Moroni 8:18

[Libs]

The critics are very fond of pointing out that they agree with Moroni 8:18, which states:

"For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity."

But, the implication is that LDS do not really believe it, because it doesn't fit in with the doctrine of eternal progression.

I looked up the verse, on lds.org, and one of the references for "unchangeable" was Alma 7:20:

"I perceive that it has been made known unto you, by the testimony of his word, that he cannot walk in crooked paths; neither doth he vary from that which he hath said; neither hath he a shadow of turning from the right to the left, or from that which is right to that which is wrong; therefore, his course is one eternal round."

..which makes sense. God's integrity is solid and unchangeable. But, in LDS doctrine, has that always been the case? From "eternity to eternity"? In what way would that be true?

(I hope this does not sound like baiting, because that is not my intention. I would really like to know how LDS interpret this verse, especially the "eternity to eternity" part.)

Edited July 23, 2011 by Libs

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

The critics are very fond of pointing out that they agree with Moroni 8:18, which states:

"For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity."

But, the implication is that LDS do not really believe it, because it doesn't fit in with the doctrine of eternal progression.

I looked up the verse, on lds.org, and one of the references for "unchangeable" was Alma 7:20:

"I perceive that it has been made known unto you, by the testimony of his word, that he cannot walk in crooked paths; neither doth he vary from that which he hath said; neither hath he a shadow of turning from the right to the left, or from that which is right to that which is wrong; therefore, his course is one eternal round."

..which makes sense. God's integrity is solid and unchangeable. But, in LDS doctrine, has that always been the case? From "eternity to eternity"? In what way would that be true?

(I hope this does not sound like baiting, because that is not my intention. I would really like to know how LDS interpret this verse, especially the "eternity to eternity" part.)

Hi Libs,

Moroni 8:18 must be one of the hot topics for the critics of late, (I'm not calling you one), because this is the second place I have seen it pop up recently. No doubt there are quotes as well from past leaders.

When we discuss issues related to "time" things can get real murky. And when we say that "God has always..." then the issue of "time" comes up. Remember, that the scripture says that time is measured only unto man. Alma 40:8--which to me means that time is not measured by God like it is measured by man.

I know that this doesn't answer your question. I couldn't satisfy those on the other forum either because with every explanation we mortals my offer, there are objections to be thought of. Suffice it to say that I believe God, our Father, has always been one to choose light over darkness, and always discern correctly between the two--just like Jesus is.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Fig-bearing Thistle

[Libs]

Hi Libs,

Moroni 8:18 must be one of the hot topics for the critics of late, (I'm not calling you one), because this is the second place I have seen it pop up recently. No doubt there are quotes as well from past leaders.

When we discuss issues related to "time" things can get real murky. And when we say that "God has always..." then the issue of "time" comes up. Remember, that the scripture says that time is measured only unto man. Alma 40:8--which to me means that time is not measured by God like it is measured by man.

I know that this doesn't answer your question. I couldn't satisfy those on the other forum either because with every explanation we mortals my offer, there are objections to be thought of. Suffice it to say that I believe God, our Father, has always been one to choose light over darkness, and always discern correctly between the two--just like Jesus is.

Thanks for the reply, Fig. It is kind of a hot topic, right now. I have seen a couple of videos, on the subject, just recently.

I think you're right that we do not see time in the same way God does. Also, I am not, personally, tied to inerrancy, in regards to scripture (Bible or LDS scripture). But, "eternity" would seem to mean forever, even for us mortals who don't really understand God's time.

Father, has always been one to choose light over darkness, and always discern correctly between the two--just like Jesus is.

So, eternally perfect?

I was also thinking that there was a definition put forth, by LDS, that the defintion for "eternity" does not have to include eternal in both directions (both past and present), but that, one can become eternally God, meaning from henceforth that person is eternally this or that (eternally God, eternally perfect, etc), even though they may not have been, in the past)...

Appreciate your input.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Libs

[altersteve]

God is unchangeable, but that does not mean that He does not progress. To change and to progress are two very different things.

[mfbukowski]

One can also be unchanging in constant change.

Think of the Mississippi river as a worldly example. Pretend for a moment it is "eternal"- certainly it has been there for a long time. And yet every moment the water flowing through it is changing- every leaf flowing downstream, every swirl and eddy is changing- yet that change is constant.

A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus had a lot to say about that.

Edited July 24, 2011 by mfbukowski

[Rob Bowman]

Mr. Bukowski,

Apparently, Plato is bad, but Heraclitus is good.

One can also be unchanging in constant change.

Think of the Mississippi river as a worldly example. Pretend for a moment it is "eternal"- certainly it has been there for a long time. And yet every moment the water flowing through it is changing- every leaf flowing downstream, every swirl and eddy is changing- yet that change is constant.

A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus had a lot to say about that.

[Libs]

God is unchangeable, but that does not mean that He does not progress. To change and to progress are two very different things.

I guess it would depend on what kind of progression we're talking about. If someone is progressing, spiritually, I would hope that means they are changing for the better, growing in wisdom and knowledge, etc.

But, I think, you are, probably talking about "increase", where a person (a god's?) estate/kingdom is constantly expanding (increasing).

I'm just not sure how to fit the idea of eternal progression in with the concept of an unchanging God. We are progressing spiritually, as well, right?

[Libs]

One can also be unchanging in constant change.

Think of the Mississippi river as a worldly example. Pretend for a moment it is "eternal"- certainly it has been there for a long time. And yet every moment the water flowing through it is changing- every leaf flowing downstream, every swirl and eddy is changing- yet that change is constant.

A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus had a lot to say about that.

I like this. I think that's really a good description of how I think about God. There is a center or part of of God that is completely unchanging and perfect in every way, with these creative outflows that constantly change, but are still a part of him. Kind of like a kalaidascopic mandala, where the center is still, but the outer designs keep moving and changing.

[BCSpace]

..which makes sense. God's integrity is solid and unchangeable. But, in LDS doctrine, has that always been the case? From "eternity to eternity"? In what way would that be true?

God is unchanging in His wisdom and love for us. If you can comprehend diffferent sized infinities, then you can see how God can be unchanging from eternity to eternity and yet there still was a time when God was not God. Also, in Jeremiah 18:1-10, we see that God has reserved for Himself the right to change His mind and adapt to changing conditions.

Of course God is not one of the Persons in the trinity but is rather an overarching abstract concept the Three Persons share, so a trinitarian is not necessarily going to understand this which makes perfect sense because a trinitarian cannot know God by definition even though the scriptures require it.

[Storm Rider]

God is unchanging in His wisdom and love for us. If you can comprehend diffferent sized infinities, then you can see how God can be unchanging from eternity to eternity and yet there still was a time when God was not God. Also, in Jeremiah 18:1-10, we see that God has reserved for Himself the right to change His mind and adapt to changing conditions.

Of course God is not one of the Persons in the trinity but is rather an overarching abstract concept the Three Persons share, so a trinitarian is not necessarily going to understand this which makes perfect sense because a trinitarian cannot know God by definition even though the scriptures require it.

I personally beleive that God the Father has always been God; there never was a time when he was not God. I also believe that position is scriptural. God himself is infinite; there is no more knowledge, no more learning, no more wisdom he can gain. To say differently for a LDS is not to understand God and to state heresy (I don't like the term, but it is the only term I can think of). What is absolutely clear is that God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one Godhead and they have always been God. There never was a time when Jesus was not part of the Godhead.

[Robert F. Smith]

I like this. I think that's really a good description of how I think about God. There is a center or part of of God that is completely unchanging and perfect in every way, with these creative outflows that constantly change, but are still a part of him. Kind of like a kalaidascopic mandala, where the center is still, but the outer designs keep moving and changing.

Excellent comparisons, which I'm not sure Stormrider quite comprehends in his rigid approach.

After all, following Freedman & Cross, "Eternal" is a descriptive name of God in both Bible and Book of Abraham (Deut 33:7 'Ôlâm, BoA 3:18 Gnolaum), and is even the source of the name Alma in both Book of Mormon and Mandaean-Gnostic sources. Indeed, Hebrew gib'ot 'olam “everlasting hills” (Hab 3:6), and the place-name bet-‘olam “(city of the) Temple of 'Ôlâm; house of eternity” (Eccles 1:4,10, 2:16, 3:14, 12:3,5,7; cf. II Cor 5:1) = bt 'rm(m) in Shishak List #36 ; pithe-‘olam “gates of eternity” (Ps 24:7,9); “God has set eternity in their heart” (Eccles 3:11 NJB note b), are generally poetic rather than absolute terms, and we can compare the usage in ancient Egyptian nb dt (or nb nhh) “Lord of eternity” = Ptah (ANET 4-6), using terms which mean "dynamic" and "static" eternity. There is a good deal of nuanced meaning available here.

Edited July 24, 2011 by Robert F. Smith

[Libs]

I personally beleive that God the Father has always been God; there never was a time when he was not God. I also believe that position is scriptural. God himself is infinite; there is no more knowledge, no more learning, no more wisdom he can gain. To say differently for a LDS is not to understand God and to state heresy (I don't like the term, but it is the only term I can think of). What is absolutely clear is that God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one Godhead and they have always been God. There never was a time when Jesus was not part of the Godhead.

Interesting, Storm Rider. That sounds more like traditional Christianity.

What about eternal progression? What does that mean, to you?

[Libs]

Excellent comparisons, which I'm not sure Stormrider quite comprehends in his rigid approach.

After all, following Freedman & Cross, "Eternal" is a descriptive name of God in both Bible and Book of Abraham (Deut 33:7 'Ôlâm, BoA 3:18 Gnolaum), and is even the source of the name Alma in both Book of Mormon and Mandaean-Gnostic sources. Indeed, Hebrew gib'ot 'olam “everlasting hills” (Hab 3:6), and the place-name bet-‘olam “(city of the) Temple of 'Ôlâm; house of eternity” (Eccles 1:4,10, 2:16, 3:14, 12:3,5,7; cf. II Cor 5:1) = bt 'rm(m) in Shishak List #36 ; pithe-‘olam “gates of eternity” (Ps 24:7,9); “God has set eternity in their heart” (Eccles 3:11 NJB note b), are generally poetic rather than absolute terms, and we can compare the usage in ancient Egyptian nb dt (or nb nhh) “Lord of eternity” = Ptah (ANET 4-6), using terms which mean "dynamic" and "static" eternity. There is a good deal of nuanced meaning available here.

Thank you, Robert. Very, very interesting.

God has set eternity in our hearts....I like that.

Dynamic and static eternity? Not sure I understand exactly what that means, but I think it means something akin to how I described the mandala. A solid center (static) with constantly moving (dynamic) outer rims.

[volgadon]

Mr. Bukowski,

Apparently, Plato is bad, but Heraclitus is good.

Yes, that phrase never made it past the first draft of "Animal Farm."

[Mike Richards]

The critics are very fond of pointing out that they agree with Moroni 8:18, which states:

"For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity."

But, the implication is that LDS do not really believe it, because it doesn't fit in with the doctrine of eternal progression.

I looked up the verse, on lds.org, and one of the references for "unchangeable" was Alma 7:20:

"I perceive that it has been made known unto you, by the testimony of his word, that he cannot walk in crooked paths; neither doth he vary from that which he hath said; neither hath he a shadow of turning from the right to the left, or from that which is right to that which is wrong; therefore, his course is one eternal round."

..which makes sense. God's integrity is solid and unchangeable. But, in LDS doctrine, has that always been the case? From "eternity to eternity"? In what way would that be true?

(I hope this does not sound like baiting, because that is not my intention. I would really like to know how LDS interpret this verse, especially the "eternity to eternity" part.)

For most of us, considering the idea of change requires a concept of time. One concept of time that I think is reasonable is the distinction between "eternity" and "time". Time is the temporal existence that we now experience. Eternity is the existence that we left when we came here and we will go to (another?) eternity when we leave here. So we can read "God is unchangeable (in some unspecified way--I like to think it refers to his attributes) from this former eternity to this next eternity." In other words, we can have complete trust in him during this mortal life (and I would presume we could in the previous eternity and as well as in the next eternity...) because he won't change from that former eternity into the next one. This view allows for a God that was once a man in a "time" an untold number of eternities before our current "time".

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

For most of us, considering the idea of change requires a concept of time. One concept of time that I think is reasonable is the distinction between "eternity" and "time". Time is the temporal existence that we now experience. Eternity is the existence that we left when we came here and we will go to (another?) eternity when we leave here. So we can read "God is unchangeable (in some unspecified way--I like to think it refers to his attributes) from this former eternity to this next eternity." In other words, we can have complete trust in him during this mortal life (and I would presume we could in the previous eternity and as well as in the next eternity...) because he won't change from that former eternity into the next one. This view allows for a God that was once a man in a "time" an untold number of eternities before our current "time".

D&C 76:1-7

1 Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof, for the Lord is God, and beside him there is no dSavior.

2 Great is his wisdom, marvelous are his ways, and the extent of his doings none can find out.

3 His purposes fail not, neither are there any who can stay his hand.

4 From eternity to eternity he is the same, and his years never fail.

5 For thus saith the Lord—I, the Lord, am merciful and gracious unto those who fear me, and delight to honor those who serve me in righteousness and in truth unto the end.

6 Great shall be their reward and eternal shall be their glory.

7 And to them will I reveal all mysteries, yea, all the hidden mysteries of my kingdom from days of old, and for ages to come, will I make known unto them the good pleasure of my will concerning all things pertaining to my kingdom.

Edited July 24, 2011 by Fig-bearing Thistle

[erichard]

I personally beleive that God the Father has always been God; there never was a time when he was not God. I also believe that position is scriptural. God himself is infinite; there is no more knowledge, no more learning, no more wisdom he can gain. To say differently for a LDS is not to understand God and to state heresy (I don't like the term, but it is the only term I can think of). What is absolutely clear is that God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one Godhead and they have always been God. There never was a time when Jesus was not part of the Godhead.

Hi Storm Rider,

Based on what you said above, do you believe that God the Father is a finite being? Does he have a physical body?

Just wondering,

Richard

[Storm Rider]

Hi Storm Rider,

Based on what you said above, do you believe that God the Father is a finite being? Does he have a physical body?

Just wondering,

Richard

I believe that both God the Father and the Son both have physical bodies; yet both of them are infinite beings. I do not think that an inifinite being is bodiless; in fact, I don't think having a body is a method for defining such a thing.

[Mike Richards]

D&C 76:1-7

1 Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, and rejoice ye inhabitants thereof, for the Lord is God, and beside him there is no dSavior.

2 Great is his wisdom, marvelous are his ways, and the extent of his doings none can find out.

3 His purposes fail not, neither are there any who can stay his hand.

4 From eternity to eternity he is the same, and his years never fail.

5 For thus saith the Lord—I, the Lord, am merciful and gracious unto those who fear me, and delight to honor those who serve me in righteousness and in truth unto the end.

6 Great shall be their reward and eternal shall be their glory.

7 And to them will I reveal all mysteries, yea, all the hidden mysteries of my kingdom from days of old, and for ages to come, will I make known unto them the good pleasure of my will concerning all things pertaining to my kingdom.

Mr. Thistle,

I'm not sure what you're intending to say with this passage.Do you think it supports my post or contradicts it or something else?

Thanks,

Mike

[erichard]

...

"For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity."

...

I would really like to know how LDS interpret this verse, especially the "eternity to eternity" part.)

... I would really like to know how LDS interpret this verse, especially the "eternity to eternity" part.

Hi Libs,

I am not LDS, but do consider myself Mormon.

In the Mormon faith, God is not "one" finite personage. God is unchanging and eternal-- not as one finite being-- but as a union of perfected beings.

That Union is unchanging and eternal. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost are all finite beings in a state of Eternal Progression. But the Infinite Union of perfected brings they are in is NOT in a state of progression-- from Eternity to Eternity it is the same, and it unchangingly has all truth, power, etc.

No finite being could be God over the entire infinite universe. The One God has to be infinite. But is God an immaterial, inconceivable being like the Trinity teaches? Or is God an infinite union of resurrected, perfected finite beings like Jesus and his Father?

Richard

More thoughts:

Before Jesus came, the idea of an immaterial, uncreated, infinite, unchangeable ONE God that created the universe out of absolutely nothing-- ie absolute monotheism-- could more easily be claimed.

But the coming of Jesus messed it all up.

Why? Because he spoke of himself as the "Son" of God. He spoke of God as his "Father"-- and our Father also. And He made himself equal with God the Father. He spoke of the Holy Ghost as also being equal with God the Father. And worse, he spoke of his followers becoming like him, and becoming Joint-Heirs with him.

If Christianity had fizzled, none of this would have matter much. But, because Christianity continued to be more and more successful, philosophers finally got around to trying to resolve the confusion for many that the teachings of finite, mortal Jesus brought.

The Trinity doctrine, the hypostatic union, and other such doctrines were developed. Politicians then used them to unite all Christians into a catholic universal faith.

Mormonism also recognizes that more needs to be understood about God. But the Mormon faith is that it should come from the same source as the Bible itself: the Word of the Lord to the Prophets of Israel.

For most Christians brought up being taught creedal ideas about the Bible, the revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith concerning God make no sense. But when truly understood, they make perfect sense. Moroni 8:18 is in complete harmony with the understanding of God that was revealed through the Prophet Joseph because God is not one finite personage.

[erichard]

(duplicate)

Edited July 24, 2011 by erichard

[Libs]

Well, I think I am still a bit confused on this issue, but I'll probably let it rest, for now.

A part of the issue seems to be, in how we interpret or define "eternity". Seems there is more than one definition.

I really appreciate all of the input. Thank you so much!

[altersteve]

I guess it would depend on what kind of progression we're talking about. If someone is progressing, spiritually, I would hope that means they are changing for the better, growing in wisdom and knowledge, etc.

But, I think, you are, probably talking about "increase", where a person (a god's?) estate/kingdom is constantly expanding (increasing).

I'm just not sure how to fit the idea of eternal progression in with the concept of an unchanging God. We are progressing spiritually, as well, right?

To change is to become different. To progress is to become greater.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

To change is to become different. To progress is to become greater.

Even under the Triune God concept, God is ruler over more today than yesterday. More hearts, more minds, more creations.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Hi Libs,

Moroni 8:18 must be one of the hot topics for the critics of late, (I'm not calling you one), because this is the second place I have seen it pop up recently. No doubt there are quotes as well from past leaders.

When we discuss issues related to "time" things can get real murky. And when we say that "God has always..." then the issue of "time" comes up. Remember, that the scripture says that time is measured only unto man. Alma 40:8--which to me means that time is not measured by God like it is measured by man.

I know that this doesn't answer your question. I couldn't satisfy those on the other forum either because with every explanation we mortals my offer, there are objections to be thought of. Suffice it to say that I believe God, our Father, has always been one to choose light over darkness, and always discern correctly between the two--just like Jesus is.

The term “eternity to eternity” which appears many times (to me) means eternity does not mean the same thing to God as it does to us…otherwise the statement make no sense.