Rick Anderson replied to my letter with...

ra> In article <C5ELp2.L0C@acsu.buffalo.edu>,
ra>
ra> >     Well, Jason, it's heretical in a few ways. The first point is that
ra> >     this equates Lucifer and Jesus as being the same type of being.
ra> >     However, Lucifer is a created being: "Thou [wast] perfect in thy
ra> >     ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in
ra> >     thee." (Ezekiel 28:15). While Jesus is uncreated, and the Creator of
ra> >     all things: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
ra> >     God, and the Word was God.  The same was in the beginning with God.
ra> >     All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made
ra> >     that was made." (John 1:1-3) "And he is before all things, and by
ra> >     him all things consist." (Colossians 1:17)
ra>
ra>    Your inference from the Ezekiel and John passages that Lucifer was
ra> "created" and that Jesus was not depends on a particular interpetation of
ra> the word "create" -- one with which many Christians may not agree.
ra> Granted the Mormon belief that all of God's children (including Christ
ra> and Lucifer) are eternally existent intelligences which were "organized"
ra> into spirit children by God, the term "creation" can apply equally well
ra> to both of those passages.

     Just briefly, on something that you mentioned in passing. You refer to
     differing interpretations of "create," and say that many Christians may
     not agree. So what? That is really irrelevant. We do not base our faith
     on how many people think one way or another, do we? The bottom line is
     truth, regardless of popularity of opinions.

     Also, I find it rather strange that in trying to persuade that created
     and eternally existent are equivalent, you say "granted the Mormon
     belief..." You can't grant your conclusion and then expect the point to
     have been addressed. In order to reply to the issue, you have to address
     and answer the point that was raised, and not just jump to the
     conclusion that you grant.

     The Bible states that Lucifer was created.  The Bible states that Jesus
     is the creator of all. The contradiction that we have is that the LDS
     belief is that Jesus and Lucifer were the same.

ra> >     Your point that we all are brothers of Jesus and Lucifer is also
ra> >     heretical, since we are not innately brothers and sisters of Christ.
ra> >     We are adopted, "For ye have not received the spirit of bondage
ra> >     again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby
ra> >     we cry, Abba, Father." (Romans 8:15); and not the natural children
ra> >     of God. It is only through faith that we even enter the family of
ra> >     God; "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus."
ra> >     (Galatians 3:26). And it is only through the manifestation of this
ra> >     faith in receiving Jesus that we are become the sons of God.  "But
ra> >     as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of
ra> >     God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not
ra> >     of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but
ra> >     of God." (John 1:12-13)
ra>
ra>    Has it occured to you, Robert, that being "born of" someone or being
ra> of that person (or Person)'s "family" may be a symbolic term in the New
ra> Testament?  Mormons believe that we are "adopted" into the House of
ra> Israel through baptism and faith in Christ, although some have expressed
ra> belief that this does evince a physical change in our bodies.

     The Mormon belief is that all are children of God. Literally. There is
     nothing symbolic about it. This however, contradicts what the Bible
     says. The Bible teaches that not everyone is a child of God:

          The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the 
          kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked [one];
          (Matthew 13:38)

          I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which 
          ye have seen with your father. (John 8:38)

          Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not 
          born of fornication; we have one Father, [even] God.  Jesus said 
          unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I 
          proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he 
          sent me.  Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye 
          cannot hear my word.  Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the 
          lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the 
          beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in 
          him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a 
          liar, and the father of it. (John 8:41-44)

          And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, [thou] child of 
          the devil, [thou] enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease 
          to pervert the right ways of the Lord? (Acts 13:10)

          Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this 
          world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit 
          that now worketh in the children of disobedience: (Ephesians 2:2)

          In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the 
          devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he 
          that loveth not his brother. (1 John 3:10)

     One becomes a child of God...

          But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the
          sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: (John 1:12)

          Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that
          we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us
          not, because it knew him not.  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 3:1-2)

     ...when he is born again through faith in Jesus Christ:

          Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of
          the will of man, but of God. (John 1:13)

          Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus
          Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
          (Ephesians 1:5)

          Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should
          be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18)

          For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of
          God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear;
          but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba,
          Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we
          are the children of God: (Romans 8:14-16)

          Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one
          that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. (1 John 4:7)

          Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and
          every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is
          begotten of him. (1 John 5:1)

          For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
          (Galatians 3:26)

ra> >     We are told that, "And this is life eternal, that they might know
ra> >     thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
ra> >     (John 17:3). Life eternal is to know the only true God. Yet the
ra> >     doctrines of the LDS that I have mentioned portray a vastly
ra> >     different Jesus, a Jesus that cannot be reconciled with the Jesus of
ra> >     the Bible. They are so far removed from each other that to proclaim
ra> >     one as being true denies the other from being true. According to the
ra> >     Bible, eternal life is dependent on knowing the only true God, and
ra> >     not the construct of imagination.
ra>
ra>
ra>    Robert, with all due respect, who died and left you Chief Arbiter of
ra> Correct Biblical Interpretation?  I don't mean to be snotty about this,
ra> but the fact is that the Bible is so differently interpreted by different
ra> groups of Biblical scholars (what do you think of the Jehovah's
ra> Witnesses, for example?) that to make reference to the "Jesus of the
ra> Bible" is simply ridiculous.  Whose "Jesus of the Bible" do you mean?

     This is really a red herring. It doesn't address any issue raised, but 
     rather, it seeks to obfuscate. The fact that some groups try to read 
     something into the Bible, doesn't change what the Bible teaches. For 
     example, the fact that the Jehovah's Witnesses deny the Deity of Christ 
     does not alter what the Bible teaches [ "Looking for that blessed hope,
     and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus
     Christ;" (Titus 2:13),"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus
     Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through
     the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:" (2 Peter 1:1)] 
     on the Deity of Christ.

     We first look to the Bible to see what it teaches. To discount, or not 
     even address, what the Bible teaches because there are some groups that 
     have differing views is self-defeating. To see what the Bible teaches, 
     you have to look at the Bible.

ra> >     "Our Lord's mortality was essential to his own salvation" (_The
ra> >     Promised Messiah_, p. 456), "He had to work out his own salvation by
ra> >     doing the will of the Father in all things" (ibid., p.54), "he had
ra> >     to be baptized to gain admission to the celestial kingdom" (_Mormon
ra> >     Doctrine_, p.71).
ra>
ra>    Welcome to the wonderful world of Mormon paradoctrine, Robert.  The
ra> above books are by the late Bruce R. McConkie, a former general authority
ra> of the LDS Church.  Those books were not published by the Church, nor do
ra> they constitute "offical doctrine."  They consist of his opinions.  Now,
ra> does that mean that what he says is not true?  Not at all; I'll have to
ra> think about the idea of Christ's personal salvation before I come to any
ra> conclusions myself.  The conclusions I come to may seem "heretical" to
ra> you, but I'm prepared to accept that.

     I find this rather curious. When I mentioned that the Mormon belief is
     that Jesus needed to be saved, I put forward some quotes from the late
     apostle, Bruce McConkie. The curious part is that no one addressed the
     issue of `Jesus needing to be saved.' Rick comes the closest with his "I
     have my own conclusions" to addressing the point.

     Most of the other replies have instead hop-scotched to the issue of
     Bruce McConkie and whether his views were 'official doctrine.' I don't
     think that it matters if McConkie's views were canon. That is not the
     issue.  Were McConkie's writings indicative of Mormon belief on this
     subject is the real issue. The indication from Rick is that they may 
     certainly be.
