According To The Lds View Of Revelation...

[mfbukowski]

Nevermind It's a waste of time

Edited December 1, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

deleted

Edited December 1, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mathonihah]

I see a distinction amongst the “things as they were, are, and will be,” as between things that are facts and things that are truths. Both facts and truths can be received by divine revelation, but then there’s also a distinction between the types of revelation.

2 Nephi 2: 13-14 explains that there are “things” to act and “things” to be acted upon, and that God organized them all. D&C 93:30 shows that we can consider truth to be a “thing” that acts for itself. So a “thing” that is acted upon might be better referred to something other than “truth,” such as an item, an object or a description—D&C 93 uses the term “light,” and by the way it is used, "light" should not be confused with "truth," and especially not with “all truth” or “all things.”

Things that act for themselves (or truths according to D&C 93:30) are manifest in the form of God and His children. God placed us in our own sphere to act for ourselves. Things that are acted upon are most fundamentally manifest in the form of light. D&C 93 shows in several places that the light which is acted upon arises and is sent forth from the truth that acts. It also shows that the light which freely emanates from God must be voluntarily received by the recipient in order for him to possess truth (and as stated in other scriptures, with all our heart, might, mind and strength) and so become like God (D&C 93:31; 88:49).

As recipients and possessors of light, we have to act upon that light to become true or to become “truth” in the same sense that God is truth. Otherwise we simply lose it.

Light creates and illuminates facts, and both depend on and answer to truth, so light and facts might be considered objective realities (see Abraham 3:6-19 for an example), but they are not “truths” that act independently (this same example refers to the intelligences which do). On the other hand, truth (which acts and answers only to itself) is subjective reality.

As independently acting beings (subjective “truths”), we experience the revelation of facts and formulate greater truth from that action—truth begets truth and uses light or facts as raw materials to accomplish that “grace for grace”. We also experience the revelation of truth as we experience it within ourselves as we become more like God, “grace for grace.” As we become one with God, what else is there to correspond with other than ourselves?

I hope this means we have nothing to discuss, because I'm tired! Just kidding.

Do you think you could be a bit more specific, and quote the relevant verses from which you derive the conclusion that truth is what acts, and light is what is acted upon?

[CV75]

Do you think you could be a bit more specific, and quote the relevant verses from which you derive the conclusion that truth is what acts, and light is what is acted upon?

Referencing the 2^nd and 3^rd paragraphs of the post you replied to, I get “truth is what acts” from D&C 93: 30 (“All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.”)

I get “light is what is acted upon” from 93:29 (“Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.”), and perhaps more directly stated in D&C 88:6-7, “He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ…”

Christ uses, or acts upon, this power to act upon other things (verses 7-13 and especially 12; “As also he is in … the light of the sun [moon, stars, stars], and the power thereof by which it was made… And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God [Who is Truth – John 14:6] to fill the immensity of space—The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.”).

Truth and light are also distinguished one from the other in 93:28, 29, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42 (verse 2 uses “true” as an adjective for “light”, indicating that light is dependent on truth). In most of these references, light is the “light of truth” indicating its origin is truth, which acts for itself to bring forth or use the light.

Truth and light can also be considered a “compound in one” where truth is a form of subjective reality and light is a form of objective reality (correspoding to truth), but I’m not sure if the theories discussed really allow that.

[mathonihah]

Referencing the 2^nd and 3^rd paragraphs of the post you replied to, I get “truth is what acts” from D&C 93: 30 (“All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.”)

I get “light is what is acted upon” from 93:29 (“Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.”), and perhaps more directly stated in D&C 88:6-7, “He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ…”

Christ uses, or acts upon, this power to act upon other things (verses 7-13 and especially 12; “As also he is in … the light of the sun [moon, stars, stars], and the power thereof by which it was made… And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God [Who is Truth – John 14:6] to fill the immensity of space—The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.”).

Truth and light are also distinguished one from the other in 93:28, 29, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42 (verse 2 uses “true” as an adjective for “light”, indicating that light is dependent on truth). In most of these references, light is the “light of truth” indicating its origin is truth, which acts for itself to bring forth or use the light.

Truth and light can also be considered a “compound in one” where truth is a form of subjective reality and light is a form of objective reality (correspoding to truth), but I’m not sure if the theories discussed really allow that.

Thanks for the reply. While the idea of truth being able to “act” based D&C 93:30 appears to have some justification, the idea of light being “acted upon” based on the scriptures cited does not.

[brainburn]

So are you saying your way or the highway?

What does that mean? My conclusions are derived from what scripture explains.

[brainburn]

Yes, but not quite. We also believe that God gives to men according to the light they are able and willing to recieve.

My point is more about whether it's possible to know true things in any degree.

[brainburn]

Yes, scripturally (see post #62). All knowledge and experience are subjective, but when what we know and experieince is affected by something outside of our knowledge and experience, that "something/knowledge and experience)" is objective as far as we are concerned. When we act, we experieince subjective reality; when we are acted upon, we are subject to a reality we do not comprehend and so it is objective to us. So that which might be a subjective reality to one person can be objective to another with less knowledge and experience of that same reality. The scriptures seem to hold that God's relationship to all truth is purely, perfectly subjective. But as long as we are not as God is, our relationship to some truths is objective, "until the fulness of the perfect day shall burst upon us" and we are like God.

But from the perspective of imperfect human beings, realism fits with our circumstance and anti-realism doesn't. Anti-realism is the denial of an objective reality. Do you agree that we can't deny that there are "objective" things that act upon us? We must accept the existence of these things at this moment even if we will one day experience them purely subjectively?

[Nemesis]

But from the perspective of imperfect human beings, realism fits with our circumstance and anti-realism doesn't. Anti-realism is the denial of an objective reality. Do you agree that we can't deny that there are "objective" things that act upon us? We must accept the existence of these things at this moment even if we will one day experience them purely subjectively?

By refusing to answer the cfr you will take a 2 day break from the board. When you come back be prepared to back it up or recant your statement.

Nemesis

[CV75]

But from the perspective of imperfect human beings, realism fits with our circumstance and anti-realism doesn't. Anti-realism is the denial of an objective reality. Do you agree that we can't deny that there are "objective" things that act upon us? We must accept the existence of these things at this moment even if we will one day experience them purely subjectively?

Since it has been pointed out that the way I use “objective” is not consistent with the formal theory, I’d have to say “no”—things “act upon us (if that term can even be used at this point)” and we experience them only as a consequence of our choices—they correspond to what we do / experience; what we experience does not correspond to them. From both temporal and eternal standpoints then, no objective thing (such as the light of Christ) acts upon a subjective thing without a correspondence to the subjective thing that directs it (such as Christ), so I would have to say “no” to that as well. As I pointed out above, they two realities may be a “compound in one,” but that’s probably another discussion.

Edited December 2, 2012 by CV75

[CV75]

Thanks for the reply. While the idea of truth being able to “act” based D&C 93:30 appears to have some justification, the idea of light being “acted upon” based on the scriptures cited does not.

My point of the cited scriptures being if it comes from God, and He directs it, it is being acted upon by Him. He teaches us to use it as well. When we receive this light we use it in our minds and bodies, ultimately in determining / defining the glory of our immortal body and resident kingdom.

[mfbukowski]

But from the perspective of imperfect human beings, realism fits with our circumstance and anti-realism doesn't. Anti-realism is the denial of an objective reality. Do you agree that we can't deny that there are "objective" things that act upon us? We must accept the existence of these things at this moment even if we will one day experience them purely subjectively?

You do not understand what these terms mean. Trust me- anti-realists get in car accidents and stub their toes in the night as much as "realists" do.

Both these terms objective and subjective refer to HOW EACH TYPE OF EXPERIENCE IS JUSTIFIED nothing more nothing less

I will say it once again - now please listen to each word.

Anti-realists deny that we can KNOW anything about a world beyond what we EXPERIENCE.

It is a theory about how we KNOW propositions- not things- are true or false and how they are verified. Things are not true or false, propositions are. I have never seen a true car or table in my life, nor have I seen a false one.

In other words, our only access to the world is through our experience- and there is no other way to know about anything other than through our experience.

To me it is so obvious as to make me totally incredulous that anyone would believe anything else.

God is included in this view- we know God by experiencing him directly

The believer in correspondence believes that language "corresponds" to some reality beyond what we experience. I find that ridiculous. How could we check the correspondence to a world we cannot see feel or hear etc?

You say God shows us that world- I think that is crazy talk. God does not allow us to drive down the street blindfolded waiting for revelation as to where to turn.

God reveals meaning to our lives and allows us to feel his love, but he does not show us some world beyond our experience. He could not show us anything we cannot experience- BECAUSE WE COULD NOT EXPERIENCE HIS REVELATION!

The mere fact that we receive revelation means that we "experience revelation" You cannot get beyond what we can experience. The very notion is an absurdity.

[harfad]

My point of the cited scriptures being if it comes from God, and He directs it, it is being acted upon by Him. He teaches us to use it as well. When we receive this light we use it in our minds and bodies, ultimately in determining / defining the glory of our immortal body and resident kingdom.

In post #129 you made the following comment:

I get “light is what is acted upon” from 93:29 (“Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.”), and perhaps more directly stated in D&C 88:6-7, “He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ…”

Christ uses, or acts upon, this power to act upon other things (verses 7-13 and especially 12; “As also he is in … the light of the sun [moon, stars, stars], and the power thereof by which it was made… And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God [Who is Truth – John 14:6] to fill the immensity of space—The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.”).

Truth and light are also distinguished one from the other in 93:28, 29, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42 (verse 2 uses “true” as an adjective for “light”, indicating that light is dependent on truth). In most of these references, light is the “light of truth” indicating its origin is truth, which acts for itself to bring forth or use the light.

Truth and light can also be considered a “compound in one” where truth is a form of subjective reality and light is a form of objective reality (correspoding to truth), but I’m not sure if the theories discussed really allow that.

Your posts contain a lot of assumptions which seem to appear self-evident to you, but not to me. Consider the following verses, D&C 93:

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

In this verse “intelligence” is made synonymous with “light of truth”. Thus:

Proposition 1: ---- intelligence = light of truth

The next verse reads:

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

In this verse, truth is not the only thing that is said to “act for itself,” but intelligence also. Thus:

Proposition 2: ---- intelligence = acts (not acted upon)

But according to proposition 1, intelligence = light of truth; therefore we conclude:

Proposition 3: ---- light of truth = acts (not acted upon)

Which contradicts your assertion (based on the scriptures cited) that truth acts, but light (of truth) is acted upon. My reading of the same scriptures is that both of them act; neither of them is acted upon.

Further, D&C 88 gives us the following additional information of this “light”:

13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.

According to this verse, this light is the power of God. It is what empowers God to do what he wants. Power is by definition something that acts, not acted upon.

Edited December 2, 2012 by harfad

[CV75]

***

Proposition 1: ---- intelligence = light of truth

Proposition 2: ---- intelligence = acts (not acted upon)

Proposition 3: ---- light of truth = acts (not acted upon)

***

Power is by definition something that acts, not acted upon.

Yes, I already took these into consideration.

Yes, intelligence "=" light of truth. This is one use of the word intelligence. It is also used to refer to the spirit / Spirit, or perhaps something more fundamental, of man / Man of Holiness. So in some uses it means “light” and in other uses it means “truth”. As I mentioned above, light and truth can be considered a “compound in one” of the opposing objective and subjective components (realities).

Yes, light is power. It is in God. Power, like energy and ability, does not have a will and does not act for itself. It does not “objectively act upon” anything else unless it is harnessed or directed by one who possesses and controls it to do so. It is a thing, a resource, not a person or truth like God is.

[harfad]

Yes, I already took these into consideration.

Yes, intelligence "=" light of truth. This is one use of the word intelligence. It is also used to refer to the spirit / Spirit, or perhaps something more fundamental, of man / Man of Holiness. So in some uses it means “light” and in other uses it means “truth”. As I mentioned above, light and truth can be considered a “compound in one” of the opposing objective and subjective components (realities).

Which confirms my claim that you are speaking with certainty about things that are very deep and spiritual, about which adequate knowledge has not been revealed, and about which I at least do not feel confident that the level of knowledge provided is adequate to warrant such certainty as you display.

Yes, light is power. It is in God. Power, like energy and ability, does not have a will and does not act for itself. It does not “objectively act upon” anything else unless it is harnessed or directed by one who possesses and controls it to do so. It is a thing, a resource, not a person or truth like God is.

Going back to D&C 88, this “light” or “Spirit” is described as something that “gives life” to all things (v.13), that “quickeneth our understanding” (v. 11), that it is the “law by which all things are governed” (v. 13), and by which all things are created. So if it gives everything intelligence, how can itself not be intelligent? And if it gives to everything life, how can itself not have life? It is not only the power, but the very intelligence and mind of God. And if it is the very intelligence and mind of God, how can it be separate from the decision-making power and will of God? As I said, your arguments are based on a lot of assumptions which the information provided does not allow for. It is speculation, and unjustified speculation. Even speculation must have some legitimate basis, whereas yours doesn’t. You are presuming to talk with certainty about things about which we do not have enough knowledge.

[CV75]

I at least do not feel confident that the level of knowledge provided is adequate to warrant such certainty as you display.

Then it is even more obvious that we can only speak for ourselves.

Going back to D&C 88, this “light” or “Spirit” is described as something that “gives life” to all things (v.13), that “quickeneth our understanding” (v. 11), that it is the “law by which all things are governed” (v. 13), and by which all things are created. So if it gives everything intelligence, how can itself not be intelligent? And if it gives to everything life, how can itself not have life?

Light does not “give everything intelligence,” but quickens the understanding (88:11*), as salt preserves the meat or yeast leavens the dough. It doesn’t make things into light (or intelligence, depending on how you define either) any more than salt turns meat into salt, or yeast turns dough into yeast. God grants life by using light, but light is not life, either.

* From the rest of Section 88, light also “giveth you light,” “giveth life to all things,” is “the law by which all things are governened,” “cleaveth unto light (“the darkness comprehendeth it not”),” and fills bodies (including brains) with light so happily they might “comprehendeth all things.”

It is not only the power, but the very intelligence and mind of God. And if it is the very intelligence and mind of God, how can it be separate from the decision-making power and will of God?

I don’t see where the scriptures say that this light “is the very intelligence and mind of God.” It “proceedeth forth from the presence of God” and is the “power of God.”

On the other hand, Christ, who “might be in all and through all things” does so by His use of light. I believe 88: 49-50 speaks to this. We are “quickened in him and by him” through His operation of light, and we “abound” when we “know” Who we “have seen.”

You are presuming to talk with certainty about things about which we do not have enough knowledge.

As the saying goes, "Well, if you say so (cough)..." It is even more obvious that we can only continue to speak for ourselves.

Edited December 2, 2012 by CV75

[volgadon]

Your posts contain a lot of assumptions which seem to appear self-evident to you, but not to me

Quote-worthy.

[harfad]

I don’t see where the scriptures say that this light “is the very intelligence and mind of God.” It “proceedeth forth from the presence of God” and is the “power of God.”

According to the Book of Moses, this Spirit, light, etc, which “quickens,” “enlightens,” “gives life” etc is none other than the Holy Spirit, also known as the Comforter:

61 Therefore it is given to abide in you; the record of heaven; the Comforter; the peaceable things of immortal glory; the truth of all things; that which quickeneth all things, which maketh alive all things; that which knoweth all things, and hath all power according to wisdom, mercy, truth, justice, and judgment. (Pearl of Great Price | Moses 6:61)

Which Holy Spirit according, to the Lectures on Faith by Joseph Smith, is in fact the mind of God. From Lecture 5:

And he being the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, and having overcome, received a fullness of the glory of the Father - possessing the same mind with the Father; which Mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son; and these three are one, ... the Father and the Son possessing the same mind, the same wisdom, glory, power, and fullness; filling all in all -the Son being filled with the fullness of the Mind, glory, and power; or in other words the Spirit, glory, and power of the Father - ... - being filled with the fullness of the Mind of the Father, or in other words, the Spirit of the Father;

And from the catechism to Lecture 5:

Q. Do the Father and the Son possess the same mind?

A. They do. ...

Q. What is this mind?

A. The Holy Spirit. ...

What we are talking about is in fact the mind of God.

As the saying goes, "Well, if you say so (cough)..." It is even more obvious that we can only continue to speak for ourselves.

How true! Some conversations can be a waste of time.

[CV75]

(Pearl of Great Price | Moses 6:61)

Which Holy Spirit according, to the Lectures on Faith by Joseph Smith, is in fact the mind of God. From Lecture 5:

And from the catechism to Lecture 5:

I am familiar with and can appreciate the references, but I don’t think they necessarily mean what you've suggested.

I see no inconsistency between Moses 6:61 and the idea of light being associated with Holy Ghost in the same way that it is with Christ. Light does things that the Holy Ghost (like the Son and the Father) directs it to. Probably more to the point, the word “light” isn’t anywhere to be found in the entire chapter of Moses 6.

The Lectures of Faith quotes do not teach that the third Personage of the Godhead is the light that is the actual Mind of the Father in the sense that either light or the Mind are objects or a things. Note it says “fullness” of the Mind or Spirit of the Father, which an eternal attribute of His Mind or Spirit, not the Mind or Spirit themselves.

That the Father and the Son possess the same mind which is the Holy Spirit only means that they communicate to mortals through Him, as He testifies of both. The Holy Spirit quickens people physically and/or spiritually according to how the Father and/or Son are communicating, and thus not only delivers the communication to the hearts and minds of God’s children, but helps them receive it. I’m confident this teaching sounds familiar to you.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Dupe.

Could you expand on this?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

What does that mean? My conclusions are derived from what scripture explains.

Which is...if you cannot point to a "Revelation" happened according to your's or other's view then it is not a revelation? Just level with us and tell us what you believe "revelation" means; we can handle it. Edited December 3, 2012 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[mfbukowski]

Could you expand on this?

:rofl:

[harfad]

I am familiar with and can appreciate the references, but I don’t think they necessarily mean what you've suggested.

I see no inconsistency between Moses 6:61 and the idea of light being associated with Holy Ghost in the same way that it is with Christ. Light does things that the Holy Ghost (like the Son and the Father) directs it to. Probably more to the point, the word “light” isn’t anywhere to be found in the entire chapter of Moses 6.

Moses 6:61 is about the Holy Spirit that Adam received (as we all receive, he being the first) following his baptism. It describes the properties and attributes of that Holy Spirit itself, not some kind of “light” that supposedly comes from him/it, or that he/it supposedly makes use of. It lists the following attributes of that Holy Spirit (or Comforter) itself:

• It abides in us.
  
• It is the record of heaven.
  
• It is the peaceable things ...
  
• It is the truth of all things.
  
• It quickens all things.
  
• It makes alive all things.
  
• It knows all things.
  
• It has all power ...
  

These are the attributes of the Spirit itself, not of some kind of “light” that supposedly comes from him/it.

In the D&C 88 and 93, however, these same attributes are applied to that “light” which we have previously talked about:

• It gives life to all things.
  
• It is the law by which all things are governed.
  
• It is the power of God who sitteth upon his throne.
  
• It is intelligence, which was not created or made.
  
• It proceeds from the presence of God
  

These describe the same attributes. It does not say that the Holy Spirit does what it does by means of the Light. It says that the Holy Spirit and the “light” are one and the same things because the same attributers are given of both.

The Lectures of Faith quotes do not teach that the third Personage of the Godhead is the light that is the actual Mind of the Father in the sense that either light or the Mind are objects or a things. Note it says “fullness” of the Mind or Spirit of the Father, which an eternal attribute of His Mind or Spirit, not the Mind or Spirit themselves.

Wrong! The Lectures on Faith teaches that the Holy Spirit IS the mind of God (Father or Son).

That the Father and the Son possess the same mind which is the Holy Spirit only means that they communicate to mortals through Him, as He testifies of both.

Wrong! That is the spin you want to put on it. That is not what it actually says. By what right do you put words in the Lord’s mouth, or in Joseph Smith’s mouth?

The Holy Spirit quickens people physically and/or spiritually according to how the Father and/or Son are communicating, and thus not only delivers the communication to the hearts and minds of God’s children, but helps them receive it. I’m confident this teaching sounds familiar to you.

Wrong! That is not what the scripture says. It says that it “quickens” all things. (To quicken means to make alive). And it says the same thing of the “light”. Conclusion:

Holy Spirit = “light” = mind of God

Edited December 3, 2012 by harfad

[CV75]

the Holy Spirit and the “light” are one and the same things because the same attributers are given of both.

Oh! Now I get it! Hot chocolate and hot waffles are the same thing(s)! And even those, hot sauce and hot topics are the same thing(s)!

[harfad]

Oh! Now I get it!

Oh no you don’t! Think about it more, and some day you might.