The uniqueness of the LDS Church

[InCognitus]

2 hours ago, theplains said:

Is the Heavenly Father of our Earth above his Father (the God before him) or is he just above the other gods of D&C 132:20?

Why do you ask the same questions over and over and over again?  Do you believe there is a "Heavenly Father of our Earth"?  Or otherwise, why do you keep asking that?  As I said before:

On 9/27/2022 at 10:05 PM, InCognitus said:

Same questions as before, but asked a different way.   I already addressed these questions.  As I said two posts ago:  "There is not a "Heavenly Father of our Earth", he is the one God who is above all."   God is the "Eternal God of all other gods"  (Doctrine and Covenants 121:32)   And the verses I quoted earlier from Abraham 3 back this up as well.

This also answers the rest of the question you asked (again) above.  "He is the one God who is above all".   Is there any clearer way to say that?  God is the "Eternal God of all other gods"  (Doctrine and Covenants 121:32)  

[theplains]

On 10/11/2022 at 1:54 PM, InCognitus said:

Why do you ask the same questions over and over and over again?  Do you believe there is a "Heavenly Father of our Earth"?  Or otherwise, why do you keep asking that?  As I said before:

This also answers the rest of the question you asked (again) above.  "He is the one God who is above all".   Is there any clearer way to say that?  God is the "Eternal God of all other gods"  (Doctrine and Covenants 121:32)  

Yes. Heavenly Father is the God of our Earth. 

When you say "God is the Eternal God of all other gods (D&C 121:32)", I think you are referring to Heavenly Father of Earth
being above all other gods (i.e. his spirit children who eventually become Gods of their own realm).

But you never say whether you believe the God and Heavenly Father of Earth (who Joseph Smith taught was once a man
who became a God) is above all the other Gods who existed before he was born.

[InCognitus]

6 hours ago, theplains said:

Yes. Heavenly Father is the God of our Earth. 

That's not what I asked.  I asked, "Do you believe there is a "Heavenly Father of our Earth"?"  (Note the letter "a" ).   By the way, scripture tells us that the LORD (Jehovah, Jesus Christ) is the "God of the whole earth" (Isaiah 54:5).

6 hours ago, theplains said:

When you say "God is the Eternal God of all other gods (D&C 121:32)", I think you are referring to Heavenly Father of Earth
being above all other gods (i.e. his spirit children who eventually become Gods of their own realm).

But you never say whether you believe the God and Heavenly Father of Earth (who Joseph Smith taught was once a man
who became a God) is above all the other Gods who existed before he was born.

Actually, I've answered that several times.  As I said last time, "He is the one God who is above all".   Is there any clearer way to say that?  God is the "Eternal God of all other gods"  (Doctrine and Covenants 121:32). 

Do you assume God the Father was not God before he was born as a man?   (I don't assume that, and that's not spelled out in what Joseph Smith was teaching).  Do you believe, as I do, that Jesus was God before he was born as a man?

[theplains]

On 10/18/2022 at 6:50 PM, InCognitus said:

That's not what I asked.  I asked, "Do you believe there is a "Heavenly Father of our Earth"?"  (Note the letter "a" ).   By the way, scripture tells us that the LORD (Jehovah, Jesus Christ) is the "God of the whole earth" (Isaiah 54:5).

Do you assume God the Father was not God before he was born as a man?   (I don't assume that, and that's not spelled out in what Joseph Smith was teaching).  Do you believe, as I do, that Jesus was God before he was born as a man?

Yes. There is *a* Heavenly Father of our Earth.  From my reading of LDS scriptures, both Jesus and Heavenly
Father are called the heavenly father of Earth.

I do not believe Joseph Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was not God from everlasting to everlasting or that
he was a man who became a God.

Yes. Jesus is God. There never was a time that he was not God.  I also don't believe in LDS teachings that Jesus
became a god or joined the Godhead in his premortal life.  For this, I provide 3 sources:

"By obedience and devotion to the truth he (Jesus) attained that pinnacle of intelligence 
which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state" 
(Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, 2004, page 10, chapter 4). 
4, online).

"Christ, who is the firstborn in the Spirit of the children of God, was elevated to Godhood, 
and in the vision Abraham saw he describes him as being like unto God" (LDS President 
Joseph Fielding Smith, The Progress of Man, chapter 6, page 74).

"Jesus was appointed to Godhood. In the Meridian of Time Christ came into the world, in 
fulfillment of the promise and appointment (LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith, The 
Progress of Man, chapter 43, pages 511-512). 

God the Father is the ultimate repository of all intelligence, "or, in other words, light 
and truth" (D&C 93:36); Jesus Christ, the Firstborn, who became a god in the premortal 
existence, the Father's steward over his creations, is the one source of light for us as 
individuals; and the Holy Ghost is the "gatekeeper," as it were, the dispenser of light 
to us according to worthiness and ability to receive it (Ensign, December 1975, "How to 
Receive Spiritual Gifts").

[InCognitus]

On 10/24/2022 at 8:38 AM, theplains said:

I do not believe Joseph Smith's teaching that Heavenly Father was not God from everlasting to everlasting...

What Joseph Smith said he would "refute" is the idea "that that God was God from all eternity".  Joseph Smith never said that Heavenly Father was not God "from everlasting to everlasting" as you say here.  You continue to misunderstand, or misconstrue what the phrase "from everlasting to everlasting" means in scripture.  This has been explained in this thread, and in posts to you specifically, over and over, here, here, here, and here.  And you are also misrepresenting what Joseph Smith taught.

When scripture says "from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God", it does not mean that he is God from all eternity past.  The actual meaning of "from everlasting" is clearly demonstrated in the verses from Proverbs 8 that I quoted to you previously here, and shown below.  These verses show that "wisdom" was "brought forth" and "set up from everlasting", from the beginning:

Quote

22 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
 24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:

If something (wisdom, in this case) was "brought forth" from everlasting, and was "set up" from everlasting, it can't possibly mean that it existed in all eternity past because it was "brought forth", it was "set up".   

This is the NLT translation: of verse 23:   "I was appointed in ages past, at the very first, before the earth began."

And here it is from the NIV:  "I was formed long ages ago, at the very beginning, when the world came to be.".

And the phrase "from everlasting to everlasting" simply means "from age to age", as I pointed out previously here.

On 10/24/2022 at 8:38 AM, theplains said:

... or that he was a man who became a God.

Joseph Smith didn't say anything about God being a man before he became God.  In fact, Joseph Smith said that "God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did."  Was Jesus God before he dwelt on earth?  Of course he was.  Who created the earth that Jesus was born as a man upon?  Jesus did.  So why should we think anything different for God the Father?

Joseph Smith taught "what kind of being God is" and how he got to be the way he is, a being who created worlds, a being who created man in his own image.  He described it this way:

"The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits."

God became who he is by increasing in glory, by bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.

On 10/24/2022 at 8:38 AM, theplains said:

Yes. Jesus is God. There never was a time that he was not God.  I also don't believe in LDS teachings that Jesus
became a god or joined the Godhead in his premortal life. 

I believe what Peter taught to the Jews in Acts 2:36, "God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ".  This is also what was understood by the earliest Christians.

Where does the Bible ever teach that there never was a time that Jesus was not God?

[theplains]

On 10/30/2022 at 8:24 PM, InCognitus said:

Joseph Smith didn't say anything about God being a man before he became God.

How do you understand these passages:

"When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; 
and so it is with the principles of the Gospel—you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the 
principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will 
have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation 
and exaltation even beyond the grave.  This is the way our Heavenly Father became God. It is the first principle 
of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. … He was once a man like us; … God himself, the 
Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did”

and

"God the Father is the ultimate repository of all intelligence, "or, in other words, light and truth" (D&C 93:36);
Jesus Christ, the Firstborn, who became a god in the premortal existence, the Father's steward over his
creations, is the one source of light for us as individuals; and the Holy Ghost is the "gatekeeper," as it were,
the dispenser of light to us according to worthiness and ability to receive it (Ensign, December 1975, "How to 
Receive Spiritual Gifts").

[InCognitus]

12 hours ago, theplains said:

How do you understand these passages:

"When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; 
and so it is with the principles of the Gospel—you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the 
principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will 
have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation 
and exaltation even beyond the grave.  This is the way our Heavenly Father became God. It is the first principle 
of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. … He was once a man like us; … God himself, the 
Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did”

How do I understand that passage?  I understand it to be an edited quote from the 1997 edition of the Gospel Principles manual that was copied word for word (complete with the ellipsis in exactly the same place) from one of two books by Vincent Poldrugovac (It comes from either The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon, p. 21, or A Mormon Encounter, p 26).  He uses the exact same quote in both publications, but oddly enough, he misrepresents this entire quote as coming from the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith in the former publication.   But his quote intermixes two separate quotations from Joseph Smith (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348, and Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345–46), mixing them in with words from the text of the manual, making it appear to be one complete quotation.

But you're probably really asking me what I make of the portions that actually came from Joseph Smith.  I understand the first quote to be saying exactly what I said before:  

God the Father is the God of us all because he more intelligent and greater than all others, and he got that way by creating worlds and by creating a way for him to obtain a body, the same as Jesus Christ himself did.  And he prepared a way for us to learn to progress to have the same things that he enjoys.  He was God before he became a man.

13 hours ago, theplains said:

and

"God the Father is the ultimate repository of all intelligence, "or, in other words, light and truth" (D&C 93:36);
Jesus Christ, the Firstborn, who became a god in the premortal existence, the Father's steward over his
creations, is the one source of light for us as individuals; and the Holy Ghost is the "gatekeeper," as it were,
the dispenser of light to us according to worthiness and ability to receive it (Ensign, December 1975, "How to 
Receive Spiritual Gifts").

I understand this passage the same way I discussed it with you previously, that Jesus was God in the premortal existence.  God the Father "made" him "both Lord and Christ".   This is the same as what the earliest Christians taught. 

This also proves what I was saying about God the Father, that he was God before he was born on earth as a man, since Jesus only did what he saw his Father do.

[Calm]

32 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

How do I understand that passage?  I understand it to be an edited quote from the 1997 edition of the Gospel Principles manual that was copied word for word (complete with the ellipsis in exactly the same place) from one of two books by Vincent Poldrugovac (It comes from either The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon, p. 21, or A Mormon Encounter, p 26).  He uses the exact same quote in both publications, but oddly enough, he misrepresents this entire quote as coming from the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith in the former publication. 

In case people want to check, it is on page 305 and the “This is how Heavenly Father became God” is clearly commentary by a manual writer, not a quote of JS..

https://archive.org/details/GospelPrinciples1997/page/n311/mode/2up

The original…both quotes are from the King Follett Discourse…

https://basic.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1971/04/the-king-follett-sermon?lang=eng
 

 

Edited November 5, 2022 by Calm

[Pyreaux]

Sticks to the script no matter how one answers.

[InCognitus]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

In case people want to check, it is on page 305 and the “This is how Heavenly Father became God” is clearly commentary by a manual writer, not a quote of JS..

https://archive.org/details/GospelPrinciples1997/page/n311/mode/2up

The original…both quotes are from the King Follett Discourse…

https://basic.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1971/04/the-king-follett-sermon?lang=eng
 

Thank you for that.  I'm usually better about my documentation, but it was late when I made that post  

I should also say that Vincent Poldrugovac may not be the only source for that particular format of the messed up quote.  His sources are what I found online for the quote (here and here), but I've learned by sad experience that it is not uncommon for so called "original sources" to be copied and copied and copied from other publications that have a similar attitude against the church (without crediting the sources being copied).   But I didn't feel like dragging out a bunch of my hard copy books to see if he had copied it from someone else.

[marineland]

On 11/4/2022 at 12:31 PM, theplains said:

How do you understand these passages:

"When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; 
and so it is with the principles of the Gospel—you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the 
principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will 
have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation 
and exaltation even beyond the grave.  This is the way our Heavenly Father became God. It is the first principle 
of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. … He was once a man like us; … God himself, the 
Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did”

and

"God the Father is the ultimate repository of all intelligence, "or, in other words, light and truth" (D&C 93:36);
Jesus Christ, the Firstborn, who became a god in the premortal existence, the Father's steward over his
creations, is the one source of light for us as individuals; and the Holy Ghost is the "gatekeeper," as it were,
the dispenser of light to us according to worthiness and ability to receive it (Ensign, December 1975, "How to 
Receive Spiritual Gifts").

 

Hello theplains.  Including @InCognitus

The missionaries I met with explained it this way:

- Heavenly Father, like you and everyone else on our earth, is an eternal intelligence (Abraham 3). For simplicity sake, I 
will refer to Heavenly Father as John.

- John, as an eternal intelligence, was organized into a spirit child of his heaven parents. In simple terms, this would be 
Jesus' grandparents.

- John, then a spirit of his heavenly parents, progressed as much as he could in his premortal home, and then he was sent 
to his earth to progress further. On this other earth, John married a woman.  Marriage is a requirement to be exalted to 
Godhood. John and his wife became Gods (reached exaltation) after they died and were resurrected. This correlates to what 
Joseph Smith taught ( ... this is the way our Heavenly Father became God).

- John is a being from everlasting to everlasting (from eternity to eternity) since he has always existed in the past and 
will exist into the future, but he is not God from all eternity. This lines up with what Joseph Smith taught (... We have 
imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may 
see. These ideas are incomprehensible to some, but they are simple).

- After his exaltation to Godhood, John and his wife organized other eternal intelligences into their own spirit children 
and they informed their children of the plan of salvation and how their children could progress and climb the ladder to 
Godhood like their heavenly parents had done earlier.

- "If we passed our tests, we would receive the fulness of joy that our heavenly parents have received. We learned that if 
we placed our faith in him, obeying his word and following his example, we would be exalted and become like our heavenly 
parents. We would receive a fulness of joy" (Gospel Principles, 1997).

[InCognitus]

4 hours ago, marineland said:

Hello theplains.  Including @InCognitus

The missionaries I met with explained it this way:

- Heavenly Father, like you and everyone else on our earth, is an eternal intelligence (Abraham 3). For simplicity sake, I 
will refer to Heavenly Father as John.

- John, as an eternal intelligence, was organized into a spirit child of his heaven parents. In simple terms, this would be 
Jesus' grandparents.

- John, then a spirit of his heavenly parents, progressed as much as he could in his premortal home, and then he was sent 
to his earth to progress further. On this other earth, John married a woman.  Marriage is a requirement to be exalted to 
Godhood. John and his wife became Gods (reached exaltation) after they died and were resurrected. This correlates to what 
Joseph Smith taught ( ... this is the way our Heavenly Father became God).

- John is a being from everlasting to everlasting (from eternity to eternity) since he has always existed in the past and 
will exist into the future, but he is not God from all eternity. This lines up with what Joseph Smith taught (... We have 
imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may 
see. These ideas are incomprehensible to some, but they are simple).

- After his exaltation to Godhood, John and his wife organized other eternal intelligences into their own spirit children 
and they informed their children of the plan of salvation and how their children could progress and climb the ladder to 
Godhood like their heavenly parents had done earlier.

- "If we passed our tests, we would receive the fulness of joy that our heavenly parents have received. We learned that if 
we placed our faith in him, obeying his word and following his example, we would be exalted and become like our heavenly 
parents. We would receive a fulness of joy" (Gospel Principles, 1997).

I see from your board post on Reddit in the Discord Chat that this was your "general summary on how you think LDS view Heavenly Father", where you said you "had a recent discussion [the post is dated 3 months ago] with a few missionaries and they said they agreed with [your] general summary".   But above you say "the missionaries I met with explained it this way".  Was it your views that they agreed with, or did they explain it this way when teaching their lesson?

It doesn't sound like anything the missionaries these days would present in a lesson plan, since it would be going beyond anything that we actually know about God.

Did you read the first comment in response to your post?   It said:  "We have no idea.  You have references for your first and last points, because we do believe those, but everything in between is pure speculation".   Don't you think that should give you some idea if you are right or not?

Edit to add:  I'd post the link to the Reddit board post, but I'm not sure if that's allowed or not.

Edited November 6, 2022 by InCognitus

[marineland]

On 11/5/2022 at 7:38 PM, InCognitus said:

I see from your board post on Reddit in the Discord Chat that this was your "general summary on how you think LDS view Heavenly Father", where you said you "had a recent discussion [the post is dated 3 months ago] with a few missionaries and they said they agreed with [your] general summary".   But above you say "the missionaries I met with explained it this way".  Was it your views that they agreed with, or did they explain it this way when teaching their lesson?

I summarized what I read in the LDS publications and the missionaries agreed with it. There was
nothing in the statements made that they disagreed with.  But I understand that other missionaries
may have other views.  

On 11/5/2022 at 7:38 PM, InCognitus said:

It doesn't sound like anything the missionaries these days would present in a lesson plan

You are right. They did not want to stay on that topic much.  Maybe one of the missionaries
did not want to disagree with Joseph Smith in front of the other if he really thought Heavenly
Father was never a man who became a God.

What is your belief?  Was Heavenly Father once a man who became a God or was he always
God?

[InCognitus]

18 minutes ago, marineland said:

I summarized what I read in the LDS publications and the missionaries agreed with it. There was
nothing in the statements made that they disagreed with.  But I understand that other missionaries
may have other views.  

What publications did you summarize to come up with what you said?

And in your post above, you said this is what the missionaries came up with, not something you came up with.  But your post on Reddit says it's what you came up with.

18 minutes ago, marineland said:

You are right. They did not want to stay on that topic much.  Maybe one of the missionaries
did not want to disagree with Joseph Smith in front of the other if he really thought Heavenly
Father was never a man who became a God.

What statement from Joseph Smith are you referring to, that the missionary didn't want to disagree with?

19 minutes ago, marineland said:

What is your belief?  Was Heavenly Father once a man who became a God or was he always
God?

I've made this clear.  Joseph Smith never said that Heavenly Father was a man before he became God.  Joseph Smith didn't provide the sequence of events in such a way to suggest he was a man first, and God later.

And God the Father has always been above all others.  How he came to be our God is explained in the statement from Joseph Smith that I quoted just a few posts ago (here) : 

Quote

The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.  (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 354)

That is how God came to be our God.

[theplains]

On 11/5/2022 at 1:46 AM, InCognitus said:

How do I understand that passage?  I understand it to be an edited quote from the 1997 edition of the Gospel Principles manual that was copied word for word (complete with the ellipsis in exactly the same place) from one of two books by Vincent Poldrugovac (It comes from either The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon, p. 21, or A Mormon Encounter, p 26).  He uses the exact same quote in both publications, but oddly enough, he misrepresents this entire quote as coming from the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith in the former publication.   But his quote intermixes two separate quotations from Joseph Smith (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348, and Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345–46), mixing them in with words from the text of the manual, making it appear to be one complete quotation.

See page 345 of "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith - 1938.  

https://scriptures.byu.edu/tpjs/STPJS.pdf

An image is attached of the relevant section.

Edited November 11, 2022 by theplains

[theplains]

On 11/5/2022 at 1:46 AM, InCognitus said:

I understand this passage the same way I discussed it with you previously, that Jesus was God in the premortal existence.  God the Father "made" him "both Lord and Christ".   This is the same as what the earliest Christians taught. 

This also proves what I was saying about God the Father, that he was God before he was born on earth as a man, since Jesus only did what he saw his Father do.

Regarding the Ensign teaching that Jesus became a god in the premortal existence which I mentioned
earlier and your statement above, do you also believe Heavenly Father became a god in his premortal
existence (i.e. Jesus' grandfather made Jesus' father a god)?  If yes, what was Heavenly Father before
he is said to have become (or have been made into) a god?

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

Regarding the Ensign teaching that Jesus became a god in the premortal existence which I mentioned
earlier and your statement above, do you also believe Heavenly Father became a god in his premortal
existence (i.e. Jesus' grandfather made Jesus' father a god)?  If yes, what was Heavenly Father before
he is said to have become (or have been made into) a god?

Section 93 of the Doctrine and Covenants testifies that before his spirit birth and before being resurrected as the Almighty God, Heavenly Father was an uncreated intelligence known as the “light of truth” who always existed without beginning from all eternity. 

Edited November 11, 2022 by teddyaware

[InCognitus]

11 hours ago, theplains said:

See page 345 of "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith - 1938.  

https://scriptures.byu.edu/tpjs/STPJS.pdf

An image is attached of the relevant section.

I'm familiar with the King Follet Discourse and teachings of Joseph Smith.  But what is your point?  This is only one of the two statements from Joseph Smith that was combined with editorial text that you copied from the Vincent Poldrugovac publication (here or here).  And I responded to the Joseph Smith quotes already in my prior post.  My complaint was not with what Joseph Smith actually said, but with how you presented it (by copying it from Poldrugovac) and made it appear that part of the manual commentary was in that portion of Joseph Smith's teaching (to see what Poldrugovac edited, see Gospel Principles, chapter 47, p. 305).

[InCognitus]

11 hours ago, theplains said:

Regarding the Ensign teaching that Jesus became a god in the premortal existence which I mentioned
earlier and your statement above, do you also believe Heavenly Father became a god in his premortal
existence (i.e. Jesus' grandfather made Jesus' father a god)?  If yes, what was Heavenly Father before
he is said to have become (or have been made into) a god?

I've explained this several times in this thread:

On 11/10/2022 at 6:33 PM, InCognitus said:

And God the Father has always been above all others.  How he came to be our God is explained in the statement from Joseph Smith that I quoted just a few posts ago (here) : 

Quote

The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.  (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 354)

That is how God came to be our God.

Repeating what I said above, "God the Father has always been above all others."  How he came to be our God was in our relationship to him, and him providing a way for us to advance and become like him.  That is the way Joseph Smith taught it in his sermon.

Now, let me ask you a few questions (relevant to this discussion) : 

Has God always been creating worlds?  Does he have other creations?  If so, does God increase in his dominion and progress by increasing his creations? 

If no, then is this earth and universe the first time God has ever created, and he's a beginner at the whole creation thing?   If God existed eternally as God with no creations and no other beings existed with him prior to him creating them, then how exactly was he eternally God?  Who or what did he have dominion over?

[marineland]

On 11/10/2022 at 8:33 PM, InCognitus said:

What publications did you summarize to come up with what you said?

I was reading Abraham 3 and Gospel Principle and made some observations about what
I thought was the progression from eternal intelligence to spirit child to a man to a married
man to a god to Heavenly Father of our Earth. I shared that with the missionaries and they
basically agreed that he was not God from all eternity. 
 

On 11/10/2022 at 8:33 PM, InCognitus said:

What statement from Joseph Smith are you referring to, that the missionary didn't want to disagree with?

That he was not God from everlasting to everlasting. Them admitting that they believed
Heavenly Father was always God would place them in a position of contradicting Smith.
 

On 11/10/2022 at 8:33 PM, InCognitus said:

That is how God came to be our God.

I see your point.  But it doesn't deal with the issue on how God came to be your God before
you were even born to your heavenly parents.

[InCognitus]

53 minutes ago, marineland said:

I was reading Abraham 3 and Gospel Principle and made some observations about what
I thought was the progression from eternal intelligence to spirit child to a man to a married
man to a god to Heavenly Father of our Earth. I shared that with the missionaries and they
basically agreed that he was not God from all eternity. 

Abraham 3 explains that God is eternal and all spirits or intelligences are eternal, and that some spirits are more intelligent than others, and that God is "more intelligent than they all".  Your observations indicate otherwise.

So I don't know how you arrived at the rest of what you said.  The fact that God was once a man does not mean we all go through the exact same process to gain a body as he did.  But God "saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself", he has provided the means by which we can enjoy the same blessings that he enjoys. He provided ways to make that possible for us.  

1 hour ago, marineland said:

On 11/10/2022 at 6:33 PM, InCognitus said:

What statement from Joseph Smith are you referring to, that the missionary didn't want to disagree with?

That he was not God from everlasting to everlasting. Them admitting that they believed
Heavenly Father was always God would place them in a position of contradicting Smith.

Please show me where Joseph Smith ever said God "was not God from everlasting to everlasting".  You continue to misuse the phrase "from everlasting to everlasting".  

As I said above (and a bunch of other places noted in this quote from my prior post) :

Quote

What Joseph Smith said he would "refute" is the idea "that that God was God from all eternity".  Joseph Smith never said that Heavenly Father was not God "from everlasting to everlasting" as you say here.  You continue to misunderstand, or misconstrue what the phrase "from everlasting to everlasting" means in scripture.  This has been explained in this thread, and in posts to you specifically, over and over, here, here, here, and here.  And you are also misrepresenting what Joseph Smith taught.

When scripture says "from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God", it does not mean that he is God from all eternity past.  The actual meaning of "from everlasting" is clearly demonstrated in the verses from Proverbs 8 that I quoted to you previously here, and shown below.  These verses show that "wisdom" was "brought forth" and "set up from everlasting", from the beginning:

When Joseph Smith said, in the King Follet Discourse, that he would "refute" the idea that "God was God from all eternity", he was referring to our relationship with God (with him as our God) as noted in my quote from that discourse in my prior post to you:  "The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits."

1 hour ago, marineland said:

I see your point.  But it doesn't deal with the issue on how God came to be your God before
you were even born to your heavenly parents.

God came to be our God when we agreed to align ourselves with Him and participate in his plan and to enter into a relationship with him.  

[Calm]

On 11/12/2022 at 11:06 AM, marineland said:

shared that with the missionaries and they
basically agreed that he was not God from all eternity. 

As soon as someone says something like “basically agreed”, I want to see an actual quote of what was said instead of a paraphrase as too often there has been some misinterpretation because someone has focused on a minor comment, making it into the major premise or ignored a qualification that substantially changes meaning.  Not saying it is intentional, but preconceptions generally lead us to confirm them.

Edited November 16, 2022 by Calm

[Navidad]

On 11/12/2022 at 4:02 PM, Calm said:

Not saying it is intentional, but preconceptions generally lead us to confirm them.

Amen to this. I have learned (more or less, the hard way) the truth of your statement. Both LDS and non-LDS Christians have very strong preconceptions about each other and each other's doctrines and beliefs, even to the point of informing each other about the other's relationship (covenantal and otherwise) to and with both the Father and Christ, regardless of the clear and present testimony of the other. Too many "others" in there. I hope I am kind of making sense. In fact, much of our "dialogue" is merely the seeking to confirm our preconceptions about the other from the mouths of the other. Then we can declare victory and move on with a degree of self-satisfaction.

I try to move beyond this because I really don't want to win. I am much more interested in understanding. But to understand, I have to let go of the certainty of my preconceptions about the other. That is very uncomfortable, because being true to, and defending our respective faith is extremely important to us - it is in some ways a sacred obligation.

From reading a thread like this, I also reflect on personal experiences. LDS missionaries are woefully unprepared in a missiological sense. I would and will say the same for non-LDS Christian zealots. LDS theology ( the doctrine of God) is wide, deep and basically incomprehensible to the non-LDS Christian who has no training that prepares him or her for the discussion. The Pratts and others who helped formulate the core LDS doctrines were amazing in the depth of their thinking and writing.

I am trying not to ask questions unless I really truly want to learn something that I cannot grasp. But, alas there is so much to learn and understand. The non-LDS gospel is simple, straight-forward and very important to its adherents. It is linear. The LDS gospel is complicated, deep and very important to its adherents. It is systemic, not linear. Both approach these discussions with the attitude and imperative to teach the other. When both are focused on teaching, very little learning happens.

Add a proselytizing imperative on the part of both and the whole thing can fall apart fairly quickly. "What part of what I said don't you understand?" "Why do you ask the same questions over and over?" "You can't or don't have covenants!" "How can you believe that about God?" "Non-LDS Christians are bound by their creeds!" "Mormons are heretics!" "Non-Mormons are heretics!"

And on and on the carousel turns - everlastingly spinning and getting nowhere. Preconceptions about the other based on what we have each been taught from childhood about the other by someone who most likely barely knows any others, but is driven by the need to correct, teach, or convert are the engines driving the carousel. Take care.

[marineland]

On 11/12/2022 at 7:02 PM, Calm said:

Not saying it is intentional, but preconceptions generally lead us to confirm them.

Agreed.  Hearsay is inadmissible in court too.

[marineland]

On 11/12/2022 at 2:28 PM, InCognitus said:

God came to be our God when we agreed to align ourselves with Him and participate in his plan and to enter into a relationship with him. 

I understand what you mean by God becoming "our" God; through some marriage with a woman
who herself became a God - they had spirit children.

But Joseph Smith generally laid out how Heavenly Father became a God before he became "our" God.

“When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; 
and so it is with the principles of the Gospel—you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the 
principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will 
have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation 
and exaltation even beyond the grave.  This is the way our Heavenly Father became God.