Biological and Celestial Connection

[CV75]

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There are a number of fallacies which I see here:  You do not see the intelligence, spirit, and body as inextricably connected.  You ignore the necessity of natural experience in human bodies as an essential step for gods in embryo,  You ignore the obvious natural functions of resurrected persons (biological eating and biological reproducing), thus rendering meaningless the human step in development. 

Why make the human body otiose?  If all you say is true, then there would be no purpose to maintaining the human appearance at all, either before or after death.  Yet everything was first made according to the natural template, including the mammalian one.  Why not jettison all that at the moment of glorification if it serves no purpose?

I’m not sure what you mean by “inextricably.” Scripturally speaking, I pretty much equate “intelligence” with “spirit” and think of the connection with the body in terms of “separable” or “inseparable.” As long as they are together they are a “soul.” None of these (except ‘body”) are biological terms. I see “separable” as the results of biological processes and “inseparable” resulting from the power of God. Now the spirit and mind may be inextricably connected once biology is introduced. In this case, biology facilitates the improvement of both spirit and mind by virtue of the mortal experience just as the power of God facilitates the improvement of both in mortality and in the resurrection, but that is not what I've been talking about.

Yes, I’ve ignored, so far for the sake of discussion, the necessity of natural experience in human bodies (biological) as an essential step for gods in embryo (not biological). But surely you are not suggesting that a crippled man, once resurrected, won’t be able to walk because he lacked that natural, biological human experience in mortality…

Biologically speaking, I do not know the “obvious” natural functions of resurrected persons (and neither do you!). I’m sure they can perform eating and procreative functions – even simultaneously (think George Castanza) -- but I wouldn’t insist they are biological. Jesus eating fish on the beach could have been a social, theatrical or other integrative process with the disciples. Or maybe He chooses eat fish on Earth and skip eating altogether back home, but that is no more “keeping kashrut” or kosher at home than biology is the power of God.

The human body certainly isn’t otiose (I like that word!), biologically or eternally, but framing the power of God as biology serves no practical purpose, for me, anyway. Just because the resurrected body looks and acts like the mortal one, the processes that sustain it (and their obvious results, death!) wouldn’t be the same.

Edited December 19, 2017 by CV75

[mfbukowski]

9 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Then there are the “three consecutive dreams . . . from on high,” which came to Descartes on the night of Nov 10, 1619, as a kind of “Hermetic trance, of that sleep of the senses in which truth is revealed” – Descartes’ three visits from the Angel of Truth that night -- J. Maritain, The Dream of Descartes (1944).

Wow, thanks, wasn't aware of that at all!

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I’m not sure what you mean by “inextricably.” Scripturally speaking, I pretty much equate “intelligence” with “spirit” and think of the connection with the body in terms of “separable” or “inseparable.” As long as they are together they are a “soul.” None of these (except ‘body”) are biological terms. I see “separable” as the results of biological processes and “inseparable” resulting from the power of God. Now the spirit and mind may be inextricably connected once biology is introduced. In this case, biology facilitates the improvement of both spirit and mind by virtue of the mortal experience just as the power of God facilitates the improvement of both in mortality and in the resurrection, but that is not what I've been talking about.

Yes, I’ve ignored, so far for the sake of discussion, the necessity of natural experience in human bodies (biological) as an essential step for gods in embryo (not biological). But surely you are not suggesting that a crippled man, once resurrected, won’t be able to walk because he lacked that natural, biological human experience in mortality…

Biologically speaking, I do not know the “obvious” natural functions of resurrected persons (and neither do you!). I’m sure they can perform eating and procreative functions – even simultaneously (think George Castanza) -- but I wouldn’t insist they are biological. Jesus eating fish on the beach could have been a social, theatrical or other integrative process with the disciples. Or maybe He chooses eat fish on Earth and skip eating altogether back home, but that is no more “keeping kashrut” or kosher at home than biology is the power of God.

The human body certainly isn’t otiose (I like that word!), biologically or eternally, but framing the power of God as biology serves no practical purpose, for me, anyway. Just because the resurrected body looks and acts like the mortal one, the processes that sustain it (and their obvious results, death!) wouldn’t be the same.

Seems to me that you take the either-or approach, while I take the both-and approach.  You also seem to take some functions as merely ceremonial or theatrical, while I take them literally, but as an either-or function at best, rather than both-and.  You also define "intelligence" in an outmoded way, although there are many on this board who agree with you.  The Brethren have in fact been less than careful and consistent in their use of the term.  However, your usage makes no sense in a coherent theological system.

Joseph Smith said:

Quote

Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it had a beginning?  The intelligence of spirits had not beginning, neither will it have an end. . . . Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle.  (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp.353-354); cf. D&C 93:29.

Joseph Fielding Smith said:

Quote

Some of our writers have endeavored to explain what an intelligence is, but to do so is futile, for we have never been given any insight into this matter beyond what the Lord has fragmentarily revealed. We know, however, that there is something called intelligence which always existed. It is the real eternal part of man, which was not created nor made. This intelligence combined with the spirit constitutes a spiritual identity or individual.  (Answers to Gospel Questions, 4:127)

Harold B. Lee said:

Quote

There is something that is not created or made. The scriptures called it "intelligence," which at a certain stage in the pre-existence was organized into a "spirit."  (The Teachings of Harold B. Lee,  p.74)

 

[CV75]

58 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Seems to me that you take the either-or approach, while I take the both-and approach.  You also seem to take some functions as merely ceremonial or theatrical, while I take them literally, but as an either-or function at best, rather than both-and.  You also define "intelligence" in an outmoded way, although there are many on this board who agree with you.  The Brethren have in fact been less than careful and consistent in their use of the term.  However, your usage makes no sense in a coherent theological system.

Joseph Smith said:

Joseph Fielding Smith said:

Harold B. Lee said:

I only equate “intelligence” with “spirit” for convenience and practicality, especially when discussing things so gauche as biology (note that I said, “pretty much”). While biology certainly has a role in play in the eternal plan*, it makes no sense to me as a central or overarching element to a coherent theological system. At least it makes less sense than the parts of the three quotes I agree with, whether intelligence is a spirit, a property of spirits, was combined with a spirit or organized into a spirit. I don’t think biology makes much of a distinction.

If by “either-or” you mean that I view biology only as a purely mortal process, or an attribute of mortal organic life only, without corresponding to the makeup and function of immortal (celestial or exalted) beings, then you would be correct. While I see the power of God evident in biology, I do not see biology as evident in the power of God. I think mortal and resurrected beings have more in common mechanically, aesthetically, psychologically, etc. than biologically.

*Let me make this weirder: I’ve postulated (usually in threads about evolution) that everything we observe and understand in and of the physical universe happened just as scientists say it did (name your science), but the Fall occurred before and initiated that. I’d call the beginning a big bang but I’ve seen some articles that say the beginning of space-time, for us at least, was something else. These “telestial” laws took billions of years to create a place where Adam could exit the Garden of Eden into a world that replicated the paradisiacal template, have descendants and pick up the mantle of his mortal ministry. You mentioned genus and species of gods earlier; who knows how back Adam looked to adopt those “Homos” that appeared along the evolutionary line prior to, and even concurrently with, “sapiens.”

[Robert F. Smith]

54 minutes ago, CV75 said:

..........................................

*Let me make this weirder: I’ve postulated (usually in threads about evolution) that everything we observe and understand in and of the physical universe happened just as scientists say it did (name your science), but the Fall occurred before and initiated that. I’d call the beginning a big bang but I’ve seen some articles that say the beginning of space-time, for us at least, was something else. These “telestial” laws took billions of years to create a place where Adam could exit the Garden of Eden into a world that replicated the paradisiacal template, have descendants and pick up the mantle of his mortal ministry. You mentioned genus and species of gods earlier; who knows how back Adam looked to adopt those “Homos” that appeared along the evolutionary line prior to, and even concurrently with, “sapiens.”

Or Adam & Eve merely participated in a standard initiatory liturgy in that Temple-Garden, thus starting a short temporal sequence which was preceded by billions of years of preparation.  The same liturgy which we still use today.

[CV75]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Or Adam & Eve merely participated in a standard initiatory liturgy in that Temple-Garden, thus starting a short temporal sequence which was preceded by billions of years of preparation.  The same liturgy which we still use today.

That could be, whether they were transported from a terrestial world or evolved from monkeys or both... 

A piece I left out is that after the Fall, Adam went back to a terrestrial sphere to wait out the billions of years of preparation before he became mortal upon arriving to Earth 7,000 years ago. He may have even gone back and forth during all that time to watch over his stewardship, orchestrate mass extinctions until the projected results turned out right, or perform a nip and tuck here and there (genetically speaking), etc.

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, CV75 said:

......................................................

A piece I left out is that after the Fall, Adam went back to a terrestrial sphere to wait out the billions of years of preparation before he became mortal upon arriving to Earth 7,000 years ago. He may have even gone back and forth during all that time to watch over his stewardship, orchestrate mass extinctions until the projected results turned out right, or perform a nip and tuck here and there (genetically speaking), etc.

Ridiculous.  To no purpose.  Sounds like the baroque version of geologic time.

[CV75]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Ridiculous.  To no purpose.  Sounds like the baroque version of geologic time.

LOL Yes, it is a long time to get anything done, which accentuates the inferiority of telestial law.

The Lord abides eternal law to the point Himself is the full expression of eternal law. In premortality, I imagine that we were infused with celestial law in a spirit condition, which by virtue of having no body, was only partially expressed, hence a third part made a bad choice. Adam in Eden (and all his stewardship) was in a filtered situation where eternal law was expressed only at the the paradiasical level, and when he fell, or chose to live by telestial law, only the telestial laws came through the big bang (or the more current theory of the cosmic inflation of vacuum energy of space fabric) and he and all his stewardship then had to abide accordingly.

 

Each successive iteration of creation follows the pattern or template of the world preceding it, each stage essential the plan of progress and happiness. Each one re-organizes or recreates the former according to its respective laws. We will now advance and recreate the world in the Millennium under terretsrial law (as teh inhabitants of Enoch's Zion and other translated people have done), and proceed toward celestial law and exaltation.

 

I'm suggesting that the filtering of telestial law is an example of where biological (and any other "-ological") law comes from. With the filtering came disconnection or apparent inconsistencies and contradictions between the laws, including how we conceptualize them (and this even happened with such laws as mercy and justice), As we advance into higher laws, they will be brought back together again through the unifying law or power of God as expressed in the Atonement of Christ.

 

This libretto is a way of explaining my view that biology is something unique to mortality.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

LOL Yes, it is a long time to get anything done, which accentuates the inferiority of telestial law.

The Lord abides eternal law to the point Himself is the full expression of eternal law. In premortality, I imagine that we were infused with celestial law in a spirit condition, which by virtue of having no body, was only partially expressed, hence a third part made a bad choice. Adam in Eden (and all his stewardship) was in a filtered situation where eternal law was expressed only at the the paradiasical level, and when he fell, or chose to live by telestial law, only the telestial laws came through the big bang (or the more current theory of the cosmic inflation of vacuum energy of space fabric) and he and all his stewardship then had to abide accordingly.

 

Each successive iteration of creation follows the pattern or template of the world preceding it, each stage essential the plan of progress and happiness. Each one re-organizes or recreates the former according to its respective laws. We will now advance and recreate the world in the Millennium under terretsrial law (as teh inhabitants of Enoch's Zion and other translated people have done), and proceed toward celestial law and exaltation.

 

I'm suggesting that the filtering of telestial law is an example of where biological (and any other "-ological") law comes from. With the filtering came disconnection or apparent inconsistencies and contradictions between the laws, including how we conceptualize them (and this even happened with such laws as mercy and justice), As we advance into higher laws, they will be brought back together again through the unifying law or power of God as expressed in the Atonement of Christ.

 

This libretto is a way of explaining my view that biology is something unique to mortality.

Ah, but there are too many notes in the music you have composed, and they are so unnecessary.  The libretto is merely the liturgy.  Adam's world is only this solar system, and the laws mastered by God are the natural laws governing the entire universe, which have always been present in space & time.  Indeed, God Himself is part of space & time, and this applies as well to all other gods through infinity.  The passage from intelligence, to spirit, to human flesh, to glory is one vast continuum.  That we may be veiled or limited in some ways along that difficult path does in no way suggest any lack of continuity.  Eternal law is one coherent whole, one eternal round, of which biology is an integral part.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Ah, but there are too many notes in the music you have composed, and they are so unnecessary.  The libretto is merely the liturgy.  Adam's world is only this solar system, and the laws mastered by God are the natural laws governing the entire universe, which have always been present in space & time.  Indeed, God Himself is part of space & time, and this applies as well to all other gods through infinity.  The passage from intelligence, to spirit, to human flesh, to glory is one vast continuum.  That we may be veiled or limited in some ways along that difficult path does in no way suggest any lack of continuity.  Eternal law is one coherent whole, one eternal round, of which biology is an integral part.

That could be said by just about anything (e.g. grace after all we can do). Adam’s world is only this planet, but it takes a “village”(spaces and times)  – a universe, and all that goes on here helps him (us), even though as “children” we don’t recognize all that is going on in our behalf behind the veils and filters.

The eternal laws mastered by God filter into the natural telestial laws, which are still thoroughly dependent on His governance through the light of Christ. The filtering falls along a continuum, as seen in D&C 88:36-38: “All kingdoms have a law given; And there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in the which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is no space, either a greater or a lesser kingdom. And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.” Veils serve as great filters.

Space and time are good things, and are the place(s) where they celestial, terrestrial and telelstial laws do their thing, biology being an integral part of the later. If you can trace it back through the filters and veils and it still looks like biology, you might have a point! Eternal law as one coherent whole and one eternal round does not mean it is homogenous with regard to the “many” (which from the scripture to me turns out to mean a innumerable or indeterminate number) spaces and kingdoms.

Edited December 20, 2017 by CV75

[Robert F. Smith]

6 hours ago, CV75 said:

That could be said by just about anything (e.g. grace after all we can do). Adam’s world is only this planet, but it takes a “village”(spaces and times)  – a universe, and all that goes on here helps him (us), even though as “children” we don’t recognize all that is going on in our behalf behind the veils and filters.

The eternal laws mastered by God filter into the natural telestial laws, which are still thoroughly dependent on His governance through the light of Christ. The filtering falls along a continuum, as seen in D&C 88:36-38: “All kingdoms have a law given; And there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in the which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is no space, either a greater or a lesser kingdom. And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.” Veils serve as great filters.

Space and time are good things, and are the place(s) where they celestial, terrestrial and telelstial laws do their thing, biology being an integral part of the later. If you can trace it back through the filters and veils and it still looks like biology, you might have a point! Eternal law as one coherent whole and one eternal round does not mean it is homogenous with regard to the “many” (which from the scripture to me turns out to mean a innumerable or indeterminate number) spaces and kingdoms.

If you could hie to Kolob

In the twinkling of an eye,

And then continue onward

With that same speed to fly,

Do you think that you could ever,

Through all eternity,

Find out the generation

Where Gods began to be?

The works of God continue,

And worlds and lives abound;

Improvement and progression

Have one eternal round.

There is no end to matter;

There is no end to space;

There is no end to spirit;

There is no end to race.

There is no end to glory;

There is no end to love;

There is no end to being;

There is no death above.

There is no end to glory;

There is no end to love;

There is no end to being;

There is no death above.

-- W. W. Phelps

[CV75]

34 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

If you could hie to Kolob

In the twinkling of an eye,

And then continue onward

With that same speed to fly,

Do you think that you could ever,

Through all eternity,

Find out the generation

Where Gods began to be?

The works of God continue,

And worlds and lives abound;

Improvement and progression

Have one eternal round.

There is no end to matter;

There is no end to space;

There is no end to spirit;

There is no end to race.

There is no end to glory;

There is no end to love;

There is no end to being;

There is no death above.

There is no end to glory;

There is no end to love;

There is no end to being;

There is no death above.

-- W. W. Phelps

This is beautiful and/because/but it definitely doesn't sound like the biology I know...

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

This is beautiful and/because/but it definitely doesn't sound like the biology I know...

That's because the biology is inextricably part of it.  It would be reductionist to try to parse it out.

[CV75]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That's because the biology is inextricably part of it.  It would be reductionist to try to parse it out.

It is also reductionist to say, as you have, “the biology is inextricably part of it” – whatever “it” is… That is what science does, breaks complex phenomenon into its constituent parts. Reducing all sciences into a single “super-theory” (one great whole) is also reductionist – the process works both ways. Once biology becomes indivisible from a larger process, it is no longer biology; its nature is changed, just as a spirit and element are changed when they become a soul, especially once they are inseparably connected.

So I see this discussion being not so much about embellishment or reduction, but whether the power of God is another phenomenon that He reduces into constituent sciences and eternal laws, or whether all phenomena are governed by the power of God according to eternal law, to be comprehended through science at one level or through the power of God at another.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

It is also reductionist to say, as you have, “the biology is inextricably part of it” – whatever “it” is… That is what science does, breaks complex phenomenon into its constituent parts. Reducing all sciences into a single “super-theory” (one great whole) is also reductionist – the process works both ways. Once biology becomes indivisible from a larger process, it is no longer biology; its nature is changed, just as a spirit and element are changed when they become a soul, especially once they are inseparably connected.

To separate out the organic from the inorganic molecules, or the biological from the inert is to flunk biochemistry if the essential unity of the elements and the bonds created by molecular structure are ingnored.  Surely you understand that it is all one system.  We only divvy things up and specialize for convenience' sake.

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

So I see this discussion being not so much about embellishment or reduction, but whether the power of God is another phenomenon that He reduces into constituent sciences and eternal laws, or whether all phenomena are governed by the power of God according to eternal law, to be comprehended through science at one level or through the power of God at another.

Well, yes, the normative Judeo-Christian-Muslim theology does define God as outside the space-time continuum, and sees him as entirely other.  For them, God creates all law of whatever kind, natural law with the rest.  God for them cannot be a man who became God, which is pure blasphemy.  There is no sense in which that normative God can be limited.  After all, He is the uncaused Cause, the Prime Mover of all, and everything else is contingent -- including evil -- which is the reason why such belief systems are being abandoned, because they are illogical, inconsistent, and paradoxical.

The reason for the superiority of the Mormon concept of God is that He masters nature (of which he is a part) as an integral part of His development from intelligence, to spirit, to human, to God (apotheosis).  No  magical nonsense.  Just hard work, with the loving assistance of his Father God.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

To separate out the organic from the inorganic molecules, or the biological from the inert is to flunk biochemistry if the essential unity of the elements and the bonds created by molecular structure are ingnored.  Surely you understand that it is all one system.  We only divvy things up and specialize for convenience' sake.

Yes, because the connection of biology and chemistry with each other is biochemistry. Mortal biology and its connection with all other processes is a necessity for mortal, telestial life and it is good to understand those conenctions. The unity of elements is one thing (chemistry); the unity of spirit and element is another (the power of God). I don’t have a word or a concept for “immortal” or “celestial biology,” or celestial chemistry or physics for that matter. Is the law of gravity the same law that Jesus used to descend out of heaven?

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Well, yes, the normative Judeo-Christian-Muslim theology does define God as outside the space-time continuum, and sees him as entirely other.  For them, God creates all law of whatever kind, natural law with the rest.  God for them cannot be a man who became God, which is pure blasphemy.  There is no sense in which that normative God can be limited.  After all, He is the uncaused Cause, the Prime Mover of all, and everything else is contingent -- including evil -- which is the reason why such belief systems are being abandoned, because they are illogical, inconsistent, and paradoxical.

The reason for the superiority of the Mormon concept of God is that He masters nature (of which he is a part) as an integral part of His development from intelligence, to spirit, to human, to God (apotheosis).  No  magical nonsense.  Just hard work, with the loving assistance of his Father God.

This is what I am saying. God masters nature, and some laws were part of His development, let’s say along the exact same lines as ours; other laws are part of His maintenance and continuance, which we have not yet mastered. He sets the laws in different spheres of operation (D&C 93:30), some for us to abide along the way and some for Him to abide along His eternal round. I am sure it is very hard work for Him to extend His grace to our hard work in following His footsteps.

Some scientists are working on biological techniques that establish life forms that do not die – immortal in every practical respect except when something (or someone) eats them or squishes them or disposes of them, or changes them into something else. What are the physical laws that prevent someone from eternally being eaten, squished, disposed of or altered?

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Yes, because the connection of biology and chemistry with each other is biochemistry. Mortal biology and its connection with all other processes is a necessity for mortal, telestial life and it is good to understand those conenctions. The unity of elements is one thing (chemistry); the unity of spirit and element is another (the power of God). I don’t have a word or a concept for “immortal” or “celestial biology,” or celestial chemistry or physics for that matter. Is the law of gravity the same law that Jesus used to descend out of heaven?

Biochemistry is merely a word which we use for convenience, not as an actual description of reality, which does not know of such reductionist nonsense.  Likewise, gravity is merely a word used to describe a universal law, which our rockets obey as they reach escape velocity, and which the Moon obeys in its orbit around Earth.  We know of no exception to such laws, nor need there ever be any exceptions.  The gods do not disobey such laws.  'they have instead mastered all the laws, just as our scientists have mastered a few.

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

This is what I am saying. God masters nature, and some laws were part of His development, let’s say along the exact same lines as ours; other laws are part of His maintenance and continuance, which we have not yet mastered. He sets the laws in different spheres of operation (D&C 93:30), some for us to abide along the way and some for Him to abide along His eternal round. I am sure it is very hard work for Him to extend His grace to our hard work in following His footsteps.

Some scientists are working on biological techniques that establish life forms that do not die – immortal in every practical respect except when something (or someone) eats them or squishes them or disposes of them, or changes them into something else. What are the physical laws that prevent someone from eternally being eaten, squished, disposed of or altered?

That is knowledge and ability which comes only with mastery of all the laws of nature.  We humans know only a small fraction of it.

[mfbukowski]

On 12/18/2017 at 12:26 PM, Calm said:

CV, define biology as you are using it because somehow I don't think you mean 'organic living organisms and their functions' because immortal bodies would qualify there.

I think these categories and the limited scope of what we are capable of knowing and speaking about are simply the "philosophies of men" anyway and frankly pretty useless except as metaphors in human-worm-speak but have nothing to do with the world "as it is". 

Imagine explaining Relativity to a nematode.

Through a glass darkly.... 

 

[CV75]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Biochemistry is merely a word which we use for convenience, not as an actual description of reality, which does not know of such reductionist nonsense.  Likewise, gravity is merely a word used to describe a universal law, which our rockets obey as they reach escape velocity, and which the Moon obeys in its orbit around Earth.  We know of no exception to such laws, nor need there ever be any exceptions.  The gods do not disobey such laws.  'they have instead mastered all the laws, just as our scientists have mastered a few.

That is knowledge and ability which comes only with mastery of all the laws of nature.  We humans know only a small fraction of it.

Our words have not been very convenient, it seems!

I think that Jesus' arrival to the Nephites had nothing to do with His mastery over gravity, though He does possess it. Likewise, He has mastery over biology, but I do not think that explains how He lives. At the risk of repeating myself, I think biology is part of the small fraction of the laws of nature that we know only something about, and that there are other laws that support celestial/immortal life.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

.................................................

I think that Jesus' arrival to the Nephites had nothing to do with His mastery over gravity, though He does possess it. ....................

And just how would you know that?  By observation and testing?  By automatic supposition?  You do not seem to understand what gravity is and what it means.  Jesus' arrival at Bountiful does not necessitate the violation of the law of gravity at all.  The issue need never come up for someone who has mastered the laws of the universe -- natural law, not mumbo jumbo, because in the economy of God there is never a need for more than is necessary to engage in an action of any kind.  It may be that you should have paid closer attention in physics class when the law of gravity was explained, and everyone came to understand why a rocket obeys the law of gravity as it reaches escape velocity, or why the Moon obeys the law of gravity continuously.  I gave you those hints on purpose.  There are no known exceptions to the law of gravitation.

[CV75]

14 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

And just how would you know that?  By observation and testing?  By automatic supposition?  You do not seem to understand what gravity is and what it means.  Jesus' arrival at Bountiful does not necessitate the violation of the law of gravity at all.  The issue need never come up for someone who has mastered the laws of the universe -- natural law, not mumbo jumbo, because in the economy of God there is never a need for more than is necessary to engage in an action of any kind.  It may be that you should have paid closer attention in physics class when the law of gravity was explained, and everyone came to understand why a rocket obeys the law of gravity as it reaches escape velocity, or why the Moon obeys the law of gravity continuously.  I gave you those hints on purpose.  There are no known exceptions to the law of gravitation.

I don't know it, I just think it. I was about to bring up the same kind of point over biology: "the gods live by a biology we haven't yet mastered yet". Really? How do you know that? I wouldn't call it biology since it isn't something the science remotely suggests. Not to pooh-pooh your personal beliefs, but I might call that idea "mumbo jumbo" and some of the other terms you've used in your responses to my posts!  

I didn't say He violated the law of gravity, I'm just saying He didn't necessarily use it. I'm not saying the laws of gravity are not observable to the extent we can observe them, and we can certainly come to know more about how it works, and even might discover on some level of operation some exceptions or substitutes.

If you think we're going around and around at this point, please feel free to say so. 

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

I don't know it, I just think it. I was about to bring up the same kind of point over biology: "the gods live by a biology we haven't yet mastered yet". Really? How do you know that? I wouldn't call it biology since it isn't something the science remotely suggests. Not to pooh-pooh your personal beliefs, but I might call that idea "mumbo jumbo" and some of the other terms you've used in your responses to my posts!  

I'm a minimalist when it comes to what God does or gods do.  I see no reason for magic or mumbo-jumbo, when the application of the law of parsimony (Occam's Razor) can be used.  I consider that the economy of God.  Why would he engage in nonsense, when direct action is enough?  I think that restraint is called for.

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

I didn't say He violated the law of gravity, I'm just saying He didn't necessarily use it. I'm not saying the laws of gravity are not observable to the extent we can observe them, and we can certainly come to know more about how it works, and even might discover on some level of operation some exceptions or substitutes...................................

I leave wild supposition to Sci Fi, which I love but don't necessarily see any reason to apply to God.  To me the baroque stuff always was and is nonsense.  Let silly Medieval scholars debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

[CV75]

9 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I'm a minimalist when it comes to what God does or gods do.  I see no reason for magic or mumbo-jumbo, when the application of the law of parsimony (Occam's Razor) can be used.  I consider that the economy of God.  Why would he engage in nonsense, when direct action is enough?  I think that restraint is called for.

I leave wild supposition to Sci Fi, which I love but don't necessarily see any reason to apply to God.  To me the baroque stuff always was and is nonsense.  Let silly Medieval scholars debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

“Now ye may suppose that this is foolishness in me; but behold I say unto you, that by small and simple things are great things brought to pass; and small means in many instances doth confound the wise. And the Lord God doth work by means to bring about his great and eternal purposes; and by very small means the Lord doth confound the wise and bringeth about the salvation of many souls.”

Personally, I see nothing complex about biology and other physical laws being relegated to the fallen creation. I do see some severe complexities with having laws of one kingdom operating within another, and it's got nothing to do with magic or with not being "small". Using biology as an example, mutation applies to individuals and evolution applies to species. Yet the prophets say salvation (the new creature) is for individuals and exaltation is for families (the creature is sealed). And mutation and evolution happen to things, and salvation and exaltation are processes requiring our choice to act upon. Is mutation to salvation as evolution is to exaltation? Why is it said that I am a god in embryo and at the same time I evolve into a god? That might be semantic, but are randomness and chance the same as will and agency?

That said, we may well might find out that “the generation where Gods began to be” was the result of an evolutionary process involving previous generations of other kinds of god- or spirit-ancestors, and that at some point onward from Kolob randomness or chance acted upon LUCA-god and gave rise to one possessing will and agency. At some point it was not a god that gave rise to great and eternal purposes. Simple, and helps explain why we don’t worship God’s father…! We can look forward to “onward” evolutionary descendants who are no more relatable to us than LUCA! Plus, it would be consistent with our understanding of how things work, which is the most convenient and attractive aspect of all!

Edited December 22, 2017 by CV75

[Robert F. Smith]

23 minutes ago, CV75 said:

.................................................... . . . helps explain why we don’t worship God’s father…! .................................

Brigham Young stated in April of 1852, in a sermon in Salt Lake City, that, of the various deities which exist, one "is our father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do" (Journal of Discourses, 1:50; cf. Paul in I Cor 8:5-6).

[CV75]

42 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Brigham Young stated in April of 1852, in a sermon in Salt Lake City, that, of the various deities which exist, one "is our father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do" (Journal of Discourses, 1:50; cf. Paul in I Cor 8:5-6).

Of course. My comment was to address the "why" of such statement in relation to the belief in biology-dependent godhood.