JLHPROF Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Lehi's doctrinal exposition in 2 Nephi 2 gives us some important clues when it comes to helping us to make a determination as to whether or not there was a 'first cause' and whether or not God always existed. And the answers to those two propositions, at least according to Lehi, is that there was no first cause that induced existence to emerge from nonexistence and that God had no beginning.But there's an unexpected twist to Lehi's presentation on things eternal. Lehi not only informs us that there is no first cause and that God has always existed but, quite remarkably, he also goes on to say there was no beginning to the forces that stand in opposition to God either. In other words, Lehi reveals to us that God and the forces opposed to God are coeval, having no beginning and no end in a self-existent and immutable reality based on perpetual opposition in all things...11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my firstborn in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility. (2 Nephi 2) Lehi is saying that unless there is a self-existing system of reality based on eternal opposition in all things, there would be neither life nor death and no sense nor insensibilty -- meaning nothing at all could exist. and Lehi continues,13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away. (2 Nephi 2) In this verse Lehi is saying law and sin had no beginning, righteousness and unrighteousness had no beginning and happiness and misery had no beginning. He goes on to say that if this uncreated system of existence constructed upon an indestructible matrix of opposition in all things did not always exist, there is nothing and no one who could have then caused existence to issue forth from a state of nonexistence. Finally he instructs us to understand that if there wasn't always an uncreated God standing at the helm of eternal power, nothing could exist; without an uncreated eternally self-existent God all things would vanish into nonexistence. Therefore God, however one may define Him, always existed and has no beginning, neither will He have an end. Perhaps that "God" that eternally exists is actually the Eloheim, the council of Gods, that has always and will always exist, regardless of which individual members are exalted into its order and introduced to progression to the higher order of kingdoms. A self-existent council that has always existed (as Joseph referred to in the KFD - the head of the Gods ) would meet this requirement even if individuals reached Godhood and joined the quorum and progressed onward. Isn't it Eloheim that is referred to in the creation scriptures? We will all join the Eloheim when we are exalted and have our turn at running a creation or two after which we too can progress to the higher order of kingdoms. And of course, we will never catch up to our Heavenly Father who is ahead of us on the ladder. Edited July 16, 2014 by JLHPROF
mfbukowski Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Okay. That is basically where we part company. I don't go with the philosophers stone about being outside of time. I find it nearly impossible to reconcile with the early prophets of the Restoration. But if you are willing to discard those teachings, well of course you can go pretty much down any Christian sectarian road you wish. But at some point when traveling that road, you wind up like Dorothy saying Toto I don't think we are in Mormonism anymore.I don't understand a word of this. Would you perhaps restate it? Philosophers stone ? I discard early prophets And follow sectarian traditions by believing God has a body? No clue what you mean.
teddyaware Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Perhaps that "God" that eternally exists is actually the Eloheim, the council of Gods, that has always and will always exist, regardless of which individual members are exalted into its order and introduced to progression to the higher order of kingdoms. A self-existent council that has always existed (as Joseph referred to in the KFD - the head of the Gods ) would meet this requirement even if individuals reached Godhood and joined the quorum and progressed onward. Isn't it Eloheim that is referred to in the creation scriptures? We will all join the Eloheim when we are exalted and have our turn at running a creation or two after which we too can progress to the higher order of kingdoms. And of course, we will never catch up to our Heavenly Father who is ahead of us on the ladder.Bingo! Give that man a cigar!
JLHPROF Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Bingo! Give that man a cigar! Thanks! So is this is how we balance the scriptural requirement for a "self-existent" God with the fact that our Heavenly Father hasn't always been "God" and was once a man like us.
teddyaware Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Thanks! So is this is how we balance the scriptural requirement for a "self-existent" God with the fact that our Heavenly Father hasn't always been "God" and was once a man like us. Give that man another cigar! A Cuban El Excelsior Suprema! In the end, we'll learn the Godhead has many more members than three. Edited July 16, 2014 by teddyaware 1
JLHPROF Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Give that man another cigar! A Cuban El Excelsior Suprema! In the end, we'll learn the Godhead has many more members than three. The funny thing is is that this is not doctrine I didn't already know. I am very familiar with the doctrine of plurality of Gods and mans progression to join them. But I guess I'd never bothered to reconcile the scriptures talking about "God" being infinite and eternal with the KFD and other places where we learn that being a "God" is something mortals progress to. I think I'd always just dismissed the infinite/eternal part as leftover protestantism. I am glad you helped me find a better explanation and mesh the two seemingly conflicting notions using the doctrines.
teddyaware Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) The funny thing is is that this is not doctrine I didn't already know. I am very familiar with the doctrine of plurality of Gods and mans progression to join them. But I guess I'd never bothered to reconcile the scriptures talking about "God" being infinite and eternal with the KFD and other places where we learn that being a "God" is something mortals progress to. I think I'd always just dismissed the infinite/eternal part as leftover protestantism. I am glad you helped me find a better explanation and mesh the two seemingly conflicting notions using the doctrines.Many thanks. Over the years I've come to learn several of the supposed "doctrinal inconsistencies" within Mormonism can indeed be harmonized once the full truth is known. This is just one of those seeming contradictions that can be reconciled with the proper information and perspective. Edited July 17, 2014 by teddyaware
VideoGameJunkie Posted July 16, 2014 Author Posted July 16, 2014 I hope all of this knowledge is revealed one day to us from either Heavenly Father or Jesus.
JLHPROF Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 I hope all of this knowledge is revealed one day to us from either Heavenly Father or Jesus. Which knowledge? If you mean "Did Heavenly Father Live As We Currently Live?" then it already was, by his prophet Joseph Smith. If you mean, how it all exactly works 100%, then we might have a bit of a wait.
VideoGameJunkie Posted July 16, 2014 Author Posted July 16, 2014 Yes, I meant how it all exactly works 100%. We will probably have a bit of a wait, but it will be worth the wait.
Alan Posted July 17, 2014 Posted July 17, 2014 Which knowledge? If you mean "Did Heavenly Father Live As We Currently Live?" then it already was, by his prophet Joseph Smith. Which of the restoration scriptures contains this revelation?
JLHPROF Posted July 17, 2014 Posted July 17, 2014 Which of the restoration scriptures contains this revelation? I'm not having this argument twice in the same thread.I will not allow myself to be one of those people that can't handle what Joseph taught:- JSH 1:20- TPJS 329- TPJS 331- HC 5:362- HC 6:366- Millennial Star - 13:257 & 55:585- 9th Article of Faith When it comes to the recorded teachings of Joseph Smith I will never allow myself to think that way.
mfbukowski Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 Which of the restoration scriptures contains this revelation?Go to the temple sometime."... that's the way Father gained his knowledge". 2
mfbukowski Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) I'm not having this argument twice in the same thread. I will not allow myself to be one of those people that can't handle what Joseph taught: - JSH 1:20 - TPJS 329 - TPJS 331 - HC 5:362 - HC 6:366 - Millennial Star - 13:257 & 55:585 - 9th Article of Faith When it comes to the recorded teachings of Joseph Smith I will never allow myself to think that way.See the above as well, and read all you can about the "Church of the Firstborn". Edited July 18, 2014 by mfbukowski
djones Posted July 18, 2014 Posted July 18, 2014 Yes he did. That's what the plan of salvation is all about. Someday if you are a god your spirit children will be asking the same question about you.
MiserereNobis Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 Yes he did. That's what the plan of salvation is all about. Someday if you are a god your spirit children will be asking the same question about you. In that case, by all means, tell your spirit children about it clearly, so that all of them (even those who belong to your true church) understand it.
teddyaware Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) In that case, by all means, tell your spirit children about it clearly, so that all of them (even those who belong to your true church) understand it. The key to understanding Mormonism is to understand that the Latter-day Saints believe God is all powerful, powerful enough to take a fallen human and fill him with so much of the Spirit of God that that men takes on the full eternal nature of that Spirit. In other words, he becomes like God. We believe the sacrifice of the Son of God is infinite and eternal in degree, quality and nature. Therefore Christ sacrificed all that He was and all He possessed to us, His beloved brothers and sisters. Other Christians put a limit on what God can do to transform a man in His image, the Latter-day Saints do not. It's just that simple. We are told that with God nothing is impossible, and we Latter-day Saints have faith simple enough to believe it... Edited July 19, 2014 by teddyaware
MiserereNobis Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 The key to understanding Mormonism is to understand that the Latter-day Saints believe God is all powerful, powerful enough to take a fallen human and fill him with so much of the Spirit of God that than men takes on the full eternal nature of that Spirit. In other words, he becomes like God. We believe the sacrifice of the Son of God is infinite and eternal in degree, quality and nature. Therefore Christ sacrificed all He was and all He possessed to us, His beloved brothers and sisters. Other Christians put a limit on what God can do to transform a man in His image, the Latter-day Saints do not. It's just that simple. We are told that with God nothing is impossible, and we Latter-day Saints have faith simple enough to believe it... My point was that the doctrine of the nature of God is a point of disagreement in Mormonism (as evidenced by this thread). The LDS belief and the Christian belief on this point are also quite divergent. If the nature of God, who He was, who we will be, is such an important point, then perhaps the doctrine should be more clear. Also, Catholics believe 100% that with God nothing is impossible, and our faith is also quite simple. We honor the Blessed Virgin Mary for Her simplicity, so much so that we know that our redemption is based on Her faith. Finally, I think it is an incorrect characterization to say that we put limits on what God can do. The fact that we do not believe in LDS exaltation does not mean we are limiting God. As an analogy: do you believe that God is going to turn you into an amoeba? No? Does that mean you are limiting God? Of course not -- it just means that you believe God is going to do something different. Same with us Christians. Our belief in theosis as opposed to exaltation does not mean we are limiting God.
teddyaware Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) My point was that the doctrine of the nature of God is a point of disagreement in Mormonism (as evidenced by this thread). The LDS belief and the Christian belief on this point are also quite divergent. If the nature of God, who He was, who we will be, is such an important point, then perhaps the doctrine should be more clear. Also, Catholics believe 100% that with God nothing is impossible, and our faith is also quite simple. We honor the Blessed Virgin Mary for Her simplicity, so much so that we know that our redemption is based on Her faith. Finally, I think it is an incorrect characterization to say that we put limits on what God can do. The fact that we do not believe in LDS exaltation does not mean we are limiting God. As an analogy: do you believe that God is going to turn you into an amoeba? No? Does that mean you are limiting God? Of course not -- it just means that you believe God is going to do something different. Same with us Christians. Our belief in theosis as opposed to exaltation does not mean we are limiting God. The overriding question is why would God not want us to be like Him in every way? If He's God and has all the power necessary to make us like Him, why wouldn't he do so? We are said to be made in His image, then why not His complete image? Does He elect to not use His infinite and eternal power to transform us into His complete image because He, for some inexplicable reason, wants to reserve the ultimate state of blessedness and happiness only to Himself? God is supremely happy because He "is light and in him there is no darkness at all." What could possibly motivate an all-powerful, all-merciful, all-giving and all-loving God to desire that His children retain even little pockets of darkness in their souls? Why wouldn't He want them to possess all the light He possesses? What kind of father wouldn't want His children to have all he has? And here are the ultimate questions: If God has the power to bring His children all the way into a state of theosis, what then holds Him back from bringing us all the way into a state of full infinite and eternal theosis? He's already clearly demonstrated He has the power to bring us so very far along the path that leads to His throne, so why does He not finish the work of infinite and eternal redemption? Is it that He really doesn't have the power to finish the work? Edited July 19, 2014 by teddyaware 2
mfbukowski Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 I want my children to grow up and be even MORE than I have been, and I think all parents do as well.
teddyaware Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) I want my children to grow up and be even MORE than I have been, and I think all parents do as well. But in Heavenly Father's case we can't be more than He is, even if He wanted us to be, because He possesses the infinite and eternal fullness of all good things. What more could there be? Edited July 19, 2014 by teddyaware
JLHPROF Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 But in Heavenly Father's case we can't be more than He is, even if He wanted us to be, because He possesses the infinite and eternal fullness of all good things. What more could there be? D&C 130:10
Stone holm Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 But in Heavenly Father's case we can't be more than He is, even if He wanted us to be, because He possesses the infinite and eternal fullness of all good things. What more could there be?What does that even mean? Infinite fullness.
MiserereNobis Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) What does that even mean? Infinite fullness. (here is where mfbukowski needs to post his Rorty video...) Edited July 19, 2014 by MiserereNobis
Stone holm Posted July 19, 2014 Posted July 19, 2014 What does that even mean? Infinite fullness.Is that like after Thanksgiving Dinner at Grandmas or something? Did He just digest us or something? I mean the word " full" doesn't even make sense when used with " infinite" . It's amazing the doctrine people can spin out of obvious hyperbole .
Recommended Posts