|
|
(39 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
− | {{Articles FAIR copyright}} | + | {{Main Page}} |
| <onlyinclude> | | <onlyinclude> |
− | {{SummaryHeader | + | {{H1 |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Latter-day Saint views of Jesus Christ | + | |L=Jesus Christ/Latter-day Saint views of Jesus Christ |
− | |subject=Latter-day Saint views of Jesus Christ | + | |H=Latter-day Saint views of Jesus Christ |
− | |summary=How do Mormons view our savior Jesus Christ? | + | |S=How do Latter-day Saints view our Savior, Jesus Christ? |
| + | |L1=Mormonism and the Biblical Jesus |
| + | |L2=Jesus Christ as creator and savior of this world |
| + | |L3=The relationship of Jesus Christ to His Father and to humanity |
| + | |L4=The conception of Jesus Christ |
| + | |L5=Latter-day Saint beliefs about the day Jesus was actually born |
| + | |L6=The potential relationship between Quetzalcoatl and Jesus Christ |
| + | |L7=Latter-day Saint beliefs regarding the marital status of Jesus Christ |
| }} | | }} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Biblical}} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Creator}} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Relationships}} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Conception}} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Date of birth}} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Relationship to Quetzalcoatl}} |
| + | {{:Jesus Christ/Marital status}} |
| </onlyinclude> | | </onlyinclude> |
− | {{:Question: Do Latter-day Saints consider Jesus to be the brother of Satan?}}
| + | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE --> |
− | {{:Source:Webb:BYUS:2011:1:Sameness_of_Jesus'_humanity}}
| |
− | | |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Conception
| |
− | |subject=Conception
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that Latter-day Saints reject the "Evangelical belief" that "Christ was born of the virgin Mary, who, when the Holy Ghost came upon her, miraculously conceived the promised messiah."
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Divine sonship
| |
− | |subject=Divine sonship
| |
− | |summary=Though the Church does not embrace Nicene trinitarianism, they still believe that there is "One God," despite seeing the Father and Son as distinct personages. How do Latter-day Saints understand Jesus' divine Sonship?
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Gordon B. Hinckley states that Latter-day Saints don't believe in the "traditional" Christ
| |
− | |subject=Gordon B. Hinckley states that Latter-day Saints don't believe in the "traditional" Christ
| |
− | |summary=President Gordon B. Hinckley, responding to a question regarding whether Latter-day Saints believe in the “traditional Christ,” stated: "No I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the dispensation of the fullness of times."
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Worship different Jesus
| |
− | |subject=Worship a "different Jesus"?
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that members of the Church worship "a different Jesus" than the Jesus worshiped by Christians.
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Latter-day Saints aren't Christians
| |
− | |subject=Latter-day Saints aren't Christians?
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not "Christian." A related claim is that the Church has only recently begun to portray itself as "Christian" in order to gain adherents.
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Lord of the Universe
| |
− | |subject=Lord of the Universe
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that the LDS view of God is provincial or limited, with God simply being a ruler over "this planet."
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Relationship to Quetzalcoatl
| |
− | |subject=Relationship to Quetzalcoatl
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that LDS scholars believe that Quetzalcoatl was Jesus Christ. However, since Quetzalcoatl's association with a "feathered serpent" constitutes "snake worship," some claim that this association is therefore inconsistent with worship of Jesus Christ.
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Savior of other worlds
| |
− | |subject=Savior of other worlds?
| |
− | |summary=It would appear that there is one savior — Jesus — and that his sacrifice was the ultimate sacrifice for all of the worlds created and populated by the Father. Some critics have used the idea of each world having its own Savior against us. Is there anything written or published on either concept?
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/The "Mormon" vs. the "Christian" Jesus
| |
− | |subject=The "Mormon" vs. the "Christian" Jesus
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that Latter-day Saints believe in a "different" Jesus that "mainstream" Christians.
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Was Jesus married
| |
− | |subject=Was Jesus married?
| |
− | |summary=Do Latter-day Saints believe Jesus Christ was married?
| |
− | }}<noinclude>
| |
− | {{SummaryItem2
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Was Jesus married/Was Jesus a polygamist
| |
− | |subject=Was Jesus a polygamist?
| |
− | |summary=Do Mormons believe Jesus Christ was a polygamist?
| |
− | }}</noinclude>
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/One of many saviors
| |
− | |subject=One of many saviors?
| |
− | |summary=It is claimed that the "Jesus of Mormonism is but one of many saviors."
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Praying to
| |
− | |subject=Praying to
| |
− | |summary=Latter-day Saints are criticized for not praying directly to Jesus Christ.
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Date of birth
| |
− | |subject=April 6th as the date of birth of Jesus Christ
| |
− | |summary=Do Latter-day Saints believe Jesus was born 1830 years before the Church's organization on 6 April 1830?
| |
− | }}
| |
− | {{SummaryItem
| |
− | |link=Jesus Christ/Alpha and Omega
| |
− | |subject=Alpha and Omega
| |
− | |summary=What does the term "Alpha and Omega" mean, beside the beginning and the end, when referring to the Savior? What does it mean to the restored church?
| |
− | }}
| |
− | </onlyinclude>
| |
− | | |
− | {{Articles Footer 1}}
| |
| | | |
− | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
| + | [[de:Jesus Christus/Heiligen der Letzten Tage von Jesus Christus]] |
− | [[en:Jesus Christ/Latter-day Saint views of Jesus Christ]] | |
| [[pt:Jesus Cristo/Perspectivas mórmons]] | | [[pt:Jesus Cristo/Perspectivas mórmons]] |
| + | [[es:Jesucristo/Perspectiva Mormona]] |
Latter-day Saint views of Jesus Christ
Summary: How do Latter-day Saints view our Savior, Jesus Christ?
Jump to Subtopic:
Jump to details:
Jump to details:
Jump to details:
Jump to details:
Question: Do Latter-day Saints believe that Mary was still a virgin when Jesus was born?
Latter-day Saints believe in the virgin birth
It is claimed that Latter-day Saints believe Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between God the Father and Mary, and that Mary therefore was not a virgin when Jesus was born. It is also claimed that Latter-day Saints reject the "Evangelical belief" that "Christ was born of the virgin Mary, who, when the Holy Ghost came upon her, miraculously conceived the promised messiah."
Often used as evidence are a handful statements from early LDS leaders, such as Brigham Young, that directly or indirectly support this idea. However, such statements do not represent the official doctrine of the Church. The key, official doctrine of the Church is that Jesus is literally the son of God (i.e., this is not a symbolic or figurative expression), and Mary was a virgin before and after Christ's conception.
At the annunciation, Mary questioned the angel about how she could bear a child: "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" (Luke 1:34; the expression "know" in the Greek text is a euphemism for sexual relations). Nephi likewise described Mary as a virgin (1 Nephi 11:13-20), as did Alma1 (Alma 7:10).
Latter-day Saints believe Jesus was the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh
Latter-day Saints do believe that Jesus Christ was literally the Son of God, not the son of Joseph or even the son of the Holy Ghost. (see 2 Ne 25꞉12 and D&C 93꞉11) As Ezra Taft Benson stated,
[T]he testimonies of appointed witnesses leave no question as to the paternity of Jesus Christ. God was the Father of His fleshly tabernacle, and Mary, a mortal woman, was His mother. He is therefore the only person born who rightfully deserves the title “the Only Begotten Son of God.”[1]
The Church does not take an official position on this issue
Statements about matters about which there is no official doctrine
J. Reuben Clark |
This is one of many issues about which the Church has no official position. As President J. Reuben Clark taught under assignment from the First Presidency:
- Here we must have in mind—must know—that only the President of the Church, the Presiding High Priest, is sustained as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator for the Church, and he alone has the right to receive revelations for the Church, either new or amendatory, or to give authoritative interpretations of scriptures that shall be binding on the Church....
- When any man, except the President of the Church, undertakes to proclaim one unsettled doctrine, as among two or more doctrines in dispute, as the settled doctrine of the Church, we may know that he is not "moved upon by the Holy Ghost," unless he is acting under the direction and by the authority of the President.
- Of these things we may have a confident assurance without chance for doubt or quibbling.[2]
|
Harold B. Lee |
Harold B. Lee was emphatic that only one person can speak for the Church:
- All over the Church you're being asked this: "What does the Church think about this or that?" Have you ever heard anybody ask that question? "What does the Church think about the civil rights legislation?" "What do they think about the war?" "What do they think about drinking Coca-Cola or Sanka coffee?" Did you ever hear that? "What do they think about the Democratic Party or ticket or the Republican ticket?" Did you ever hear that? "How should we vote in this forthcoming election?" Now, with most all of those questions, if you answer them, you're going to be in trouble. Most all of them. Now, it's the smart man that will say, "There's only one man in this church that speaks for the Church, and I'm not that one man."
- I think nothing could get you into deep water quicker than to answer people on these things, when they say, "What does the Church think?" and you want to be smart, so you try to answer what the Church's policy is. Well, you're not the one to make the policies for the Church. You just remember what the Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians. He said, "For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified" (1 Corinthians 2:2). Well now, as teachers of our youth, you're not supposed to know anything except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. On that subject you're expected to be an expert. You're expected to know your subject. You're expected to have a testimony. And in that you'll have great strength. If the President of the Church has not declared the position of the Church, then you shouldn't go shopping for the answer.[3]
|
First Presidency |
This was recently reiterated by the First Presidency (who now approves all statements published on the Church's official website):
- Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency...and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles...counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.[4]
In response to a letter "received at the office of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" in 1912, Charles W. Penrose of the First Presidency wrote:
- Question 14: Do you believe that the President of the Church, when speaking to the Church in his official capacity is infallible?
- Answer: We do not believe in the infallibility of man. When God reveals anything it is truth, and truth is infallible. No President of the Church has claimed infallibility.[5]
There is more material on official doctrine in the Church in this link. |
References |
Notes
- ↑ Ezra Taft Benson, "Five Marks of the Divinity of Jesus Christ," From a fireside address given at the University of Utah Special Events Center on 9 December 1979.
- ↑ J. Reuben Clark, Jr., "Church Leaders and the Scriptures," [original title "When Are the Writings or Sermons of Church Leaders Entitled to the Claim of Scripture?"] Immortality and Eternal Life: Reflections from the Writings and Messages of President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Vol, 2, (1969-70): 221; address to Seminary and Institute Teachers, BYU (7 July 1954); reproduced in Church News (31 July 1954); also reprinted in Dialogue 12/2 (Summer 1979): 68–81.
- ↑ Harold B. Lee, Teachings of Harold B. Lee (Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1996), 445.
- ↑ LDS Newsroom, "Approaching Mormon Doctrine," lds.org (4 May 2007)
- ↑ Charles W. Penrose, "Peculiar Questions Briefly Answered," Improvement Era 15 no. 11 (September 1912).
|
What the Church has not taken a position on is how the conception took place, despite speculations by various early Church leaders
The canonized scriptures are silent on how the conception took place—even Nephi's detailed vision of then-future Messiah is veiled during the part where Mary conceives (1 Nephi 11:19).
Some early leaders of the Church felt free to express their beliefs on the literal nature of God's Fatherhood of Jesus' physical body
For example, Brigham Young said the following in a discourse given 8 July 1860:
"...[T]here is no act, no principle, no power belonging to the Deity that is not purely philosophical. The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers." [1]
Jesus shared God's genetic inheritance without necessarily requiring a sexual act to combine that inheritance with Mary's mortal contribution
But are these types of statements official Church doctrine, required for all believing Latter-day Saints to accept? No—they were never submitted to the Church for ratification or canonization. (See General authorities' statements as scripture.)
Critics have noted that this statement, and others like it, can be read to indicate there was sexual intercourse involved in the conception of Jesus. Regardless of this speculation--which goes beyond the textual data--Brigham Young's view may be seen by some contemporary Latter-day Saints as correct in that Jesus was literally physically the Son of God, just as much as any children are "of our fathers." Modern science has discovered alternative methods of conceiving children--e.g., in vitro "test tube" babies--that don't involve sexual intercourse. Thus, though processes such as artificial insemination were unknown to Brigham and thus likely not referenced by his statements, it does not necessarily follow from a modern perspective that the conception had to come about as the result of a literal sexual union. It is certainly not outside of God's power to conceive Christ by other means, while remaining his literal father. (Put another way, Jesus shared God's genetic inheritance, if you will, without necessarily requiring a sexual act to combine that inheritance with Mary's mortal contribution).
Ezra Taft Benson taught:
He was the Only Begotten Son of our Heavenly Father in the flesh—the only child whose mortal body was begotten by our Heavenly Father. His mortal mother, Mary, was called a virgin, both before and after she gave birth. (See 1 Nephi 11:20.) [2]
Benson's emphasis is on both the literalness of Jesus' divine birth, and the fact that Mary's virginal status persisted even immediately after conceiving and bearing Jesus.
Church leaders' statements on the literal paternity of Christ were often a reaction to various ideas which are false
- they disagreed with the tendency of conventional Christianity to deny the corporeality of God. They thus insisted that God the Father had a "natural," physical form. There was no need, in LDS theology, for a non-physical, wholly spirit God to resort to a mysterious process to conceive a Son.
- they disagreed with efforts to "allegorize" or "spiritualize" the virgin birth; they wished it understood that Christ is the literal Son of God in a physical, "natural" sense of sharing both human and divine traits in His makeup. This can be seen to be a reaction against more "liberal" strains in Christianity that saw Jesus as the literal son of Mary and Joseph, but someone endowed with God's power at some point in His life.
- they did not accept that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were of one "essence," but rather believed that they are distinct Personages. Thus, it is key to LDS theology that Jesus is the Son of the Father, not the Holy Ghost. To a creedal, trinitarian Christian, this might be a distinction without a difference; for an LDS Christian it is crucial.
Bruce R. McConkie said this about the birth of Christ:
God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says. [3]
In the same volume, Elder McConkie explained his reason for his emphasis:
"Our Lord is the only mortal person ever born to a virgin, because he is the only person who ever had an immortal Father. Mary, his mother, "was carried away in the Spirit" (1 Ne. 11:13-21), was "overshadowed" by the Holy Ghost, and the conception which took place "by the power of the Holy Ghost" resulted in the bringing forth of the literal and personal Son of God the Father. (Alma 7:10; 2 Ne. 17:14; Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38.) Christ is not the Son of the Holy Ghost, but of the Father. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp. 18-20.) Modernistic teachings denying the virgin birth are utterly and completely apostate and false. [4]
Note that McConkie emphasized the literal nature of Christ's divinity, his direct descent from the Father, and the fact that the Holy Ghost was a tool, but not the source of Jesus' divine Parenthood.
Harold B. Lee was clear that the method of Jesus' conception had not been revealed, and discouraged speculation on the matter
Harold B. Lee said,
We are very much concerned that some of our Church teachers seem to be obsessed of the idea of teaching doctrine which cannot be substantiated and making comments beyond what the Lord has actually said.
You asked about the birth of the Savior. Never have I talked about sexual intercourse between Deity and the mother of the Savior. If teachers were wise in speaking of this matter about which the Lord has said but very little, they would rest their discussion on this subject with merely the words which are recorded on this subject in Luke 1:34-35: "Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
Remember that the being who was brought about by [Mary's] conception was a divine personage. We need not question His method to accomplish His purposes. Perhaps we would do well to remember the words of Isaiah 55:8-9: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."
Let the Lord rest His case with this declaration and wait until He sees fit to tell us more. [5]
Jump to details:
Jump to details:
Jump to details: