.

Since breath and wind are material what implications is there for the Spirit?

[Guest]

I've been thinking about this this morning and am wondering, from a non-LDS Christian point of view, whether or not Jesus was the son of God before the earth was created?

 

I know that for many non-LDS Christians the idea that Jesus was created by God-is God's spirit Son-is offensive.  That would seem to imply that Jesus is only considered the Son of God because of his mortal birth as such.  

 

So before Jesus was born as the physical Son of God, what was His relationship with God the Father?

He is the first Spirit Son of God and the only begotten Son of God "after the manner of the flesh".

[JLHPROF]

He is the first Spirit Son of God and the only begotten Son of God "after the manner of the flesh".

 

So here is a question.

I am sealed to my mother and father (or born in the covenant).  My father is sealed to his mother and father (or born in the covenant).  Most members are sealed to their parents either by a sealing or being born in the covenant.

We are all sealed back in a line till Father Adam.

 

Is Christ sealed to his mother and father?  Is he sealed to Heavenly Father and Mary?  Does this mandate the existence of a marriage sealing between Heavenly Father & Mary?  Or does Christ not have the blessing of an eternal family and exaltation that is so much the focus of Mormonism?

 

I'm sure you can guess my opinion, but what is everyone else's?

[Guest]

So here is a question.

I am sealed to my mother and father (or born in the covenant).  My father is sealed to his mother and father (or born in the covenant).  Most members are sealed to their parents either by a sealing or being born in the covenant.

We are all sealed back in a line till Father Adam.

 

Is Christ sealed to his mother and father?  Is he sealed to Heavenly Father and Mary?  Does this mandate the existence of a marriage sealing between Heavenly Father & Mary?  Or does Christ not have the blessing of an eternal family and exaltation that is so much the focus of Mormonism?

 

I'm sure you can guess my opinion, but what is everyone else's?

Christ is always obedient to all God's commands...so I would say he is. He is also the one to confer the sealing powers to Elijah, so he migh be able to seal himself and not have the ordinance as he is the ordinance.

[coolrok7]

calmoriah, do you have the link to the talk Elder McConkie gave that I've quoted from for quite a long time. I don't see where I paraphrased what he said.

I do have the entire talk in printed form but I don't have the link where it came from. You quoted from after what I had posted. The before set the stage for the rest of what he said to a BYU Mormon audience.

Edited July 21, 2015 by coolrok7

[Anakin7]

   coolrok7  I read your Highlighted  red portion in post # 859 and am in wonder how he [bruce R. McConkie] has misrepresented that belief of mere confession and a onward/outward sinful lifestye with no change that was [in Bruce R. McConkie's time] and still is dominate in Evangelical Christianity today [ And in other Houses of non LDS Christianity as well ]. It has happened in the past, is still happening in the now and will continue in the future. No call for Discipleship to the person and work of Christ Jesus. It may not be as prevalent in your room of evangelical christianity [Lutheranism] but it happens and continues to be so. I am a witness to this, on the weekends in the downtown area were I work on Fri/Sat evenings I see and hear many evangelical christians [ Some of which are friends of mine ] share the person and work of Christ Jesus with many, and God bless them for there efforts in doing so however no call or invitation is made to the individual to count the cost of the individual to follow Christ Jesus in walking in the Light and to put off the natural man to become a True Saint/Christian so as to accept/access/activate/grab hold of/hold on to True Grace by way of True Faith. I admit that many a LDS do not recognize/see/feel/do this as well. I am a spiritual knucklehead at times and need True Repentance by way of True Faith to Accept/ Access/Activate True Grace.

 

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

             Anakin7

Edited July 21, 2015 by Anakin7

[coolrok7]

Anakin7, I'm solely responsible for what I believe based upon the Biblical text (I have a Greek Interlinear to look up the Greek text with the English terms directly under as translated from the Greek). I've heard sufficiently how others represent their beliefs in which I'm not responsible for in that they don't directly represent what I would say concerning these topics often discussed here in what Elder McConkie represented to a Mormon BYU audience back in 1984.
 
As a Christian, of the Lutheran, Missouri Synod, I would like for you to go to LCMS.org and demonstrate that (the red terms used by Elder McConkie that I quoted) what he said is what is taught there.
 
From a post of yours from ZLMB (1/04/09):

 

We are Saved by Charis [Grace] alone though [Pistis] Faith Alone, the definition of "Faith" [Pistis] as used by you is not how the Anchient Saints Read/Understood "Faith" Pistis. we believe that Grace is a "Gift", and it needs to be unwrapped/used in rightiousness to bless the one useing it and those who's lives it touches as used by the individual themself. Law Of The Harvest.

We do good works to show we want to stay Saved [No Eternal Security] and to give Glory to God and Jesus Christ. . . .

 

I would show it this way:

 

We are saved by grace (charis) [Grace Alone] through faith (pistis) [Faith Alone] , not of works . . .created in Christ Jesus unto good works. According to [scripture Alone].

 

This is not a denial of having good works and would affirm obedience to the commands of God in response to the message read/preached from the word of God (given the ability to hear the Gospel by God the Holy Spirit). The brackets above is the Lutheran position concerning our Justification "before God" (Romans 4:2) and is not the faith alone of James 2.

[Anakin7]

    coolrok7 thank you for your thoughtfull reply. I still stand firm by my post as Bruce R. McConkie was addressing those of other evangelical Christian Churches/Faith's that he had heard/seen read about in there presentation of easy cheap grace by intelectual belief only in the evangelical world. As I posted before this has happened in the past, happens today and will continue to happen in the future.

    Still once again I would employ you to accept/access/activate True Grace [charis] by way of True Faith [pistis] as was held in the very being of the anchient Saint's/Christians souls. As James was addressing those of the intelectual faith only crowd in his message was not GOD having a sight into there Hearts/Minds as to there Salvation Soteriological Journey and Quest ?, was he not concerned for there souls ?. Of course your predestinationalism cannot accept that. Your older Brother in Catholicism in response to your Justification before God and Justification before men view see  Jimmy Akin - http://jimmyakin.com/justification-in-james-2  Scroll down to - " The Meaning of Justified ".

   In response to your "I would show it this way" - I would say  We areSaved by Grace [The True Grace of The Anchients - charis] Alone through the [True Faith - Allegience/Commitment/Confidence/Covenant/Devotion/Discipleship/Faithfulness/Fidelity/Loyalty/Obedience/Trust of the Anchients] to the person and work of Christ Jesus alone of the Anchients]. Not a self rightious self centered work but a Anchient Love Faith Obedience Covenant work for Serving God The Father/God The Son Jesus Christ/God The Holy Ghost Spirit and our fellow man. Martin Luther and Joseph Smith J.r had theological differences but had many theological simularities as well.

 

    May your Day Be Blessed by True Grace by way of True Faith

                                  In His Eternal Debt/Grace

                                               Anakin7

Edited July 22, 2015 by Anakin7

[coolrok7]

Regardless, it is still a misrepresentation of the generic view of what the Solas actually mean which is not cheap grace!

Edited July 22, 2015 by coolrok7

[Anakin7]

    Actualy coolrok no it is not. And yes I am a witness as with others adinfinentum of this happening all over the Earth/Globe/World.

 

    In His Eternal Debt/Grace

[coolrok7]

Anakin7, you keep accusing me of not having true grace/faith in which Ephesians 2:8-10 explains what I believe and having responded to in faith.

[coolrok7]

I'm waiting for you to provide the teaching of the LCMS.ORG wherein we reach what Elder McConkie stated in his talk.

[Anakin7]

   Pray tell coolrok7  I am not accussing [ a judgement call on your part ] but inviting ! . The Faith [The True One] in response to True Grace [ The True one ]  by Paul in Ephesians is awesome Power ! . It costs you to do so, True Salvation is Absolutly Free but it Costs you your very Life. So once again I employ/invite you to partake of The True Grace of the Anchients by way of the True Faith of The Anchients to add to what you already have.

   I have already given you my statement on Bruce R. McConkie reason of why he said what he did. He is responding to individuals not Lutheran church Organizations [or any other specific church oraganizations. So Indiana Let it go !.

 

   Washing My Robes

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

             Anakin7

Edited July 22, 2015 by Anakin7

[Anakin7]

    Coolok7 ignors nor responds to our specific responses to his accusations - see posts # 863,865,867,868 - which expains Bruce R. McConkies statement !,869,870,882,894,889. As Bruce R. McConkie also stated in the past [paraphrasing] The dogs will bark at the travelers which are on there way to there appointed destiny to the Kingdom of God and of his Christ.

 

In His EternalDebt/Grace

  Washing My Robes

           Anakin7