Jesus Christ

The evening before the Lamb of God was to be crucified for the sins of the world and hours before He was betrayed, the Lord Jesus was sitting with his Apostles in a “large upper room” (Mark 14:15). It was here that He first instituted the sacrament: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples,” (Matthew 26:26). Then He said, “Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me” 1 Corinthians 11:24). Then, “After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me” (1 Corinthians 11:25). Thus, the purpose of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is to look back and remember Jesus the Christ and what He has done for each of us. Everything points “to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice [is] the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal” (Alma 34:14).... Read the rest of this entry »

The atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ “embraces, sustains, supports, and gives life to all other gospel doctrines.  It is the foundation upon which all truth rests and all things grow out of it and come because of it.”1 “The wondrous and glorious Atonement was the central act in all of human history.”2 Because of these statements, all things also point to Christ and His atonement.  Those who lived before Christ looked forward to Him and His infinite and eternal sacrifice.  Those who live after Christ look back to this greatest of all events and “remember what was done.”3 There were many different ways in which the blood sacrifices before Christ were types and shadows of the great and last sacrifice.  Note a few of the details: First, like Christ, the [sacrificial] animal was chosen and anointed by the laying on of hands. (The Hebrew title Messiah and the Greek title Christ both mean “the Anointed One.”) Second, the animal was to have its life’s blood spilt. Third,... Read the rest of this entry »

Sometimes some of the simplest questions are also some of the most profound.  These types of questions are therefore some of the most difficult to answer.  “Why is Jesus called the Son of God?” is one of these questions, simple, profound, and difficult to answer.  But as one of my English Professors told me the other day, “The hard questions are really the only questions worth asking.”  In that case, Why is Jesus called the Son of God? In a basic sense, the question is closely related to the question the Spirit of the Lord asked Nephi: “Knowest thou the condescension of God?” (1 Nephi 11:16).  Note a definition of “condescend” that the Oxford English Dictionary gives the word, “To depart from the privileges of superiority by a voluntary submission; to sink willingly to equal terms with inferiours.”  I feel like I can use Nephi’s response to the Spirit’s question as my own response, “I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning... Read the rest of this entry »

Because Jesus’ name-titles are symbolic, one might analyze them in order to both gain a greater appreciation of and learn who He really is.  One of the titles of Jesus Christ that has a very profound level of symbolism is when he is called “the Lamb of God.”  I will attempt a basic explanation of what this name-title means, and why of all creatures, a lamb was chosen to represent the Savior. Long before the Lamb of God was born in Bethlehem and laid in a manger, Isaiah likened the Savior of all men and women unto a lamb when he wrote, “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth” (Isaiah 53:7).  The lamb is therefore a symbol of meekness, humility, and of willingness to submit to the will of the master.  It is true that Jesus is all of these (humble, willing to submit to the Father) but the level of symbolism goes much deeper than this. 195 But... Read the rest of this entry »

In the first verse of the first gospel as it appears in our New Testament, Matthew calls Jesus Christ “the son of David” as if it were a sort of preface to the genealogy he is about to write, and perhaps, a preface to Matthew’s entire testimony of the Savior. Following this preface is the line of royal descent from Joseph, Mary’s husband, back to David, King of Israel (Cf. Matthew 1:1-16).  Because Joseph is listed as a descendant of David, Joseph can also be called a son of David. Joseph treated Jesus as if He were his own son, and by those who knew not of His divine origin Jesus was presumed to be “the son of Joseph” (Luke 3:23), or “the carpenter’s Son” (Matthew 13:55).  It may be said, then, that Jesus is the adopted son of Joseph.  However, Joseph was not Jesus’ literal Father.  As James E. Talmage explained, “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... Read the rest of this entry »

189 In the providence of God, the marvelous testimony of Simeon was not to stand alone. Anna, an aged widow, a devout and saintly woman who worshiped constantly in the temple with fasting and prayer both day and night, now approached the holy family. As Simeon was a prophet, so she was a prophetess, and her voice now joined his as a special witness of the birth of Jesus Christ. Anna, whose name means “full of grace,” bore testimony to all Jerusalem who “looked for redemption” (Luke 2:38). Through the countless hours she had spent within the walls of the temple, she was undoubtedly well known to those of the holy city who also faithfully sought the coming of the Messiah. All such would hear her testimony of His birth (see Luke 2:36-38). Sperry Symposium Classics, Joseph Fielding McConkie, 2006, Brigham Young University & Deseret Book, 115-116.  Read More →

216 We have no scriptural record of any words spoken by Joseph, the foster father of Jesus Christ. Despite the lack of words, Joseph’s testimony as to Jesus Christ’s divine sonship is most eloquent. He was, as we are told, a “just man,” meaning that he lived the law of Moses with exactness and honor. We know that he dreamed dreams and entertained angels. Further, we know that he was faithful in keeping the law of Moses, so he faithfully heeded each divine direction that was given to him. Surely his unquestioning obedience is evidence of belief. It included taking Mary, who carried another’s child as his wife, and knowing “her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son,” naming Him Jesus, fleeing by night with Mary and the holy child to Egypt, remaining in Egypt until directed to return, and then living in Galilee rather than Judea upon their return (see Matthew 1:19-21, 25; 2:13-23). Each action witnessed anew Joseph’s conviction that... Read the rest of this entry »

There could be no more perfect mortal witness of Christ’s divine sonship than His mother, Mary. From Gabriel she received the promise that she would conceive in her womb “the Son of the Highest” (Luke 1:32). Following that marvelous event, she testified, “He that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name” (Luke 1:49). Nephi gave the most perfect scriptural account of this sacred event. Our eternal Father, he told us, condescended–that is, He came down from His royal court on high and in union with the beautiful virgin girl of Nazareth fathered a son “after the manner of the flesh” (1 Nephi 11:18). “And it came to pass,” Nephi wrote, “that I beheld that . . . after she had been carried away in the spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look! And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms. And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the son... Read the rest of this entry »

The Greek word apokrypha means “hidden writings.” Clement of Alexandria uses it in this literal sense (Stromateis 1.15.69.9). But, for the most part, ancient Christian authors used it to refer to writings of their opponents, which they considered spurious. Clement says that his opponents “derived their doctrines from an apocryphal work. . . . where they have taken a sound doctrine and perversely misapplied it” (Stromateis 4.29). Ireneaus describes “apocryphal writings” as texts written by his opponents “who are ignorant of the Scriptures of truth” (Against Heresies 1.20.1). Tertullian refused to acknowledge teachings from the Shepherd of Hermas because it did not “find a place in the Divine canon” and “had been habitually judged by every council of Churches. . . among apocryphal and false (writing)” (On Modesty 10.6). The phrase New Testament Apocrypha was not used in antiquity. Instead, it is a modern umbrella title... Read the rest of this entry »

301 The New Testament used the term in an eschatological sense to refer to the glorious return of Jesus Christ (see 1 Corinthians 15:23, “coming”). The Greek term means “being present” and was adopted for the state visit of a Roman emperor.  Read More →