Spammer Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Well said. The true meaning of theosis is that when we are in Christ and Christ is in us, we partake of the divine nature and become gods by grace - divinized humans. God is God by nature, something we can never be. Edited October 26, 2012 by Spammer
Maidservant Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 Does Matthew 5:48 said that we are also a God just like heavenly father?No, but neither did the question of the thread. I thought you were asking about the question of the thread.
TAO Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Yes, Tacenda, all kinds of absurdities emerge when we creatures anthropomorphize God, who is uncreated and infinite.Equal absurdities emerege when we de-anthopomorphize God, however. Edited October 26, 2012 by TAO 1
volgadon Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 This is grating to me, but I have a good idea that you're not serious, in fact this OP is about enough to make me ill. God is alot bigger and greater and our minds will not ever comprehend what he's able to do. Not here they won't, but as Bobby Dylan once observed, death is not the end... 1
Ramil Torres Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 No, but neither did the question of the thread. I thought you were asking about the question of the thread.Well said. The true meaning of theosis is that when we are in Christ and Christ is in us, we partake of the divine nature and become gods by grace - divinized humans. God is God by nature, something we can never be.what kind of divine nature? is it omni-presence, omni-science, omni potence?
Spammer Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Equal absurdities emerege when we de-anthopomorphize God, however.Indeed. When created, finite human minds attempt to comprehend the Uncreated, Beginningless, Endless, and Limitless, paradox and absurdity are the inevitable results. We're necessarily reduced to metaphors, as nothing in our material, finite existence equips us with appropriate reference points with which 'grasp' the reality of God. Edited October 26, 2012 by Spammer 1
TAO Posted October 26, 2012 Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) Indeed. When created, finite human minds attempt to comprehend the Uncreated, Beginningless, Endless, and Limitless, paradox and absurdity are the inevitable results. We're necessarily reduced to metaphors, as nothing in our material, finite existence equips us with appropriate reference points with which 'grasp' the reality of God.Indeed. When created, finite human minds attempt to comprehend the Uncreated, Beginningless, Endless, and Limitless, paradox and absurdity are the inevitable results. We're necessarily reduced to metaphors, as nothing in our material, finite existence equips us with appropriate reference points with which 'grasp' the reality of God.That is precisely why a non-anthropomorphic God is not worth thinking about from my point of view though. I can't understand the absurd, so it's kind of like it doesn't exist from my point of view. You'll never understand the un-understandable, so how can you even say he will do this or that? A universe with no rules is nearly as scary as one with lots of rules.Things need to be understandable for communication to occur, in my point of view. You can't communicate with something absurd because it would be unpredictable. And communication with God is critical for me. That's why I think, pardon the irony, that the idea of an uncomprehendable infinite God is absurd, sorry to say. I do not claim to understand God fully, but I am sure he is actually understandable; merely, we haven't understood him yet.Like mfbukowski, I rely a lot on my God being anthormorphic. But I'd say I'm even more dependent on the concept than he is, because my entire belief in God is based on my communication with him... without it, I would have no reason to believe. And that communication is dependent on his anthormorphism. Without it, without the limited, yet real understanding that I have, I would not believe in him, I must say =/. Edited October 26, 2012 by TAO 3
altersteve Posted October 27, 2012 Posted October 27, 2012 Honestly, I don't really think about it too much. It's impossible for us to fully understand it so it's a pointless thing to think about too much anyway, imo.
altersteve Posted October 27, 2012 Posted October 27, 2012 When I read the first post I was struck by the oddity of the question. When I think of God my first thoughts are not that he is intelligent or powerful. These descriptions are like looking at the Pietà and then pointing to a single microscopic point and saying that infinitesimal point is really beautiful. It ignores the all encompassing beauty of the whole. Further, using these types of descriptors comes across as envy.I am not sure there are words that can adequate describe God or my feelings for him. Being like God is an invitation to follow him; to learn to love as he loves. Regardless of how much I desire to follow him I acknowledge that I cannot without his grace to bring me to him. My responsibility is to accept him as God, to humble myself before him, and to live by faith. I will fail and he will forgive me and urge me on. Take one more step and hold to the Iron Rod.Bingo. It's about the journey, not the destination. 1
Nathair/|\ Posted October 28, 2012 Posted October 28, 2012 Yes, Tacenda, all kinds of absurdities emerge when we creatures anthropomorphize God, who is uncreated and infinite.How about when God theomorphizes men, who are also uncreated and infinite? 2
Spammer Posted October 28, 2012 Posted October 28, 2012 (edited) How about when God theomorphizes men, who are also uncreated and infinite?Men (homo sapiens) are uncreated (eternally self-existent), without beginning, and infinite (utterly without limit; limitless)? If not, are pre-mortal spirits in this state? Or are you referring only to that part of man that was once an intelligence found within the pre-mortal pool of intelligences? Can anything uncreated and infinite not be divine? If no, then men are already divine at their core. If not, why the need for theosis if they're already divine in their innermost being? Calling men 'uncreated and infinite' is pantheistic. Perhaps you're a buddhist? Unless you believe divinity can be subdivided into discrete divinities, separate and distinct. But then such divinities would be limited by nature, not infinite. Or, would they? Edited October 28, 2012 by Spammer
Nathair/|\ Posted October 28, 2012 Posted October 28, 2012 Men (homo sapiens) are uncreated (eternally self-existent), without beginning, and infinite (utterly without limit; limitless)? Are pre-mortal spirits in this state? Or are you referring only to that part of man that was once an intelligence found within the pre-mortal pool of intelligences? Can anything uncreated and infinite not be divine? If not, why the need to theomorphize men if they're already divine in their innermost being? Calling men 'uncreated and infinite' is pantheistic. Perhaps you're a buddhist?There is a lot of truth in Buddhist philosophy, but I've not studied it enough to feel comfortable calling myself one. Other than LDS, I'm primarily learning to be a Druid. I would say that Men are gods in the sense that at least our core selves has always existed as intelligences, in the sense that we participated in the creation of the world, and possibly in the sense that we were worshiped by many cultures before we came here. (I'm not 100% sure about the last part, but that's where the preponderance of the evidence leads right now.) By Theomorphize, though, I mean both that God created our spirits and physical bodies in the image of His spirit and body respectively, and that He can progress us (with our permission and cooperation) into the kind of God He is, ruling over an entire universe. I have no problem with being both pantheist and panentheist. It all depends on what facet of existence you are looking at. 1
Ahab Posted October 29, 2012 Author Posted October 29, 2012 This is grating to me, but I have a good idea that you're not serious, in fact this OP is about enough to make me ill. God is alot bigger and greater and our minds will not ever comprehend what he's able to do. Don't derail my thread by your negative comments. This thread was intended to be about God and all the many reasons we should want to be like him, or, if you prefer, why you would NOT want to be like him. If you don't think it's possible to become as good as he is, or as intelligent as he is, or as loving as he is, or as powerful as he is, even given the fact that you will have all of eternity to grow and develop and become more and more like him as his child, then you should at least try your best to be like him. Others of his children have already made great strides to become more and more like him while following Jesus' counsel to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect. It can be done, otherwise Jesus would not have told us to do it.
Ahab Posted October 29, 2012 Author Posted October 29, 2012 When I read the first post I was struck by the oddity of the question. When I think of God my first thoughts are not that he is intelligent or powerful. These descriptions are like looking at the Pietà and then pointing to a single microscopic point and saying that infinitesimal point is really beautiful. It ignores the all encompassing beauty of the whole. Further, using these types of descriptors comes across as envy.I am not sure there are words that can adequate describe God or my feelings for him. Being like God is an invitation to follow him; to learn to love as he loves. Regardless of how much I desire to follow him I acknowledge that I cannot without his grace to bring me to him. My responsibility is to accept him as God, to humble myself before him, and to live by faith. I will fail and he will forgive me and urge me on. Take one more step and hold to the Iron Rod.So, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that you're trying to become more like him by thinking of all his qualities, collectively, rather than thinking of each of his individual qualities which make up the whole of what kind of person he is. I can do that, too, and I wasn't ignoring that aspect of my worship, but when trying to describe him and become more like him I find it more helpful to think in terms of his individual qualities which make up his whole person. I can't do it all at once. I can do it only a little bit at a time, as he helps me to know him better.Anyway, whatever works best for you as you try to be like him. That's the main goal, and what worshipping him is all about.
Ahab Posted October 29, 2012 Author Posted October 29, 2012 Theosis? No, thank you.So you're saying you don't want to become like our Father in heaven? The question I asked for people like you is, Why?I can't think of a good reason to turn down the opportunity to become like he is, but you should have at least what seems like a good reason to you... and I really would like to hear it.
Ahab Posted October 29, 2012 Author Posted October 29, 2012 Men (homo sapiens) are uncreated (eternally self-existent), without beginning, and infinite (utterly without limit; limitless)? If not, are pre-mortal spirits in this state? Or are you referring only to that part of man that was once an intelligence found within the pre-mortal pool of intelligences? Can anything uncreated and infinite not be divine? If no, then men are already divine at their core. If not, why the need for theosis if they're already divine in their innermost being? Calling men 'uncreated and infinite' is pantheistic. Perhaps you're a buddhist? Unless you believe divinity can be subdivided into discrete divinities, separate and distinct. But then such divinities would be limited by nature, not infinite. Or, would they?We are already the kind of being as our Father in heaven, we're just not as perfect as he is yet (if we will ever be). That's the difference between "kind" and "degree". We got to be the same kind of being he is by virtue of the fact that we are and were his children even before we were born as his children, while we existed within him (and our Mother) in heaven. Life doesn't begin. Life perpetuates itself, as each particular "kind" of being gives birth to others of the same kind.And btw, this is all very, very basic knowledge which got lost as as result of apostasy, when people stopped believing this as the truth.
Damien the Leper Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 So you're saying you don't want to become like our Father in heaven? The question I asked for people like you is, Why?I can't think of a good reason to turn down the opportunity to become like he is, but you should have at least what seems like a good reason to you... and I really would like to hear it.First, I'm a non-believer.Second, even when I was a member of the church, I had no desire for godhood. I didn't want to create worlds, galaxies, life, etc.
MiserereNobis Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 We are already the kind of being as our Father in heaven, we're just not as perfect as he is yet (if we will ever be). That's the difference between "kind" and "degree". We got to be the same kind of being he is by virtue of the fact that we are and were his children even before we were born as his children, while we existed within him (and our Mother) in heaven. Life doesn't begin. Life perpetuates itself, as each particular "kind" of being gives birth to others of the same kind.If my understanding of LDS doctrine is correct (oh dear...), we have always existed eternally. How, then, are we literally children of God? Doesn't that presuppose that he existed prior to us, as all parents exist prior to their children?
MiserereNobis Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 First, I'm a non-believer.Second, even when I was a member of the church, I had no desire for godhood. I didn't want to create worlds, galaxies, life, etc.As explained to me here on this board, and with a few conversations with "real-life" Mormons, I wouldn't have much of a desire for it, either. Seems like a lot of work I prefer the Beatific Vision, basking in the glory, love, and happiness of union with God. But then again, I'm more of a contemplative nature...
Ahab Posted October 29, 2012 Author Posted October 29, 2012 First, I'm a non-believer. A non-believer of what? Does that mean you don't believe you can become like our Father in heaven, or that you don't believe you have a Father in heaven? Second, even when I was a member of the church, I had no desire for godhood. I didn't want to create worlds, galaxies, life, etc.Well, okay, try to separate the difference between what he can do and the kind of person he is. Or do you not believe he is, at all?
Ahab Posted October 29, 2012 Author Posted October 29, 2012 If my understanding of LDS doctrine is correct (oh dear...), we have always existed eternally. How, then, are we literally children of God? We existed as a part of him (and our Mother) before we were born, kinda like we existed within our mortal parents before they gave birth to us, or before they even met each other, or before even they were born. All that we are came from our parents, and what came from those parents came from their parents, etc, etc, etc, into eternity past. We are them, or who they perpetuated.Doesn't that presuppose that he existed prior to us, as all parents exist prior to their children?I don't know that I'd say it "presupposes" that fact, but yes, that is the sense in which it is true. There is no point where there were no persons who were God, and we are a perpetuation of that species.
Damien the Leper Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 A non-believer of what? Does that mean you don't believe you can become like our Father in heaven, or that you don't believe you have a Father in heaven?Well, okay, try to separate the difference between what he can do and the kind of person he is.Or do you not believe he is, at all?I can't say, as a humanist, that God does not exist. I can only say that God is irrelevant to my world and worldview. IOW, I have no use for a god. I'm not an "anti-theist" by any means but I am good without God.
Lightbearer Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 If my understanding of LDS doctrine is correct (oh dear...), we have always existed eternally. How, then, are we literally children of God? Doesn't that presuppose that he existed prior to us, as all parents exist prior to their children?I suppose you could say that we have always been a part of God's DNA (if that makes sense) and at one point we were born spirit children of heavenly parents. And just as I had the normal desire to be like my earthly father, so I desire to become like my Heavenly Father. We are the offspring of God, heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.
TAO Posted October 29, 2012 Posted October 29, 2012 If my understanding of LDS doctrine is correct (oh dear...), we have always existed eternally. How, then, are we literally children of God? Doesn't that presuppose that he existed prior to us, as all parents exist prior to their children?Misrere, there are two different schools of thought on this subject. One is the one Ahab suggested. The other is that we were 'encapsulated' into a spirit... and that was birth.
Recommended Posts