inquiringmind Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 In the King Follet Sermon (if I understand him correctly) JS seems to interpret something Jesus said about doing what He had seen His Father do, to mean that The Father had been incarnate, and had laid His life down, and been the Savior of another world.I think this is also one interpretation of the Lorenzo Snow couplet.What I don't understand is that the BOM speaks of Christ's atonement as infinite.Wouldn't The Father's atonement have also been infinite?Why would there be need for more than one infinite atonement?If there are Fathers above The Father, would there also be Saviors (and infinite atonements) before Him?
tyler90az Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 (edited) Infinite to whom he atoned for. Edited December 30, 2012 by tyler90az
JeremyOrbe-Smith Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Here's how I see it: If Christ acted as an Angel (Angelos/Messenger) to us on behalf of the Father and the Holy Spirit of Wisdom, then when He brought to pass the ritual At-One-Ment of this world, the Restoration of the Covenant between the Heavens and Earth, He was adding to His Father's Kingdom, which is what we're supposed to be learning to do as well when we are Adopted as Children of the Promise. So there is only a single At-One-Ment, but it has to be accepted in the hearts of an infinite number of separate Uncreated Intelligences; they all have to take part in order to make One from Many. But the underlying law of Justice says that unity cannot be forced by unrighteous dominion; it has to be a free-will choice to serve others and sacrifice for them so that all may have joy. E pluribus unum and all that. Hence all the nature metaphors to try and get around the linguistic ambiguity of the One and the Many; the At-One-Ment grows out from the planting of a single seed into a forest of Trees of Life over an infinite number of gardens over worlds without number; we drink from the waters of life and become separate droplets connected within a single endlessly flowing river; we're Sparks emanating from the Fire; etc.. There's no fight for priority here; the Son's At-One-Ment is part of the Father's, and is offered to us, and we're supposed to be Evangelists who take the name of Christ ("Anointed One") upon ourselves, bringing the Good News of the infinite At-One-Ment to others so everyone can know that we can all choose to be a part of the same family. Our Heavenly Parents and Christ and everyone we know have the potential to be Gods because the seeds of faith they nourish continue on forever. Y'dig? 1
Damien the Leper Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 The KFS is not doctrine. I don't see it or Snow's couplet as being adopted any time soon.The short answer is No.God has always been and always will be God. Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father. The Spirit is the mind and will of God. All being one God.
Bernard Gui Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Jesus Christ is not the Father of the spirits who have taken or yet shall take bodies upon this earth, for He is one of them. He is The Son, as they are sons or daughters of Elohim. So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring. Only such exalted souls have reached maturity in the appointed course of eternal life; and the spirits born to them in the eternal worlds will pass in due sequence through the several stages or estates by which the glorified parents have attained exaltation.The First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Salt Lake City, Utah, 30 June 1916The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity. God Himself is an exalted man, perfected, enthroned, and supreme. By His almighty power He organized the earth and all that it contains, from spirit and element, which exist coeternally with Himself. He formed every plant that grows and every animal that breathes, each after its own kind, spiritually and temporally—“that which is spiritual being in the likeness of that which is temporal, and that which is temporal in the likeness of that which is spiritual.” He made the tadpole and the ape, the lion and the elephant, but He did not make them in His own image, nor endow them with godlike reason and intelligence. Nevertheless, the whole animal creation will be perfected and perpetuated in the Hereafter, each class in its “distinct order or sphere,” and will enjoy “eternal felicity.” That fact has been made plain in this dispensation (see D&C 77:3).Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.Joseph F. SmithJohn R. WinderAnthon H. LundFirst Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day SaintsNovember 1909 2
ERayR Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 The KFS is not doctrine. I don't see it or Snow's couplet as being adopted any time soon.The short answer is No.God has always been and always will be God. Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father. The Spirit is the mind and will of God. All being one God.So that I can see more clearly where you are coming from am I correct then in assuming you are a modalist.
Tacenda Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Here's how I see it: If Christ acted as an Angel (Angelos/Messenger) to us on behalf of the Father and the Holy Spirit of Wisdom, then when He brought to pass the ritual At-One-Ment of this world, the Restoration of the Covenant between the Heavens and Earth, He was adding to His Father's Kingdom, which is what we're supposed to be learning to do as well when we are Adopted as Children of the Promise. So there is only a single At-One-Ment, but it has to be accepted in the hearts of an infinite number of separate Uncreated Intelligences; they all have to take part in order to make One from Many. But the underlying law of Justice says that unity cannot be forced by unrighteous dominion; it has to be a free-will choice to serve others and sacrifice for them so that all may have joy. E pluribus unum and all that. Hence all the nature metaphors to try and get around the linguistic ambiguity of the One and the Many; the At-One-Ment grows out from the planting of a single seed into a forest of Trees of Life over an infinite number of gardens over worlds without number; we drink from the waters of life and become separate droplets connected within a single endlessly flowing river; we're Sparks emanating from the Fire; etc.. There's no fight for priority here; the Son's At-One-Ment is part of the Father's, and is offered to us, and we're supposed to be Evangelists who take the name of Christ ("Anointed One") upon ourselves, bringing the Good News of the infinite At-One-Ment to others so everyone can know that we can all choose to be a part of the same family. Our Heavenly Parents and Christ and everyone we know have the potential to be Gods because the seeds of faith they nourish continue on forever. Y'dig? This is good stuff. It's very Christian sounding with a little LDS mixed in.
Damien the Leper Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 (edited) So that I can see more clearly where you are coming from am I correct then in assuming you are a modalist.I'm not sure Trinitarianism is modalism. Edited December 30, 2012 by Valentinus
DarkScythe Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 the question is, "does it matter if Heavenly Father was a Savior similar to Christ Matter to us?" My answer, No it doesn't matter. To this Multi verse and to me, Heavenly Father is Heavenly Father is just Heavenly Father.
ERayR Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 I'm not sure Trinitarianism is modalism.OK I think that I have some idea of where you are coming from now.
ChristKnight Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 I'm not sure Trinitarianism is modalism.Well, I think he's pointing out that saying that "Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father" is modalism, not Trinitarianism. Trinitarianism teaches that Jesus, God the Son, is a distinct Person from the Father. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father.
ERayR Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 This is good stuff. It's very Christian sounding with a little LDS mixed in.Not to be nit picky but LDS is Christian too.
Tacenda Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Not to be nit picky but LDS is Christian too.I know it's the laziness in me of not putting in the (non LDS) Christian part. I knew the minute I did it someone would call me out on it. Long time no see Ray.
Teancum Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 (edited) The KFS is not doctrine. I don't see it or Snow's couplet as being adopted any time soon.The short answer is No.God has always been and always will be God. Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father. The Spirit is the mind and will of God. All being one God.The KFD certainly is church doctrine. It has been taught and referred to repeatedly over the general conference pulpit and published hundreds of times at least in official church manuals and other publications. This makes it official church doctrine. Edited December 30, 2012 by Teancum 1
inquiringmind Posted December 30, 2012 Author Posted December 30, 2012 The KFD certainly is church doctrine. It has been taught and referred to repeatedly over the general conference pulpit and published hundreds of times at least in official church manuals and other publications. This makes it official church doctrine.So is it possible that there have been multiple incarnations and atonements in multiple worlds?One reason I asked the questions in the OP is that I've been thinking about the multiverse theory (and when I say "worlds," I don't necessarily mean planets.)Is it possible that before the Son's incarnation and atonement, Heavenly Father (perhaps as some other Heavenly Father's Son) incarnated and atoned for the sins of some other world (universe), and that this perhaps happened many times before that?That seems implied in the KFD.But if there had to be more than one atonement, how can any one be called infinite (as the atonement of Christ is called in the BOM)?
Damien the Leper Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 The KFD certainly is church doctrine. It has been taught and referred to repeatedly over the general conference pulpit and published hundreds of times at least in official church manuals and other publications. This makes it official church doctrine.No. Time and again for more than 15 years I have been told that doctrine is in the Standard Works.
Damien the Leper Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Well, I think he's pointing out that saying that "Jesus is the physical manifestation of the Father" is modalism, not Trinitarianism. Trinitarianism teaches that Jesus, God the Son, is a distinct Person from the Father. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father.Hence John 1:1. This doesn't merely distinguish between the 2 but establishes the theology that there is but one God. The Nicene and Apostle's creeds are in harmony with scripture.
halconero Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 My personal feelings are yes, based around several statements and my own conclusions drawn from scripture.One thing I will say though is that I believe that there has to have been another Saviour in a different period. The Latter-day Saint belief that the Father has a body makes it so. For if he has a body, and that body is glorified, by what power was that body glorified or resurrected?I believe that a plurality of eternities makes statements such as "God was once a mortal man" and "God is eternal, and before him there was none" both possible.I'll elaborate on what I mean by that later. Time to go renew some covenants!
ChristKnight Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Hence John 1:1. This doesn't merely distinguish between the 2 but establishes the theology that there is but one God. The Nicene and Apostle's creeds are in harmony with scripture.Right of course, however that oneness of substance (consubstantiaiity) also includes not "confounding the persons", as stated in the Athanasian Creed. Stating that Jesus Christ is "the physical manifestation fo the Father" is "confounding the persons", and is not Trinitarianism, but modalism (do you know the differences between the two?). Jesus Christ, according to the orthodox Trinity doctrine, is the physical "manifestation", or more precisely, the physical Incarnation, of the Son, not the Father (since the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, yes are one in substance, are also distinct Persons, who are not each other, as taught by the Athanasian Creed).Not trying to argue about this or divert the thread, just pointing out the error.
ERayR Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 I know it's the laziness in me of not putting in the (non LDS) Christian part. I knew the minute I did it someone would call me out on it. Long time no see Ray.It was just to keep you on your toes. Tough job but somebody has to do it.
CV75 Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 (edited) duplicate... Edited December 30, 2012 by CV75
CV75 Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 (edited) In the King Follet Sermon (if I understand him correctly) JS seems to interpret something Jesus said about doing what He had seen His Father do, to mean that The Father had been incarnate, and had laid His life down, and been the Savior of another world.I think this is also one interpretation of the Lorenzo Snow couplet.What I don't understand is that the BOM speaks of Christ's atonement as infinite.Wouldn't The Father's atonement have also been infinite?Why would there be need for more than one infinite atonement?If there are Fathers above The Father, would there also be Saviors (and infinite atonements) before Him?Christ followed His Father, who at some point lost His life to find it. His invitation is that we also become saviors by losing our lives to find them.His atonement is infinte in that:a) 2 Nephi 9 (especially the first 7 verses) – it pertains to the application of His covenant with Israel from the beginning to the end of that covenant as it is realized upon this earth; it is for all men and all me are subject to it; its blessings last forever; it yields incorruption (a condition which never ends).b) 2 Nephi 25:16 – it is “infinite for all mankind” that reside on this earth (as indicated by the context of all the surrounding verses).c) Alma 34 -- “infinite atonement” conveys that it applies to all mankind (and note that verse 8 distinguishes between transgression and sin).This doesn’t prevent the infinite atonement we enjoy from being enjoyed by other worlds or universes, nor does it prevent other infinite atonemnets from taking place for yet other worlds or universes. It is infinite in its need by and results for the indivduals impacted by it. Edited December 30, 2012 by CV75
ERayR Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 The KFD certainly is church doctrine. It has been taught and referred to repeatedly over the general conference pulpit and published hundreds of times at least in official church manuals and other publications. This makes it official church doctrine.I Corinthians 13:1212 For now we see through a aglass, bdarkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know ...
thesometimesaint Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 In the King Follet Sermon (if I understand him correctly) JS seems to interpret something Jesus said about doing what He had seen His Father do, to mean that The Father had been incarnate, and had laid His life down, and been the Savior of another world.I think this is also one interpretation of the Lorenzo Snow couplet.What I don't understand is that the BOM speaks of Christ's atonement as infinite.Wouldn't The Father's atonement have also been infinite?Why would there be need for more than one infinite atonement?If there are Fathers above The Father, would there also be Saviors (and infinite atonements) before Him?Unknown at this time.Allowable, but not doctrine.It applies to everyone everywhere from the moment of creation through all of eternity.Unknown at this time.That assumes doctrine that we don't have.That assumes doctrine we don't have. 1
Damien the Leper Posted December 30, 2012 Posted December 30, 2012 Right of course, however that oneness of substance (consubstantiaiity) also includes not "confounding the persons", as stated in the Athanasian Creed. Stating that Jesus Christ is "the physical manifestation fo the Father" is "confounding the persons", and is not Trinitarianism, but modalism (do you know the differences between the two?). Jesus Christ, according to the orthodox Trinity doctrine, is the physical "manifestation", or more precisely, the physical Incarnation, of the Son, not the Father (since the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, yes are one in substance, are also distinct Persons, who are not each other, as taught by the Athanasian Creed).Not trying to argue about this or divert the thread, just pointing out the error.You are right. Incarnation is the more appropriate word. Looking back at what I said, I realized that I may have been endorsing the Patripassian heresy. Thank you for the correction.
Recommended Posts