Sons of God

In January 2008 radio host Krista Tippett (Speaking of Faith on American Public Media) interviewed LDS scholar Robert Millet. Her stated goal for the interview was to gain a sense of Mormonism, both theologically and spiritually. Throughout the course of the interview, many interesting topics were discussed.

About 25 minutes into the interview, following a statement by Ms. Tippett about how the Mormon tradition views Jesus (Jehovah of the Old Testament, exalted as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob), Dr. Millet told the story of being in a meeting with 20 evangelical pastors who had been invited to “ask whatever questions they wanted to ask” about the Mormon faith. One of the questions asked of an unnamed LDS apostle in attendance was whether Mormons believe Jesus and Lucifer are brothers. After admitting that yes, Jesus and Lucifer were in the pre-existence together, the LDS apostle clarified:

“But let me be straight forward on this. Jesus was God, and there was never a time when He and Lucifer were on the same plane.”

BrothersWhile this answer might alleviate some concern from evangelicals who shudder over the idea that Jesus and Lucifer are both–in the same sense–sons of God, I don’t see the apostle’s answer supported in other LDS teachings.

To begin with, Mormonism teaches that all spirits born to Heavenly Father were first eternal entities “co-equal” (co-eternal) with God:

“Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be” (D&C 93:29).

“The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal with God himself…” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 353).

“Our spirit matter was eternal and co-existent with God, but it was organized into spirit bodies by our Heavenly Father” (Spencer W. Kimball, Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 5).

Jesus and Lucifer both began as these co-equal intelligences. They were on the same plane at least at this early point in LDS cosmology.

Next, all of Heavenly Father’s spirit children were born in the pre-existence with equal attributes:

“Every spirit that comes to this earth to take upon it a tabernacle is a son or a daughter of God and possesses all the intelligence and all the attributes that any son or daughter can enjoy, either in the spirit world or in this world, except that in the spirit, and separated from the body, they lacked just the tabernacle of being like God the Father” (Joseph F. Smith, Young Women’s Journal, 6:371-372).

The Pearl of Great Price Student Manual says, “There are varying degrees of intelligence among Heavenly Father’s children,” but then goes on to indicate that the differences are not inherent; rather, they are a product of development:

“[W]e know they were all innocent in the beginning; but the right of free agency which was given to them enabled some to outstrip others, and thus, through the eons of immortal existence, to become more intelligent, more faithful, for they were free to act for themselves, to think for themselves, to receive the truth or rebel against it” (p. 37).

Indeed, the late LDS Apostle Neal A. Maxwell wrote:

“The ascendancy of Jesus Christ among all of our spirit brothers and sisters) is clearly set forth. Of Him it was said that He is ‘more intelligent than they all.’” (Quoted in The Pearl of Great Price Student Manual, Religion 327, p. 38).

This is in keeping with what Milton R. Hunter taught in General Conference when he said, “during his pre-mortal life Jesus Christ rose to the status of Godhood” (Conference Report, October 1949).

To say that in Mormonism “there was never a time when [Jesus] and Lucifer were on the same plane” is quite misleading. Some might entertain an explanation suggesting that by the time Lucifer was born to Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother Jesus had already ascended to Godhood. If there are authoritative LDS sources that support this position I would be interested in seeing them; as of now, I’m not aware of any. In fact, everything I have read regarding this issue points to the equality of Jesus and Lucifer; other than birth order, they seem to be understood as having been peers (for example, see Gospel Principles, 1988, pp. 15-16, pp. 32-34).

In 1986 the LDS Ensign magazine included a regular column titled, “I Have a Question.” In the June issue, a question asked and answered was:

“How can Jesus and Lucifer be spirit brothers when their characters and purposes are so utterly opposed?

“Jess L. Christensen, Institute of Religion director at Utah State University, Logan, Utah [answers]. On first hearing, the doctrine that Lucifer and our Lord, Jesus Christ, are brothers may seem surprising to some—especially to those unacquainted with latter-day revelations. But both the scriptures and the prophets affirm that Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of our Heavenly Father and, therefore, spirit brothers. Jesus Christ was with the Father from the beginning. Lucifer, too, was an angel ‘who was in authority in the presence of God,’ a ‘son of the morning.’ (See Isa. 14:12; D&C 76:25–27.) Both Jesus and Lucifer were strong leaders with great knowledge and influence. But as the Firstborn of the Father, Jesus was Lucifer’s older brother. (See Col. 1:15; D&C 93:21.)

“How could two such great spirits become so totally opposite? The answer lies in the principle of agency, which has existed from all eternity. (See D&C 93:30–31.) Of Lucifer, the scripture says that because of rebellion ‘he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies.’ (Moses 4:4.) Note that he was not created evil, but became Satan by his own choice” (Ensign, June 1986, 25–26).

So it appears that, according to the documented teachings of Mormonism, Jesus and Lucifer started out together – on the same plane, if you will – but due to choices they made in the pre-existence their paths split. One became a god; the other became Satan.

But I suppose this answer would not have had gone over very well in a meeting with 20 evangelical pastors.

About Sharon Lindbloom

Sharon surrendered her life to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1979. Deeply passionate about Truth, Sharon loves serving as a full-time volunteer research associate with Mormonism Research Ministry. Sharon and her husband live in Minnesota.
This entry was posted in Jesus Christ. Bookmark the permalink.

72 Responses to Sons of God

  1. DefenderOfTheFaith says:

    It’s nice that there are many who know Mormon doctrine so well. I don’t think that it is a big shock that we differ in our understanding of the nature of God. Burean goes to great lengths to prove that we differ in our beliefs when The First Vision and Article of Faith #1 will suffice to make that point. It doesn’t seem to make much sense to “go to battle” over what the scriptures say. For every scripture that RickB throws out there, I can throw just as many back to show the inconsistency. Where does that leave us? Usually with enmity toward each other. And for those of us who know the BoM is the Word of God, we have these words from the Savior

    3Nephi 11: 28 neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.
    29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.
    30 Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away.

    These are the words of the Savior and if “disputing” his points of doctrine turns to anger you can be assured who is driving the discussion. (Of course, you would have to believe the BoM is true to believe this)

  2. Lancaster says:

    The funny thing about the Millet quote is that the average General Authority isn’t any more schooled in the scriptures than y’all are, and so tends to get his talking points from Correlation or think tanks like FARMS. Most likely, the aforementioned GA was simply parroting something Millet had probably written. FARMS in particular has been walking the church away from traditional Mormon orthodoxy for the last two decades.

    Still, getting Mormon apologists to agree on “deeper doctrine” is practically impossible. GRCluff says, “Christ and Satan were in heaven together.” He is correct. Susan says that “Jesus and Lucifer were NEVER at the same level of righteousness, virtue, or obedience to God the Father.” She’s implying predestination, which is heresy. “Jesus and Lucifer ARE NOT NOW at the same level of righteousness” would be more correct.

    In Moses 4:1-4 we see that Satan and Jesus both had equal access to God. Both present their business plans for Earth, Inc., and God goes with Jesus. Satan gets annoyed because he thinks God is playing favorites (the text certainly suggests God is playing favorites–the only reason offered is that the eldest son inherits the company because he was born first and dad liked him best) and attempts a hostile takeover. He loses, and gets booted out of Heaven.

    The Mormon version wins hands down in the melodrama department. (Presented in a spirit of mild amusement.)

  3. germit says:

    DOF: “it doesn’t seem to make much sense to “go to battle” over what the scriptures say. For every scripture that RB throws out there, I can throw just as many back to show the inconsistency. Where does that leave us? Usually with enmity toward each other.” well, it doesn’t have to , although I will quickly and unashamedly say I will always have enmity toward your ‘gospel’ until such time as I convert, but I do not have to have enmity to YOU, in order to do so. I know that seems a very thin line: our ‘gospels’ are at odds, and God would have us hot or cold, but we “NOT to be quarrelsome, but kind to ALL, patient when wronged, with GENTLENESS correcting those who are in opposition..” 2cdTim 3. As for going to the scripture: and the burning bosom, inner testomony, work of the Holy Spirit is more sure footing, and will lead to less ‘contention’?? Good luck, dude. your question is apt: where does this leave us [when scripture is pitted against scripture]. At least this is a situation that someone can sit back AWAY from the emotion on enmity and say with some clarity: DOF seems to have a much stronger point and make more sense, his claim has a lot more going for it, I should consider that..etc…the fact that two or twenty people would be ‘contentious’ about the verses should not poison the system: the personal testimony/Holy Spirit thing won’t go any farther, unless you want to heal the sick or raise the dead: that’s a pretty good apologetic and worked great for the NT crowd (some would say it still does). And if the BoM is such a great book, work some of that in as well: truth has its own inherent power. blessings on all gentle people of passion,GERMIT

  4. Andrea says:

    susan,

    Thank you for clarifying the definition of “plane” -I concede that this may be what the apostle meant. Moving on, you say to state that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers is “completely 100% supporting LDS church doctrine” -here’s where I have a problem. The Bible unequivocally states the opposite as many have pointed out, and this is one of many points where Mormons have a different gospel than that of the Bible.

    Berean, Germit –great posts! Remember, Satan doesn’t always deceive with pure lies, he will use truths and half-truths and anything he can to get us to disobey God and sever our connection with Him. This is exactly what he did to Adam and Eve.

  5. mobaby says:

    Of course this entire debate is reminiscent of what happened during the presidential primaries with Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. Mitt Romney kind of/sort of denied that according to Mormons Jesus and Satan are brothers with a line something like “it’s not a correct understanding of what we believe.” Likewise, I think Sharon correctly assessed the parsing of words by Robert Millet (in her response post above) in that Millet wants to obfuscate because this doctrine does not make good public relations. Mormons don’t like anyone talking about this belief. It is a belief that most people – Christians and non-Christians alike, find troubling and shocking. I know when I first heard about it years ago I was really repulsed at the idea that the Lord God of heaven come in the flesh is a brother to Satan – and that there was some question as to who would be our Lord and whose plan God would choose. I think this is another one of those doctrinal questions that Gordon B. Hinkley would have dodged while he was the LDS Church president – much like he did the belief that man can become a god, and that god was once a man. It’s a doctrine that is not supported by scripture and one that most find inherently offensive.

  6. Ralph says:

    Lancaster and Mobaby,

    Did you read my post earlier? The plan was always God’s plan, it was Jesus who supported it while Lucifer presented a different one – this is why Jesus was chosen not just because He was the first-born, but that did come into play as well.

    RickB,

    If you have read the BoM properly you will find that the 2 scriptures you present for proving that God is a spirit are not actually doing that at all. The first scripture, Alma 18, Ammon is doing what Paul did in the Bible when he was talking to the Greeks. Paul saw the statue to the unknown god and then said that he will tell the people who this unknown god is. Does this mean that Jesus is one of the Greek pantheon of gods? No. In Alma 18, Ammon is using the belief of the Lamanites, who believe in a Great Spirit, and equates this with God. Ammon never said that God is a spirit. The second scripture, Alma 22, is discussing the belief system of an apostate/wicked people who believe that God is a spirit. Nowhere does it state that that is what the BoM teaches about God. So there is nothing in the BoM teaching that God is spirit.

    Berean,

    Please provide references of doctrine (ie from a prophet or in the scriptures or teaching manuals), not someones’ opinion, that we believe that spirit children are created through sex. As far as I know it has never been doctrine, it has just been the idea of people within the church. Aaron and I have discussed this in the past and as far as I know he could not come up with any references of doctrine. He did point out that our belief supports the idea which I agree it does, but that does not mean that is what happens. In the things I have read it states that the intelligences were organised into spirits. Yes the words offspring and begotten, etc can denote through sexual intimacy, but that also is found in the Bible for Jesus (John 1:14, 3:16) – so with your reasoning what does this say about Jesus?

  7. Soy Yo says:

    In the Mormon world, does this make God, Heavenly Mother, Jesus and Lucifer (along with the 1/3 hosts of heaven he took with him) the most dysfunctional family?

    Out of the 4 kids in my family, two of us have broken free from Mormonism. My mom has taken it hard so in an attempt to help her see that she is on par for the course I said. “Mom, you shouldn’t feel too bad about this, even 1/3 of God’s children fell away.”

    She did not laugh…

    I know this does not really lend much to the conversation but mobaby’s last comment made me remember it for some reason.

  8. jackg says:

    JesiciaJoy and Andrea,

    I love reading your posts. Keep up the awesome apologetics!

    Ralph,

    I don’t get what you’re trying to get at with your discourse on birth defects, etc. Are you claiming that birth defects and the like are a result of decisions made in a pre-mortal state, and that one can judge the faithfulness of another person by such defects? The reason for birth defects is that we live in a fallen world, and the condition of the world changed due to the fall of Adam and Eve.

  9. Rick B says:

    DoF said

    These are the words of the Savior and if “disputing” his points of doctrine turns to anger you can be assured who is driving the discussion. (Of course, you would have to believe the BoM is true to believe this)

    I would say to you as the Bible and the BoM say, Have I then become your enemy for telling you the truth?

    Let me add to that, it’s Funny how JS said the BoM was the most correct book on earth, and a man could get closer to god from reading it. Yet the Bible and the BoM both teach lucifer was cast out of heaven for trying to set himself above God the father. Yet the Pearl of GR, PRICE, Teaches a different story, so who do we believe? Rick b

  10. Berean says:

    Ralph,

    Are you kidding me or are you actually serious? You want me to document from LDS sources that the Mormon god and his wife/wives actually have physical sex when you and all Mormons both past and present know that this is a fact? If sex wasn’t involved then why the need for a wife in celestial marriage? It’s understood in Mormonism that there is a “mother in heaven” according to Mormon Doctrine on page 519. (By the way, this is authoritative because numerous Church manuals reference this work and the prophets quote from it extensively). “Begotten” in the Christian sense does not apply to Jesus because Christians know that there is no “mother in heaven” whom God had sexual relations with to procreate. Mormons know about heavenly mother because when I have asked Mormons about her they get extremely sensitive about the issue.

    Do you really expect Thomas Monson to stand up and start giving intimate details about the sex act that the Mormon god and his wife/wives have in bringing about spirit children? Church members would scream in horror and mothers would put their hands over their children’s ears! It’s understood what takes place. They don’t have to spell it out there or in church manuals the nitty-gritty details because they don’t want to insult the intelligence of the Church members who know what takes place as do you.

    Scripture? How about D&C 132? Why the need for eternal marriage and the ordinance for this in the temple? You did this ordinance I’m sure so you could have exaltation. You can’t have it without a wife in celestial marriage. Why the need for a wife? To procreate for all eternity! Did the Mormon god and heavenly mother just look at each other and procreate? Is procreation on Kolob done asexually like the worms here on earth? If so, why the need for a wife/wives with your own planet one day? Let’s get serious.

    References? I’ll give you a few for the remainder of my posts.

  11. Berean says:

    (References: part 1)

    On 30 June 1916, the First Presidency of the Church (Joseph F. Smith, Anthon H. Lund and Charles Penrose) declared: “So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring. Only such exalted souls have reached maturity in the appointed course of eternal life; and the spirits born to them in the eternal worlds will pass in due sequence through the several stages or estates by which the glorified parents have attained exaltation.” (In Clark, “Messages of the First Presidency”, 5:34. Also quoted in “Doctrines & Covenants Student Manual” page 325)

    “Every person is literally a son or a daughter of God, having been born as a spirit to Heavenly Parents previous to being born to mortal parents on the earth.” (LDS Bible Dictionary, p. 776) [What does the word "LITERALLY" mean? Just what it says in the same way that we were brought about here on earth!]

    “The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fulness of his kingdom becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus and man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over the worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring.” (Joseph F. Smith, “Doctrines of Salvation”, Vol.2, p.48)

    “We, the human family, are literally the sons and daughters of Divine Parents, the literal progeny of God our Eternal Father, and of our God Mother, are away from home for a season.” (Bruce McConkie, “The Philosophical Basis of Mormonism”, page 9)

    “In the heav’ns are parents single? No; the tho’t makes reasons stare! Truth is reason, Truth eternal, Tells me I’ve a Mother there” (Milton Hunter, “Gospel Through the Ages”,pp.99-100) [PARENTS ARE NOT SINGLE!]

  12. Berean says:

    (References – part 2)

    “In the literal sense, the expression SPIRIT BIRTH has reference to the birth of the spirit in pre-existence. Spirits are actually born as the offspring of a Heavenly Father, a glorified and exalted Man. They will be born in a future eternity to future exalted beings for whom the family unit constitutes.” (Mormon Doctrine, p.750)

    “All men in pre-existence were the spirit children of God our Father, an exalted, glorified, and perfected Man. The offspring born to him in that primeval sphere had bodies of spirit element. In a future eternity, spirit children will be born to exalted, perfected, glorified COUPLES for whom the family unit continues. (Mormon Doctrine, p.751)

    “all men are the spirit children of an Eternal Father is the usually unspoken truth that they are also the offspring of an Eternal Mother. An exalted and glorified Man of Holiness could not be a Father unless a Woman of like glory, perfection, and holiness was associated with him as a Mother. The begetting of children makes a man a father and a woman mother whether we are dealing with man in his mortal or immortal state.” (Mormon Doctrine, p.516)

    “man, as a spirit was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father…all men and women are in the similtude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity.” (First Presidency, Joseph F. Smith, John Winder & Anthon Lund; “Man: His Origin and Destiny”, pp.348-355)

    Ralph, if you want LDS quotes where it talks about the private parts of the Mormon god and his wife making this happen then it’s not there and you know it. You know what these quotes are saying. Let’s get real and quit fooling around. The point has been made. Jesus of the Mormons and how He got here is completely different than the Jesus of Christianity. Mormons are guilty of 2 Cor 11:4 and Gal 1:6-9. Mormonism and its celestial sex is paganism.

  13. germit says:

    Ralph: thanks for the thots on “blood”, could you sum up about Jesus: did HE LOSE his blood prior to ascension?? What is the LDS view, and I don’t know if it’s worth asking for scripture on this one..(small smile). Also: did ADAM gain or lose ‘blood’ at the fall. I seem to recall Coke Nesell mumbling about that in “Latter DAys” , when he wasn’t busy telling me how cool he was/is. Berean is on target here: understandable that your church might want to be less than “official” about the big celestial sex party, but logic takes you there, and all the corrolary parts: couples, marriage, the emphasis on bodies, etc…Lots of baggage there, Ralph my friend, I know you are a strong lifter, limber up. As usual , do NOT expect the LDS leadership to clean this up, or explain anything, they are too busy leading the flock. There’s always Mr.Millet.

  14. falcon says:

    Celestial sex, between mother god and father god. What do our Mormon friends think Joseph Smith was all about? It was about scoring with as many women as he could. Do you think he was going to stop after death? That’s why he had a harem and that’s why his home boys grooved on the whole concept. To them heaven was making it for eternity with as many babes as they could get sealed to. And the real clincher is, spiritualize the whole thing. Make promiscuity a virture. Anyone see Satan in any of this?

    In his Word God says that he would give people over to their depraved minds. That is one Bible verse Joseph Smith, B. Young et al fullfilled.

  15. GRCluff says:

    Celestial sex? Give me a break please.

    Heres a quote from Jesus the Christ by James Talmage:

    “That Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the “Son of the Highest.”

    We (Mormons) believe in a thing called a “higher manifestation of a natural law”. Just like God’s power is not limited to time or space, no God will be limited to the baser natural laws of this world.

    Yes, I said it. Offspring WITHOUT sex. God did it with Mary. He propably does it all the time.

  16. GRCluff says:

    Berean said:
    “I often ask Mormons what they think of Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

    Heres my 2 cents. Their plan of salvation stinks. It is not even Biblical. They got the Trinity right, but they still mix up the identity of Jesus and The Father. Their missionary program is the best. Mormons could learn from them there. Required tracting is a great idea.

    I always say that Satan creates false churches for the purpose of keeping good people out of his true church. Just give them enough truth to keep them satisfied, but not enough to keep them from sin. Well at least the JW’s got missionary work right–that should keep a few more people out of the true church (LDS in case you forgot)

    I met with them for 10 weeks in a row, but they finally gave up on me.

  17. JessicaJoy says:

    Jesus the Christ by James E. Talmage is a doctrinal study on the life and ministry of Christ, and is a widely appreciated document among Latter-day Saints. The book consists of 42 chapters, each focusing on important aspects of the life and mission of Jesus as the Messiah.”

    - I had to look that one up on Wikipedia to figure out how come GRCluff’s quote was so different from all the quotes Berean gave us from Mormon doctrine regarding the Heavenly Father/Mother view. I can see why this book by Talmage would be “widely appreciated” among LDS members. If this is the view that is widely held by LDS, why don’t they have their doctrine updated to match what they believe?

  18. Berean says:

    Ralph,

    I see that you answered me on another thread. You’re off topic over there. The discussion is over here. Please stay focused.

    I figured you would reject every quote from authoritative references that I gave you since these speakers didn’t go into exact details describing the genitalia of the Mormon god and his wife/wives and how those body parts were used to bring about Jesus in the preexistence. I see that you didn’t answer any of the questions that I posed to you in reference to D&C 132 (the need for a wife?) and for what your personal motive is when you did temple ordinances for celestial marriage. Why don’t you be honest and tell everyone what Ralph and other Mormons really think and know is going to happen when you think you will become a god one day and get your own planet with your plural wives? Is it going to be artificial insemination or asexual reproduction like the worms? Give me a break!

    I think this is another case where the LDS leadership has shown a real lack of courage and leadership by not addressing this issue. Mormons like yourself have been left to wonder about this issue because there is no official church position. Why is that? The LDS Church would never gain the mainstream acceptance if they said that their Mormon god who is an exalted man has a penis and his heavenly mother has a vagina and they brought Jesus into the preexistence by using them and then the Mormon god who has a penis used that with Mary, one of his spirit daughters who has a vagina, to bring Jesus into the world thus nullifying the virgin birth and committing incest.
    I think this quote pretty much sums it up:

    “Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers”. (Mormon Doctrine, p.547)

    This is pretty simple to understand for anyone who has learned sex education. (MODERATORS: I apologize for the content of this post. I just don’t know any other way to put it. This has gotten silly and absurd.)

  19. falcon says:

    Berean,
    I guess sometimes you just have to say it…bluntly. The reason for this is that Mormonism likes to play around the edges and obfuscate and throw up fog banks to mask the truth regarding the beliefs, doctrines, practices and history of their church. We know that Joseph Smith took at least 33 women and kids as “wives”. Now our Mormon friends think we are so niave as to believe these were just platonic relationships and that the prophet was providing spiritual counsel to these MoGals. Mormons can’t bring themselves to see JS for who he really was. The sanitized version of his life when discovered by many now exMos lends credence to the reputation that the Mormon church is a stranger to the truth. Hence the dancing around the issue of god and goddess sex discussed here.

    The fact of the matter is that Joseph Smith’s dream was to have a celestial kingdom where he and the other god wannabees could have endless eternal sex with countless women. Brings new meaning to the term “sex objects”. If people want to see 19th century Joseph Smith Mormonism played out, just look at the FLDS. That’s the Joseph Smith legacy. The UtahLDS has to spend it’s time spinning the truth of the matter to remain acceptable to polite society. Actually the branch of Islam that will give a guy 72 virgins if he offs himself with a bomb, offers, it would seem, a better deal.

  20. DJBrown says:

    The conception of Christ’s mortal body is one of the most sacred topics ever discussed. Yes, we believe He was and is the literal Son of God, possessing the genetic make-up and powers of His Father in Heaven. He is the Only Begotten of God. He also possessed the mortal attributes and genes of Mary. We do not know exactly how He was conceived. As modern technology has unfolded, we can now see numerous methods by which this could have been achieved. But the bottom line is that knowing all the details is not necessary for our salvation. And given our tendancy toward irreverence in these matters, I think the reasons God does not reveal every detail are obvious.

    Many of you insist that the church leaders are conspiring to deceive people by not dwelling on “deep doctrinal” topics. Could it be that they don’t know and we don’t need to know. God will reveal things when He wants to. Don’t you keep insisting that true christians focus on the atonement of Christ as the means of salvation? I believe the basics of the gospel are most important- faith, repentence, baptism, following the Holy Ghost, and keeping the commandments.

    We are given a few hints in modern revelation about some of these matters, but ultimately we do not know everything, nor do we need to. It is my experience that none of these things are taught in the church (i.e. in our meetings, etc.) These deep topics are not things we dwell on because our salvation does not depend on them, and we are probably not mature enough to fully understand God’s ways. That is probably not satisfying to somebody insistant on having everything laid out in front of them. But faith is the first principle of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Again, I am not dodging here as I’m sure you will insist. There is no “back room” in the church where the “real” teachings of the church are kept. There is simply no conspiracy. But it is sort of fun and entertaining to believe and teach such things.

  21. JessicaJoy says:

    DJ said he does not believe salvation depends on things such as the details of who Jesus Christ is or how He came to be.

    Christians believe our salvation is entirely dependent on knowing the true Jesus Christ of the Bible and the Bible warns us not to receive “another Jesus” (II Cor. 11:4).

    After the Mormon doctrine that has been quoted throughout this thread regarding the Mormon concept of Jesus being conceived through natural processes of a Heavenly Father and Mother and that Jesus was the literal brother of Lucifer and is merely “a god” (one of many), what are the clues that would help me to understand this as merely an expansion and further revelation upon what the Bible has said, and not as “another Jesus” that I was warned not to receive?

  22. germit says:

    DOF and others: one would think that in an effort to give us the true picture of Jesus, and the nature of salvation, that Hinckley and others would not have to hem and haw about what they DO know about Jesus’ birth, and the nature of the Heavenly Father. As an aside: it stands out to me that your ‘revelation’ has taken huge steps backwards: what JS spoke of confidently in King Follett, is now shrouded in “we really don’t know much about that…I don’t know if we really teach that….etc.” and if Hinckley thinks we don’t deserve a straight answer because of our hardness of heart, why didn’t he have the charity to tell us that plainly? Why mumble? These are questions I would put before cwix, and anyone else considering the LDS faith: look close before you leap and ask yourself if this methodology (you’re not mature enough to get an answer…) is worthy of your trust. I’ve heard that line before in orth. christian circles by a national leader (now unseated and removed for good, and to me obvious reasons). Let the ‘buyer’ beware. Great post JJ: examine EVERYTHING, hold fast to that which is good..can’t do the second, until you’ve done the first. GERMIT

Comments are closed.