Scriptural evidence for "pre-mortal existence". Is there any?

[KathleenGee]

I would think the Hebrew Catholics would be a good source. They are highly educated people...www.hebrewcatholic.org....

[Telstar]

Originally Posted by ParkerD

Lori (Telstar),

Thanks for having read what I had suggested. It was kind of you to do that.

A person thinking about the scattering and gathering of the house of Israel (remembering that there were twelve tribes and then the sons of Joseph--Ephraim and Manasseh), ought to read Isaiah chapters 49 through 52, and the book of Hosea, perhaps three or four times, and then think about that scattering and gathering of the house of Israel and of the Gentiles that was prophesied and therefore is part of what Paul knew about (he even quoted from Isaiah in his epistle that you read.)

Have a good day.

Parker,

I did it because I wanted to see if there was a chance of my finding any hint of what you seem to understand from them. But, I didn't find anything in Paul's writings that would even suggest a preexistence, without having to take things out of context and contort what he said to make it fit.

On the other hand, my reading of the chapter from the BoM was very eyeopening, but certainly not in a good way. It only confirmed my belief in the complete lack of understanding that Joseph Smith had for the true meaning of scriptures, much like the other chapters that I read in the past. It also clearly showed his complete disdain for all of Christianity, and his very egotistical view of the role he saw for himself, in trying to replace all other churches with his own. It also shows his very twisted view of God's true purposes. I know that you don't see it that way, but the more I read the BoM, the more convinced I am that it all came from the (quite possibly schizophrenic) mind of Joseph Smith. I'm sorry, but I believe it was a combination of his own misinterpretations of the Bible, along with what he chose from many of the early heresies that were rightly rejected by the Early Church Fathers, as well as from the influences of other author's works that he obviously plagiarized when writing it.

But, I took your advice, again, and read Isaias chapters 49 to 52, then continued on to read through chapter 55. My original understanding of them remains unchanged. They are all parts of his prophecies about the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, and the establishment of His Church. He also refers to the fact that the Jews would reject Him, so salvation would then be given to the Gentiles, instead.

I also read the whole Book of Osee (Hosea), although I only needed to read it once. It's also clearly about the rejection of Jesus being the Messiah by the Jews (the 'House of Israel'), as well as their worshiping of false 'gods' to find favor and please their enemies, instead of pleasing God. Most of the Book revolves around their consistent tendency toward unfaithfulness, that causes them to constantly stray away from God and become lost. It says that those serious offenses against God would eventually cause them to become desolate and abandoned by Him, until the time they would finally repent of their sins and recognize Jesus as their true Messiah, by converting to His True Church. I'm not exactly sure what you could possibly see in that Book that would be any different, except when considering what I read in the BoM chapter, yesterday. When looking at it from that perspective, I can easily see how you could possibly have a vastly different meaning for all of it, which I could probably figure out without too much effort on my part.

[ParkerD]

Originally Posted by Telstar

Parker,

I did it because I wanted to see if there was a chance of my finding any hint of what you seem to understand from them. But, I didn't find anything in Paul's writings that would even suggest a preexistence, without having to take things out of context and contort what he said to make it fit.

On the other hand, my reading of the chapter from the BoM was very eyeopening, but certainly not in a good way. It only confirmed my belief in the complete lack of understanding that Joseph Smith had for the true meaning of scriptures, much like the other chapters that I read in the past. It also clearly showed his complete disdain for all of Christianity, and his very egotistical view of the role he saw for himself, in trying to replace all other churches with his own. It also shows his very twisted view of God's true purposes. I know that you don't see it that way, but the more I read the BoM, the more convinced I am that it all came from the (quite possibly schizophrenic) mind of Joseph Smith. I'm sorry, but I believe it was a combination of his own misinterpretations of the Bible, along with what he chose from many of the early heresies that were rightly rejected by the Early Church Fathers, as well as from the influences of other author's works that he obviously plagiarized when writing it.

But, I took your advice, again, and read Isaias chapters 49 to 52, then continued on to read through chapter 55. My original understanding of them remains unchanged. They are all parts of his prophecies about the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, and the establishment of His Church. He also refers to the fact that the Jews would reject Him, so salvation would then be given to the Gentiles, instead.

I also read the whole Book of Osee (Hosea), although I only needed to read it once. It's also clearly about the rejection of Jesus being the Messiah by the Jews (the 'House of Israel'), as well as their worshiping of false 'gods' to find favor and please their enemies, instead of pleasing God. Most of the Book revolves around their consistent tendency toward unfaithfulness, that causes them to constantly stray away from God and become lost. It says that those serious offenses against God would eventually cause them to become desolate and abandoned by Him, until the time they would finally repent of their sins and recognize Jesus as their true Messiah, by converting to His True Church. I'm not exactly sure what you could possibly see in that Book that would be any different, except when considering what I read in the BoM chapter, yesterday. When looking at it from that perspective, I can easily see how you could possibly have a vastly different meaning for all of it, which I could probably figure out without too much effort on my part.

Telstar (Lori),

I hadn't suggested reading those Isaiah chapters and Hosea to learn about the pre-existence, but to learn about the scattering and gathering of the house of Israel since you had earlier expressed not knowing much if anything about that subject. The Gentiles do figure in, but "Ephraim" (which was the Northern Kingdom, scattered) and "Judah" (which was the Southern Kingdom, scattered also later in time), will be gathered through coming to know the true Messiah, and through coming to no longer "vex" the other group and instead be joined together, as prophesied in Hosea and in Isaiah 11 and also in the chapters I had suggested you might read.

Part of that scattering was to the islands of the sea, as noted by Isaiah, so the gathering will in turn also be from the islands of the sea.

I guess it's not surprising that reading Jacob 5 would bring to your mind Joseph Smith rather than the Old Testament prophecies of the scattering of Israel and the olive tree grafting allegory used by Paul but only in summary form. There is not one item described in Jacob 5 that is not corroborated in the Old Testament or the New Testament as a prophesy about the scattering and gathering of Israel, although different allegories or allusions are used--but as the usual thing I observe happen is that these kinds of prophecies seem to not be well understood although right there in plain view to be read. Thanks for reading those Isaiah chapters.

[Telstar]

Originally Posted by ParkerD

Telstar (Lori),

I hadn't suggested reading those Isaiah chapters and Hosea to learn about the pre-existence, but to learn about the scattering and gathering of the house of Israel since you had earlier expressed not knowing much if anything about that subject. The Gentiles do figure in, but "Ephraim" (which was the Northern Kingdom, scattered) and "Judah" (which was the Southern Kingdom, scattered also later in time), will be gathered through coming to know the true Messiah, and through coming to no longer "vex" the other group and instead be joined together, as prophesied in Hosea and in Isaiah 11 and also in the chapters I had suggested you might read.

I realize that, but I don't recall ever saying that I didn't have very much knowledge about it. I'm certainly not a theologian or a Bible scholar, but I'm fairly familiar with them. Maybe you're assuming that my not seeing your interpretation in them is due to a lack of understanding on my part, but no matter how many times I read them, my understanding of what they mean will always be the same. For the most part, they refer to the coming of the Messiah.

Originally Posted by Telstar

But, I took your advice, again, and read Isaias chapters 49 to 52, then continued on to read through chapter 55. My original understanding of them remains unchanged. They are all parts of his prophecies about the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, and the establishment of His Church. He also refers to the fact that the Jews would reject Him, so salvation would then be given to the Gentiles, instead.

My comment about not finding anything about the preexistence was in reference to Romans, not Isaias. As I said, those chapters from Isaias are prophecies referring to the Messiah, and the rejection of the Jews that refused to accept Him. Because of their sin, God would 'scatter' them to the ends of the earth (without His help) until they repented of their sin. Then, He will once again 'gather' them together into His fold, in the Church established by Jesus. Until that time, He would withdraw His grace from them and leave them on their own. They would no longer serve Him and He would no longer recognize any of their sacrifices, or answer their prayers, because they had rejected Him to follow their own selfish ways. The Book of Osee (Hosea) is more detailed concerning the Jews (the House of Israel), who were always turning away from God to follow other strange 'gods', and their many punishments because of it.

Originally Posted by ParkerD

Part of that scattering was to the islands of the sea, as noted by Isaiah, so the gathering will in turn also be from the islands of the sea.

You do understand that, in the Bible, sometimes "the sea" refers to a multitude of people, and "islands" can mean individuals or small groups, either good or bad, right? So, when God says He will "scatter" them to the islands of the sea, it might just refer to small groups of individuals that share common beliefs and culture, that are broken off or somehow separated from the others. So, the term "sea" doesn't always mean the "ocean", and "islands" are not necessarily actual islands.

Originally Posted by ParkerD

I guess it's not surprising that reading Jacob 5 would bring to your mind Joseph Smith rather than the Old Testament prophecies of the scattering of Israel and the olive tree grafting allegory used by Paul but only in summary form. There is not one item described in Jacob 5 that is not corroborated in the Old Testament or the New Testament as a prophesy about the scattering and gathering of Israel, although different allegories or allusions are used--but as the usual thing I observe happen is that these kinds of prophecies seem to not be well understood although right there in plain view to be read. Thanks for reading those Isaiah chapters.

Although it has some similarities to the parable of the olive tree in the Bible, I didn't see it as referencing anything about Israel, per se. What I saw was an analogy to the original tree and its branches representing the Catholic Church, and the withering branches that were later transplanted are those that were separated from Her during the reformation, supposedly due to Her 'decay'. In his analogy, they all became "bitter" to God, until they were reattached to the root (referring to Christ) by the 'vine-dresser/husbandman' (aka: Joseph Smith). This also fits with the story of his first vision where all churches were claimed to be "abominable" in the eyes of God. The whole story was his way of calling himself the 'new savior' that would create a 'new church', to replace all of the others that he claimed had 'become bitter' to God. The "gathering" is represented by those branches being reattached and grafted into his new church, by him and his followers, from all of the other Christian churches. As I said, I don't think he's talking about the "House of Israel", except as it representing all of the people of God that will be saved.

[sallybutler]

Originally Posted by sallybutler

In your theory, if you have been around as long as God has been and you will be around as long as He will be, how would He stop you from doing whatever you want? Why do you need God at all?

Why have no LDS members responded to this?

[ParkerD]

Originally Posted by sallybutler

Why have no LDS members responded to this?

SallyButler,

Your question was asked to someone else, but I could try and answer if I understood your question, which I don't, other than to say that eons ago we were "tiny" intelligences with no capability or opportunity for growth, change, learning, or expanding our understanding beyond a starting point of "light" or "energy". God is everything in providing those opportunities through His knowledge, His light, and His love. We continue to need Him at every moment of our lives on this wonderful planet, earth, and will need Him infinitely hereafter.

[sallybutler]

Originally Posted by ParkerD

SallyButler,

Your question was asked to someone else, but I could try and answer if I understood your question, which I don't, other than to say that eons ago we were "tiny" intelligences with no capability or opportunity for growth, change, learning, or expanding our understanding beyond a starting point of "light" or "energy". God is everything in providing those opportunities through His knowledge, His light, and His love. We continue to need Him at every moment of our lives on this wonderful planet, earth, and will need Him infinitely hereafter.

When you become the same as God, will you still need Him? Won't you be equal to Him at that point?

[ParkerD]

Originally Posted by sallybutler

When you become the same as God, will you still need Him? Won't you be equal to Him at that point?

Sally,

Please re-read the intercessory prayer in John 17, especially verses 22 and 23; then you might also read Revelation 2:26-27 and Revelation 3:21 and also Revelation 21:7. It would be well to also read 1 John 3:1-2.

By doing that, you will understand that Christ provides access to being "like God" (meaning a "son of God" with an inheritance like the Savior through His grace) and inheriting a "joint throne" with Him, but it is to be one with Them, and it neither means being "equal" to Them nor does it mean not needing Them.

It means being one with Them, to be entrusted so that "clay in the hands of a potter" has meaning and "rule them with a rod of iron" (which is an allusion to the rod of Jesus Christ or His Word, His Light and His righteousness) has meaning.

[sallybutler]

Originally Posted by ParkerD

Sally,

Please re-read the intercessory prayer in John 17, especially verses 22 and 23; then you might also read Revelation 2:26-27 and Revelation 3:21 and also Revelation 21:7. It would be well to also read 1 John 3:1-2.

By doing that, you will understand that Christ provides access to being "like God" (meaning a "son of God" with an inheritance like the Savior through His grace) and inheriting a "joint throne" with Him, but it is to be one with Them, and it neither means being "equal" to Them nor does it mean not needing Them.

It means being one with Them, to be entrusted so that "clay in the hands of a potter" has meaning and "rule them with a rod of iron" (which is an allusion to the rod of Jesus Christ or His Word, His Light and His righteousness) has meaning.

I do not see how any of these say I existed in any form before the world existed or before I was conceived by my parents.

[ParkerD]

Originally Posted by sallybutler

I do not see how any of these say I existed in any form before the world existed or before I was conceived by my parents.

Sally,

I was answering your other question, but here is a great verse answering your new question:


Isaiah 64:8

8 But now, O Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.


Have a good day.

[SteveVH]

Originally Posted by ParkerD

Sally,

I was answering your other question, but here is a great verse answering your new question:


Isaiah 64:8

8 But now, O Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.


Have a good day.

Therefore, Sally, we are to believe that the clay has always existed, even though this verse says nothing of the sort. It's what happens when one believes more in their pre-conceived notion than in the words of Scripture. Everything gets molded into a form that can fit into that particlur hole.

[sallybutler]

Originally Posted by SteveVH

Therefore, Sally, we are to believe that the clay has always existed, even though this verse says nothing of the sort. It's what happens when one believes more in their pre-conceived notion than in the words of Scripture. Everything gets molded into a form that can fit into that particlur hole.

Thank you. I wasn't quite making that leap.

[Jerusha]

The analogy of the potter and the clay is frequently used in the Journal of Discourses in terms of a clay pot that does not conform to the potter's desire. It is then torn up and re-formed in a later pot. It really is not that applicable to the pre-existence. If one would use this analogy to its fullest extent, then why not jump all the way to re-incarnation? Because re-incarnation is definitely not part of Christian belief, and Mormonism forms itself in imitation of Christianity, they could not make the leap into full-blown re-incarnation.

It therefore has more meaning in terms of slavishly conforming oneself to LDS culture, to please the potter (BY).

[Holly3278]

There is absolutely no evidence for "pre-mortal existence". Some Mormons might claim that there is but remember, they are not authoritative when it comes to interpreting the Bible. They might also be taking a portion of the Bible out of context or making some other error in their interpretation. However, I can assure you that the Bible does not teach a pre-mortal existence. We come into existence at our conception and that is when we receive our soul, not before and not after.

[TexanKnight]

Originally Posted by sallybutler

When you become the same as God, will you still need Him? Won't you be equal to Him at that point?

Maybe at some point. See, the LDS God was once a sinful man. Then he became a God and then you can become a God and then you will be equal.