Are there Biblical Scriptures that My LDS Friends Believe Refer Specifically and Only to the LDS Church?

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

Actually no.  The person spoken of in the verse is Christ. Other qualifications of this 
person are found in verses 1-4.

"And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out 
of his roots: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and 
understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear 
of the LORD; And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he 
shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his 
ears: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the 
meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the 
breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked". 

The "his" in "his rest" (in Isaiah 11:10) is a reference to Christ, not multiple people
resting in Christ.

"And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the 
people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious".

The root of Jesse is Christ, who would be an ensign to the people.  The Gentiles (plural) 
would seek this ensign and "his" rest (singular, Christ) would be glorious.  That is why 
I mentioned that the "his" in "his rest" is Christ.  It is "his rest" / "Christ's rest" that I
mentioned before in the several passages in Hebrews and Romans.

Regarding Doctrine and Covenants 101:31 ("And when he dies he shall not sleep, that is to 
say in the earth, but shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye, and shall be caught up, 
and his rest shall be glorious").

Yes. In this case, the "his" in "his rest" is a reference to multiple people.
 

I've seen several references in Mormon scriptures about this (Mosiah 3:5; Moroni 7:22-23; 
D&C 20:17; 39:1; 61:1

In this context, I think the teaching is that Jesus/Heavenly Father are from everlasting to 
everlasting in the sense that they have always existed as spirits (gnolaum) in LDS theology but
then progressed into becoming Gods.  

That might explain why Joseph Smith switched to the word eternity in the King Follett Discourse.

"I will go back to the beginning before the world was, to show what kind of being God is. 
What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open you ears and hear, all ye ends of the 
earth, for I am going to prove it to you by the Bible, and to tell you the designs of God 
in relation to the human race, and why He interferes with the affairs of man. God himself 
was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!".

"In order to understand the subject of the dead, for consolation of those who mourn for 
the loss of their friends, it is necessary we should understand the character and being 
of God and how He came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We 
have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, 
and take away the veil, so that you may see."

In simple terms, he teaches God himself was once as we are now – just a man like Joseph  
Smith was when he gave the sermon. And Joseph was not a God.

You’re main problem on this point is that you’re not differentiating between generations of time, such as what we’re presently experiencing on this temporal earth, and eternity where all things past, present and future exist in one eternal now. In eternity, the eternal God can exist as both a helpless infant on a temporal world, who’s utterly incapable of taking care of himself, and yet be the omniscient, omnipotent God who existed throughout all eternity simultaneously. It’s for this reason that the Bible teaches us that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever, even though he experienced all kinds of changes and had all kinds of learning and growing experiences while dwelling on this temporal world. Until you can reconcile yourself to the verity that eternity is one eternal now, where the past, present and future coexist simultaneously, you’ll be unable to grasp the theology of the Latter-Day Saints.

8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. (Hebrews 12)

40 And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. (Luke 2) 

Though he were a son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; (Hebrews 5)

 

 

Edited January 9 by teddyaware

[JAHS]

4 hours ago, theplains said:

Considering I believe there is only one God and that he has never been been anything
less than God, my simple answer is "I don't know".

The way I see it we know that our intelligences have existed forever including God's intelligence until He was made a spirit by His parents, after which he gained a body and died and was resurrected to a celestial being and became fully God. Since we believe in foreordination, God the Father could have always been considered our God in the eternal sense in the past and future in the sense that he was foreordained to be so as an intelligence. Now if you can follow that line of reasoning you are just as teched in the head as I am. 😄

[InCognitus]

13 hours ago, theplains said:

Actually no.  The person spoken of in the verse is Christ. Other qualifications of this 
person are found in verses 1-4.

Doctrine and Covenants 113:1-2 says Isaiah 11:1-5 refers to Christ.  So on that point you are correct.  

13 hours ago, theplains said:

The "his" in "his rest" (in Isaiah 11:10) is a reference to Christ, not multiple people
resting in Christ.

Nobody said it is a reference to multiple people.  Rather, it is a reference to the person who is the "root of Jesse" spoken of in Isaiah 11:10.  That person will have a glorious rest, in Christ, as the verse says.

13 hours ago, theplains said:

"And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the 
people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious".

The root of Jesse is Christ, who would be an ensign to the people.  The Gentiles (plural) 
would seek this ensign and "his" rest (singular, Christ) would be glorious.  That is why 
I mentioned that the "his" in "his rest" is Christ.  It is "his rest" / "Christ's rest" that I
mentioned before in the several passages in Hebrews and Romans.

 You forget that the whole reason this was brought up is because this was a sign that would begin the gathering of Israel, just exactly like the two writing tablets coming together in the hand of the prophet that would signal the beginning of the gathering of Israel, as spoken about by Ezekiel.  Because this is when the Lord shall "set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people".  Israel is being gathered now, and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now.  How exactly does Christ fit that timing?

13 hours ago, theplains said:

Regarding Doctrine and Covenants 101:31 ("And when he dies he shall not sleep, that is to 
say in the earth, but shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye, and shall be caught up, 
and his rest shall be glorious").

Yes. In this case, the "his" in "his rest" is a reference to multiple people.

This is why the "rest" spoken of in Isaiah 11:10 is the "rest" that comes in Christ, for the individual spoken of in that verse.

13 hours ago, theplains said:

In simple terms, he teaches God himself was once as we are now – just a man like Joseph  
Smith was when he gave the sermon. And Joseph was not a God.

No, in simple terms Joseph Smith taught that God himself was once a man exactly the same way Jesus Christ is God and was once a man.  Joseph explained, in the same sermon, that Jesus said he did what his Father did before him.  God the Father had the power to lay down his life and to take it up again.  And Jesus taught, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do; for what things soever he [the Father] doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19).  So if Jesus did what his Father did, then you can't really draw the conclusion that you are making above about God the Father, since Jesus was God in the beginning and created the world that he was born on, and so on.  

Edited January 10 by InCognitus

[theplains]

On 1/9/2024 at 11:53 AM, Pyreaux said:

But if you think Joseph is wrong and you know well enough to condemn him, God having never been less or changed, you believe he was forever backwards the God of nothing and no one, the Creator with no creation, the King with no subjects, the Lord with no land. Saying nothing, doing nothing, thinking nothing for he already knows everything. Truly unchanging, until what? The Bible actually gives up a lot of information of things existing and transpiring before Day One. Of a war, how a divine council of begotten gods made the Lord their King that day. It was him dawning his royal robe of light that was the light of creation before there was a sun on Day One, and he consulted with these gods on how to best mold an already existing world of water infested with wicked shades he cast down to it. Lots of history before Day One.

It sounds like you are describing the first God in the LDS pantheon – the God who 
always was.

[theplains]

On 1/9/2024 at 11:56 AM, teddyaware said:

In eternity, the eternal God can exist as both a helpless infant on a temporal world, who’s utterly incapable of taking care of himself, and yet be the omniscient, omnipotent God who existed throughout all eternity simultaneously.

The LDS Church teaches that both Jesus and Heavenly Father became Gods. Before that,
they were supposedly eternal spirits.

[theplains]

On 1/9/2024 at 2:56 PM, JAHS said:

The way I see it we know that our intelligences have existed forever including God's intelligence until He was made a spirit by His parents, after which he gained a body and died and was resurrected to a celestial being and became fully God. Since we believe in foreordination, God the Father could have always been considered our God in the eternal sense in the past and future in the sense that he was foreordained to be so as an intelligence. Now if you can follow that line of reasoning you are just as teched in the head as I am. 😄

Similar comment as I made to teddyaware:

The LDS Church teaches that both Jesus and Heavenly Father became Gods. Before that,
they were supposedly eternal spirits.

[theplains]

On 1/9/2024 at 11:48 PM, InCognitus said:

This is why the "rest" spoken of in Isaiah 11:10 is the "rest" that comes in Christ, for the individual spoken of in that verse.

Let's put a few verses side by side:

"And when he dies he shall not sleep, that is to say in the earth, but shall be changed in 
the twinkling of an eye, and shall be caught up, and his rest shall be glorious" (Doctrine 
and Covenants 101:31)

"And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the 
people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious" (Isaiah 11:10)

Who is referenced in "his rest shall be glorious" in both verses?
 

On 1/9/2024 at 11:48 PM, InCognitus said:

in simple terms Joseph Smith taught that God himself was once a man exactly the same way Jesus Christ is God and was once a man. 

Do you believe Jesus and Heavenly Father became Gods?

Edited January 19 by theplains

[InCognitus]

On 1/19/2024 at 8:57 AM, theplains said:

Let's put a few verses side by side:

"And when he dies he shall not sleep, that is to say in the earth, but shall be changed in 
the twinkling of an eye, and shall be caught up, and his rest shall be glorious" (Doctrine 
and Covenants 101:31)

"And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the 
people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious" (Isaiah 11:10)

Who is referenced in "his rest shall be glorious" in both verses?

I explained that already in the post where I first brought up Doctrine and Covenants 101:31 (here).  The Doctrine and Covenants verse is talking about the glorious “’rest’ that will come to righteous individuals during the Millennium”, and the Isaiah 11:10 verse is talking about a specific individual that will have a glorious rest (in Christ). 

On 1/19/2024 at 8:57 AM, theplains said:

Do you believe Jesus and Heavenly Father became Gods?

There are various ways to define the word “God”.  Some define God as anything that is eternal.  Of course we believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ have existed eternally. 

But “God” is also defined as the being who is the creator of worlds and has individuals and creations that are subject to him.  In our beliefs, God has created “worlds without number” (Moses 1:33).  And I think it is in this sense that God the Father and Jesus Christ “became Gods” to us, because they created our world and we became subject to them and reliant upon them.  

Do you believe God has been a creator of worlds eternally?  Or do you believe this earth is the first time God ever created anything (i.e. he’s a beginner at the whole creator role)?

There is one question I asked you in my last post that relates to Isaiah 11 that you didn't answer.  I said:

On 1/9/2024 at 9:48 PM, InCognitus said:

You forget that the whole reason this was brought up is because this was a sign that would begin the gathering of Israel, just exactly like the two writing tablets coming together in the hand of the prophet that would signal the beginning of the gathering of Israel, as spoken about by Ezekiel.  Because this is when the Lord shall "set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people".  Israel is being gathered now, and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now.  How exactly does Christ fit that timing?

So I ask again:  Since Israel is being gathered now and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now, how does Christ fit as the individual spoken of in Isaiah 11:10, since the person spoken of in that verse shows up just prior to the gathering of Israel?

[Pyreaux]

On 1/19/2024 at 9:40 AM, theplains said:

It sounds like you are describing the first God in the LDS pantheon – the God who 
always was.

It's your traditional and unBiblical God, the ultimate being platonic pagans conceived of, responsible for Creato ex Nihlio, and therefore once was eternally the God of nothing. Are you trying to deflect that this is indeed your orthodox alternative to Joseph's damned "mistake"?

Edited January 21 by Pyreaux

[Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

It's your traditional and unBiblical God, the ultimate being platonic pagans conceived of, responsible for Creato ex Nihlio, and therefore a once eternally the God of nothing. Are you trying to deflect that this is indeed your orthodox alternative to Joseph's damned "mistake"?

Interesting! Physicist Stephen Hawking wrote about creatio ex nihilo in his last book, and he used it to demonstrate that there could be no Creator.

In the book "Brief Answers to the Big Questions," in chapter one he asks "Is There a God?"  And, of course, (surprise, surprise!) there isn't! He says: "I think the universe was spontaneously created out of nothing, according to the laws of science."  And why does he think this? He elaborates as follows:

"As we travel back in time towards the moment of the Big Bang, the universe gets smaller and smaller and smaller, until it finally comes to a point where the whole universe is a space so small that it is in effect a single infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense black hole. And just as with modern-day black holes, floating around in space, the laws of nature dictate something quite extraordinary. They tell us that here too time itself must come to a stop. You can’t get to a time before the Big Bang because there was no time before the Big Bang. We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."

He seems to allow for the possibility that the truth is otherwise, in using "For me." But I think we can safely say he was quite sincere in his logic. I wonder how a creedal Christian gets around Hawking's logic? Does the "no time for a creator to have existed in" argument present any problem? I'm not entirely familiar with @theplains theological belief about creation. Does it include creatio ex nihilo? If so, then Hawking's logic invites a response.

I have a response to Hawking, but I'll wait to hear yours or @theplains reply.

Edited January 21 by Stargazer

[mfbukowski]

On 1/19/2024 at 7:40 AM, theplains said:

It sounds like you are describing the first God in the LDS pantheon – the God who 
always was.

The idea that there WAS a "last or first" is STILL earthly thing, that things happen in order, one before the other.

 

[theplains]

On 1/21/2024 at 6:14 PM, mfbukowski said:

The idea that there WAS a "last or first" is STILL earthly thing, that things happen in order, one before the other.

 

Regarding the concept of before or after in heavenly terms, do you believe Heavenly 
Father and Mother became Gods before Jesus became their first born spirit child?

[theplains]

On 1/21/2024 at 12:47 PM, Pyreaux said:

It's your traditional and unBiblical God, the ultimate being platonic pagans conceived of, responsible for Creato ex Nihlio, and therefore once was eternally the God of nothing. Are you trying to deflect that this is indeed your orthodox alternative to Joseph's damned "mistake"?

It's hard to fathom, but I believe God has always been.  Even in the LDS pantheon of Gods
and Goddesses, there must have been a God who always was.  Otherwise what would
explain how that first thing (or whatever term you want to use) became a God long before
a man became a God of our planet Earth.

[theplains]

On 1/21/2024 at 1:17 AM, InCognitus said:

I explained that already in the post where I first brought up Doctrine and Covenants 101:31 (here).  The Doctrine and Covenants verse is talking about the glorious “’rest’ that will come to righteous individuals during the Millennium”, and the Isaiah 11:10 verse is talking about a specific individual that will have a glorious rest (in Christ). 

When I read the context of Doctrine and Covenants 101:28-31, I see that the phrase "his 
rest shall be glorious" applying to individuals.

But when I read the context of Isaiah 11, the "his" in "his rest shall be glorious" is a
reference to Christ. The entire chapter is not speaking about many individuals, but 
rather one key figure.

Let me quote verses 10 and 12 of Isaiah 11.

"And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse [Christ], which [who] shall stand for 
an ensign of the people; to it [to Christ] shall the Gentiles seek: and his [Christ's] 
rest shall be glorious.
 
And he [Christ] shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts 
of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

This is whom (speaking of Christ) Paul wrote about (Romans 15:12 - "And again, Esaias 
saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; 
in him shall the Gentiles trust"). 

The ensign is spoken of earlier in Luke 2 as well. I'll quote a bit.

"Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, Lord, now lettest thou thy 
servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; A light to lighten the Gentiles, 
and the glory of thy people Israel".
 

On 1/21/2024 at 1:17 AM, InCognitus said:

Of course we believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ have existed eternally.

If I may be more precise, I think you believe those two beings existed eternally as 
spirits (gnolaum; Abraham 3:18) "somewhere".  One of those beings was first taken out 
of that "somewhere" and was born as a spirit child to his heavenly parents.  Then he 
was born into a world created by his God and Heavenly Father (either in the form of 
an immortal Adam type or into a mortal man).  That man would progress , marry at 
least one woman, and he would then become a God (i.e. Heavenly Father of our planet 
Earth).  This Earth's Heavenly Father took the eternal being (who would later be 
known as Jesus) from this "somewhere" and he became the first spirit child born to 
Heavenly Father and Mother (of our Earth).  Somehow he became a God in the pre-mortal 
life without marriage.  Later, he would come down to our Earth to provide an Atonement.
 

On 1/21/2024 at 1:17 AM, InCognitus said:

But “God” is also defined as the being who is the creator of worlds and has individuals and creations that are subject to him.  In our beliefs, God has created “worlds without number” (Moses 1:33).  And I think it is in this sense that God the Father and Jesus Christ “became Gods” to us, because they created our world and we became subject to them and reliant upon them.

In that definition, they (Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ) were not Gods when they 
existed "somewhere" as eternal, uncreated spirits (gnolaum).
 

On 1/21/2024 at 1:17 AM, InCognitus said:

Do you believe God has been a creator of worlds eternally?  Or do you believe this earth is the first time God ever created anything (i.e. he’s a beginner at the whole creator role)?

I believe there is only one God everywhere and anywhere. He is the creator of
everything.  I cannot fathom it. It blows my mind to even try to comprehend it.
 

On 1/21/2024 at 1:17 AM, InCognitus said:

There is one question I asked you in my last post that relates to Isaiah 11 that you didn't answer.  I said:

You forget that the whole reason this was brought up 
is because this was a sign that would begin the gathering of Israel, just exactly 
like the two writing tablets coming together in the hand of the prophet that would 
signal the beginning of the gathering of Israel, as spoken about by Ezekiel.  
Because this is when the Lord shall "set his hand again the second time to recover 
the remnant of his people".  Israel is being gathered now, and has been in the 
process of being gathered for many years now.  How exactly does Christ fit that 
timing?

So I ask again:  Since Israel is being gathered now and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now, how does Christ fit as the individual spoken of in Isaiah 11:10, since the person spoken of in that verse shows up just prior to the gathering of Israel?

I explained some of my answer above.  Isaiah 11 is a future prophecy about Christ.  
In his ministry, the gathering of Israel started. Afterwards, the gathering of the 
Gentiles began (I believe it began with Peter and Cornelius).  From that point on, 
the gathering of both Israelites and Gentiles into his church has been going on.

About the two writing tablets, I think we already discussed this. Ezekiel's two 
sticks is about two nations (the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah) 
eventually becoming one nation.

I'll quote the key verses again.

"And the sticks [not books] whereon thou writest [which Ezekiel wrote on, not on
the Book of Mormon or the Bible as they did not even exist] shall be in thine hand
before their eyes. And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take
the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will
gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land [the land of Israel,
not the United States].  And I will make them one nation [not the Book of Mormon +
the Bible] in the land upon the mountains of Israel [not in the land of America]; and
one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations [not two
books], neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms [not two books but rather
the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah] any more at all". 

[Pyreaux]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

It's hard to fathom, but I believe God has always been.  Even in the LDS pantheon of Gods
and Goddesses, there must have been a God who always was.  Otherwise what would
explain how that first thing (or whatever term you want to use) became a God long before
a man became a God of our planet Earth.

I rather think its a matter of relativity. Its a perspective as a human. Our God always was, and always divine, since before the beginning, unlike mortals. Never lies, unlike mortals, immortal, unlike mortals. With exceptions that all humans have immortal spirits, our redeemed righteous self that also become perpetually honest, all sins in past that are remembered no more and atoned, the resurrected body that will be immortal and unchanging. All the attributes of God that men will inherit. We'll inherit all things the Father hath.

Jesus was God since before the beginning, he was 100% God, the same today, and forever..... yet was a mortal man, like like us. He was born, circumcised, grew in wisdom, didn't have authority to ordain himself, got angry, cried, got surprised when his Father abandoned him, and was killed by men. Why can't the Father do the same? After all, if Jesus is God the Father, yet also not in the Trinitarian pantheon. God is not impassible. The God of the Bible changes his mood and mind, from Nineveh to the Canaanite woman.

Maybe God always was, but not always as he is today. Most powerful being in the universe might of had to grow, had limits that he had to overcome before he created anything. That doesn't mean he didn't exist or wasn't divine or not the ultimate power. An always evolving, eternally progressing, being.

Edited January 25 by Pyreaux

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, theplains said:

Regarding the concept of before or after in heavenly terms, do you believe Heavenly 
Father and Mother became Gods before Jesus became their first born spirit child?

That is a MORTAL way of seeing the world, we cannot even conceive of what it would be like to be eternal, where time is irrelevant.

So sure, IF that is the way you see it, in this place where our time is limited to before and after.

Here, causation is tied to "what happened first" linking to the "next event" which WE then classify as the "cause".

I believe the question is unanswerable where there is no before and after. 

 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mental-causation/#EmpIss

 

https://plato.stanford.edu/search/searcher.py?query=causation+correlation

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, theplains said:

I believe there is only one God everywhere and anywhere. He is the creator of
everything.  I cannot fathom it. It blows my mind to even try to comprehend it.

Yes, and when I try to fathom that, it blows my mind, too. Simply trying to visualize infinity can do that. It has sometimes been alleged that famous mathematician Georg Cantor's mental issues that required hospitalization in 1884 was due to his attempts to understand infinity. This is certainly a myth, however. He suffered from depression, but it was more likely due to the opposition his work was attracting among the mathematical community at the time.

It's a plain fact that our minds are very limited in this mortal sphere. When John wrote "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2), it should be clear that as difficult as it is to imagine ourselves in our "final form" we will be like God Himself. Not equal to him, obviously, but of the same kind.

Paul agreed, and wrote: "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together." (Romans 8:16-17)

What would you call someone who is an heir of God, a joint-heir with Christ, and who is like God? A similar question might be "What is the heir of a King?" It ought to be fairly easy to see that God has greater plans for us than we have for ourselves. Christian apologist C. S. Lewis clearly recognized this.

“It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship..."

If God is working to create beings like Himself out of us, and if He is infinite, then there will be an infinite number of what Lewis calls "possible gods and goddesses." Wouldn't these elevated creatures be destined to do what God has done, which is implied in these two passages? Or would they be destined to float in the clouds strumming harps forever and ever? Is that God created us to do? To play in his house band? <- Sorry, I know you're not saying that, but the image made me laugh. I may not be a poet, but sometimes I aspire to be a comedian. Badly, I admit.

Because of the present limitations of our mortal form, we cannot comprehend these things. We can only trust God about them, and that he will eventually reveal them to us. When we are "glorified together" with Christ, we will know these things.

In another part of your post, you bring up the LDS concept of the origin of God, and ask questions dealing with that, but they cannot be answered. This is simply because the answer has not yet been revealed. I've heard plenty of atheists attack your point of view, too, with the question "Where did God come from," to which you only have "there is only one God everywhere and anywhere". And for all time. So you're in the same boat you imagine us to be in. You have no way to explain it, and can only assert it. Welcome to the club.

But Joseph Smith was promised answers at a later time. In addition to the answers he received during his lifetime.

 

[InCognitus]

On 1/25/2024 at 9:40 AM, theplains said:

When I read the context of Doctrine and Covenants 101:28-31, I see that the phrase "his 
rest shall be glorious" applying to individuals.

But when I read the context of Isaiah 11, the "his" in "his rest shall be glorious" is a
reference to Christ. The entire chapter is not speaking about many individuals, but 
rather one key figure.

Isaiah 11:10 is about one key figure, and that key figure receives a glorious “rest”, which is in Christ, as in “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)

Both Doctrine and Covenants 101:28-31 and Isaiah 11:10 are speaking about individuals who receive rest in Christ.

On 1/25/2024 at 9:40 AM, theplains said:

I explained some of my answer above.  Isaiah 11 is a future prophecy about Christ.  
In his ministry, the gathering of Israel started. Afterwards, the gathering of the 
Gentiles began (I believe it began with Peter and Cornelius).  From that point on, 
the gathering of both Israelites and Gentiles into his church has been going on.

You are totally missing the point of the timing in the context of Isaiah 11:10-14.  When the person shows up as described in verse 10, what immediately follows is important, because the person stands as “ensign” to the people and the gathering of Israel begins right after that event:  

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.  And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.  The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.”  (Isaiah 11:11–13)

Above you said that this gathering of Israel started with Christ in his ministry.  That interpretation is impossible because of what Jesus said in Luke’s account of Christ’s sermon where he foretells of the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem.  Speaking of the Jews, he said: 

“And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.  Then let them which are in Judæa flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.  For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.  But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.  And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”  (Luke 21:20-24)

So as you can see, when Christ came he didn’t “start” the gathering, rather he foretold that after his departure the scattering would be even greater than it was before (i.e. those at Judaea, “shall be led away captive into all nations”), because the two remaining tribes would also be scattered (not just the northern ten tribes) as part of the “days of vengeance” that must be fulfilled. Furthermore, Jesus says in these verses that they will remain in this scattered state “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”.  Therefore, it is impossible that Christ, during his mortal ministry, would be the one that would “start” the gathering.

The apostle Paul also affirmed this same timing of events in his epistle to the Romans, stating that Israel’s time for receiving the gospel was essentially postponed until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled:  

“For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”  (Romans 11:25)

Regarding Romans 15:12 where Paul quotes from Isaiah 11:10, your reasoning that Paul is referring to Christ in that verse also doesn’t make sense within the context.  In verse 8 of that chapter, Paul made it clear that Christ’s mission was to the “circumcision”, which was Paul’s way of designating the Jews.  Paul is saying that Jesus ministered to the Jews so that he could confirm God’s promises to the “fathers” (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob).  Paul’s intent here and in the next few verses is to explain that even though Christ’s mission was to the House of Israel, the scriptures also foretold that the time would come when the Gentiles would have the gospel preached to them as well. 

As Paul continues in Romans 15, he quotes from Psalms 18:49 or 2 Samuel 22:50 (verse 9, “For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name”), Deuteronomy 32:43 (verse 10, “Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people”), Psalm 117:1 (verse 11, “Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people”), and finally he quotes Isaiah 11:10 (verse 12).  And in quoting all of these verses (including Isaiah 11:10) he does not identify Christ as the subject.  Rather, he simply quotes them to establish that the Gentiles have a place in God’s plan and have a right to rejoice in the grace of God.  

You quoted from Luke 2:32 where Simeon declared, upon seeing the Christ child, that he had seen the Lord’s “salvation” which he had prepared before the face of all people, as “a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel”.  You presume (incorrectly) that this lends support to your interpretation of Isaiah 11:10. The verses in Isaiah 11:10-14 are about setting up an ensign to the nations that signals the gathering of Israel, and there is no mention of giving “light” to the Gentiles in that context.  But there are many other prophecies about the Gentiles benefiting from the “light” that comes through Christ and his servants and his people, but these are all in a totally different set of circumstances than what is being discussed in Isaiah 11:10.

Obviously, Jesus is truly the “light of the world” (John 8:12), but others are described as providing light as well (i.e. Jesus taught us, “Ye are the light of the world…”, Matthew 5:14).  And Isaiah, speaking of Israel says “the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of they rising” (Isaiah 60:3).  

Also, in chapter 49, Isaiah quotes the Lord as saying: “Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified… And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength.  And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”  (Isaiah 49:3-6)

The “servant” of the Lord in this context can have many applications.  It may be Christ.  It may be Isaiah himself.  It may be Israel as a people (as verse 3 says).  It may be Ephraim (the Lord’s firstborn – Jeremiah 31:9).  Or it may be any other servant that the Lord may send out (including Joseph Smith).  And all of these may be correct.

The fact that this could be applied to any of the Lord’s servants is born out by the fact that Paul and Barnabas considered these verses to be applicable to them:   

“Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.  For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.”  (Acts 13:46–47)

As you can see, appealing to Luke 2:32 to try to claim that Isaiah 11:10 is speaking about Jesus doesn’t really work.  There is no connection between the two passages, and the prophecies about those who are a light unto the Gentiles are applicable to many individuals, and not only Jesus.

Now I’d like to summarize a few things and explain why my question is still an important one.

1. All of Israel was scattered, either because of their unrighteousness and rebellion, or for directly rejecting their Messiah:
   • Israel was split into the northern and southern kingdoms, and in approximately 721 BC the northern tribes were carried captive into Assyria and were scattered and lost.
   • In 605 BC and 597 BC, the remaining Israelites were carried captive into Babylon.  They were permitted to return to Jerusalem in approximately 537 BC after Babylon was conquered by the Persians.
   • In 70 AD and 135 AD, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, and the remaining tribes of the House of Israel were scattered among all nations. 
   • Jesus and Paul both testified that Israel would remain in this scattered and blinded state until the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled (Luke 21:24, Romans 11:25)
2. During his ministry Jesus was sent only to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt 15:24), and never to the Gentiles directly.  Later, after his rejection by the Jews he declared to them that “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (Matt 21:43), and the kingdom of God was left to another people (Daniel 2:44).  After his resurrection, Jesus sent his apostles to the Gentiles.  This marked the beginning of the time of the Gentiles.
3. Isaiah 11:10-14 prophesies that an individual will show up on the scene and shall stand as an “ensign of the people”, and this signals the point in time where the “Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people” from all over the earth (verse 11), and the ensign for the nations “shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth (verse 12).  
4. Isaiah 49:22-23 has a similar prophecy that reaffirms the meaning of Isaiah 11:10-14: “Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.  And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.” 

This brings me back to the question I asked, which I will restate here: “Since Israel is being gathered now and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now, how does Christ fit as the individual spoken of in Isaiah 11:10, since the person spoken of in that verse shows up just prior to the gathering of Israel?”

You answered this by saying that the gathering of Israel “started” with Christ’s ministry, which has been shown to be impossible because of what Jesus said in Luke 21:24 (quoted above).  And both Jesus (Luke 21:24) and Paul (Romans 11:25) said that Israel would be in their blinded and scattered state “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”, so this process could not have begun until relatively recently.

But you also said that Isaiah 11:10 “is a future prophecy about Christ”, and you said, when the gospel began to be taught to the Gentiles, "From that point on, the gathering of both Israelites and Gentiles into his church has been going on."  Can you explain how your interpretation fits the timeline given above, and the prophecies and statements from Jesus and Paul noted above?  

On 1/25/2024 at 9:40 AM, theplains said:

About the two writing tablets, I think we already discussed this. Ezekiel's two 
sticks is about two nations (the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah) 
eventually becoming one nation.

I'll quote the key verses again.

"And the sticks [not books] whereon thou writest [which Ezekiel wrote on, not on
the Book of Mormon or the Bible as they did not even exist] shall be in thine hand
before their eyes. And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take
the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will
gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land [the land of Israel,
not the United States].  And I will make them one nation [not the Book of Mormon +
the Bible] in the land upon the mountains of Israel [not in the land of America]; and
one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations [not two
books], neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms [not two books but rather
the kingdom of Israel and the kingdom of Judah] any more at all". 

The issue is not of what Ezekiel literally did (writing on tablets and putting them together - using the New English Bible translation of the verse) but what the writing tables coming together represented (the records of the two nations) and that this would immediately precede the gathering of Israel:  "Thus I shall make them one tablet, and they shall be one in my hand. The leaves on which you write shall be visible in your hand for all to see".  And, it is stated as a prophecy of what will happen to signal the beginning of the gathering of Israel (i.e. "I am gathering up the Israelites from their places of exile among the nations").  

As for what is "their own land", we did already discuss that (here) where you assumed that they would be returning to "the land of their inheritance, like it was at their zenith in the Old Testament."  And, I already explained why that is not the case.

Edited January 28 by InCognitus
spelling fix

[theplains]

On 1/25/2024 at 11:46 AM, Pyreaux said:

Our God always was, and always divine, since before the beginning, unlike mortals.

Jesus was God since before the beginning, he was 100% God, the same today, and forever..... yet was a mortal man, like like us.

Maybe God always was, but not always as he is today. Most powerful being in the universe might of had to grow, had limits that he had to overcome before he created anything. That doesn't mean he didn't exist or wasn't divine or not the ultimate power. An always evolving, eternally progressing, being.

Similar to what I replied to Incognitus, the LDS version of God (Heavenly Father) always 
was in the sense of always being an eternal being (who always was - gnolaum; Abraham 3:18). 
This is similar to yourself.  Both you and the being who would eventually progress into 
becoming the God of our Earth were on the same level at some time in eternity past - gnolaum, 
but not Gods.

[theplains]

On 1/25/2024 at 2:25 PM, mfbukowski said:

I believe the question is unanswerable where there is no before and after. 

If there is no before or after in the mind of God, what do we do with the concept of eternal
progression?

[theplains]

On 1/25/2024 at 7:39 PM, Stargazer said:

What would you call someone who is an heir of God, a joint-heir with Christ, and who is like God? A similar question might be "What is the heir of a King?" It ought to be fairly easy to see that God has greater plans for us than we have for ourselves. Christian apologist C. S. Lewis clearly recognized this.

“It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship..."

Adam and Eve became like Gods when they ate from the forbidden tree but they were
not "like God" like the LDS concept of exaltation means.

As for Romans 8:16-17, I think we need to include verses 14-15 too.

"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the 
spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption 
as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”  The Spirit himself bears witness with our 
spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow 
heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified 
with him".

In Romans 8, only those led by the spirit of God are the children of God, and are joint 
heirs.  From what I have seen in LDS teachings, these joint heirs are gods.  So, the
non-gods are not viewed as children.

I didn't understand what you were implying when you mentioned C.S. Lewis, but I have
seen in LDS teachings that future Mormon males who become Gods will be worshipped by
their own spirit children on the worlds they create.

[InCognitus]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

Similar to what I replied to Incognitus, the LDS version of God (Heavenly Father) always 
was in the sense of always being an eternal being (who always was - gnolaum; Abraham 3:18). 
This is similar to yourself.  Both you and the being who would eventually progress into 
becoming the God of our Earth were on the same level at some time in eternity past - gnolaum, 
but not Gods.

Some have speculated that Joseph Smith was referring to an infinite regression of Gods, but others see what Joseph Smith taught differently.  It is more in line with what the book of Abraham teaches (and other scriptures) to understand that Joseph Smith was teaching that God the Father is the greatest of all spirits and always has been, but others have become like him through his assistance.

[Stargazer]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

Adam and Eve became like Gods when they ate from the forbidden tree but they were
not "like God" like the LDS concept of exaltation means.

Correct! They became like Gods in the sense that they now knew good from evil. In other words, they became accountable, unlike young children in mortality, whose brains have not developed far enough to be held accountable for their transgressions. 

2 hours ago, theplains said:

As for Romans 8:16-17, I think we need to include verses 14-15 too.

"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the 
spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption 
as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”  The Spirit himself bears witness with our 
spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow 
heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified 
with him".

It's good to include verse 14-15, yes. It doesn't detract from my point, however. And that point is that we may also be glorified with him -- also known as inheriting the Celestial Kingdom, or in other words, inheriting celestial glory with the Father.

2 hours ago, theplains said:

In Romans 8, only those led by the spirit of God are the children of God, and are joint 
heirs.  From what I have seen in LDS teachings, these joint heirs are gods.  So, the
non-gods are not viewed as children.

Nevertheless, when Jesus taught us how to pray, he taught all of us to address God as our Father. Your assertion that the non-gods are not viewed as children has no support in scripture. When Paul writes that we should be subject to the "Father of spirits" (Heb 12:9), he is expressing the idea that the fatherhood of God applies to all, not just to the ones who are counted worthy to be a joint-heir with Christ. 

In some human societies where noble titles are passed down from father to son, one son inherits the father's titles when the father passes away, but no other sons inherit them. They inherit nobility, but not titles. By the same token, a child of God the Father who does not inherit exaltation (or "godhood" as you put it), still inherits salvation. I know this goes counter to your own beliefs, where those who are not joint-heirs with Christ go to the "bad place," instead.

2 hours ago, theplains said:

I didn't understand what you were implying when you mentioned C.S. Lewis,

In bringing C.S. Lewis into the matter I was attempting to show that even a stalwart Protestant like Lewis saw that God wants to make us into something far greater than we may perhaps expect. In saying we might be strongly tempted to worship such an one that God has exalted, Lewis was perhaps alluding to John the Beloved's experience as recounted in Revelation 21 & 22, where an angel shows him some very amazing things. The angel then says:

7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.

This angel was so impressive, that when he said this, John seemed to think that he was being addressed by the Lord, for he reacted as follows

8 And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.

He was "strongly tempted to worship" this angel! But the angel countered:

9 Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.

In other words, "Don't worship me; I'm not God." Who was he, this angel? We're not told, other than this angel was a fellowservant with John, clearly a prophet, and of some importance to show up here in John's divine vision. He was recognizably something far greater than a mere mortal.

Well, that's why I brought up C.S. Lewis.  

2 hours ago, theplains said:

but I have seen in LDS teachings that future Mormon males who become Gods will be worshipped by their own spirit children on the worlds they create.

Sure. But it correlates well with what Jesus said in John 5:19-20...

Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

This demonstrates rather clearly that while the Father and the Son are one, they nevertheless are separate personages (contra the Nicene Fathers). AND, if one becomes a "joint-heir with Christ," then the same applies to that joint-heir, meaning that the Father will show that joint-heir what He did, and expect that joint-heir to do that what He did.

Which is what what you said, in a somewhat less elegant fashion.

 

Edited January 31 by Stargazer

[Stargazer]

By the way, @theplains, I want to thank you for your contributions here on this board. It may not entirely be what you intend, but I almost always gain new insights and knowledge through responding to things you bring up, and strengthens me in my testimony, not only of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but even more importantly, my testimony of Jesus Christ. Your challenges cause me to delve more deeply into scripture, and this opens up my mind and heart to new and unexpected realizations. 

Keep up the good work!

[theplains]

will redo my post.

Edited January 31 by theplains