“Yonder Is Matter Unorganized”; Why Joseph Was A Visionary.

[mfbukowski]

zerinus,

See the article “Did Emanuel Swedenborg Influence LDS Doctrine?” by Craig Miller.

Yes, we believe in personal revelation, meaning that God reveals it to all who seek him in earnest.

In fact the truth of the Book of Mormon has been revealed to millions.

It's ironic that you think that Swedenborg influenced Joseph, but don't seem to think that the philosophy of William James, who's father was the Swedenborgian, Henry James is compatible with Mormonism!

Unbelievable! In previous conversations you have told me that Pragmatism is incompatible with Mormonism, and yet here you say Joseph got it all from Swedenborg, while James, the father of Pragmatism was a virtual Swedenborgian.

You can't have it both ways.

Transitive property of equality and all that. If Mormonism = Swedenborgianism and Swedenborgianism = Pragmatism, then Pragmatism must = Mormonism.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Truth is truth after all.

Edited November 24, 2011 by mfbukowski

[Rob Bowman]

Lehi,

Regarding the notion that God was once a mortal man who progressed to become a God and that we can do the same thing, you wrote:

It is "original" only if you reject the idea we see from the ECFs of theosis and deification. While they may not have spoken of this in exactly the same terms and from the same references as we modern Saints do, and may not have believed this in exactly the same way we do today, Joseph was hardly the first to advance the "notion".

Okay, CFR, please. Tell me what person or persons prior to Joseph Smith you think advanced the notion that God was once a mortal man who progressed to become a God and that we can become Gods in the same way that he did, and tell me where they said this.

[Rob Bowman]

Steve,

Regarding "what God was doing floating around for an eternity before the ex nihilo creation, or why he decided to create us in the first place," you commented:

I don't think a Creedal Christian has ever been able to adequately explain this to me. Fortunately, LDS doctrine and science have the answer.

Science has the answer for what God was doing for eternity before creation? Science tells us why God decided to create us? I'm fascinated. Please explain.

[mfbukowski]

Regarding William James and Swedenborgianism, and 12 step programs:

http://www.quantuminteractive.net/quantuminteractive/sd/swedenborg/who-was-swedenborg/swedenborg-influence-on-james.htm

All are based on "testimony" - a personal experience of God's effect in our lives. It is no wonder now that there is a variation of a 12 step program now being used by the LDS church in addiction recovery programs.

[mfbukowski]

And then of course we have this series:

http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/pragmatizing-mormonism-and-baptizing-william-james-or-was-william-james-a-closet-mormon-and-joseph-smith-a-proto-pragmatist-part-i-on-william-james-and-mormonism/

[zerinus]

zerinus,

See the article “Did Emanuel Swedenborg Influence LDS Doctrine?” by Craig Miller.

I am already familiar with that article. It is about ten years old. What was there in that article that you wanted to draw my attention to?

[Nominee]

I am already familiar with that article. It is about ten years old. What was there in that article that you wanted to draw my attention to?

Zerinus,

Reading over the link Bowman posted, “Did Emanuel Swedenborg Influence LDS Doctrine?”, I see where it discusses the three divisions of the Celestial kingdom. You had said above regarding this matter, "I don’t recall reading that. Can you provide a reference?"

[thesometimesaint]

Rob:

http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/science.shtml

As for critics who might argue that "old earth" opinions somehow contradict standard Church doctrine, they are without real foundation. As early as 1845, William Phelps wrote that the text of the Book of Abraham (only a portion of which was translated, and almost none of which survived the Chicago fire of 1871) indicated that "this system" was 2.55 billion years old (Times and Seasons, Nauvoo, vol. 5, pg. 758, Dec. 25, 1844, as cited by BYU Professor, Steven Jones, in his essay, "How Old Is the Earth?").

Edited November 24, 2011 by thesometimesaint

[altersteve]

Steve,

Regarding "what God was doing floating around for an eternity before the ex nihilo creation, or why he decided to create us in the first place," you commented:

Science has the answer for what God was doing for eternity before creation? Science tells us why God decided to create us? I'm fascinated. Please explain.

I don't know what I was trying to say right there, but I wasn't saying that science tells us what God was doing. I think I meant that science is consistent with the LDS view here, but it came out weird. My bad.

While we're on this subject, though, what was God doing all that time? Just lounging around until He got bored and decided to make something appear out of nowhere? Or do you believe God has been creating other universes prior to this one?

Steve,

You asked:

No. I did not say that the universe's beginning had no reason. God caused it to come into existence. That was the reason. And "nothing just blew up" is not an accurate statement of the idea of the Big Bang (which, by the way, is itself a nickname given to the theory by an opponent). The theory is that space, time, matter, and energy all originated at a "singularity" that had no preexisting material cause (i.e., it was not simply a rearrangement of existing materials). The moment of the universe's beginning was literally "time zero" of the material world. This should not be misunderstood to mean that the universe has no efficient cause; it does, namely, God.

Edited to add: Steve, I took your use of the word "reason" in the popular sense of a cause. If you meant a "reason" in another sense, say, the purpose or intention for which the event was caused to happen, then that would be a somewhat different question. A very brief answer to such a question would be that God caused the world to come into existence for the purpose of providing an environment in which beings that he created could experience his love and bring him glory and joy. But again, I think you were asking about the cause or origin of the universe, not its purpose.

You're right, not the best way to put it. That was more of a sarcastic question than anything, sorry for being unclear. But still, there was never "nothing," at any time. There was always something. Like you said, there was a pre-existing "singularity," which is something. The Big Bang theory states that this "gravitational singularity" was a very hot, dense, chaotic, unorganized mass of energy, which expanded rapidly and over time became what our universe is now, and that it is still expanding (i.e., God organized this chaos and is still organizing it with every world that comes into existence; and you also said that energy once came into existence, which is false because energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed in form). In other words, it was the Big Bang that God made happen; He did not make the singularity come into existence. It had always been there in some form. The idea that there was "nothing" at one point doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and would be false anyway because if God has existed for eternity, then there was "something," because clearly God is a "something." Furthermore, some believe in the Big Bounce theory, which is that a previous universe collapsed (this is known as the Big Crunch) into a black hole singularity, which then "exploded" (i.e., the Big Bang; I know the term "exploded" is inaccurate, but I use it because it's the only word I can think of) and became our universe. This, of course, is 100% consistent with the LDS view.

It seems to me that you're forcing science in order for to it fit with your traditional interpretation of the Bible (and I don't think the Bible supports the ex nihilo view, anyway). It doesn't work that way.

Besides, I love the idea that God is a God who creates order out of chaos. Just as He organized something as enormous and amazing as this universe from a chaotic mass of unorganized energy (which, you recall, cannot be created or destroyed, only changed in form), He also organizes our lives from something chaotic into something orderly and beautiful. It's perfectly consistent with His nature, and it's very comforting to me.

Edited November 24, 2011 by altersteve

[altersteve]

Lehi,

Regarding the notion that God was once a mortal man who progressed to become a God and that we can do the same thing, you wrote:

Okay, CFR, please. Tell me what person or persons prior to Joseph Smith you think advanced the notion that God was once a mortal man who progressed to become a God and that we can become Gods in the same way that he did, and tell me where they said this.

Once again, Rob, Joseph never said God was once a man who progressed and became God. He said God the Father lived on an earth, just as Jesus Christ Himself did. Jesus received the power to law down His life and take it back up again from His Father. His Father also had this power. This is what Joseph taught. Reading the infamous "I will refute that idea and take away the veil so that you may see" quote in context of the entire King Follett sermon shows this, and it must be read in this context. Because Joseph clearly compared the Father's mortality to the Son's, not to ours. He did so for a reason. The Father was mortal like His Son was, and gave the power to enter into mortality to His Son so that He (Jesus) could atone for the sins of mankind. Just as Jesus has been God eternally, therefore, so has the Father; He simply hasn't always been exactly as He is now. He once did not have a physical body, and He too progressed in the same way Jesus Christ has. He "became God" in a sense, but that doesn't mean He was once not God. And this is not a contradiction. His very nature has always been the nature of God, just as Christ's nature has always been. And that, ultimately, was the teaching of the King Follett discourse, and I think it's beautiful. To interpret the discourse in any other way distorts Joseph's meaning.

And also, just to add, even if God the Father had a Father, that doesn't mean He was once not God. Christ has a Father too, but Christ has still been God eternally. I think that's the idea that needs to be understood here.

Maybe I'm just rambling. But I hope I got the point across.

Edited November 24, 2011 by altersteve

[zerinus]

Zerinus,

Reading over the link Bowman posted, “Did Emanuel Swedenborg Influence LDS Doctrine?”, I see where it discusses the three divisions of the Celestial kingdom. You had said above regarding this matter, "I don’t recall reading that. Can you provide a reference?"

Thank you. For the benefit of those who are not familiar with Swedenborg's writings, the Arcana Caelestia is a book of spiritual commentary which Swedenborg wrote on the Genesis and Exodus. In it he gives a detailed, clause by clause commentary on the spiritual (or what he calls the "internal") meaning of Genesis and Exodus. Arcana Caelestia 9993[2] that Miller references is Swedenborg's commentary on the highlighted clause in Exedus 29:2: "And unleavened bread, and cakes unleavened tempered with oil, and wafers unleavened anointed with oil: of wheaten flour shalt thou make them." Swedenborg provides his own translation, which is not identical to the KJV. Here is the commentary:

AC 9993. And cakes of unleavened things mixed with oil.

[1] That this signifies the purification of the middle celestial, is evident from the signification of ‘cakes,’ as being the middle celestial; and from the signification of ‘oil,’ as being the good of love (n. 886, 4582, 4638). From this it is evident that by ‘cakes mixed with oil’ is signified the celestial which is from the inmost, for ‘oil’ denotes the good of love, which is inmost. The case herein is that the heavens have been distinguished into two kingdoms, one of which is called ‘spiritual,’ the other ‘celestial.’ To the spiritual kingdom in the heavens corresponds understanding with man, and to the celestial kingdom corresponds his will (n. 9835). In each kingdom there is an internal and an external, as also with man in his understanding and will; for understanding with man is internal and external, and will is internal and external. Internal understanding makes the spiritual life of the internal man, and external understanding makes the spiritual life of the external man; but internal will makes the celestial life of the internal man, and external will makes the celestial life of the external man. That there is an internal and an external with man, can be seen by everyone who reflects, especially from hypocrites, the deceitful, the cunning, and the malicious, in that interiorly they think contrary to the truths of faith, and also will contrary to the goods of celestial love; but exteriorly they think and will in agreement with them, and also speak and act accordingly, that they may so appear before the world.

[2] Be it known further, that each kingdom in the heavens, namely the spiritual kingdom and the celestial kingdom, is in three divisions, being inmost, middle, and external (n. 9873). The inmost of the celestial kingdom is the good of love to the Lord; the middle there is the good of mutual love, which is the good thence proceeding; and the external is the delight proceeding from this good. The two former are in the internal man with those who are in the Lord’s celestial kingdom; but the third is in the external with the same. These three were represented by the bread of unleavened things, the cakes of unleavened things mixed with oil, and the wafers of unleavened things anointed with oil; and their purification is represented by the offering of these three upon the altar together with the burnt-offering or sacrifice. That such things are signified in order, can be seen merely from the fact that these three were commanded, and their preparation is also described, in the books of Moses, which would by no means have been done unless they had involved arcana of heaven and the church. Otherwise of what use would such things be? Source.

I am not sure how one can conclude that Joseph Smith got his idea of the three degrees in the celestial kingdom from this.

Edited November 24, 2011 by zerinus

[mfbukowski]

I don't know what I was trying to say right there, but I wasn't saying that science tells us what God was doing. I think I meant that science is consistent with the LDS view here, but it came out weird. My bad.

You weren't bad at all. That quote was a hodge podge of quotes 33 and 40- you never said any of those words you are apologizing for!

You gotta check references around here especially with present company, and make sure he isn't misquoting.

I think perhaps you were referring to my reference to the "big crunch" which is a hypothesis that the universe will eventually collapse into another singularity, then explode again into another Big Bang.

That would be a scientific explanation for a theory not unlike that implied in the KFD, that there are multiple Gods each succeeding each other with their own universes and own eternities. It also sort of fits with the notion of "one eternal round" in my opinion.

I don't know if I believe that, I am just putting it forth as one possible way to see a compatibility.

Edited November 24, 2011 by mfbukowski

[Bernard Gui]

God caused it to come into existence. That was the reason.

Which God? CFR.

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

Second, the universe did not require preexisting atoms from which to be created. The Big Bang was a singularity with no space or time "before" it, and brought atoms into existence. It literally is creation ex nihilo.

Not really. The singularity contained all that was necessary for the creation of every particle in the potential universe. If the singularity contained nothing, ex nihilo, there could have been no initial expansion and contraction that resulted in the Big Bang. The expansion and contraction of nothing could not generate heat nor pressure. Nothing cannot expand, contract, and go "Bang!"

Bernard

Edited November 25, 2011 by Bernard Gui

[erichard]

...

Does this make him a Prophet, a visionary or just observant? Or does it make him all three?

It just means that Joseph was in tune with the Holy Ghost. But I guess that is the same thing as all three of what you said.

"I thank God that I have got this old book; but I thank him more for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I have got the oldest book in the world; but I have got the oldest book in my heart, even the gift of the Holy Ghost." --King Follett discourse

The Holy Ghost has always been telling those who will listen that "the elements are eternal". Someday humanity as a whole will finally accept it-- and all the other truths needed to establish heaven on earth.

Richard

[Rob Bowman]

Bernard,

I had stated that God had caused the universe to come into existence. You wrote:

Which God? CFR.

Which God? Yahweh (Jehovah), the Lord God Almighty, who revealed himself to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to Israel through Moses and the Prophets, and who became incarnate as the man Christ Jesus.

CFR? The Bible. I'm not sure what exactly you are asking me to reference here.

[Rob Bowman]

Bernard,

You wrote:

Not really. The singularity contained all that was necessary for the creation of every particle in the potential universe. If the singularity contained nothing, ex nihilo, there could have been no initial expansion and contraction that resulted in the Big Bang. The expansion and contraction of nothing could not generate heat nor pressure. Nothing cannot expand, contract, and go "Bang!"

The singularity is an extrapolation from the evidence of the expansion of the universe (and confirmed by other observational data) in which the universe begins with an initial state of incredible heat and density in which the "normal" laws of physics as we know them would not have applied, an initial point of origin of the space-time universe in which all of the matter and energy of this world originated from essentially a point "zero"--with no preexisting space, no time "before" that initial moment, etc. The "stuff" of our universe all originates from that initial singularity, as you said, but that "stuff" did not preexist the singularity because there is no "before" the first moment of time. Many scientists resisted the Big Bang model for decades precisely because they saw it as implying creation ex nihilo. This point has been well documented in such books as Robert Jastrow's God and the Astronomers and Hugh Ross's The Creator and the Cosmos. Again, I highly recommend Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation Out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), especially chapters 7 and 8.

[Rob Bowman]

Richard,

You wrote:

The Holy Ghost has always been telling those who will listen that "the elements are eternal". Someday humanity as a whole will finally accept it-- and all the other truths needed to establish heaven on earth.

Your claim here leads to the incongruous conclusion that the atheists and pantheists who believe that the stuff of the cosmos is eternal have been listening to the Holy Ghost, while the theists who believe in creation ex nihilo have been shutting their ears to the Holy Ghost.

[thesometimesaint]

Neither one is entirely correct. The elements, as in the Periodic Table of Elements, are not eternal, but most do last for a very long time. At some point in the far distant future all the suns will use all the hydrogen, and helium, they have, and finally made iron. That sun will last seconds. This universe will then experience heat death. Then about 100 trillion trillion trillion years from now even the protons that all matter is made of will dissolve into the nothingness. Then the Gods will once again say "Let there be light", and it willl be.

Edited November 25, 2011 by thesometimesaint

[zerinus]

The singularity is an extrapolation from the evidence of the expansion of the universe (and confirmed by other observational data) in which the universe begins with an initial state of incredible heat and density in which the "normal" laws of physics as we know them would not have applied, an initial point of origin of the space-time universe in which all of the matter and energy of this world originated from essentially a point "zero"--with no preexisting space, no time "before" that initial moment, etc. The "stuff" of our universe all originates from that initial singularity, as you said, but that "stuff" did not preexist the singularity because there is no "before" the first moment of time. Many scientists resisted the Big Bang model for decades precisely because they saw it as implying creation ex nihilo. This point has been well documented in such books as Robert Jastrow's God and the Astronomers and Hugh Ross's The Creator and the Cosmos. Again, I highly recommend Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation Out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), especially chapters 7 and 8.

According to all the definitions of singularity that I have found, that is not quite what it means. Here are some definitions:

• Astrophysics. A point in space-time at which gravitational forces cause matter to have infinite density and infinitesimal volume, and space and time to become infinitely distorted.
  
• Astronomy. a hypothetical point in space-time at which matter is infinitely compressed to infinitesimal volume
  
• A point of infinite density and infinitesimal volume, at which space and time become infinitely distorted according to the theory of General Relativity. According to the big bang theory, a gravitational singularity existed at the beginning of the universe. Singularities are also believed to exist at the center of black holes.
  
• (physics) a point or region in spacetime in which gravitational forces cause matter to have an infinite density; associated with Black Holes
  
• In astronomy, a term often used to refer to the center of a black hole, where the curvature of spacetime is maximal. At the singularity, the gravitational tides diverge; no solid object can even theoretically survive hitting the singularity.
  
• A point or region of infinite mass density at which space and time are infinitely distorted by gravitational forces and which is held to be the final state of matter falling into a black hole
  
• Astronomy. (in general relativity) the mathematical representation of a black hole.
  

So singularities already exist inside black holes; and it doesn't mean a point at which there was nothing, or there was no time, space, or matter before it. Just as black holes are made of pre-existent matter, and there is time, space, and matter outside of black holes; so did time, space, and matter exist before the particular singularity that we are talking about. It doesn't mean that God made something out of nothing. Ex-nihilo creationists are trying to distort science to their own advantage. The Big Bang theory is not a statement about how God created the universe. It is a scientific (and atheistic) theory about the universe might have begun.

Edited November 25, 2011 by zerinus

[Bernard Gui]

Bernard,

I had stated that God had caused the universe to come into existence. You wrote:

Which God? Yahweh (Jehovah), the Lord God Almighty, who revealed himself to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to Israel through Moses and the Prophets, and who became incarnate as the man Christ Jesus.

CFR? The Bible. I'm not sure what exactly you are asking me to reference here.

Since we are talking science here, I thought you might have some proof other than the Bible

that the God who created the universe is the God of the Bible. Seems like circular reasoning

to me. I am asking you for an independent source that verifies Jehovah as creator.

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

Bernard,

You wrote:

The singularity is an extrapolation from the evidence of the expansion of the universe (and confirmed by other observational data) in which the universe begins with an initial state of incredible heat and density in which the "normal" laws of physics as we know them would not have applied, an initial point of origin of the space-time universe in which all of the matter and energy of this world originated from essentially a point "zero"--with no preexisting space, no time "before" that initial moment, etc. The "stuff" of our universe all originates from that initial singularity, as you said, but that "stuff" did not preexist the singularity because there is no "before" the first moment of time. Many scientists resisted the Big Bang model for decades precisely because they saw it as implying creation ex nihilo. This point has been well documented in such books as Robert Jastrow's God and the Astronomers and Hugh Ross's The Creator and the Cosmos. Again, I highly recommend Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation Out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), especially chapters 7 and 8.

I know what the singularity is supposed to be. One of my best life-long friends was in the original group of physicists at

Princeton that developed black hole theory. You are making a huge leap to claim that the God of the Bible

caused the Big Bang. There is no way to verify that claim.

Bernard

Edited November 26, 2011 by Bernard Gui

[mfbukowski]

Since we are talking science here, I thought you might have some proof other than the Bible

that the God who created the universe is the God of the Bible. Seems like circular reasoning

to me. I am asking you for an independent source that verifies Jehovah as creator.

Bernard

Ah yes, the old circularity problem. Keep bringing it up, and eventually he will just ignore you. Unfortunately, sticking one's head in the sand does not make it go away.

This is THE central problem in my opinion, of Creedal Christianity. They have no way to verify the bible as scriptural except the bible itself.

They refuse to understand or concede that the reason they know that the bible is from God is by personal revelation, because then they would have to acknowledge our testimony of the Book of Mormon to be just as valid as their testimony of the Bible. We of course have testimonies of all four standard works.

Edited November 26, 2011 by mfbukowski

[Rob Bowman]

Bernard,

You wrote:

Since we are talking science here, I thought you might have some proof other than the Bible that the God who created the universe is the God of the Bible. Seems like circular reasoning to me. I am asking you for an independent source that verifies Jehovah as creator.

The God of the Bible is the only deity in the history of world religions whose description matches the scientific evidence. That is, the scientific evidence shows that the universe has an omniscient, purposeful, transcendent Creator who was able to bring the universe into existence at a specific beginning (i.e., God is eternal but his creation is temporal). This evidence excludes pantheistic and polytheistic religions and proves that theism is true. The Bible teaches theism, and Judaism and Christianity are the two ancient religions that accept the biblical view of God and creation (Islam accepts more or less the same view, which it derived from them).

Now, if you wish to present a serious argument in favor of a different deity as the maker of the world, have at it.

[Rob Bowman]

zerinus,

We're not talking about just any singularity, but about the singularity from which the entire space-time-matter-energy universe originated -- the "mother of all singularities," if you will. The Big Bang is not analogous to a black hole singularity.

Read some of the books I have referenced; they will show that the Big Bang model has been a great boon to theism, not to atheism.

According to all the definitions of singularity that I have found, that is not quite what it means. Here are some definitions:

• Astrophysics. A point in space-time at which gravitational forces cause matter to have infinite density and infinitesimal volume, and space and time to become infinitely distorted.
  
• Astronomy. a hypothetical point in space-time at which matter is infinitely compressed to infinitesimal volume
  
• A point of infinite density and infinitesimal volume, at which space and time become infinitely distorted according to the theory of General Relativity. According to the big bang theory, a gravitational singularity existed at the beginning of the universe. Singularities are also believed to exist at the center of black holes.
  
• (physics) a point or region in spacetime in which gravitational forces cause matter to have an infinite density; associated with Black Holes
  
• In astronomy, a term often used to refer to the center of a black hole, where the curvature of spacetime is maximal. At the singularity, the gravitational tides diverge; no solid object can even theoretically survive hitting the singularity.
  
• A point or region of infinite mass density at which space and time are infinitely distorted by gravitational forces and which is held to be the final state of matter falling into a black hole
  
• Astronomy. (in general relativity) the mathematical representation of a black hole.
  

So singularities already exist inside black holes; and it doesn't mean a point at which there was nothing, or there was no time, space, or matter before it. Just as black holes are made of pre-existent matter, and there is time, space, and matter outside of black holes; so did time, space, and matter exist before the particular singularity that we are talking about. It doesn't mean that God made something out of nothing. Ex-nihilo creationists are trying to distort science to their own advantage. The Big Bang theory is not a statement about how God created the universe. It is a scientific (and atheistic) theory about the universe might have begun.