Ogden and Skinner on John 5:21-27, Bold Accusation & a Syllogism

In The Four Gospels:  Verse by Verse (Deseret, 2006), D. Kelly Ogden and Andrew C. Skinner write on page 265,

The Son has life in himself, independent of all other powers in the universe.  The Father gave the Son that privilege and power and also the authority to judge and to quicken, or resurrect, bodies to everlasting life.  Those who hear and hearken to the voice of the Son will pass “from death unto life” (v. 24).

 

By exercising these powers Jesus was also doing what his Father had done before him.  Joseph Smith taught:

 

“The Scriptures inform us that Jesus said, As the Father hath power in Himself, even so hath the Son power—to do what?  Why, what the Father did.  The answer is obvious—in a manner to lay down His body and take it up again.  Jesus, what are you going to do?  To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again.  Do we believe it?  If you do not believe it, you do not believe the Bible” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 346).

 

“As the Father hath power in Himself, so hath the Son power in Himself, to lay down His life and take it again, so He has a body of His own.  The Son doeth what He hath seen the Father do: then the Father hath some day laid down His life and taken it again; so He has a body of His own” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 312).

First, I consider this a bold accusation by Joseph Smith in claiming that if I don’t believe the Father laid down his life in the flesh as the Son did, then I don’t believe the message of the Bible.  But after my initial reaction, I realize that Joseph Smith considered this particular text of Scripture just as fundamental to his religion as I do.  For in fact if you reject the proper understanding of Christ’s word (v. 24), his proclamations in John 5, you have no everlasting life.   Jesus is communicating strongly to the Jews.  Though you might think you are secure in your sincere activities of religion, you are in reality under damnation.  Though you might be thinking all is sunshine, death hangs over you like a dark cloud.  But if you really hear what Jesus is saying in John 5 and believe the Father, you are already passed from death to life.  The last phrase in John 5:24 is one of the most powerful, realized statements of eschatology in all the New Testament!

 

Secondly, I believe that in a way Joseph Smith seeks to trap me with this particular line of logic:

  1. Whatever the Father does, the Son also does (John 5:19)
  2. The Son laid down his life.
  3. Therefore, the Father must have laid down his life.

Joseph interprets:  because the Son has a body of flesh, presently, the Father must have a body. But how far does this go?

 

Because the Son created all things (John 1:1), the Father must have also created all things somewhere else?  Because the Son became the Lamb of God (1:29), the Father must have become a lamb somewhere else?  Because the Son had disciples, so did the Father first?  Since the Son turned water into wine (2:9), is this because he had first seen the Father do this on another world  (And is this why some LDS see Jesus married—because if the LDS father is married, then Jesus must be married)?  Also, as the Son was the sent one by His Father (3:16), does this mean the Father is a sent one by his father?  When Jesus was wearied (4:6), does that mean the Father was at one time wearied physically?  When Jesus healed the nobleman’s son (4:50), did the Father do likewise earlier?

 

Basically, do you think that John 5:19 is all about Jesus as a separate god mimicking or copying another god, who is called Father?

If you say yes to this last question, it completely alters your concept of worship to God and your path of salvation unto eternal life.  Joseph Smith is right about one thing—the stakes are higher than any other decision you will encounter in life.  Seriously, Joseph is asking us to hang all our understanding of God and our future destiny on his interpretation of John 5:19.  The problem is . . . it doesn’t fit with the text.

 

I think Joseph Smith is wrong here on what is fundamental to faith and God.  Jesus is communicating to us that in all those things that he has done from John 1:1 to John 5:14, he did not just copy that which his Father has already done.  No—all that he has done, he did as one with the Father who initiated it all.  The Father and the Son concurrently work (5:17) by creating, maintaining, taking life, giving life, healing, saving, indwelling, and judging (5:30).  It is a supernatural oneness unlike any other phenomena that I am discovering here in this divine logic of Christ; the experience is stretching and shattering my natural inclinations.  It is the impossible disconnect between the Father and the Son as God that causes me to cry out to the Son, to pray to the Son, and to cling to the Son.

 

Bewildered, I don’t understand why everyone just prays to their Heavenly Father.  Surely, don’t feel bound that you can’t pray to the Son.  When you honor the Son with all the religious expression of your heart, you honor the Father.

 

I am exploding with life on this Monday, completely emancipated.  What Jesus is saying in John 5 bursts all human categories and patterns of expression.

 

Actually, I struggle with even trying to communicate all this in words.

  

3 comments

  1. When you dig a little in mormon denied Adam-God doctrine you cant understand better this idea of Joseph Smith, but of course that doctrine is nt clear at all, and if the idea of the eternal progressions is to much then this doctrine is way crazy for you. But at least you can understand the way Joseph’s thinks.

  2. Actually Todd, I believe your struggle with all this, is al of our own struggles as well. I rather enjoyed your well articulated and interesting comments. I shall have to blog on them on my Backyard Professor Blog when I get time. Thanks for sharing your concerns, as well as joys and ideas.

    Best,
    Kerry

  3. I see a lot of bold statements like this from Joseph Smith where he seems to “lay it on the line” in “you’re either with us or against us” kind of language.

    Sometimes I wonder how much he really meant it, or if it was just his habit to speak in such audacious fashion.

Leave a comment