From: "Jeff" <jeff_x02@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Subject: Re: ***orah
Date: Friday, March 28, 2008 9:36 AM
On Mar 27, 11:48 am, The Poster Formerly Known as Craig Olson
<cr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Whereas others feel that when non-LdS realize that man is indeed and in
> fact a child and heir of God and not some flawed clay creation of a
> dispassionate disembodied God, then they will arrive.
>
I believe that in a spiritual sense people become children of God
through faith.
(Gene) Does this mean that in a spiritual sense, the man Jesus of Nazareth
became a son of God throuuh His faith in God? If this is what you mean,
you
are not alone for I have known of many protestnats who seem to believe
something like that.
Romans 8:14 states, "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they
are the sons of God". If you are not led by His Spirit, then you are
not considered His son. Jesus even referred to some as the children of
the devil ... not physically but spiritually.
(Gene) Correct. On one occasion Jesus referred to Simon, called Peter, as
Satan (meaning deceiver, or enemy, or tempter, most likely I think) yet on
another He said Simon was blessed because he had received his knowledge
(his
testimony) not of man (or by a book or books written by man?) but from
God.
Of course Jesus, God in the flesh as soe say, had taught Peter, but was
that
what He meant or did He mean that someone greater than even He had taught
Simon? (Reference John 14:28) Of course there are some protestants who
claim
that John is a sort of "Johnnie come lately" and not a real witness of the
literal Jesus. That he was influenced by other factors than what the ones
who literally walked and talked with Jesus (among whom these protestants
do
not include John) had experienced.
The Bible also refers to us being co-heirs with Christ someday.
Romans 8:17 - "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".
(Gene) That is correct. We will be co-heirs with Jesus Christ. Now that
could mean that He will inherit most of what His Father has, and a little
will be left over for us, or it could mean, as our ****phets seem to have
understood, that it will be sort of like "Tenancy in Common" in which the
inheritance is undivided and is for the use of all as they need and are
able.
Being an heir is conditional on being a child.
(Gene) Indeed is may be. But there are heirs at law, who are not children
by
age, and are not natural descendants of the person whose heirs they are.
So
what are you trying to say here? Of course we believe that those who come
to
earth were spirits in the presence of God the Father in the pre-mortal
eons
of time, and that we were sent to earth to obtain physical bodies. Why?
Well, obviulsy because that is the way that Father chose to do it. Perhaps
the only way it could have been done, perhaps not. Having come here and
obtained bodies which are throught the mechanism of mortal activity, we
may
or may not remain "Children of God" in the sense that you are using the
word. We must learn of Him, we must sort of be adopted back into the
family
throught the Grace of God brought about by the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
It
is almost like a "black sheep" in a family who has been disowned either
for
actions of his, lack of something required by his family or for no good
reason at all, who later is brought back into the family by action of some
member who loves him. Jesus is that good member who loves us all and gives
us a chance. But of course that is not to say that Father does not love us
equally well. Here we sort of get the idea of "tough love".
The Bible and the Mormon scriptures do not teach that humans are the
offspring of heavenly parents. The LDS Church however teaches this in
"The Family - Proclamation to the World" and many other training
manuals. The existence of Heavenly Mother was even made a doctrine by
the First Presidency. Latter-day Saints are given the freedom to
decide if this teaching is true or false.
(Gene) I understand that when the Proclamation says that we are offspring
of
heavenly parents, it is natural to say that this is tantamount to
declaring
that we have a "Heavenly Mother". So I will refrain from saying that you
are
stating something that is not there. I will say that you spend more time
on
a literal interpretation, heavily tinged with mortal understanding, than I
would on that one. As for deciding whether this teaching is true, well,
all
men have agency to choose good or evil. All men have agency and freedom to
believe whatever they wish to believe. Whatever "seemth good unto them".
That is what you are doing. We may disagree with you We may even be
saddened
by your apparent blindness in some areas. But we do respect the principle
of
agency. The freedom to make choices and then the necessity to accept the
cosnsequences of those choices.
Jeff
|
