I Am Not A Christian

[MiserereNobis]

There always is. My own hypothesis is that the Gods were once mortal creatures who ultimately evolved to Divinity and now have discoovered and more efficient way for Theosis.

Interesting. Do you mean that early gods who were once mortal creatures evolved naturally? Through a natural process? And then, as gods, they knew how to make the process more efficient, through atoning sacrifice, etc?

LDS doctrine is that God was once a mortal man on another planet (Gospel Principles ch 47). This precludes him from being the first and only God unless you like my hypothesis. But that would not leave time enough for evolution......

On another thread, there were many LDS who said that this is not a doctrine but just a speculation. Is it actually doctrine?

[MiserereNobis]

What I do not find appropriate as an argument is the overstated "Is this reality really real?" "Can we trust what we know despite not knowing that this is actually real?" It is a poor attempt at over philosophizing and is an absolute mess.

Descartes opened the hole from which modern/contemporary philosophy has not been able to extract itself. It is a mess.

You should read G. E. Moore's "Proof of an External World." He mocks the seriousness with which some of us approach the question. You might appreciate his tactics

[altersteve]

On another thread, there were many LDS who said that this is not a doctrine but just a speculation. Is it actually doctrine?

What is "doctrine" is the teaching that God was once like us. How, when, or where is not known.

[MormonMason]

What is most interesting is the underlying meaning of the phrase "divine nature" that none but LDS believe. Lots of attempts to redefine it are on record but few in the world actually believing what it means. It is contrary to all the philosophers gave to the early church after ignoring Paul's warning about avoiding vain philosophy.

[swfarnsworth]

On another thread, there were many LDS who said that this is not a doctrine but just a speculation. Is it actually doctrine?

I can't think of any instance where a General Authority explicitly said that the Father went though a mortal life like ours, but that's the only straightforward interpretation of the doctrine that I've ever been presented with. My personal opinion is that the apostles/prophets have been essentially silent on the issue to prevent everyone from having to accept whatever the correct interpretation is (some people might not want to) when it's not that important.

[MormonMason]

I believe you made a bad impression when you suggested eternal doesn't mean forever. It is true that eternity is an indefinate period of time, because it doesn't end or begin, but he probably didn't make that connection and thought you meant Jesus hasn't really existed forever, which isn't what you should want him to think.

...

The word used in the Bible means "time veiled from the sight." It is the same meaning throughout in spite of what many try to do with it. I have come to appreciate the way that Jewish translators and writers have rendered it. "Time Immemorial." It works for me. It also allows for LDS views on the subject. The same word has been used throughout the Bible to describe things that had beginnings and a period of time as short as three days and nights. No, I am not kidding.

And, someone needs to go back into time and tell certain writers of the New Testament that they weren't Christians for writing things that allow for such an interpretation. If one looks at the second and third editions of A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, under the word αρχη, one would see that scholarly analysis has moved from "possible" to "probable" as to the meaning that Christ may have had a beginning at some point in eternity (hinted at by some passages of scripture in comparison to how the words are used in other authors). One wonders what the next iteration of scholarly understanding will give to us in the next edition of the Lexicon.

Edited September 15, 2012 by MormonMason

[TAO]

Descartes opened the hole from which modern/contemporary philosophy has not been able to extract itself. It is a mess.

Haha, yeah, Descartes and Socrates both.

It drives people mad, I guess.

I'm not a skeptic myself, but I guess one could say I appreciate skpetic viewpoints alot =p.

Edited September 15, 2012 by TAO

[MiserereNobis]

Haha, yeah, Descartes and Socrates both.

Well, at least Socrates (Plato) offered a way out. One can and should leave the cave and then bask in the light of the sun, the knowledge of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. For him, the abstract world of the forms is real, and we can reach that world via philosophy.

Descartes tried to save the world with proof of the existence of God, but his skeptical method was so strong that it defeated his own proof.

It drives people mad, I guess.

I'm not a skeptic myself, but I guess one could say I appreciate skpetic viewpoints alot =p.

Yeah, it does drive some people mad. I'm not a skeptic either, but I appreciate the way that it forces us to question our assumptions about something as basic as the reality we are experiencing. It's the same reason that I am fascinated with mysticism and modern physics. It appears from a preponderance of evidence from multiple disciplines that our assumptions on the way things are are usually wrong

[TAO]

Well, at least Socrates (Plato) offered a way out.

Mmmm... I'd say partially. What he says, is essentially, that you should use philosophy and logic, rather than the senses. Or something along those lines (at least in the Cave analogy that Valentinus referenced, if I was reading it right).

One can and should leave the cave and then bask in the light of the sun, the knowledge of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. For him, the abstract world of the forms is real, and we can reach that world via philosophy.

Of course.

Descartes tried to save the world with proof of the existence of God, but his skeptical method was so strong that it defeated his own proof.

That's the difficulty with trying to prove God. ;-).

Yeah, it does drive some people mad. I'm not a skeptic either, but I appreciate the way that it forces us to question our assumptions about something as basic as the reality we are experiencing. It's the same reason that I am fascinated with mysticism and modern physics. It appears from a preponderance of evidence from multiple disciplines that our assumptions on the way things are are usually wrong

Haha, that is true, that it is!

Edited September 15, 2012 by TAO

[Calm]

I appreciate the way that it forces us to question our assumptions about something as basic as the reality we are experiencing. It's the same reason that I am fascinated with mysticism and modern physics. It appears from a preponderance of evidence from multiple disciplines that our assumptions on the way things are are usually wrong

You and mfb should really get along well.

[MiserereNobis]

You and mfb should really get along well.

We've engaged in a few discussions and I like him already

[Calm]

We've engaged in a few discussions and I like him already

It just gets better.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Good to see this, PaPa.

I am beginning to see it is not all about me. If the gospel was true before I starting having so many troubles, then all that has changed is my attitude, I need to start counting my blessings, instead of numbering my problems. I just regret some of the things I said. But alas I cannot change what I said, but I can change what I say now. I just hope my negative comments have not caused long lasting harm.

[Tacenda]

I am beginning to see it is not all about me. If the gospel was true before I starting having so many troubles, then all that has changed is my attitude, I need to start counting my blessings, instead of numbering my problems. I just regret some of the things I said. But alas I cannot change what I said, but I can change what I say now. I just hope my negative comments have not caused long lasting harm.

I think what you're going through has enabled you to humble yourself enough to empathise with others who have the same ordeals you have, like with your mom, and with your physical & spiritual hardships too. It just helps you become more Christlike!

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I think what you're going through has enabled you to humble yourself enough to empathise with others who have the same ordeals you have, like with your mom, and with your physical & spiritual hardships too. It just helps you become more Christlike!

I hope so as nothing would please me more...just sorry for those shocked (none more than me) by my comments before. Pity parties are lonely.

[Tacenda]

I hope so as nothing would please me more...just sorry for those shocked (none more than me) by my comments before. Pity parties are lonely.

Join the crowd Pa Pa. I think the Lord is pleased that you see yourself in a different light now honestly. He really wants us to realise we need Him more than anything. Yes, he wants us to become perfect, but maybe our faults are the only way we'll become that way.

[Calm]

I am beginning to see it is not all about me. If the gospel was true before I starting having so many troubles, then all that has changed is my attitude, I need to start counting my blessings, instead of numbering my problems. I just regret some of the things I said. But alas I cannot change what I said, but I can change what I say now. I just hope my negative comments have not caused long lasting harm.

I think you would be amazed at how much we all learn by watching how others work through hard times. If anything, your openness about your issues is likely to help others rather than harm.

[Stargazer]

I have found that the harder I have tried to decide and figure out what it is that I actually believe, the more I realize that I don't believe any of it at all.

I guess I'm tired of the drawn out diatribes and soap boxes of who is more right than others or what is the correct way of believing anything concerning religious practice and theology.

People can't seem to avoid this, even when it has nothing to do with relligion.

Taking your avatar and title, "Socialist at Large" into consideration, I submit the case of Molotov and Khruschev. Both avowed and committed Communists, they had a falling out over whether Stalin was a bad guy or a good guy, i.e. they had a problem with policy issues. Khruschev prevailed, and got Molotov kicked out of the Party.

Just like Luther and Pope.Leo X. Although excommunicating Luther didn't stop his work, in this case.

[Stargazer]

Well, if our born again brothers and sisters would stop and wax introspective for a few moments, they might learn the reason why they are so despised and derided: At least in part, this antipathy exists because the seculaists think Evangelicals believe in a God who is apparently unconcerned with the fact that he's going to send the majority of his human creation into and endless hell, where those so consigned will be compelled to endure endless sufferings of such horrific torment that the human mind cannot even conceive of the degree and extent of this never-ending spiritual, mental and physical agony. People like Nora Ephron have a sterotypical caricture of Christians affixed in their minds -- they think they worship a being who makes Hitler, Stalin and Mao look like a trio of amateurs.

That's a great observation, but is this really the image that people like Nora Ephron has in their minds? Keeping in mind that Ephron passed away earlier this year. Did anyone ask Ephron at this conference what was it particularly about "Evangelical Christians" and "Bush supporters" that made her proud she didn't know any? So, what does this caricature look like?

I'm not denying that it might be the EV notion of unending hell and damnation that caused Ephron to be proud -- but I'm asking because I don't know what was in Ephron's mind that caused her to say that -- perhaps you do, from other sources?

[teddyaware]

That's a great observation, but is this really the image that people like Nora Ephron has in their minds? Keeping in mind that Ephron passed away earlier this year. Did anyone ask Ephron at this conference what was it particularly about "Evangelical Christians" and "Bush supporters" that made her proud she didn't know any? So, what does this caricature look like?

I'm not denying that it might be the EV notion of unending hell and damnation that caused Ephron to be proud -- but I'm asking because I don't know what was in Ephron's mind that caused her to say that -- perhaps you do, from other sources?

Good observation, Stargazer. The ultimate point I was trying to make in my post can be more easily understood by the following clarification: Secular Humanists despise Evangelical Christian types because they see them as narrow-minded, bigoted, judgemental, noninclusive enemies of "human diversity," To the humanists, Christians are simply following the lead of their God, who apparently has no hesitation to take all the "nonconformers" (whom the humanists value as fellow creatures of dignity and worth) and cast them into an everlasting nightmare of unimaginable torture for no logically based reason or purpose.

What the humanists don't seem to realize is that the Latter Day Saints believe all the aforesaid nonconformers -- despite their temporary waywardness -- remain beloved spirit children of God, who do indeed have dignity, worth and bright futures as saved beings. Rather than being cast out of God's presence forever, Mormons believe, in the end, after a great ongoing process of divine salvation and redemption, most all of these former nonconformers will be inheritors of joy, peace and glory in one of God's many mansions.

Edited September 16, 2012 by teddyaware

[Storm Rider]

I am beginning to see it is not all about me. If the gospel was true before I starting having so many troubles, then all that has changed is my attitude, I need to start counting my blessings, instead of numbering my problems. I just regret some of the things I said. But alas I cannot change what I said, but I can change what I say now. I just hope my negative comments have not caused long lasting harm.

The path to Salvation is one of choice. All have felt the buffetings and challenges of mortal life. None of us is unique; there is always another who has equally suffered similar events or much worse. None of us is a profitable servant; none of us "deserve" a better life. I suspect that if we each received what we deserved in this life it would be a dreary life indeed. As they say, it is not falling down that is the issue, it is how many times we are prepared to stand back up and take one more step.

You are right, self-pity is unbecoming of a disciple of Christ. All of us need to learn to put that behind us and move forward in faith.

[Anakin7]

As I believe would happen this thread that I started has gone way out of the intended direction. Apostacy lives still.

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[Stargazer]

Good observation, Stargazer. The ultimate point I was trying to make in my post can be more easily uderstood by the following clarification: Secular Humanists despise Evangelical Christian types because they see them as narrow-minded, bigoted, judgemental, noninclusive enemies of "human diversity," To the humanists, Christians are simply following the lead of their God, who apparently has no hesitation to take all the "nonconformers" (whom the humanists value as fellow creatures of dignity and worth) and cast them into an everlasting nightmare of unimaginable torture for no logically based reason or logical purpose.

What the humanists don't seem to realize is that the Latter Day Saints believe all the aforesaid nonconformers -- despite their temporary waywardness -- remain beloved spirit children of God, who do indeed have dignity, worth and bright futures as saved beings. Rather than being cast out of God's presence forever, Mormons believe, in the end, after a great ongoing process of divine salvation and redemption, most all of these former nonconformers will be inheritors of joy, peace and glory in one of God's many mansions.

Well said.

And bringing up Nora Ephron caused me to break out my copy of "You've Got Mail!" to watch one more time tonight. I love that movie.

[Stargazer]

As I believe would happen this thread that I started has gone way out of the intended direction. Apostacy lives still.

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

They all do. What could be special about your thread? That being said, it is a lovely thread. But it isn't Apostasy, it is diversity of opinion and Attention Deficit Disorder.

[followerofemmanuel]

Far too often this type of thing occurs...individuals cannot be content that one believes and follows the teachings of Christ, but is only concerned in you follow their idea of who Christ is or is not. This is a recent phenomenon with the EV movement and the counter-cult community. They are accepting of even the behavior of Westboro (although they find it distasteful) because they have the right Jesus. I have sometimes quoted great Christian thinkers (great in their eyes and ours) such as C.S. Lewis. If they did not recognize the quote and thought it to be my words or the words of an Apostle or Prophet, they would object to the content, assuming that if coming from a Mormon it is wrong. When they learn the truth of who said it the conversation turns to my or "our" misunderstanding of what Lewis or Luther had to say. In short...the fact that we are Mormons renders any thought or idea invalid.

Thanks for your thoughts Pa Pa. I hope that Ev's (as you put it) are not painted with the same brush as I can't think of any people in my Ev' circle who would think that Westboro Church has the "right" Jesus. I attend a Baptist Church, ( not that denominations mean anything to me.. I am simply a Christian) but my Church as with most Ev's church's I know would totally disagree with their beliefs and actions. In my opinion, the TRUE Jesus is the one who said that he was they way the truth and the life, to love one another as he has loved us, the greatest commandments-Love God, love people etc. If a belief in a Jesus causes you to act in hatred towards anyone, I would say that they are following the wrong Jesus. Anyway, by the sounds of the how the conversation went, I got the impression that the person was asking sincere questions and had genuine concern for the other, even though he does not quite know what the other person believes. Sounds like a great opportunity for continued discussions which would likely be interesting for both parties as they share and learn about one an others beliefs.

Blessings!