by Eric Kotter, a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (“Mormon“), student at BYU-Idaho studying communications, and freelance writer.

The Holy Spirit, also referred to as the Holy Ghost, was given to us by God in order to guide us and strengthen us here in this earth life. The Holy Spirit is an actual person, but he doesn’t have a physical body, He has a spirit. The Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ, and Heavenly Father are three separate beings that are all a part of the Godhead. They all have the same purpose, which is to help bring us back into the presence of God so that we might have eternal life.

There are two parts to understanding the Holy Spirit. There is the power of the Holy Spirit, and there is the gift of the Holy Spirit, or gift of the Holy Ghost. Before someone is baptized and given the gift of the Holy Ghost, they can feel the power and influence of the Holy Spirit testify to their hearts of things that are true. It can help them feel peace and lead them to what is right and good. When the spirit leads others to truth, it prompts them act on those truths. For example, after finding out that Jesus Christ asks us to get baptized, the Holy Spirit would then prompt that person to make changes in their lives in order to get ready for baptism. After baptism, when given under proper priesthood authority, we receive the gift of the Holy Ghost which is the right to have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost whenever one is worthy. The gift of the Holy Ghost has a sanctifying effect on the body, and helps remove the desires to do evil and sin. It helps us literally become like Jesus Christ, and allows us to be cleansed from our sins.

One purpose of the Holy Spirit is to testify of all truth. In The Book of Mormon, a volume of ancient holy scripture which testifies of Jesus Christ, it says, “And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is” (Book of Mormon: Moroni 10:5-6). The Holy Spirit speaks to us through our thoughts and feelings. When Heavenly Father sent us to this earth He did not want to leave us alone and lost without any way of knowing what is right and what is wrong, what is true and what isn’t, so He gave us the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit speaks to us through thoughts, feelings, and impressions. The Holy Ghost speaks to us more as a still small voice rather than a loud voice. An apostle of Jesus Christ said, “That sweet, quiet voice of inspiration comes more as a feeling than it does as a sound” (Elder Boyd K. Packer). The book of Galatians in the Bible helps us recognize when we are feeling the influence of the Holy Spirit. It says, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law” (Galatians 5:22-23). When I feel the spirit it helps me want to be more loving, kind, patient and good. When I feel the spirit, I want to be more like Jesus Christ. I know that I am feeling the Holy Ghost when I feel calm and at peace, and when confusion and doubt clears away. When I feel this way, it helps me know what is true and good. I have felt that way about Jesus Christ and His restored church. I know that His church has been restored to the earth. Just as a blind man knows that the sun exists because he can feel its heat, I know that Jesus Christ lives because I can feel His love for me when I read about Him, and follow His counsel to love and serve others. I also know that there are living prophets and apostles on this earth who speak for Jesus Christ by revelation. I have felt the same feelings of the Holy Spirit testify to me that these things are true.

When I was a child of eight years old, I was baptized a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Commonly misnamed “The Mormon Church“) and given the gift of the Holy Ghost. Through the authority of God, which is called the priesthood, I was baptized, and then hands were laid on my head to confer upon me the gift of the Holy Ghost. I don’t remember everything that was said at the baptism, but I do remember the feeling I felt. I felt clean–clean spiritually. I felt happy and peaceful. I felt that the Lord was pleased with my decision of committing to follow Him. The Holy Spirit rested upon me and I felt the Lord’s love. The Holy Spirit has been a tremendous blessing in my life. Without it, I would be lost in this world of confusion. I know that it is real. I have felt it’s power and influence lift me, teach me, and testify to me of the reality of Jesus Christ. I know that the Holy Spirit can be felt by all who honestly want to do what’s right and find truth.

Additional Resources:

Obtain a free copy of The Book of Mormon

The Gift of the Holy Ghost

Read more about the Holy Ghost from an apostle of Jesus Christ at the official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Why is Jesus Christ called the Son of Man?  While others in the Scriptures (particularly the Old Testament) who are called “son[s] of man” (Jeremiah 49:18, Ezekiel 4:16, Psalms 8:4), the word “son” is uncapitalized.  Elder James E. Talmage, a Biblical scholar, sheds light on the answer in his renown work, Jesus the Christ.  He says,

“In applying the designation to Himself, the Lord invariably uses the definite article. ‘The Son of Man’ was and is, specifically and exclusively, Jesus Christ. While as a matter of solemn certainty He was the only male human being from Adam down who was not the son of a mortal man, He used the title in a way to conclusively demonstrate that it was peculiarly and solely His own. It is plainly evident that the expression is fraught with a meaning beyond that conveyed by the words in common usage. The distinguishing appellation has been construed by many to indicate our Lord’s humble station as a mortal, and to connote that He stood as the type of humanity, holding a particular and unique relationship to the entire human family.”

Others are called by the title “son of man,” but only the Lord Jesus Christ is called The Son of Man.  Said the Spirit of the Lord to the prophet Nephi, “Knowest thou the condescension of God?” (Book of Mormon: 1 Nephi 11:16; emphasis added).  But, as Talmage says,

There is, however, a more profound significance attaching to the Lord’s use of the title ‘The Son of Man’; and this lies in the fact that Jesus Christ knew His Father to be the one and only supremely exalted Man, whose Son Jesus Christ was both in spirit and in body—the Firstborn among all the spirit-children of the Father, the Only Begotten in the flesh—and therefore in sense applicable to Himself alone, He was and is the Son of the ‘Man of Holiness,’ Elohim, the Eternal Father.

Moses wrote,
Wherefore teach it unto your children, that all men, everywhere, must repent, or they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God, for no unclean thing can dwell there, or dwell in his presence; for, in the language of Adam, Man of Holiness is his name, and the name of his Only Begotten is the Son of Man, even Jesus Christ, a righteous Judge, who shall come in the meridian of time” (Moses 6:57).

In other words, “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us” (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22).

Joseph Smith, a prophet God raised up to re-establish Jesus Christ’s Church on earth in our day, said,

The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 121). Since ‘all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to [Jesus Christ],’ and since the Old Testament is something ‘which pertains to our religion,’then the Old Testament must somehow testify of Jesus Christ.1

Yet, the somewhat gruesome nature of blood sacrifice [in the Old Testament] has led some to ask, “How could such an activity have anything to do with the gospel of love?” We can better understand the answer to that question when we understand the two major purposes for the law of sacrifice. These purposes applied to Adam, Abraham, Moses, and the New Testament Apostles, and they apply to us today as we accept and live the law of sacrifice in a different way: through exemplifying a broken heart and contrite spirit. Its two major purposes are to test and prove us and to assist us in coming unto Christ” (M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct 1998, 7).

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). Blood sacrifices looked forward; the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper looks backward, and the central act—the atonement of Jesus Christ—is right in the middle—the meridian of time.

In the previous two articles about the law of sacrifice, we have discussed how the law was used anciently to teach God’s children to look forward to this “great and last sacrifice.” With the Savior’s ultimate sacrifice, the law of Moses was done away. The law of Moses, however, “is not the same thing as the law of sacrifice” (M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct 1998, 7). The Savior said after His resurrection from the dead, “And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood . . . [but] ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit” (3 Nephi 9:19-20). Hence, what we sacrifice has changed; that we sacrifice, and the reasons why we sacrifice have remained the same.

The word sacrifice means to make holy. It also means “To surrender or give up (something) for the attainment of some higher advantage or dearer object” (Oxford English Dictionary, “Sacrifice”). Or, as Apostle of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Bruce R. McConkie put it, “Sacrifice involves giving up the things of this world because of the promises of blessings to be gained in a better world” (Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. “Sacrifice,” Bookcraft: 1966).

But what is a broken heart and a contrite spirit? A broken heart is the opposite of a hard heart. The image of a hard heart is used in the scriptures to denote pride. Hence, a person with a broken heart is one who is humble. The word contrite means repentant. A person with a contrite spirit is one who has an awareness of his or her guilt. This person remembers the things he or she has done wrong, but because the person is repentant, he or she strives to change and be better than before. This person knows that through the atonement of Jesus Christ, he or she can overcome all obstacles.

To have a broken heart and a contrite spirit therefore means we are willing to submit to God. We are willing to submit to God as Christ was willing to submit to His father. The Savior said, “And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross; and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men, even so should men be lifted up by the Father, to stand before me, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil” (3 Nephi 27:14).

God loves us. He wants us to come unto Him. The law of sacrifice tests us and assists us in coming unto Christ (M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct 1998, 7). Another Apostle of the Church, Russell M. Nelson, has taught: “Our highest sense of sacrifice is achieved as we make ourselves more sacred or holy. This we do by our obedience to the commandments of God” (“Lessons from Eve,” Ensign, Nov. 1987, 88). Hence, “the sacrifice changed from the offering to the offerer” (M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct 1998, 7).

Sacrifice is therefore a wonderful blessing. Joseph Smith said, “A religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation” (Lectures on Faith 6:7). In other words, sacrifice gives us faith, and with faith we can receive salvation. It is not always easy to give up something we want, especially when we can’t actually see the end results. But I testify that it is worth it in the end. Sometimes we must take a few steps into the darkness in order for the light to turn on and go before us. That’s faith. And sacrifice takes faith.

I end with one of my favorite quotes on the law of sacrifice: “Real, personal sacrifice never was placing an animal on the altar. Instead, it is a willingness to put the animal in us upon the altar and letting it be consumed!” (Neal A. Maxwell “ ‘Deny Yourselves of All Ungodliness,’ ” Ensign, May 1995, 68).

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, it had to be without blemish—totally free from physical

flaws, complete, whole, and perfect. Fourth, the sacrifice had to be clean and worthy. Fifth, the sacrifice had to be domesticated; that is, not wild but tame and of help to man (see Lev. 1:2–3, 10; Lev. 22:21). Sixth and seventh, for the original sacrifice practiced by Adam and the most common sacrifice in the law of Moses, the animal had to be a firstborn and a male (see Ex. 12:5; Lev. 1:3; Lev. 22:18–25). Eighth, the sacrifice of grain had to be ground into flour and made into breadstuffs, which reminds us of our Lord’s title the Bread of Life (see John 6:48). Ninth, the firstfruits that were offered remind us that Christ was the firstfruits of the Resurrection.”4

About 74 years before Christ, the prophet Amulek wrote about how Christ’s sacrifice would eventually end blood sacrifices:

It is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice . . .
And behold, this is the whole meaning of the law, every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal. (Alma 34:10, 14)

Nine years before that, the prophet Alma also testified of Christ,

And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.
And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities. (Alma 7:11-12)

The Savior of all mankind came and fulfilled the law.  He is the great and last sacrifice.  The pain that He went through was “so hard to bear” that we cannot comprehend it, and His suffering was so great that He–God, the greatest of all–trembled because of the pain, bled from every pore, and suffered both body and spirit (See Doctrine and Covenants 19:18).

With His death, the law of Moses was fulfilled.  Yet, the law of Moses is not exactly the same thing as the law of sacrifice.5 We still keep the law of sacrifice.  The Savior taught concerning the fulfilling of the law and what we are to sacrifice nowadays:

And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.
And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit.  And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost. (3 Nephi 9:19-20)

Malachi 3:8-10 is often quoted to motivate us to pay our tithes and offerings.  “Will a man rob God?” the record reads,

Yet ye have robbed me.  But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee?  In tithes and offerings.
Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of Hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.  (Malachi 3:8-10)

Because one of the offerings we are to give to the Lord is “a broken heart and a contrite spirit,” the same principle of blessings applies.  I testify that when we offer up to the Lord a broken heart and a contrite spirit that He will pour out a blessing upon us that is so great that we will not have room enough to receive it.  Our cup of blessings will fill to overflowing, even so much that those around us will also receive blessings.

Yet, no matter how contrite our spirit or how broken our heart, our sacrifice is nothing compared to the one that happened in the meridian of time.  Indeed, there is one offering that pours out a blessing so great upon all of mankind, that none can even begin to comprehend the greatness of it.  This offering is so great that it has power to bless—and save—all mankind: “black and white, bond and free, male and female” (2 Nephi 26:33).

In conclusion, hear another testimony from another prophet in the Book of Mormon–King Benjamin:

And lo, he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death; for behold, blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people.
And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary.
And lo, he cometh unto his own, that salvation might come unto the children of men even through faith on his name; and even after all this they shall consider him a man, and say that he hath a devil, and shall scourge him, and shall crucify him.
And he shall rise the third day from the dead; and behold, he standeth to judge the world; and behold, all these things are done that a righteous judgment might come upon the children of men.
For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned. (Mosiah 3:7-11)

Hence, “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”6

Notes

1 Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966, 60.
2 Neal A. Maxwell, “Willing to Submit,” Ensign, May 1985, 70.
3 Hymns of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Salt Lake City, 1980, 185.
4 M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct 1998, 7.
5 Ibid.
6 Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Ed. Joseph F. Smith, Deseret Book: Salt Lake City, 1976, 121.

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 of all things” (1 Nephi 11:16-17).

What the record says next is a basic answer to the question.

“And he [the Spirit] said unto me [Nephi]: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.
And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and 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 of the Eternal Father!”  (1 Nephi 11:18-21).

James E. Talmage, a biblical scholar, wrote about the Savior’s birth and what it means that Jesus is the Son of God:

“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 thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the “Son of the Highest.” In His nature would be combined the powers of Godhood with the capacity and possibilities of mortality; and this through the ordinary operation of the fundamental law of heredity, declared of God, demonstrated by science, and admitted by philosophy, that living beings shall propagate—after their kind. The Child Jesus was to inherit the physical, mental, and spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that characterized His parents—one immortal and glorified—God, the other human—woman. (Jesus the Christ. Deseret Book: Salt Lake City, 1990. 77.)

When speaking of a son, we mean a male child of a father and a mother.  Calling Jesus Christ the Son of God is closely related to calling Jesus the Firstborn.  Also, to be called a firstborn son implies being an heir and inheriting “the leadership of the family. . . This is often spoken of in the scriptures as birthright” (Bible Dictionary: Firstborn).  Because Jesus is the Son of God and the Firstborn, He is therefore heir to “all . . . that the Father hath” (John 16:15).  Furthermore, He “is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father, [and] the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh” (Bible Dictionary: Firstborn).

The second of these last two statements from the Bible Dictionary, that Jesus is the “Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh,” reiterates what the Spirit said to Nephi, that Mary is “the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh” (1 Nephi 11:18).  The phrase “after the manner of the flesh” is interesting.  It specifies that Mary is Jesus’ mortal mother.  But by specifying, the phrase alludes to the existence of a life before Jesus received a physical body.  “We are not now thinking about the Virgin Birth,” said C. S. Lewis, “We are thinking about something that happened before Nature was created at all . . . ‘Before all worlds’ Christ is begotten” (Lewis, 157).  This is essentially a rewording of the first statement from the Bible Dictionary, that Jesus “is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father.”

But because of the definition of “son” that was defined above, that a son is a male child of a father and a mother there is another corollary.  The definition of “son” implies that during the Premortal Life, “before Nature was created at all,” Jesus, “the firstborn of the spirit children,” must have a Heavenly Mother as well as a Heavenly Father.  Eliza R. Snow once wrote,

I had learned to call thee Father,
Thru thy Spirit from on high,
But, until the key of knowledge
Was restored, I knew not why.
In the heav’ns are parents single?
No, the thought makes reason stare!
Truth is reason; truth eternal
Tells me I’ve a mother there. (Hymns 292)

For some, all this will be hard to comprehend.  But, “There is no good complaining that these statements are difficult.  Christianity claims to be telling us about another world, about something behind the world we can touch and hear and see.  You may think the claim false, but if it were true, what it tells us would be bound to be  difficult—at least as difficult as modern Physics, and for the same reason” (Lewis, Mere Christianity 156).

Yet, just because these statements are difficult does not mean they are not possible to comprehend with study and faith.  “For with God all things are possible” (Mark 10:27).

I know I have certainly not come close to describing every way (or even one way) in which Jesus is the Son of God, but I hope this basic explanation will invite the reader to study more deeply the life of the Savior, and the “great . . . plan of our God” (2 Nephi 9:13).

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.

But before a further explanation of why Jesus is called the Lamb of God is given, we must dwell for a moment on the Law of Sacrifice, a rite of worship that had been practiced as a part of worship since the days of Adam and Eve.  An understanding of the Law of Sacrifice will give us a starting point as to the deeper symbolism of why Jesus is called the Lamb of God.�
The Bible Dictionary states that, “Soon after Adam and Eve were cast out of the Garden of Eden, the Lord gave them the law of sacrifices, which included offering the firstlings of their flocks in a similitude of the sacrifice that would be made of the Only Begotten Son of God” (Bible Dictionary: Sacrifices).  The law therefore pointed men and women “to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice [would] be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal” (Alma 34:14).

In the Mosaic Law one reads that the sacrifices must be “a male without blemish,” (Leviticus 1:3), the firstling or firstborn of one’s flocks (Numbers 18:17), and having no broken bones (Exodus 12:46).  Lambs of this nature were highly valued possessions and had to be offered voluntarily.  After the paschal lamb was sacrificed it was “eaten . . . with unleavened bread and bitter herbs” (Bible Dictionary: Feasts).  Anything left over was burned.

This is what happened when lambs were sacrificed during the Passover, a feast of the Jews that was “instituted to commemorate the passing over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt when God smote the firstborn of the Egyptians,” and Israel’s “redemption from Egypt” (Bible Dictionary: Feasts).  This lamb sacrifice at the feast of the Passover is known as the “paschal lamb.”

James E. Talmage said, putting the pieces of the puzzle together,

“The paschal lamb, slain for every Israelitish household at the annually recurring feast of the Passover, was a particular type of the Lamb of God who in due time would be slain for the sins of the world. The crucifixion of Christ was effected at the Passover season; and the consummation of the supreme Sacrifice, of which the paschal lambs had been but lesser prototypes, led Paul the apostle to affirm in later times: ‘For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us’” (Jesus the Christ. Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1922. 46-47).

Furthermore,

“If ‘the preparation of the passover’ (John 19:14) on Friday, the day of Christ’s crucifixion, means the slaughtering of the paschal lambs, our Lord, the real sacrifice of which all earlier altar victims had been but prototypes, died on the cross while the passover lambs were being slain at the temple” (Ibid. 620).

Abraham therefore said prophetically as he prepared to sacrifice his only son, “My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering” (Genesis 22:8).

Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God.  He is a male, sinless and without blemish.  None of his bones were broken (John 19:36).  He is the Firstborn.  He is meek, humble, and willing to submit to the will of his Father.  He is our Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7).

While all sacrifices, including the Passover, helped ancient Israel look forward to the greatest event ever to occur on the earth, the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper helps us look back to that same event.  We symbolically eat His flesh and drink His blood as a token of remembrance of that transcendent event (Matthew 26:26-28).  Thus the old law was done away, and a new one had been given in its place.

“For it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice” (Alma 34:10).

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 thereof; and, the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the “Son of the Highest” (Jesus the Christ. Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1922. 82).

Hence Christ is called the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh; he had a mortal mother and an immortal Father.  Therefore, in order for Jesus to be a literal descendant (and therefore a son) of David, Mary must also have been of Davidic descent.  Talmage explained further that:

“A personal genealogy of Joseph was essentially that of Mary also, for they were cousins. Joseph is named as son of Jacob by Matthew, and as son of Heli by Luke; but Jacob and Heli were brothers, and it appears that one of the two was the father of Joseph and the other the father of Mary and therefore father-in-law to Joseph.  That Mary was of Davidic descent is plainly set forth in many scriptures; for since Jesus was to be born of Mary, yet was not begotten by Joseph, who was the reputed, and, according to the law of the Jews, the legal father, the blood of David’s posterity was given to the body of Jesus through Mary alone” (Jesus the Christ. Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1922.  87).

Jesus is therefore a son of David.  But because the title “son of David” recognizes the genealogy of Jesus Christ means it must have a deeper meaning.  In order to find out what this deeper meaning is, the title itself must be defined.

David was the great king of ancient Israel.  His reign “was the most brilliant of Israelitish history, for (1) he united the tribes into one nation, (2) he secured undisputed possession of the country, (3) the whole government rested upon a religious basis, and the will of God was the law of Israel (Bible Dictionary: David).  Because David was king of Israel, his descendents, under the patriarchal order, were entitled to the throne.  However,

“At the time of the Savior’s birth, Israel was ruled by alien monarchs. The rights of the royal Davidic family were unrecognized; and the ruler of the Jews was an appointee of Rome. Had Judah been a free and independent nation, ruled by her rightful sovereign, Joseph the carpenter would have been her crowned king; and his lawful successor to the throne would have been Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” (Ibid. 88).

Finally, perhaps the analysis can go one step further if we distinguish “son of David” with a lowercase ‘s’ from “Son of David” with a capital ‘S.’  The lowercase ‘s’ version denotes any son or descendant of David.  Absalom, Amnon, Solomon, and others are given this title (Cf. 2 Samuel 13:1, 2 Chronicles 1:1).   But the title “Son of David” with a capital ‘S’ is reserved for only one being that has ever walked the earth.  It is applied only to Jesus of Nazareth, usually when asked to perform a miracle.  Hence, by addressing “Jesus as Son of David” one “demonstrates . . . belief that He was the Messiah of Israel” (Ibid. 335).

Messiah is an Aramaic word that means “the anointed” (Bible Dictionary: Messiah).  In Old Testament times, kings were anointed to their offices, as were priests, high priests, and prophets (Cf. 1 Samuel 10:1, Exodus 40:15, Leviticus 21:10, 1 Kings 19:16).  It is, therefore, fitting that Jesus is called Messiah—the Anointed One—for He is Prophet, Priest, and King.  David was anointed when he became king of Israel, and he, as heretofore quoted, “united the tribes into one nation, . . . secured undisputed possession of the country, . . .  and [made] the will of God . . . the law of Israel” (Bible Dictionary: David).  David, in a sense, delivered Israel.  It is therefore also fitting that the Anointed One—the Messiah—“denotes the King and Deliverer whose coming the Jews were eagerly expecting” (Bible Dictionary: Messiah).  The Jews were “eagerly expecting” that Deliverer because the Old Testament is full of references, types, shadows, and prophecies of the coming of One who would unite Israel once and for all, give them the law of God to live by, and deliver unto them their nation.  This Deliverer was and is Jesus the Christ, the Son of David.

When we think about what it means to be born, we usually think of being given life and a mortal body from a father and a mother. Therefore, when asking “What does it mean to say that Christ is the Firstborn?” another question usually comes up: “How can Christ be the firstborn if he lived in what is sometimes called the meridian of time?” In order to answer these questions, we must rethink our definition what it means to be born.

The scriptures speak of receiving a rebirth when one receives a remission of sins. But since Christ never sinned, this cannot be the case. “They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick” (Matthew 9:12). At any rate, when people are born, they are thought of as receiving life. Hence, to be reborn is to receive life anew. One way in which Jesus is the firstborn is because he “is risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept” (1 Corinthians 15:20). By calling Christ the Firstborn we make reference to his act of conquering death in order that “all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). One could say then, that it is therefore an act of worship–of awed reverence–to remember that Jesus Christ is the Firstborn, the first to be resurrected and receive his physical body anew.

But there is more than one way in which Jesus Christ is the firstborn.

Under the term “Firstborn” in the Bible Dictionary, one reads of three ways that Jesus is called by this title:

“Jesus is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father, the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh, and the first to rise from the dead in the resurrection, ‘that in all things he might have the preeminence’ (Colossians 1:13-18).”

Because I have just written about the last statement, how Jesus is “the first to rise from the dead in the resurrection,” and because an article has already been written on the middle statement, Christ as “the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh,” I prepare now to address the first statement, that “Jesus is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father.”

In order to understand what this statement means, one must understand that all men and women, before they were born on this earth, existed as spirits. These spirits of premortal men and women “knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life” (The First Presidency and Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102). These spirits are the “spirit children” referred to above, and Jesus is the firstborn—preeminent–of these “spirit children.”

In 1909, the governing body of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) issued a statement that explains this idea further: “The Father of Jesus is our Father also. Jesus himself taught this truth, when He instructed His disciples how to pray: ‘Our Father which art in heaven,’ etc. Jesus, however, is the firstborn among all the sons of God–the first begotten in the spirit, and the only begotten in the flesh. He is our elder brother, and we, like Him are in the image of God.” (The First Presidency [Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, Anthon H. Lund], “The Origin of Man,” Improvement Era, November 1909, 75-81).

This seems to make sense, but now I want to ask, is it wrong to consider a God to be our Elder Brother? Does it not seem at least a little strange to say that we are related—at least spiritually—to the greatest being that ever walked the earth? But strange or not, “. . . [a]mong the spirit children of Elohim [Heavenly Father] the firstborn was and is Jehovah or Jesus Christ to whom all others are juniors” (First Presidency and Council of the Twelve, in Improvement Era, August 1916, 940-1).

So, Christ is the firstborn of all of God’s spirit children and while he can be considered in a sense to be our Elder Brother, yet at the same time the God of all the earth still desires to call us His friends (Cf. John 15:15).

The late Elder Neal A. Maxwell eloquently stated a remedy for this strangeness,

“In intelligence and performance, He [Jesus Christ] far surpasses the individual and the composite capacities and achievements of all who have lived, live now, and will yet live! (See Abraham 3:19). He rejoices in our genuine goodness and achievement, but any assessment of where we stand in relation to Him tells us that we do not stand at all! We kneel!” (Neal A. Maxwell, in Conference Report, Oct. 1981, 9).

So can we call Jesus Christ our Elder Brother? Well, in the sense of having the same Eternal Father in Heaven—the Father of our spirit bodies—the answer is yes. But I personally would not feel comfortable doing it. I would much rather stick to the term Firstborn, because it encompasses so much more of what He is—”the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father, the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh, and the first to rise from the dead in the resurrection, ‘that in all things he might have the preeminence’ (Colossians 1:13-18)” (Bible Dictionary: Firstborn).

What a marvelous scene it must have been–John, yet within his mother’s womb, filled with the Holy Ghost and leaping for joy in an unspoken testimony of the divine sonship of the unborn child that Mary carried; Elisabeth greeting her cousin Mary in the spirit of prophecy and Mary responding by that same spirit. Again we are compelled to say, how perfect! The testimony of two women: the aged Elisabeth and the youthful Mary; each bearing a child conceived under miraculous circumstances, rejoicing together.

As Jesus Christ was born the rightful heir to David’s kingdom, so John was born the rightful heir to the office of Elias that he had been promised by Gabriel. Robert J. Matthews identifies that heirship in this language:

The things of the law of Moses, especially with regards to the qualifications to the priests and their functions in the offerings of various animal sacrifices, were designed by revelation to prefigure and typify the Messiah and to bear witness of him. Heavy penalties were affixed to the performance of sacred rites and duties without the proper authority. It was, therefore, essential that when the Messiah came in person as the Lamb of God, John, the forerunner and witness of the Lamb, should be of the proper lineage to qualify for the mission. If it was necessary for a priest to be of the lineage of Aaron in order to labor with the sacrificial symbols, which were only prefigures of the Messiah, how much greater the necessity that John, the forerunner of the Messiah in person, be of the proper priestly lineage and authority.

Sperry Symposium Classics, Joseph Fielding McConkie, 2006, Brigham Young University & Deseret Book, 111-112.

As we read of John, that he would be “filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb,” it tells us something of the purity of the temple in which his body was housed (Luke 1:15). Indeed, Elizabeth was a prophetess in her own right. None could tell the story more beautifully than Luke.

When Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

And she spake in a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

For, lo, as soon as the voice of salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord. (Luke 1:41-45)

Sperry Symposium Classics, Joseph Fielding McConkie, 2006, Brigham Young University & Deseret Book, 110-111.