Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted July 26, 2011 Posted July 26, 2011 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.)I would say that he is unchanging in principal. And Alma 7:20 makes that very clear. It is not saying that he has been exactly the same in all areas forever, unchanging. If that were the case all of Christianity would have the same issue.
Libs Posted July 26, 2011 Author Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) Yes, there might something to that, otherwise, it seems like it would have been worded something like "he is unchangeable for all eternity", period. Or "eternity to eternity" may just be a figure of speech for something that exists eternally. I understand eternal existence (I believe we all are eternal). Just not sure how to think about that, in conjunction with eternal progression and "unchangeable". Edited July 26, 2011 by Libs
Libs Posted July 26, 2011 Author Posted July 26, 2011 Oops, sorry, that last post was in response to Papa's post.
Libs Posted July 26, 2011 Author Posted July 26, 2011 I would say that he is unchanging in principal. And Alma 7:20 makes that very clear. It is not saying that he has been exactly the same in all areas forever, unchanging. If that were the case all of Christianity would have the same issue.Could you explain how all of Christianity would have the same issue? Not quite understanding...
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted July 26, 2011 Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) Could you explain how all of Christianity would have the same issue? Not quite understanding...Sure.The issue involves Christ. If we look at at statement of "unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity" and we look at this phrase that God never changes in any aspect of his existence and is the same in all aspects forever. Then we run into issues. Why? Because Christ is God and he took up a body, thus he changed. Then he died, and lost a body. That means that he changed again. Then he was resurrected, that means one more change. Hope that helps.As to the idea of "eternity to all eternity" I believe under an ancient context it means that it is an age or a very long time. Edited July 26, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram
Libs Posted July 26, 2011 Author Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) Sure.The issue involves Christ. If we look at at statement of "unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity" and we look at this phrase that God never changes in any aspect of his existence and is the same in all aspects forever. Then we run into issues. Why? Because Christ is God and he took up a body, thus he changed. Then he died, and lost a body. That means that he changed again. Then he was resurrected, that means one more change. Hope that helps.As to the idea of "eternity to all eternity" I believe under an ancient context it means that it is an age or a very long time.Thanks for the clarification, Mola.I see what you're saying, but not sure the incarnation of Christ would be considered a "change". I think the changes that other Christians are concerned about (in LDS theology) have to do with changes in basic character, like going from sinner to saint. This is a part of LDS doctrine that confuses me. There seems to be a consensus, among LDS, that we are progressing (some to exaltation), but when this principle or doctrine is applied to Heavenly Father or Christ, it gets murky and unclear. Edited July 26, 2011 by Libs
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted July 26, 2011 Posted July 26, 2011 Thanks for the clarification, Mola.I see what you're saying, but not sure the incarnation of Christ would be considered a "change". I think the changes that other Christians are concerned about (in LDS theology) have to do with changes in basic character, like going from sinner to saint. This is a part of LDS doctrine that confuses me. It seems to be a consensus, by LDS, that we are progressing (some to exaltation), but when this principle or doctrine is applied to Heavenly Father or Christ, it gets murky and unclear.Yeah it does, that is because not much is known. However as I understand LDS doctrine there is nothing in there that states that God the Father was a sinner. The closest thing that comes to mind that God lived on another world is in the implication from John 5:9. And that puts God the Father more in a role as Christ or a Christ on another world. Christ was perfect and not a sinner. So in this aspect God can literally be unchanging in principal for ever. And eternal progression, as I understand it has to do with progression through our kids. Some have speculated that it means a progression in knowledge. And that may be. I don't know, there is nothing official on that. So I hope this is a little more clear.
Libs Posted July 26, 2011 Author Posted July 26, 2011 (edited) And eternal progression, as I understand it has to do with progression through our kids. Some have speculated that it means a progression in knowledge. And that may be. I don't know, there is nothing official on that. So I hope this is a little more clear. As in "eternal increase", you mean? Yes, I have heard that. But, Gospel Principles says we are also progressing in terms of knowledge and wisdom (and I would certainly hope so). I have also heard that it's possible that a certain class or group of individuals (Heavenly Father and Christ among them) have always been perfect. Not sure how that works. Edited July 26, 2011 by Libs
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted July 26, 2011 Posted July 26, 2011 As in "eternal increase", you mean? Yes, I have heard that. But, Gospel Principles says we are also progressing in terms of knowledge and wisdom (and I would certainly hope so). I have also heard that it's possible that a certain class or group of individuals (Heavenly Father and Christ among them) who have always been perfect. Not sure how that works.Well I am not sure how it all works. The idea of eternal increase in knowledge is not a bothersome point. It is to some. I think the knowledge comes from the increase. I don't know how always being perfect works. Christ is clearly one such example of that, though.
Recommended Posts