Stone holm Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 Homer and Hesiod are rife with anthropomorphism so striking that even the gods were made to have all the emotions of man and even the same kinds of debauchery. But, I will grant you that the intelligentsia tended to ignore such materials and had a more abstract view of the subject. That is what made it so infective and attractive all at once. It was easy to prefer so "lofty" thoughts of the philosophers in preference to the striking and ubiquitous anthropomorphism in the Hebrew "Old Testament" and even those of the Greek New Testament. This made allegorization methodologies of Augustine and others so necessary, resulting in the culmination of the apostasy.I agree about Homer. And, I also agree that the pagan peasants and average Joes of most pagan religions tended to think in anthropomorphic terms even if they were primarily nature worshippers as they tended to create anthropomorphic dieties to represent various aspects of nature. I tend to trust in such hardwired beliefs over the thinking of people who spent too much time trying to figure out the metaphysical questions. Mormonism allows us to kick most of the metaphysical questions and the philosophical questions concerning first causation down the road. That is the beauty of the Snow Couplet, it lets us synchronize our hard wired concepts of God with our doctrine and yet let us leave the ultimate questions unanswered. Although I have noticed that a fair number of commentators on this board want to tackle the ultimate questions and suck them back into our doctrines of deity, these attempts, however, usually just lead to confusion.
Stone holm Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 I can agree with this.Yeah, I have always loved our doctrine when you can strip away some of the opinions it has a beauty that surpasses anything I have encountered in any of my religious explorations. I wish it was discussed more.
3DOP Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 Those who believe in the Nicene concept of The Trinity, which means that God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all the same - three beings of one substance, they also believe in the physical Resurrection of Jesus Christ. So if Jesus really was resurrected then that means God has a physical body since Jesus has one since He is God and They are of "one substance". The Bible also teaches that the "resurrected" Christ is in "the brightness of his (God's) glory, and the express image of his person" (Hebrews 1:3).To me it doesn't get more plain than that.Maybe this will help:http://farms.byu.edu...15&num=1&id=474Three beings of one substance?The Nicene Trinity emphatically does not teach that there are three beings and one substance since substance and being are synonymous. Divine consubstantiality, per Nicea, means that the three Persons have one Being, Existence, Essence, or Substance. There are not three beings in the Nicene Trinity. Being is not synonymous with person. The Three are persons, the One is essence, substance, being, or nature. This is not an attempt to explain the mystery, but it is an attempt to help Mormons know and articulate what they oppose. 2
Stone holm Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 Three beings of one substance?The Nicene Trinity emphatically does not teach that there are three beings and one substance since substance and being are synonymous. Divine consubstantiality, per Nicea, means that the three Persons have one Being, Existence, Essence, or Substance. There are not three beings in the Nicene Trinity. Being is not synonymous with person. The Three are persons, the One is essence, substance, being, or nature. This is not an attempt to explain the mystery, but it is an attempt to help Mormons know and articulate what they oppose.It's kind of a shame they deleted my favourite character from the Endowment, it used to do such a good job of displaying the total confusion.
MormonMason Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 It's kind of a shame they deleted my favourite character from the Endowment, it used to do such a good job of displaying the total confusion.I recall what he said about a God "whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere," and so forth. Funny thing is, I actually read a book from the 19th century that gave precisely that definition of that kind of God to which you allude. I'll be darned if I can't recall the title of the book, though. But, on the flip side, there is a Latin translation of the Greek works of Hermes Trismegistos that speaks of God: "God is a perfect sphere whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere."Consider also the following:[Elder Daniel D. McArthur, whose home is in St. George, Washington County, Utah, was born in the town of Holland, Erie County, New York, on the 8th day of April, 1820. He met Joseph Smith for the first time in Kirtland, in the month of July, 1836. His estimation of the Prophet, and his testimony concerning him are given here in his own words:]To me he seemed to possess more power and force of character than any ordinary man. I would look upon him when he was with hundreds of other men, then he would appear greater than ever.My testimony is that he was a true Prophet of the living God; and the more I heard his sayings and saw his doings the more I was convinced that he had of a truth seen God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, as also the holy angels of God. I cannot call to mind that I ever had a doubt enter my heart, since I first heard the gospel preached, which was in the spring of 1832, as to his being a true Prophet. It always seemed to me that if I ever did know anything on this earth I surely knew that he was a Prophet.[some things which he remembers of this great man he also relates as follows:]When he first spoke to me I was in the woods, about half a mile south of Kirtland. He was on his horse and I was chopping wood. Said he, "Good afternoon." I returned the compliment. He had a smile on his face, and I felt that he was going to say something else, "You are not the young man who sold his wife for a bull-eye watch the other day, are you?" he asked. I replied, "No, sir," and he went on laughing. There was a man who had sold his wife for a bull-eye watch a day or two before, and there was quite a talk about it in the neighborhood, so I suppose he thought he would have a little fun with me.This same winter, 1836, he stated that he was out of firewood and that he had no time to get up any, for the officers of the law were continually on his track. So some of the brethren thought they would turn out and get him some wood. Father and some two other brethren took their teams to haul, and myself and three other boys went to chop the wood into sled lengths. It was the last of December and snow was on the ground.When noon came we were all called to dinner at Joseph's house. The table was loaded down with cornmeal mush and milk, and at the bidding of Joseph we all stepped forward to our places around the table, standing on our feet. Joseph asked Joshua Holman, who was one of the wood haulers, to ask a blessing upon the food. He went at his duty with all his soul. As he had been a Methodist exhorter before joining the Church, he commenced to call upon the great and mighty God who sat upon the top of a topless throne, to look down and bless the food and asked many other blessings to rest upon the Prophet, etc. As soon as he closed Brother Joseph said, "Brother Joshua, don't let me ever hear you ask another such a blessing;" and then before we took our seats he stated his reasons for making this remark, and showed us how inconsistent such ideas were, and told us many things about God and who He was.(http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/REC-JS.html)Apparently, such sayings really were in vogue among the sects of Joseph's day when the ceremony was ritualized and the character alluded to was present. 1
Stone holm Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 I recall what he said about a God "whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere," and so forth. Funny thing is, I actually read a book from the 19th century that gave precisely that definition of that kind of God to which you allude. I'll be darned if I can't recall the title of the book, though. But, on the flip side, there is a Latin translation of the Greek works of Hermes Trismegistos that speaks of God: "God is a perfect sphere whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere."Consider also the following:Apparently, such sayings really were in vogue among the sects of Joseph's day when the ceremony was ritualized and the character alluded to was present.Well it does sound impressive when you state completely nonsensical stuff and then contend it is a deep mystery.
MormonMason Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 Well it does sound impressive when you state completely nonsensical stuff and then contend it is a deep mystery.Now, think of this great mystery recited by "The Impressive Clergyman"! (If you don't know what I am alluding to you should sit down and watch The Princess Bride).
3DOP Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) It's kind of a shame they deleted my favourite character from the Endowment, it used to do such a good job of displaying the total confusion.One man's confusion is another's faith. One man's nonsense is another's mystery.Sometimes I think Mormons misunderstand Catholics and the Trinity in this way.Catholics are confident in something like the Trinity which seems like confusion to you, but even to us, it is over our heads. Our confidence isn't founded in our ability to understand an isolated difficult, mysterious teaching like the teaching of the Church on the Blessed Trinity. We believe it because otherwise we would have to deny the Church. We don't believe in the Apostasy. Some of you guys are confident about an Apostasy because the Trinity is confusing to you. We don't expect to be able to prove and thoroughly comprehend everything. Are all your doctrines easy? Are there no logical problems in your faith? I really don't know. In a way, I think I would be uncomfortable if I thought I had it all figured out in this life.Anyway, it doesn't seem strange that we struggle to understand something like the Trinity. But more than that, we think the existence of the Church for these centuries is miraculous and that God has shown with lots of other signs that He approves of the Catholic Church. If the Catholic Church is true, so is its teaching. Our faith isn't in the Trinity per se, but in God's revelation through His Church. It won't do to convince us that we don't understand the Trinity! We know that we don't understand the Trinity already.Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost...On the Feast of the Holy Trinity,3DOP Edited May 27, 2013 by 3DOP 2
MormonMason Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 Wishing I was at home with my Lectionary of the Mass right about now....
3DOP Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) Wishing I was at home with my Lectionary of the Mass right about now....Mormon Mason,I wish I didn't have to go to work in a few minutes. Do you want to trade places?I am not sure if your comment about a Lectionary was aimed at me. I can't imagine what would be in a Lectionary that would speak to this question. Lectionaries have the Scriptural readings for the day. I am not suggesting that we are not required to believe precise formulae. I wonder if you might be thinking of the Preface of the Trinity, (the part of the Mass that precedes the Sanctus) which explicitly spells out why I was trying to correct Hannah Rebecca's innaccuracies. In addition to an accurate belief, it is a dogma of the Catholic faith that we cannot fully comprehend the belief. We do not understand generation or procession in the Godhead.I understand that to an outsider that sounds like a smoke cover for craziness. But to an insider it takes a healthy humility to be willing to be realize our intellectual limitations and sometimes to be ridiculed for it. I am not accusing you or anyone here at this time of that. Sometimes pride tempts one try to explain it. Regards,3DOP Edited May 27, 2013 by 3DOP 1
Stone holm Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 One man's confusion is another's faith. One man's nonsense is another's mystery.Sometimes I think Mormons misunderstand Catholics and the Trinity in this way.Catholics are confident in something like the Trinity which seems like confusion to you, but even to us, it is over our heads. Our confidence isn't founded in our ability to understand an isolated difficult, mysterious teaching like the teaching of the Church on the Blessed Trinity. We believe it because otherwise we would have to deny the Church. We don't believe in the Apostasy. Some of you guys are confident about an Apostasy because the Trinity is confusing to you. We don't expect to be able to prove and thoroughly comprehend everything. Are all your doctrines easy? Are there no logical problems in your faith? I really don't know. In a way, I think I would be uncomfortable if I thought I had it all figured out in this life.Anyway, it doesn't seem strange that we struggle to understand something like the Trinity. But more than that, we think the existence of the Church for these centuries is miraculous and that God has shown with lots of other signs that He approves of the Catholic Church. If the Catholic Church is true, so is its teaching. Our faith isn't in the Trinity per se, but in God's revelation through His Church. It won't do to convince us that we don't understand the Trinity! We know that we don't understand the Trinity already.Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost...On the Feast of the Holy Trinity,3DOPThe nature of God is not a small side matter it is fairly fundamental. A description which is a set of contradictions may be mind expanding like a Zen riddle, but if on the other hand you believe in a God of order having a house of order, then such mysticism becomes merely confusion which obscures the truth. At least the Buddhists do not worship their riddles, but use them as tricks to free the mind.
Spammer Posted May 27, 2013 Author Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) The nature of God is not a small side matter it is fairly fundamental. A description which is a set of contradictions may be mind expanding like a Zen riddle, but if on the other hand you believe in a God of order having a house of order, then such mysticism becomes merely confusion which obscures the truth. At least the Buddhists do not worship their riddles, but use them as tricks to free the mind.We worship God, not riddles. Like Buddhists, we acknowledge that God is beyond all concepts. The trinitarian formulation is only intended as a framework to help anchor us as we begin to approach the reality of God through prayer, but that formulation is not God. if you think you have grasped God with your mind, you have not grasped God. That is our belief. Zen koans and our apophatic theology both seek to strip the mind of concepts in the approach to the divine Mystery. Edited May 27, 2013 by Spammer 2
volgadon Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 We worship God, not riddles. Like Buddhists, we acknowledge that God is beyond all concepts. The trinitarian formulation is only intended as a framework to help anchor us as we begin to approach the reality of God through prayer, but that formulation is not God. if you think you have grasped God with your mind, you have not grasped God. That is our belief. Zen koans and our apophatic theology both seek to strip the mind of concepts in the approach to the divine Mystery.Basically, there is a limit to what the human intellect in its present state can grasp. God extends far beyond that. Several LDS here seem to forget that we aren't an exception, either. 2
Stone holm Posted May 27, 2013 Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) Basically, there is a limit to what the human intellect in its present state can grasp. God extends far beyond that. Several LDS here seem to forget that we aren't an exception, either.We may not fully understand God, but JS taught that we could come to an understanding of his nature and what He was like. We do not describe as a form of riddle. From time to time, however, you will. Find LDS who seek to engraft onto our doctrine some of the mysticism and first cause related issue onto our teachings in order to make it seem more rigorously monotheistic. We see that on occasion when threads drift off into issues say involving Heavenly Mother(s). Edited May 27, 2013 by Stone holm
3DOP Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 Basically, there is a limit to what the human intellect in its present state can grasp. God extends far beyond that. Several LDS here seem to forget that we aren't an exception, either.I haven't ever talked about this here. I haven't really thought it through before. My bad.Why the "Marriage Supper of the Lamb"? Why the Church as bride? Why all the imagery of marriage? Before all is revealed between the spouses, married life is a wonderful mystery, something known and believed to be wonderful, to be anticipated, but beyond our present experience, and our ability to appreciate before the time. God will reveal Himself completely to His beloved, but not before the wedding. We will know, even as we are known. But not yet. It is a wedding!!!Okay. Good. I am totally satisfied with mystery. I have no desire to fully comprehend at this time.I am glad volgadon that you see beyond any kind of polemical motive to be suspicious of mystery. We need mystery. You need mystery. Pre-marriage/Engagement implies mystery. The Marriage implies full revelation in due time. Not yet. Beautiful. Beautiful.3DOP 2
volgadon Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 We may not fully understand God, but JS taught that we could come to an understanding of his nature and what He was like. We do not describe as a form of riddle. From time to time, however, you will. Find LDS who seek to engraft onto our doctrine some of the mysticism and first cause related issue onto our teachings in order to make it seem more rigorously monotheistic. We see that on occasion when threads drift off into issues say involving Heavenly Mother(s).Can you fully understand the nature of the atonement? Can you fully understand God's love? Can you fully understand the resurrection? Can you fully understand how there is no end? Can you fully understand how there is no beginning? Can you fully understand priesthood? Can you fully understand light? Can you fully understand truth? Can you fully understand joy? Can you fully understand sorrow? Can you fully understand heaven? Can you fully understand hell?Yes, you can, but not currently. 1
Calm Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 (edited) Joseph Smith also said it would be a long time after death that we would finally learn and understand all of the principles of exaltation. (see sig for quote)How can we understand the nature of God in mortality when we won't be able to understand the nature of exaltation?Perhaps when Joseph Smith said we would come to an understanding, he meant it in the same way as he did the quote I use, God will be comprehended but not in this world alone.I have yet to meet anyone who has fully comprehended the nature of another fellow mortal human being, even those they have lived intimately with for decades. Though all things are possible with the Spirit, I don't believe that necessarily means that all things will happen. Edited May 28, 2013 by calmoriah 1
volgadon Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 I haven't ever talked about this here. I haven't really thought it through before. My bad.Why the "Marriage Supper of the Lamb"? Why the Church as bride? Why all the imagery of marriage? Before all is revealed between the spouses, married life is a wonderful mystery, something known and believed to be wonderful, to be anticipated, but beyond our present experience, and our ability to appreciate before the time. God will reveal Himself completely to His beloved, but not before the wedding. We will know, even as we are known. But not yet. It is a wedding!!!Okay. Good. I am totally satisfied with mystery. I have no desire to fully comprehend at this time.I am glad volgadon that you see beyond any kind of polemical motive to be suspicious of mystery. We need mystery. You need mystery. Pre-marriage/Engagement implies mystery. The Marriage implies full revelation in due time. Not yet. Beautiful. Beautiful.3DOPPowerful words. There is an account of one of our prophets, David O. McKay, which shows that our lifetimes are too short to unravel the mysteries of God.As his health began to decline in the mid-1960s, he soon spent much of his time in a wheelchair and called additional counselors into the First Presidency. Despite his weakening physical condition, he continued to conduct the business of the Church and to teach, lead, and inspire. Not long before his death, he spoke at a meeting in the Salt Lake Temple with the General Authorities of the Church. Elder Boyd K. Packer, who was present at the meeting, recalled the experience as follows:“[President McKay] talked of the temple ordinances and quoted at length from the ceremonies. He explained them to us. (That was not inappropriate, considering that we were in the temple.) After he had spoken for some time, he paused and stood gazing up to the ceiling in deep thought.“I remember that his big hands were in front of him with his fingers interlocked. He stood gazing as people sometimes do when pondering a deep question. Then he spoke: ‘Brethren, I think I am finally beginning to understand.’“Here he was, the prophet—an Apostle for over half a century and even then he was learning, he was growing. His expression ‘I think I am finally beginning to understand,’ was greatly comforting to me.” Even with his extensive understanding of the gospel and his experience in the Church, President McKay was humble enough to realize that he could still learn and discover deeper levels of meaning.http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=8313be335dc20110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=198bf4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD
MormonMason Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 Mormon Mason,I wish I didn't have to go to work in a few minutes. Do you want to trade places?I am not sure if your comment about a Lectionary was aimed at me. I can't imagine what would be in a Lectionary that would speak to this question. Lectionaries have the Scriptural readings for the day. I am not suggesting that we are not required to believe precise formulae. I wonder if you might be thinking of the Preface of the Trinity, (the part of the Mass that precedes the Sanctus) which explicitly spells out why I was trying to correct Hannah Rebecca's innaccuracies. In addition to an accurate belief, it is a dogma of the Catholic faith that we cannot fully comprehend the belief. We do not understand generation or procession in the Godhead.I understand that to an outsider that sounds like a smoke cover for craziness. But to an insider it takes a healthy humility to be willing to be realize our intellectual limitations and sometimes to be ridiculed for it. I am not accusing you or anyone here at this time of that. Sometimes pride tempts one try to explain it.Regards,3DOPNo sarcasm or ridicule or anything the like. I wasn't addressing you, although your brief remark mentioning the Feast of the Holy Trinity reminded me of things. If I were addressing you, however, I most likely would have quoted you. I am aware of Hannah Rebekah's errors in understanding on the matter (three beings rather than three persons or three hypostases, etc). I simply expressed my wish that I were home with my books. I know what the Lectionary is and what it contains. I frequently consult it when I want to see what is going on with the scripture readings at any given time. Your remark simply reminded me of my wish to be home with my books, particularly the Lectionary at that given moment. Crazy sounding or not, looking at the Lectionary is something that I frequently would do when I was home with my books.No, if I wanted to frame some sort of argument I might have pulled out some others of my books such as those containing the full Mass and so forth--had I been with them, that is.But, if I could trade with you I would. If you knew what it was that you were trading, you definitely would not make such an offer. Unfortunately, I can say nothing about what it is that you would be trading because doing so would risk placing myself and most of my immediate family and their safety in jeopardy.
MormonMason Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 Basically, there is a limit to what the human intellect in its present state can grasp. God extends far beyond that. Several LDS here seem to forget that we aren't an exception, either.But, Latter-day Saints are promised that, in time, we would even comprehend God (Doctrine and Covenants 88:49). For other faiths God is forever incomprehensible and unknowable.
3DOP Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 No sarcasm or ridicule or anything the like. I wasn't addressing you, although your brief remark mentioning the Feast of the Holy Trinity reminded me of things. If I were addressing you, however, I most likely would have quoted you. I am aware of Hannah Rebekah's errors in understanding on the matter (three beings rather than three persons or three hypostases, etc). I simply expressed my wish that I were home with my books. I know what the Lectionary is and what it contains. I frequently consult it when I want to see what is going on with the scripture readings at any given time. Your remark simply reminded me of my wish to be home with my books, particularly the Lectionary at that given moment. Crazy sounding or not, looking at the Lectionary is something that I frequently would do when I was home with my books.No, if I wanted to frame some sort of argument I might have pulled out some others of my books such as those containing the full Mass and so forth--had I been with them, that is.But, if I could trade with you I would. If you knew what it was that you were trading, you definitely would not make such an offer. Unfortunately, I can say nothing about what it is that you would be trading because doing so would risk placing myself and most of my immediate family and their safety in jeopardy.Hi Mason,Thank you for the gracious reply. As I too frequently do, I was feeling sorry for myself for having to work on the holiday. Allow me to retract my offer of a trade and offer a prayer on behalf of you and your family.God bless,3DOP
Stone holm Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 Can you fully understand the nature of the atonement? Can you fully understand how there is no end? Can you fully understand how there is no beginning? Can you fully understand priesthood? Can you fully understand light? Can you fully understand truth? Can you fully understand joy? Can you fully understand sorrow? Can you fully understand heaven? Can you fully understand hell?Yes, you can, but not currently.Yes, I think we can get a fairly good grasp of most of these in this life. I don't think that we have faith in a "black box" which is labeled you are going to like this, but you have no understanding of it. As to the "no beginning", although JS did his ring sermon, that has to be understood in terms of other doctrine. People here have been interpreting that as in essence denying the Snow Couplet and the clear meaning of "Hie Unto Kolob".
MormonMason Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 Hi Mason,Thank you for the gracious reply. As I too frequently do, I was feeling sorry for myself for having to work on the holiday. Allow me to retract my offer of a trade and offer a prayer on behalf of you and your family.God bless,3DOPThank you, kind sir, for your offer of prayer. It is much appreciated.
volgadon Posted May 28, 2013 Posted May 28, 2013 Yes, I think we can get a fairly good grasp of most of these in this life. I don't think that we have faith in a "black box" which is labeled you are going to like this, but you have no understanding of it. As to the "no beginning", although JS did his ring sermon, that has to be understood in terms of other doctrine. People here have been interpreting that as in essence denying the Snow Couplet and the clear meaning of "Hie Unto Kolob".I wasn't aware of Catholics and Orthodox having such a "black box" either. St. Gregory Palamas' "One Hundred and Fifty Chapters" is a good place to start regarding Orthodox views on attainment of knowledge.
Recommended Posts