Robert F. Smith Posted December 22, 2017 Posted December 22, 2017 6 hours ago, CV75 said: Of course. My comment was to address the "why" of such statement in relation to the belief in biology-dependent godhood. Of course, but that is a red herring: There is no "biology-dependent godhood." That is once again reductionist. 1
CV75 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Of course, but that is a red herring: There is no "biology-dependent godhood." That is once again reductionist. I didn't intend it to be a red-herring but a summary of how "Gods began to be" where biology is an integral component: Posted 10 hours ago .That would include evolution unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by biology being an integral part of eternal law followed and mastered by God and Gods. The only point you attended to from that post was that we worship our Father and not any others in the regressions and splits going back to an eternal LUCA. That suggests there is a point in immortal / celestial / exalted evolution where the councils of generations and various deities break off from each other. My questions in that post were not rhetorical. I am trying to understand how you see certain aspects of god-biology playing out vis-à-vis some of our basic doctrine (salvation and exaltation, will and agency). Is mutation to salvation (an individual event resulting in a new creature) as evolution is to exaltation (a sealed pedigree of like new creatures defining the family or species)? Aside from the inconsistency of using biological analogy to say that I am a god in embryo and at the same time say that I evolve into a god, are randomness and chance the same as will and agency? Edited December 23, 2017 by CV75
Robert F. Smith Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 11 hours ago, CV75 said: I didn't intend it to be a red-herring but a summary of how "Gods began to be" where biology is an integral component: Posted 10 hours ago .That would include evolution unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by biology being an integral part of eternal law followed and mastered by God and Gods. The only point you attended to from that post was that we worship our Father and not any others in the regressions and splits going back to an eternal LUCA. That suggests there is a point in immortal / celestial / exalted evolution where the councils of generations and various deities break off from each other. My questions in that post were not rhetorical. I am trying to understand how you see certain aspects of god-biology playing out vis-à-vis some of our basic doctrine (salvation and exaltation, will and agency). Is mutation to salvation (an individual event resulting in a new creature) as evolution is to exaltation (a sealed pedigree of like new creatures defining the family or species)? Aside from the inconsistency of using biological analogy to say that I am a god in embryo and at the same time say that I evolve into a god, are randomness and chance the same as will and agency? None of those things are relevant, because we just don't know the specific ways in which they might be applied. In any case, using human linguistic designations to reduce a continuum to discrete parts does violence to the very notion of the indivisibility of that continuum. How can we know, for example, how a glorified body can walk through walls? We have been told that it is a tangible glorified body of flesh and bone, just as tangible as ours. It retains human capabilities, including the ability to eat, talk, and to be handled by ordinary humans. Yet, the ability of angels and gods to move through space is a mystery beyond our comprehension. Using guessing games to posit theoretical application of biological evolution gets us nowhere, and tells us nothing. The best we can do is to simply acknowledge that gods retain crucial features of each stage of their development or passage. How that happens is beyond our understanding, and certainly entails far more than mere "biology." 2
CV75 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: None of those things are relevant, because we just don't know the specific ways in which they might be applied. In any case, using human linguistic designations to reduce a continuum to discrete parts does violence to the very notion of the indivisibility of that continuum. How can we know, for example, how a glorified body can walk through walls? We have been told that it is a tangible glorified body of flesh and bone, just as tangible as ours. It retains human capabilities, including the ability to eat, talk, and to be handled by ordinary humans. Yet, the ability of angels and gods to move through space is a mystery beyond our comprehension. Using guessing games to posit theoretical application of biological evolution gets us nowhere, and tells us nothing. The best we can do is to simply acknowledge that gods retain crucial features of each stage of their development or passage. How that happens is beyond our understanding, and certainly entails far more than mere "biology." Yes, we retain some aspects that are obtained in mortality (D&C 130:18-19, and I include the body as a "principle of intelligence"), and whatever is retained is no longer mortal, and whatever heavenly principles we attained remain eternal. If you're saying the retention of biology means a god can convert his gametes (or any particle or the whole of his body) into mortal ones, I see that inconsistency as a reason to not see biology as a component of exalted life.
Robert F. Smith Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 50 minutes ago, CV75 said: Yes, we retain some aspects that are obtained in mortality (D&C 130:18-19, and I include the body as a "principle of intelligence"), and whatever is retained is no longer mortal, and whatever heavenly principles we attained remain eternal. If you're saying the retention of biology means a god can convert his gametes (or any particle or the whole of his body) into mortal ones, I see that inconsistency as a reason to not see biology as a component of exalted life. You like reductionism. I can see that. Yet using words like "mortal" and "biology" leads you to miss the point. We simply do not know how certain things are retained, or even why. We only know that they are. What we finally need to understand is that exaltation appears to have nothing at all to do with biological evolution. Apotheosis follows another, extraordinary path to mastery of the universe. Modern scifi likewise seems to miss the point, tinkering with the melding of human and AI, or simply ever expanding technical and intellectual advancement -- both of which seem logically possible, but both of which pale into insignificance when set over against apotheosis. 1
CV75 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said: You like reductionism. I can see that. Yet using words like "mortal" and "biology" leads you to miss the point. We simply do not know how certain things are retained, or even why. We only know that they are. What we finally need to understand is that exaltation appears to have nothing at all to do with biological evolution. Apotheosis follows another, extraordinary path to mastery of the universe. Modern scifi likewise seems to miss the point, tinkering with the melding of human and AI, or simply ever expanding technical and intellectual advancement -- both of which seem logically possible, but both of which pale into insignificance when set over against apotheosis. I think I made the very point you think I missed (wow, it's been a week now) here: Posted Sunday at 07:45 PM For those LDS who subscribe to biological evolution, it is a necessary step between the spirit world and exaltation, but I see it ending with this world. Where evolution and biology are inextricable, I see biology the same way, ending with this world for the reasons you describe. Using words like "mortal" and "biology" are as necessary as using words like "exalted" and "they are [by the power of God]" to compare what is going on in the respective realms of mortals and gods (the process and aim of apotheosis being common to both). I see a difference between the hypothetical that exalted beings make themselves (or their gametes) mortal, and which entails the assumption of a biological process, in order to carry out their purposes in a fallen world and their being able to behave in a compatible fashion with a lesser kingdom, entailing some other process that to me transcends biology. Edited December 23, 2017 by CV75
mfbukowski Posted December 26, 2017 Posted December 26, 2017 (edited) On 12/23/2017 at 1:36 PM, CV75 said: I think I made the very point you think I missed (wow, it's been a week now) here: Posted Sunday at 07:45 PM For those LDS who subscribe to biological evolution, it is a necessary step between the spirit world and exaltation, but I see it ending with this world. Where evolution and biology are inextricable, I see biology the same way, ending with this world for the reasons you describe. Using words like "mortal" and "biology" are as necessary as using words like "exalted" and "they are [by the power of God]" to compare what is going on in the respective realms of mortals and gods (the process and aim of apotheosis being common to both). I see a difference between the hypothetical that exalted beings make themselves (or their gametes) mortal, and which entails the assumption of a biological process, in order to carry out their purposes in a fallen world and their being able to behave in a compatible fashion with a lesser kingdom, entailing some other process that to me transcends biology. The Pragmatist would look at such speculation and wonder how believing such things gives our lives meaning as a coherent story which is believable, or a possible paradigm which gives a coherent view of the universe. Seeing such a story as the "way it really is" becomes irrelevant just as unknowable history is irrelevant. It's a paradigm that works and gives life meaning. The way I see things talk of The Force in Star Wars could serve such a function in some people.The idea that we can communicate thoughts to God faster than light over huge distances, that God knows the contents of our hearts, and organizes matter through the power of his mind/word is in the same category as Star Wars when I look at it "objectively". All this talk to me is indistinguishable from science fiction really EXCEPT for the feelings within my heart that make it "real" to me and change the way I behave and receive what I take as feedback for its authenticity. There are many possible paradigms and I suppose each person makes up their own in these matters. That is why we share a common orthopraxis which creates our community. Agreeing on the rest often becomes irrelevant. Future generations could conceivably see Star Wars as scripture https://bycommonconsent.com/2017/12/25/the-redemptive-power-of-leias-love-for-luke-thelastjedi-spoilers/#comment-395514 Edited December 26, 2017 by mfbukowski
Recommended Posts