Do Latter-Day Saints Believe They Can Become Gods?

[Hestia]

apostate1 is no longer participating on this thread. When he comes back he needs to have read the board guidelines as previously instructed or he will be out of here altogether.

[georged]

Yes, we do, and it is a Biblical and a true Christian principle! Psalms 82:6 states: "Ye are gods and all of you are the children of the most high." Jesus Christ Himself used this scripture to defend Himself from His persecutors who tried to stone Him for what they thought was blasphemy, and He stated, "isn't written in your law, I said, ye are gods" (see John 10:33-35). And, in order to show that this meant much more than simply being immortal in the resurrection, He also stated as recorded in Revelation 3:21: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne just as I overcame and am sat down with my Father in His throne."

[altersteve]

Yes, we do, and it is a Biblical and a true Christian principle! Psalms 82:6 states: "Ye are gods and all of you are the children of the most high." Jesus Christ Himself used this scripture to defend Himself from His persecutors who tried to stone Him for what they thought was blasphemy, and He stated, "isn't written in your law, I said, ye are gods" (see John 10:33-35). And, in order to show that this meant much more than simply being immortal in the resurrection, He also stated as recorded in Revelation 3:21: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne just as I overcame and am sat down with my Father in His throne."

The word "gods" in Psalms 82:6 and John 10:33-35 is a mistranslation, so these are not good passages to use as biblical evidence of our doctrine.

[georged]

It is absolutely not! You need to back up what you write on these blogs! You always come out with anti- Mormon statements with no supporting evidence!

[Scott Lloyd]

The word "gods" in Psalms 82:6 and John 10:33-35 is a mistranslation, so these are not good passages to use as biblical evidence of our doctrine.

The Hebrew word translated here as "gods" is elohim, which is a plural word that literally means gods. How is that a mistranslation?

[altersteve]

It is absolutely not! You need to back up what you write on these blogs! You always come out with anti- Mormon statements with no supporting evidence!

Well, first of all, you should know that I'm a believing member of the Church. I'm not an "anti-Mormon." Second, my use of the word "mistranslation" was inaccurate and I apologize. I didn't mean it was translated incorrectly, what I meant was that the translation which is given causes confusion.

It's difficult for Psalm 82:6 to be used as evidence that we may become as God is, because this was probably not what the author intended. The word "gods" seems to be applied to those with authority, and doesn't seem (to me) to be saying that we can become gods. And I don't think Jesus' quotation of this verse was meant to say that either. In the verses preceding John 10:34, Jesus claims to be one with the Father, the very Son of God, and the Jews pick up rocks to kill Him with. He asks them which good works they are stoning Him for, and they respond that they're not stoning Him because of any good works, but He claimed to be God. To which Jesus responds, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said I am the Son of God?" In other words, Jesus is saying, "Your scriptures apply the word 'gods' to human beings, so why do you say that I am committing blasphemy by claiming to be the Son of God?" Basically, He was accusing them of a double standard. He doesn't seem to be saying anything about human beings literally becoming gods themselves. This is all based on my own understanding, of course.

Obviously, I do believe the doctrine of exaltation is consistent with the Bible, just not with Psalm 82:6 or how the Savior uses it.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. But please don't accuse me of promoting any "anti-Mormon" ideas.

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, first of all, you should know that I'm a believing member of the Church. I'm not an "anti-Mormon." Second, my use of the word "mistranslation" was inaccurate and I apologize. I didn't mean it was translated incorrectly, what I meant was that the translation which is given causes confusion.

It's difficult for Psalm 82:6 to be used as evidence that we may become as God is, because this was probably not what the author intended. The word "gods" seems to be applied to those with authority, and doesn't seem (to me) to be saying that we can become gods. And I don't think Jesus' quotation of this verse was meant to say that either. In the verses preceding John 10:34, Jesus claims to be one with the Father, the very Son of God, and the Jews pick up rocks to kill Him with. He asks them which good works they are stoning Him for, and they respond that they're not stoning Him because of any good works, but He claimed to be God. To which Jesus responds, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said I am the Son of God?" In other words, Jesus is saying, "Your scriptures apply the word 'gods' to human beings, so why do you say that I am committing blasphemy by claiming to be the Son of God?" Basically, He was accusing them of a double standard. He doesn't seem to be saying anything about human beings literally becoming gods themselves. This is all based on my own understanding, of course.

For Daniel C. Peterson's take on these passages, see here.

[Log]

Regarding the conception of Jesus Christ, unfortunately the critics' interpretation of the statements of previous GAs is accurate. Nobody ever questions whether Mary went through a full nine-month pregnancy with Christ, nor does anyone care whether she delivered via cesarean section. The specific point of curiosity now, as anciently, is how Mary got pregnant in the first place - and that was the specific point being addressed in the citations from Cobalt-70. For interesting hints, see this (run a word search for Mary).

The scriptures describe Adam, the man, as the son of God. Because Jesus is held to be the "Only Begotten in the flesh," there has arisen a manner of interpretation which centers around the word "flesh" that denies that Adam, the man, was "flesh" before the fall. This reading preserves a particular interpretation of Jesus as the "Only Begotten in the flesh," even though no scripture seems to describe Christ as "the only son of God the Father whose flesh was sired by God the Father" (this being the interpretation which requires the tendentious reading of "flesh" with reference to Adam, the man), and scripture exists which describes Adam, the man, as having flesh before the fall.

Since Mary, in Nephi's account of his vision, is introduced as "a virgin," it seems logical that in Nephi's narrative, after she had given birth to Christ and without her name being used to identify her, she should be referred to again as "the virgin," not that it necessarily accurately reflected her virginal status at that time. Even if we thought it possible that God the Father physically sired the tabernacle of Christ, Mary's virginal status may be preserved, similar to how Christ's status as "the Only Begotten in the flesh" is, by noting that God the Father is not a (mortal) man, and a woman's virginal status only ceases if she has known (mortal) man. Certainly the scripture states that Joseph knew Mary not till after she had Jesus.

Such are the ways of wresting the scriptures to support our preconceptions.

Incidentally, I don't believe I am aware of any official statement by the Church on whether Mary was a virgin after giving birth or not. If there is not, then it would appear the issue is up for grabs. Nevertheless, scripture is not that which is spoken or written, but that which is carried into the heart by the power of the Spirit, which is the word of Christ.

With regards to the OP - any "Christian" who denies a full-throated deification of man denies also John 17, and many other scriptures besides. They do this because according to their traditions, God is the "ground of all being," or the fountain from which flows all that exists, and clearly man cannot become the "ground of all being." Thus do the traditions and creeds of the fathers prevent many from recognizing truth even when it is told them as plain as words can be.

Edited March 17, 2012 by Log

[Nemesis]

It is absolutely not! You need to back up what you write on these blogs! You always come out with anti- Mormon statements with no supporting evidence!

Please read the board guidelines.

Nemesis

[volgadon]

Well, first of all, you should know that I'm a believing member of the Church. I'm not an "anti-Mormon." Second, my use of the word "mistranslation" was inaccurate and I apologize. I didn't mean it was translated incorrectly, what I meant was that the translation which is given causes confusion.

It's difficult for Psalm 82:6 to be used as evidence that we may become as God is, because this was probably not what the author intended. The word "gods" seems to be applied to those with authority, and doesn't seem (to me) to be saying that we can become gods.

If you insist on a fair representation of the Trinity rather than a caricature you must be a hardened anti-Mormon of the worst sort.

You are right that Ps. 82 isn't about deification, but nor does it apply the title "gods" to human figures with authority. El's divine council is gathered, YHWH prosecutes the gods appointed over the nations and as a result of their abuses and perversion of justice, they are sentenced to die like men.

Given the Psalms concern with justice, it would seem that the message of Ps. 82 is that if YHWH didn't spare gods from punishment for wrongdoing, earthly rulers and judges won't escape either.

And I don't think Jesus' quotation of this verse was meant to say that either. In the verses preceding John 10:34, Jesus claims to be one with the Father, the very Son of God, and the Jews pick up rocks to kill Him with. He asks them which good works they are stoning Him for, and they respond that they're not stoning Him because of any good works, but He claimed to be God. To which Jesus responds, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said I am the Son of God?" In other words, Jesus is saying, "Your scriptures apply the word 'gods' to human beings, so why do you say that I am committing blasphemy by claiming to be the Son of God?" Basically, He was accusing them of a double standard. He doesn't seem to be saying anything about human beings literally becoming gods themselves. This is all based on my own understanding, of course.

Jesus was refering to a then-current understanding of Ps. 82 which saw it as a reference to the children of Israel at Mt. Sinai. God was going to give them his law and make them immortal. They were afraid and refused, which cause him to revoke his decree.

[why me]

I think that we are straying for the title of the thread. Do Latter Day Saints believe that they will become gods? Yes or no?

[thesometimesaint]

Yes. But that simple answer leaves open a lot more questions.

[Cobalt-70]

Well, first of all, you should know that I'm a believing member of the Church. I'm not an "anti-Mormon." Second, my use of the word "mistranslation" was inaccurate and I apologize. I didn't mean it was translated incorrectly, what I meant was that the translation which is given causes confusion.

It's difficult for Psalm 82:6 to be used as evidence that we may become as God is, because this was probably not what the author intended. The word "gods" seems to be applied to those with authority, and doesn't seem (to me) to be saying that we can become gods. And I don't think Jesus' quotation of this verse was meant to say that either. In the verses preceding John 10:34, Jesus claims to be one with the Father, the very Son of God, and the Jews pick up rocks to kill Him with. He asks them which good works they are stoning Him for, and they respond that they're not stoning Him because of any good works, but He claimed to be God. To which Jesus responds, "Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said I am the Son of God?" In other words, Jesus is saying, "Your scriptures apply the word 'gods' to human beings, so why do you say that I am committing blasphemy by claiming to be the Son of God?" Basically, He was accusing them of a double standard. He doesn't seem to be saying anything about human beings literally becoming gods themselves. This is all based on my own understanding, of course.

Obviously, I do believe the doctrine of exaltation is consistent with the Bible, just not with Psalm 82:6 or how the Savior uses it.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. But please don't accuse me of promoting any "anti-Mormon" ideas.

This is how I would like to see Psalm 82 translated:

"You gods stand in the assembly of El, who governs at your center. How long will you rule unjustly, and comfort the wicked?

"Govern the weak and the orphans. Vindicate the depressed and the poor. Let the weak and poor escape. Deliver them out of the hands of the wicked. These people are ignorant, and they don't understand. They walk in the darkness. All the foundations of the earth are shaken.

"I said that you are gods, and all of you are sons of His Highness. But you shall die like humans, and you shall fall like one of the Shining Ones.

"Arise, gods, and judge the earth, for you will inherit all the nations."

I know this is a pretty radical translation, but Psalm 82 was written during the Hebrew polytheistic era. There were several Hebrew gods at the time, including the gods of other nations, and El was their king. As I read it, the author of the poem is disappointed with how they have governed, and warns them that unless they shape up their act, they will fall to earth like the Shining Ones (i.e., the fallen god Lucifer).

So no, it doesn't say that righteous Mormons will be gods. But for a quite different reason.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[thesometimesaint]

cobalt70:

Red Herring. The Bible doesn't mention Mormons at all; righteous or otherwise.

Ps. It does mention Saints, and how the righteous will be like God.

Edited March 18, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[Bernard Gui]

I think that we are straying for the title of the thread. Do Latter Day Saints believe that they will become gods? Yes or no?

It is our doctrine. Whether or not we believe it is up to the individual.

Bernard

[Calm]

It is our doctrine. Whether or not we believe it is up to the individual.

Bernard

And what the implications of that belief tend to be very personal in interpretation as well, I have found in the few discussions I've had with others about the topic. Few discussions because most LDS are satisfy to keep things simple by just trusting in the Lord and focus their thoughts and energy on other things.

[Cobalt-70]

cobalt70:

Red Herring. The Bible doesn't mention Mormons at all; righteous or otherwise.

Ps. It does mention Saints, and how the righteous will be like God.

Psalm 82 doesn't say that saints will be gods, either, unless you define a "saint" as a member of the Hebrew pantheon. Even then, it says that they are already gods, and will remain as gods unless they don't start governing righteously.

[BCSpace]

Yes, we do, and it is a Biblical and a true Christian principle! Psalms 82:6 states: "Ye are gods and all of you are the children of the most high." Jesus Christ Himself used this scripture to defend Himself from His persecutors who tried to stone Him for what they thought was blasphemy, and He stated, "isn't written in your law, I said, ye are gods" (see John 10:33-35).

Correct. Jesus' comparison in John does not work unless Ps 82:6 refers to real and divine Gods.

And, in order to show that this meant much more than simply being immortal in the resurrection, He also stated as recorded in Revelation 3:21: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne just as I overcame and am sat down with my Father in His throne."

The throne is a symbol of power and authority and I don't get the impression that the saints are getting to sit down in it merely as part of the tour. Rather, we will have a share of Godhood with the Father and the Son. Notice also that even though we know the Father has committed all judegment to the Son, he is obviously going to be delegating that to the Saints (1 Corinthains 6:2).

[Mehrdad]

I keep thinking about the ancient prophets of old, if they knew and saw how glorious the eternities were, why else did they give everything up in pursuit of attaining the highest glory?

[georged]

It appears to me that some people just like to sound intelligent and make something confusing when it is really not! Psalms 82:6 vmeans just what it says! "Ye are GODS and all of you are the children of the Most HIgh"! Of course, this meaning is obvious! What do frog eggs become when they mature?!? It would not make sense for Jesus to defend against the charges of blasphemy if it meant anything else!!! "Isn't it writtewn in your law, I said, ye are gods?" (see John 10-33-35) If this simply meant someone in power, which it does not and there is no basis for saying that, then how would that defend HIm against the charge of blasphemy?!? There are enoough problems and confusion on this site without adding to the confusion with basless statements!!!

[georged]

Concerning the birth of Jesus, and Adam being the son of God, I would refer you to "Mormon Doctrine" and "The Discources of Brigham Young." These teachings clearly state that Christ's birth was the same as ours as was Adams! The Holy Ghost merely protected Mary as she was "overshadowed" by the Most High. This conception, as stated by the learned apostles Bruce McConkie and James Talmadge as well as Brigham Young was in the natural (as much as it could be considering) and normal course of events and not in violation of the natural laws of propogation. Concerning Adams birth, the prophet Brigham Young explains that Heavenly Father "partook of the course materials of the earth" and, as a result of that, instead of fathering a spirit child, He fathered physical tabernacles for Adam and Eve (her being taken from Adams rib being allegorical), and thus Adam and Eve were created from the dust of the earth. The statement in Isaiah that a "virgin" would conceive is really a mistranslation as the Hebrew word "alma" means young woman and not virgin!

[Cobalt-70]

Concerning the birth of Jesus, and Adam being the son of God, I would refer you to "Mormon Doctrine" and "The Discources of Brigham Young." These teachings clearly state that Christ's birth was the same as ours as was Adams! The Holy Ghost merely protected Mary as she was "overshadowed" by the Most High. This conception, as stated by the learned apostles Bruce McConkie and James Talmadge as well as Brigham Young was in the natural (as much as it could be considering) and normal course of events and not in violation of the natural laws of propogation. Concerning Adams birth, the prophet Brigham Young explains that Heavenly Father "partook of the course materials of the earth" and, as a result of that, instead of fathering a spirit child, He fathered physical tabernacles for Adam and Eve (her being taken from Adams rib being allegorical), and thus Adam and Eve were created from the dust of the earth. The statement in Isaiah that a "virgin" would conceive is really a mistranslation as the Hebrew word "alma" means young woman and not virgin!

Brigham Young didn't say that Heavenly Father fathered physical tabernacles for Adam and Eve. He said that Adam and Eve already had immortal bodies when they came to the earth because they lived and were resurrected on another planet. They came to earth and became mortal again by eating the course earthly fruits of the Garden of Eden. Moreover, Adam was the Heavenly Father in Young's theology. Adam was the father of the spirits of humanity, and the literal father of the body of Jesus.

I agree with essentially everything else you said, though.

[georged]

Perhaps you didn't read all of the discourses of Brigham Young! He most certainly did, and furthermore, if you read in "Mormon Doctrine" under "Son of God", you will see it there also! The other statements you made were also incorrect. No resurrected being ever becomes unresurrected! Furthermore, Brigham Young never stated that Adam was God the Father! The Adam God theory is also justifiably condemned in "Mormon Doctrine"! The only thing that you did get right was that Brigham Young did state that our first prents came from another planet.

[Log]

Brigham Young didn't say that Heavenly Father fathered physical tabernacles for Adam and Eve. He said that Adam and Eve already had immortal bodies when they came to the earth because they lived and were resurrected on another planet. They came to earth and became mortal again by eating the course earthly fruits of the Garden of Eden. Moreover, Adam was the Heavenly Father in Young's theology. Adam was the father of the spirits of humanity, and the literal father of the body of Jesus.

I think your interpretation of Brigham is faulty. http://eldenwatson.net/7AdamGod.htm

Now, you needn't agree with that analysis. Hopefully, though, you can agree that the analysis is reasonable.

Edited March 19, 2012 by Log

[volgadon]

It appears to me that some people just like to sound intelligent and make something confusing when it is really not!

Drats, my pseudo-intellectual posturing exposed for what it is, again.

Psalms 82:6 means just what it says! "Ye are GODS and all of you are the children of the Most HIgh"!

Of course it means what it says, but what is it saying? Divorcing the verse from its context hardly helps.

Of course, this meaning is obvious! What do frog eggs become when they mature?!?

You could kiss them and find out.

It would not make sense for Jesus to defend against the charges of blasphemy if it meant anything else!!! "Isn't it writtewn in your law, I said, ye are gods?" (see John 10-33-35) If this simply meant someone in power, which it does not and there is no basis for saying that, then how would that defend HIm against the charge of blasphemy?!?

Perhaps somewhere in the morass of meaningless semantic meanderings undertaken to obfuscate my lack of intelligence you missed where I stated that "gods" wasn't applied to human figures with authority.

Even so, there are two issues here. One is what the psalm originally meant, and two is how did Jesus' contemporaries interpret it, as Christ appealed to that interpretation.

There are enough problems and confusion on this site without adding to the confusion with basless statements!!!

Even so, no one asked you to stop participating.

Edited March 19, 2012 by volgadon