Monster Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 I will state out of the gate that I am a Diest. I am also lifelong member of the LDS church in as good a standing as I can be given my knowledge and beliefs. The question I pose is not to convince anyone of anything or persuade then to my opinion (I have given up on that) I am just curious.Being a Diest I believe God to be the clock maker who built the clock by himself or with help I do not know. He then wound it up and let it run. Maybe he checks on it from time to time to see what time it is or maybe even wind it again but he is not taking it apart and rebuilding it all the time. He is not involved in every tick of the clock. He does not obese about the movement of the hands. He may even walk away and not look at the clock for extended periods of time. I have no evidence of this it is just what I choose to believe. To me personally it is the only way I can believ in God given my observations of my surroundings and what I know.The flip side of this is more of what I perceive the Mormon view to be. God is involved in everything. There is nothing going on in the universe that he does not know. He knows every detail down to the structure of every atom. He knows what is happening, and he knows what will happen to every individual in the cosmos. To be less than this he would cease to be God.So where do your beliefs fit in. How omnipresent is God to you?
Peppermint Patty Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 I will state out of the gate that I am a Diest. I am also lifelong member of the LDS church in as good a standing as I can be given my knowledge and beliefs. The question I pose is not to convince anyone of anything or persuade then to my opinion (I have given up on that) I am just curious.Being a Diest I believe God to be the clock maker who built the clock by himself or with help I do not know. He then wound it up and let it run. Maybe he checks on it from time to time to see what time it is or maybe even wind it again but he is not taking it apart and rebuilding it all the time. He is not involved in every tick of the clock. He does not obese about the movement of the hands. He may even walk away and not look at the clock for extended periods of time. You mean He doesn't really care about BYU football?!? 1
thesometimesaint Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 Monster:He knows. However because of his knowledge he will do nothing to violate the greater principle of Agency.
BCSpace Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 (edited) Being a Diest I believe God to be the clock maker who built the clock by himself or with help I do not know. He then wound it up and let it run. Maybe he checks on it from time to time to see what time it is or maybe even wind it again but he is not taking it apart and rebuilding it all the time. He is not involved in every tick of the clock. He does not obese about the movement of the hands. He may even walk away and not look at the clock for extended periods of time. I have no evidence of this it is just what I choose to believe. To me personally it is the only way I can believ in God given my observations of my surroundings and what I know.The flip side of this is more of what I perceive the Mormon view to be. God is involved in everything. There is nothing going on in the universe that he does not know. He knows every detail down to the structure of every atom. He knows what is happening, and he knows what will happen to every individual in the cosmos. To be less than this he would cease to be God.So where do your beliefs fit in. How omnipresent is God to you?I tend to think the same way as you about how God influences. But I also think that it does not conflict with what you perceive to be the Mormon view. I say that God's hand is in all things even if He only wound the clock/set the initial conditions. I also think it's possible or even likely that God continuously exerts a subtle underlying influence on all things though that is no substitute for direct intervention.So yes, I believe God had a hand in any team's latest football victory, but only because He set the initial conditions, likely long in the past, because such a win influences the thoughts and actions of so many people in a way that satisfies His plan. The players are right to praise God for their prowess on the field though wrong to assume it had much to do with them in the overall scheme of things. I don't believe He takes a ring side seat (unless it's the Dallas Cowboys ), or guides the motion of the ball. Edited December 24, 2011 by BCSpace
Monster Posted December 24, 2011 Author Posted December 24, 2011 You mean He doesn't really care about BYU football?!?Only when they are winning!!!
Stargazer Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 Only when they are winning!!!I do not doubt your sincerity, only your spelling. The word is "Deist". From the Latin word for "god": deus.Actually, the Universe as we can observe it is clearly analogous to a clock once made and started by its maker, and subsequently allowed to run its course without further intervention. However, the kicker here is "as we can observe". If the clockmaker stays out of the limelight (which he must, in order to preserve Agency, as TSS says), this does not mean that he is uninvolved. Deism is, in my opinion, merely an admission that we cannot see where God involves himself. Or it is a willful choice to ignore those instances where He does. Depends upon your experience.I have found that God has made clear to me, personally, that He knows who I am, and that He has certain expectations of me. The clarity of this is entirely subjective, however. I can tell people why it is clear to me, but since my reasons can only be described by me, and cannot be observed by them, they have no objective reason to consider my reasoning. Except as a springboard for seeking similar experiences to mine. So I can tell you that Deism is not valid, and I know it is not because God has spoken to me in response to my earnestly seeking His will, and has thus deeply involved Himself in my own life. Now, I will admit that I don't know if it was the Father, Himself, personally, speaking, or His servant the Holy Ghost, but inasmuch as He has said "whether by myself or my servants, it is the same," it is a distinction without a difference.I think is Godhood 101 to be able to set a Universe into motion in just such as a way that it evolves exactly as desired without further direct intervention; it's not that He doesn't intervene, it is just that He doesn't need to intervene. But yet He does, at least where us volitional children of His are concerned. 3
blackstrap Posted December 24, 2011 Posted December 24, 2011 I don't think God has a weight problem(6th line of OP).I think He can and does involve Himself when we ask with real intent. I do not like the idea of things being set in stone from the beginning.
Smith Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 The flip side of this is more of what I perceive the Mormon view to be. God is involved in everything. There is nothing going on in the universe that he does not know. He knows every detail down to the structure of every atom. He knows what is happening, and he knows what will happen to every individual in the cosmos. To be less than this he would cease to be God.So where do your beliefs fit in. How omnipresent is God to you?I wuold say we have very little choice but to see him as you have described here above given the scriptures that talk of Him as knowing all things and then http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/59.21?lang=eng#20this one, to me putting these together means He somehow is aware of all things happening here and sonehow is involved in them and that through this involvement He provides a way for each of us individually and personally to learn/develop/grow/understand/repent/progress in the spheres we need to in order to be exalted. Thats how I see it.
cdowis Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 (edited) I will tell my own story.I had an uncle who was institutionalized with altzheimers who lived over a thousand miles away, so I had no real contact with him . One day I got a very strong impression that I should put his name on the temple roll. I did this over several months and was told, " It is enough" so I stopped.A few months later I was having lunch with my mom and asked her about Uncle Hebert."Charles, didn't you hear?" She told me how he had severe migrane headaches for weeks, and quite suddenly they stopped.I learned a lesson that Father knew that he could help someone I loved, but only if I asked in faith, not even knowing what was going on. Without that faith to ask for His help, I don't think He would have intervened.That's just my personal experience and conclusion. Edited December 25, 2011 by cdowis
Kenngo1969 Posted December 25, 2011 Posted December 25, 2011 ... He does not obese about the movement of the hands. ...Good, because if He did that, might get fat. (Sorry; couldn't resist).In answer to your question, I believe the scripture which says that all flesh is in God's hand. To what extent this is true, I honestly don't know. I don't believe, however, that we're all mere pieces on a Chess board. I honestly don't understand the interplay between His choosing to intervene, His choosing not to intervene, what He permits, what He prevents, and what He actually causes. I can't explain specific instances of favorable outcomes vis-a-vis seemingly-similar circumstances in which the outcomes aren't so favorable. Perhaps I will come to understand that through aeons of time in the life to come. Until then, I can only say, with Nephi, "I know that He loveth His children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things."
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) This is an interesting topic to me.I've thought a lot about circumstances, promptings, and whether anything is coincidence.and I recently noticed something strange.Brigham Young died on the same day that he made the polygamy announcement (in 1852.)David Hyrum Smith (who opposed polygamy) also died on the same day (but, unlike Brigham, he was only 59, and died in an insane asylum.)Joseph F. Smith (not the first president) also died on that day.What (if anything) do things like this mean?Was Brigham's death (on the anniversary of the polygamy announcement) a sign of approval or disapproval?Did David Smith die under God's curse (because he opposed polygamy)?And why did Joseph F, Smith die on this day?Are these things supposed to mean something?Are we supposed to figure them out?And if the past, the present, and the future are all one to God (one eternal round, as I believe it says somewhere in the standard works), how can anything be purely random?These are questions I've asked myself, and I was wondering if anyone here has any thoughts? Edited December 27, 2011 by inquiringmind
The Nehor Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 You mean He doesn't really care about BYU football?!?I suspect he roll his eyes at how much his followers care.
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) I suspect he roll his eyes at how much his followers care.That may be, but what of circumstances that would seem to have nothing to do with agency (unlike the outcome of a football game, which would have a lot to do with practice time, dedication, leadership, management, etc.)Brigham Young, David Smith, and Joseph F. Smith didn't choose when they would die.But they all died on the same day (see post #11, above.)Are such "coincidences" designed to mean something? Edited December 27, 2011 by inquiringmind
katherine the great Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 Did David Smith die under God's curse (because he opposed polygamy)?If you believe that (or even entertain the thought), I suggest you read his biography.
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) If you believe that (or even entertain the thought), I suggest you read his biography.Do you mean "From Mission to Madness: Last Son of the Mormon Prophet," by Valeen Tippets Avery?From what I've read, David was an effective RLDS missionary in Utah, a good singer (known as "the sweet psalmist of Israel" in the RLDS), and an adviser to his brother (in the first presidency of the RLDS.)But he spent the last 27 years of his life in a mental institution.Some conjecture that (while in Utah) he was presented with evidence that his father was a polygamist (contrary to the teachings of his Church), and that he was unable to either accept this, or discuss it with his mother or brother.It's not my purpose to denigrate him, or Brigham, but I am interested in coincidences.He and Brigham both died on the anniversary of the polygamy announcement.Brigham was 79 years old, and surrounded by a family to whom he left a sum equaling 2,000,000 British lbs (according to the Encyclopedia Britannica.)David died in an asylum.Joseph F. Smith died on the same anniversary.I'm interested in whether such things mean something, or are just "coincidences"?And if they're just "coincidences," what exactly does that mean (given a God for whom past, present, and future are "one eternal round")? Edited December 27, 2011 by inquiringmind
Duncan Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 This is an interesting topic to me.I've thought a lot about circumstances, promptings, and whether anything is coincidence.and I recently noticed something strange.Brigham Young died on the same day that he made the polygamy announcement (in 1852.)David Hyrum Smith (who opposed polygamy) also died on the same day (but, unlike Brigham, he was only 59, and died in an insane asylum.)Joseph F. Smith (not the first president) also died on that day.What (if anything) do things like this mean?Was Brigham's death (on the anniversary of the polygamy announcement) a sign of approval or disapproval?Did David Smith die under God's curse (because he opposed polygamy)?And why did Joseph F, Smith die on this day?Are these things supposed to mean something?Are we supposed to figure them out?And if the past, the present, and the future are all one to God (one eternal round, as I believe it says somewhere in the standard works), how can anything be purely random?These are questions I've asked myself, and I was wondering if anyone here has any thoughts?what do you mean they died on the same day? Joseph F. Smith and David H. Smith died on different days and different years. I'll have you know that Kurt Cobain, Amy Winehouse, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin and Brian Jones all died in their 27th year. Now that is nuts!
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) what do you mean they died on the same day? Joseph F. Smith and David H. Smith died on different days and different years...Check your facts.Yes, they all died in different years, but they all died on the anniversary of the polygamy announcement (which was on August 29th, 1852.)Brigham Young died on that date in 1877, David H. Smith in 1904, and I don't remember what year Joseph F. Smith died (not the Joseph F. Smith who was President of the Church, but the other one.)All on the same day of the year. I'll have you know that Kurt Cobain, Amy Winehouse, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin and Brian Jones all died in their 27th year. Now that is nuts!That still leaves the question of whether such things mean something?What do you think? Edited December 27, 2011 by inquiringmind
katherine the great Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 It's not my purpose to denigrate him, or Brigham, but I am interested in coincidences.Is that why you mention that Brigham Young died rich and surrounded by a large family while David Died alone in an asylum? David struggled with severe depression and mental illness. I don't think his death had anything to do with his opposition to polygamy.
Rivers Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 I suppose I have a deistic view of God myself. I don't think that when there is a car accident, God always purposely cause two cars two smash into each other. I believe in the fourth law of thermodynamics:Crap happens.
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) Is that why you mention that Brigham Young died rich and surrounded by a large family while David Died alone in an asylum? David struggled with severe depression and mental illness. I don't think his death had anything to do with his opposition to polygamy.I mentioned that because it would seem (at least to me) to weigh against Brigham's death on the anniversary of the polygamy announcement being a sign of divine disapproval.My question concerns whether such things mean anything, or whether they're coincidences, and what coincidences are.I've found a lot of people who say there are no such things.They say "everything means something," "everything has a purpose," "coincidence is just God's way of being anonymous," and things like that (and I wanted to get an LDS POV.) Edited December 27, 2011 by inquiringmind
blackstrap Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) From my understanding of probability,pick 50 people in a crowd at a football game and there is a very high probability that 2 of them have the same birthday.Not the same year necessarily.(97%) Edited December 27, 2011 by blackstrap
katherine the great Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 We have a one in 365 chance of dying on any particular day of the year. I think we can read meaning in to anything we choose.
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 I suppose I have a deistic view of God myself. I don't think that when there is a car accident, God always purposely cause two cars two smash into each other. I believe in the fourth law of thermodynamics:Crap happens.Do you think you could elaborate on that a little?And could we forget about the two cars?Two cars would have two drivers, and that would complicate the equation by adding issues of freewill and agency (i.e. was one of the drivers drinking, driving too fast, or talking on a cell phone?)The examples I gave don't seem to involve such issues.Brigham, David, and Joseph all seem to have died of natural causes, on the same day of the year.Does that mean that God willed that for some reason?Does it mean something?
inquiringmind Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) We have a one in 365 chance of dying on any particular day of the year. I think we can read meaning in to anything we choose.But that's my question.If you believe in God, what exactly do you mean by "chance" (especially if you believe that God is above time, as most Evangelicals do, as the LDS standard works seem to say, and as at least some LDS believe)? Edited December 27, 2011 by inquiringmind
blackstrap Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 We have a one in 365 chance of dying on any particular day of the year. I think we can read meaning in to anything we choose.This seems reasonable,but it can be shown that there are seasons of the year where many more deaths occur.On a side note: have you noticed that the vast majority of people die within 6 months of their birthday?
Recommended Posts