A Power Heavenly Father Doesn'T Have

[asbestosman]

Does Heavenly Father's physical body limit His power? The scriptures tell us that the Holy Ghost does not have a body of flesh and bone and were it not so that the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us (D&C 130:22-23). Does that mean that Heavenly Father cannot dwell in us? Also, what about Satan--can the devil dwell in us? Does this mean that Satan has a power that Heavenly Father does not?

When we speak of God being omnipotent, we of course know that He can't microwave a burrito so hot that He Himself couldn't eat it. However, is the power to dwell in us something that the Father does not have? Can this be resolved if we consider the power of the Godhead all together? If so, won't this power lost after the Holy Ghost receives a body? Is this really a limitation of power? Now that Jesus is resurrected, He can't very well atone for our sins again--not that such a thing makes sense (it being an Infinite atonement).

[Vance]

. . . Does that mean that Heavenly Father cannot dwell in us? Also, what about Satan--can the devil dwell in us? . . .

However, is the power to dwell in us something that the Father does not have?. . .

Is this a power that He needs to accomplish His work?

[Calm]

Does Heavenly Father's physical body limit His power? The scriptures tell us that the Holy Ghost does not have a body of flesh and bone and were it not so that the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us (D&C 130:22-23). Does that mean that Heavenly Father cannot dwell in us? Also, what about Satan--can the devil dwell in us? Does this mean that Satan has a power that Heavenly Father does not?

When we speak of God being omnipotent, we of course know that He can't microwave a burrito so hot that He Himself couldn't eat it. However, is the power to dwell in us something that the Father does not have? Can this be resolved if we consider the power of the Godhead all together? If so, won't this power lost after the Holy Ghost receives a body? Is this really a limitation of power? Now that Jesus is resurrected, He can't very well atone for our sins again--not that such a thing makes sense (it being an Infinite atonement).

Personally, I think it is more likely the stage of progression the Holy Ghost is in (that he can't dwell within us and have a body at the same time) and that the Father has delegated this office to him, not that the Father is incapable of doing this....but I could be wrong.

[mfbukowski]

Does Heavenly Father's physical body limit His power? The scriptures tell us that the Holy Ghost does not have a body of flesh and bone and were it not so that the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us (D&C 130:22-23). Does that mean that Heavenly Father cannot dwell in us? Also, what about Satan--can the devil dwell in us? Does this mean that Satan has a power that Heavenly Father does not?

When we speak of God being omnipotent, we of course know that He can't microwave a burrito so hot that He Himself couldn't eat it. However, is the power to dwell in us something that the Father does not have? Can this be resolved if we consider the power of the Godhead all together? If so, won't this power lost after the Holy Ghost receives a body? Is this really a limitation of power? Now that Jesus is resurrected, He can't very well atone for our sins again--not that such a thing makes sense (it being an Infinite atonement).

If God violated the laws of physics, he would no longer be God. He has a material body and two material bodies cannot occupy the same space, so if he were to "dwell" in us- ie: in our fleshly tabernacle to use scriptural language- it would violate the laws of physics.

It's not that he is not omnipotent, but he is self-determined, and has voluntarily decided to surrender to the laws he has given us. He too would drive on the right side of the road if he were driving a car- a silly example- but that is what I mean.

He voluntarily lives by the laws he has established and is properly termed "self determined" and totally "self-actualized". In fact, his existence defines what those terms mean.

[mfbukowski]

Also, what about Satan--can the devil dwell in us? Does this mean that Satan has a power that Heavenly Father does not?

Suppose that it is true that you would never murder someone. Yet let us also assume that you know how to use a gun and go target shooting all the time.

Does that mean that you lack a power that a murderer has?

Not at all. You have voluntarily given up the "ability" to murder someone.

As far as Satan dwelling in you, imo it is more that sin dwells in us.

JST Romans 7:5–27

5For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were not according to the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

6But now we are delivered from the law wherein we were held, being dead to the law, that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

7What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9For once I was alive without transgression of the law, but when the commandment of Christ came, sin revived, and I died.

10And when I believed not the commandment of Christ which came, which was ordained to life, I found it condemned me unto death.

11For sin, taking occasion, denied the commandment, and deceived me; and by it I was slain.

12Nevertheless, I found the law to be holy, and the commandment to be holy, and just, and good.

13Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin by that which is good working death in me; that sin, by the commandment, might become exceeding sinful.

14For we know that the commandment is spiritual; but when I was under the law, I was yet carnal, sold under sin.

15But now I am spiritual; for that which I am commanded to do, I do; and that which I am commanded not to allow, I allow not.

16For what I know is not right I would not do; for that which is sin, I hate.

17If then I do not that which I would not allow, I consent unto the law, that it is good; and I am not condemned.

18Now then, it is no more I that do sin; but I seek to subdue that sin which dwelleth in me.

19For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me, but to perform that which is good I find not, only in Christ.

20For the good that I would have done when under the law, I find not to be good; therefore, I do it not.

21But the evil which I would not do under the law, I find to be good; that, I do.

22Now if I do that, through the assistance of Christ, I would not do under the law, I am not under the law; and it is no more that I seek to do wrong, but to subdue sin that dwelleth in me.

23I find then that under the law, that when I would do good evil was present with me; for I delight in the law of God after the inward man.

24And now I see another law, even the commandment of Christ, and it is imprinted in my mind.

25But my members are warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

26And if I subdue not the sin which is in me, but with the flesh serve the law of sin; O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

27I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord, then, that so with the mind I myself serve the law of God.

Note that in verse 8 it is actually the law, which defines what "sin" is. Without the law, there could be no sin. Drinking beer is not a commandment for most, unless you are LDS- so the existence of the commandment (for us) makes it "sin". And were you to totally abuse the WOW it would be even more serious for you, since you have accepted the law or commandment, whereas perhaps it is not even a minor sin for those who have not accepted that law.

So acceptance of the law makes it harder for you to live than it is for those who do not accept it. So by accepting the law, you are also accepting more ways you can be condemned- you can now be condemned, by breaking the new law you have accepted which others have not accepted.

So you are constantly warring against the "natural man" because you have decided to do so. It is the natural man within you which you have volunteered to strive to overcome. (By being baptized)

So it is not so much that Satan dwells in you, but the natural man.

[zerinus]

Does Heavenly Father's physical body limit His power? The scriptures tell us that the Holy Ghost does not have a body of flesh and bone and were it not so that the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us (D&C 130:22-23). Does that mean that Heavenly Father cannot dwell in us? Also, what about Satan--can the devil dwell in us? Does this mean that Satan has a power that Heavenly Father does not?

When we speak of God being omnipotent, we of course know that He can't microwave a burrito so hot that He Himself couldn't eat it. However, is the power to dwell in us something that the Father does not have? Can this be resolved if we consider the power of the Godhead all together? If so, won't this power lost after the Holy Ghost receives a body? Is this really a limitation of power? Now that Jesus is resurrected, He can't very well atone for our sins again--not that such a thing makes sense (it being an Infinite atonement).

God the Father has a Spirit that proceeds from Him by means of which He can dwell in us, and likewise does Jesus Christ.

[mfbukowski]

God the Father has a Spirit that proceeds from Him by means of which He can dwell in us, and likewise does Jesus Christ.

Sleeping pills have a property which proceed from them by means of which they put us to sleep.

I am not disagreeing with you, but just pointing out that this doesn't explain much. I think the question was HOW, knowing what little we know about God, can he do this "indwelling", if we both have bodies.

Again, I don't disagree, but as always I think it is a question of defining the word "indwelling". I believe what you mean (and I am positive you will correct me vociferously if I am wrong) that he has the Holy Ghost do this for him, that the "Sprit that proceeds from Him" is indeed the Holy Ghost.

Sounds a little modalistic, I know, but I think the "Spirit of God" is defined as the Holy Ghost. No?

[Calm]

Again, I don't disagree, but as always I think it is a question of defining the word "indwelling". I believe what you mean (and I am positive you will correct me vociferously if I am wrong) that he has the Holy Ghost do this for him, that the "Sprit that proceeds from Him" is indeed the Holy Ghost.

Sounds a little modalistic, I know, but I think the "Spirit of God" is defined as the Holy Ghost. No?

Could also be what is usually referred to as "light of Christ".

I think the key issue is what does "indwelling" mean and how does it occur. Until we know what this is, how do we know that God the Father is incapable of it?

[zerinus]

Sleeping pills have a property which proceed from them by means of which they put us to sleep.

I am not disagreeing with you, but just pointing out that this doesn't explain much. I think the question was HOW, knowing what little we know about God, can he do this "indwelling", if we both have bodies.

Again, I don't disagree, but as always I think it is a question of defining the word "indwelling". I believe what you mean (and I am positive you will correct me vociferously if I am wrong) that he has the Holy Ghost do this for him, that the "Sprit that proceeds from Him" is indeed the Holy Ghost.

Sounds a little modalistic, I know, but I think the "Spirit of God" is defined as the Holy Ghost. No?

The scriptures tell us that God and Jesus can dwell in us by means of their Spirit:

D&C 11

:

13 Verily, verily, I say unto you, I will

impart unto you of my Spirit,

which shall enlighten your mind, . . .

D&C 19

:

38 Pray always, and I will

pour out my Spirit upon you,

and great shall be your blessing . . .

D&C 84

:

88 . . . I will be on your right hand and on your left, and

my Spirit shall be in your hearts,

and mine angels round about you, to bear you up.

Moses 6

:

34 Behold

my Spirit is upon you,

wherefore all thy words will I justify; . . .

You do talk a lot of nonsense. You realize that don't you.

[Brian 2.0]

The bigger question is what constitutes "indwelling." The premise is that the HG doesn't have a body so he can dwell within us, but the personage of the HG is only ONE spirit personage. While he can dwell in our physical bodies, his spirit personage can't dwell within multiple bodies at the same time. So when people are feeling the spirit simultaneously in a sacrament meeting, the HG as a personage can't be "indwelling" in all those people at the same time. So what is going on?

If it's just "the Power of the Holy Ghost" than what medium is this? The Light of Christ or some activation of the Light of Christ by the Holy Ghost?

And if it is that, or some external power being used, they why the necessity to have a physical bodiless Holy Ghost?

[DarkScythe]

there are some mysteries that we can't understand but it doesn't mean we can't speculate about them. Honest Answer:I don't know the limits of God. So I don't know.

[Eldwynn]

Of course. This answers the age old question, Can god make a rock so heavy he can't lift it?

Yes he can, but he can use the holy ghost to lift it.

[Brian 2.0]

Isn't the Mormon belief is God a bit less "all-powerful" than most Christiandom? Don't we acknowledge the limits of God openly?

I feel like I have often heard quote about God being "bound by eternal laws" or "works within natural laws" as if God is someone who is operating within eternal laws that were set by someone/something other than Him.

Isn't this the concept that requires the atonement to pay for sins? God can't simply "forgive" without "payment" according to the laws of justice.

[Calm]

Isn't the Mormon belief is God a bit less "all-powerful" than most Christiandom? Don't we acknowledge the limits of God openly?

Depends on what you mean by "all-powerful". For example, some LDS see God the Father having a physical body in addition to a spiritual body as expanding on the abilities and attributes of the traditional God of Christianity.

If God is limited only because he chooses to be limited, is he really any less powerful than if he is unlimited?

[Kenngo1969]

... Drinking beer is not a commandment for most' date=' unless you are LDS ...[/quote']

Drinking beer is a commandment ... really? Man, I gotta read the Word of Wisdom more closely!

[Nathair/|\]

Drinking beer is a commandment ... really? Man, I gotta read the Word of Wisdom more closely!

Yeah, pass the Guinness.

[Brian 2.0]

I guess I'm asking if we have church doctrine that states God CANNOT violate eternal law. I feel like I've seen this plenty of time before and such a claim does put limits on God.

[mfbukowski]

Drinking beer is a commandment ... really? Man, I gotta read the Word of Wisdom more closely!

LOL!

Man, I messed that one up!

[Nathair/|\]

Isn't the Mormon belief is God a bit less "all-powerful" than most Christiandom? Don't we acknowledge the limits of God openly?

I feel like I have often heard quote about God being "bound by eternal laws" or "works within natural laws" as if God is someone who is operating within eternal laws that were set by someone/something other than Him.

Isn't this the concept that requires the atonement to pay for sins? God can't simply "forgive" without "payment" according to the laws of justice.

On the other hand, our God can do something nobody else's can, that is to make others like Him.

[mfbukowski]

I guess I'm asking if we have church doctrine that states God CANNOT violate eternal law. I feel like I've seen this plenty of time before and such a claim does put limits on God.

http://lds.org/search?query=%22cease+to+be+God%22〈=eng

[cksalmon]

If God violated the laws of physics, he would no longer be God. He has a material body and two material bodies cannot occupy the same space, so if he were to "dwell" in us- ie: in our fleshly tabernacle to use scriptural language- it would violate the laws of physics.

Hold the phone! The Holy Spirit has an immaterial body? I wasn't aware that any Mormon (at least s/p the disappearance of LoF) held that the Holy Spirit does not comprise material substance.

Do you agree with me that B. H. Roberts and O. Pratt were weak on this, too? Or, is there a sort of matter that is material and yet escapes your denial that two material bodies can occupy the same space?

[mfbukowski]

Hold the phone! The Holy Spirit has an immaterial body? I wasn't aware that any Mormon (at least s/p the disappearance of LoF) held that the Holy Spirit does not comprise material substance.

Do you agree with me that B. H. Roberts and O. Pratt were weak on this, too? Or, is there a sort of matter that is material and yet escapes your denial that two material bodies can occupy the same space?

I suppose the standard answer would be that "spirit matter is more refined", which I admit I do not understand, but I believe a physical explanation is in principle discoverable.

I suspected that someone was going to bring that up!

[BCSpace]

I guess I'm asking if we have church doctrine that states God CANNOT violate eternal law.

We seem to have such a doctrine. For example, Alma 42:13,22,25, Mormon 9:19, and James 1:13.

I feel like I've seen this plenty of time before and such a claim does put limits on God.

I don't see why a God that has limits would be a problem. Such a God can still be omni everything relative to our mortal existence and the fact of the matter is that the LDS God is the most powerful God because, as far as I can tell, He is the only God who can create other Gods.

[cksalmon]

I suppose the standard answer would be that "spirit matter is more refined", which I admit I do not understand, but I believe a physical explanation is in principle discoverable.

I suspected that someone was going to bring that up!

Well, if it walks like an unextended immaterial duck and sqawks like an unextended immaterial duck, it's probably an unextended immaterial duck. Rather than, say, being an extensible material duck indistinguishable from its immaterial cousin in all but name.

[mfbukowski]

Well, if it walks like an unextended immaterial duck and sqawks like an unextended immaterial duck, it's probably an unextended immaterial duck. Rather than, say, being an extensible material duck indistinguishable from its immaterial cousin in all but name.

LOL - I love it.

That is of course correct- but the difference that in one language game, we accept on faith that one day one of those ducks will actually be discovered to be both extended in some sense and material.

In another, one of the usual other analogies are various portions of the electromagnetic spectrum- "tuning the radio" to the right frequency or "sunlight which can be felt in many places". Certainly various frequencies of radio waves "occupy the same space" as others, and using magical language could be said to "indwell" a radio.

In still another perspective, all explanations of this kind are really metaphors constructed to make the parts fit together- but after all, what isn't?

(We can look at all these models, including the most "Scientific", as a guy like Kuhn or the later Wittgenstein might)