In the Beginning....

[Saint Bonaventure]

34 minutes ago, bluebell said:

To the bolded statements, these these things are true for Latter-day Saints as well.

To the underlined statement, we do believe in an apostasy and a restoration, but it is a falling away of priesthood authority to act in the name of God and a confusion and/or loss of some doctrine.  And a restoration of that authority and doctrine that could only occur by God intervening directly.

Kind of an "new wine cannot go into old bottles because the bottles can't handle it" idea.

Thank you so much. I feel I'm getting a handle on the similarities and differences, but I'm sure I have plenty of blind spots. The whole apostasy and restoration thing is certainly an important difference. LDS notions of authority, though, might be worth further discussion at some point. From the way you're describing authority, our Protestant friends wouldn't find you all consistent with sola scriptura.

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

Thank you so much. I feel I'm getting a handle on the similarities and differences, but I'm sure I have plenty of blind spots. The whole apostasy and restoration thing is certainly an important difference. LDS notions of authority, though, might be worth further discussion at some point. From the way you're describing authority, our Protestant friends wouldn't find you all consistent with sola scriptura.

No, they wouldn't.  We don't believe in sola scriptura and it's one of the reasons that many protestants think we aren't Christian.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

I want to respectfully differ with you on several points. I don't mean to be argumentative, but I do want to address a couple of things that we can continue to discuss, if you want.

I am aware of some scientists who theorize about "mechanisms of inflation," but a somewhat nuanced view of the Big Bang is the majority view. I'm not a physicist, but my reading on this suggests work on a "singularity" that, problematically, is inconsistent with relativity theory, may exist 10 to the -43 seconds before the BB. The majority understanding, like this one from Nasa.gov, is still that:

"Our universe began in a tremendous explosion known as the Big Bang about 13.7 billion years ago," NASA - Brief History of the Universe

 

The infinite past idea has a logical knot in it that I'm unable to unravel. I'll venture an analogy:

The universe is like a greenhouse. The "open" sign represents today--the present, and all the plants in the greenhouse represent every day in the past. If the past had an infinite number of days (or plants), and every day must happen or "be counted" before today can happen, then the greenhouse will never open and today will never happen. But today has happened, time moved through every day before today, and therefore there could not have been an infinite number of days in the past. Consequently, there must have been a first day, and thus a beginning of the universe.

 

Regarding your point that an ancient individual would not be able to correctly conceptualize the nature of the universe--that isn't an issue for Catholicism. Catholics see truth as unfolding through time, not only in a subjective way, but also in relation to objective, natural truths. I think this notion is central to the different understandings between Catholics and LDS in some fundamental ways. Catholics see the Church in continuity, all the way back to the gathering at Sinai, and see that continuity as an unfolding, or succession of truth. Apostolic succession is certainly part of that, but Catholics don't need to see every belief and practice (or Dogma, Doctrine, and Discipline, as we like to say) at every point in history or place on the earth, even in the New Testament Church. That's kind of the whole point of Sacred Tradition and having a Magisterium. Apostasy can happen--the latter parts of the 9th century through the mid-11th century were rough, no popes were Sainted or Blessed between St Nicholas the Great (858-867) and St. Gregory the VII (1073-1085), but there were Saints and Blessed, there were miracles, and there was authority)--but in Catholic thinking, apostasy never amounts to the gates of hell prevailing (Matt. 16:18) and restorations occur within continuity.   

My understanding of LDS teaching is that at some point it's not about continuity. There's argued to be a general, comprehensive apostasy that necessitates a restoration, a perhaps a general pattern of apostasy and restoration that has culminated in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I've forgotten how to break the quotes again. I'm an idiot.

 

"Objective, natural truths" are experienced by a subjective mind. For example, two people feel, interpret and find meaning in the coldness of ice differently. When they describe their experience amenably, they will find subjective agreement between them (when they do not, disagreement).

There can be a first day, and subsequent days, marked as practical reference points on an infinite (indeterminately long) line. We use the concept of the "eternal round" to allow that each spirit has their own indeterminately lengthy existence, as do other spirits, and who are amenably brought together to share our lives under God, the Father of all. A ring is indeterminately long until it is marked and measured, and this is what God does for us by granting us pre-mortal, mortal, post-mortal and resurrected versions of our life. The concept also allows us to advance from one ring to another, as spiral. This is about as continuous ("continuitous?") as one can get!

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

The universe is like a greenhouse. The "open" sign represents today--the present, and all the plants in the greenhouse represent every day in the past. If the past had an infinite number of days (or plants), and every day must happen or "be counted" before today can happen, then the greenhouse will never open and today will never happen. But today has happened, time moved through every day before today, and therefore there could not have been an infinite number of days in the past. Consequently, there must have been a first day, and thus a beginning of the universe.

In studying and practicing contemplative prayer as taught by a Benedictine Monk, he often emphasized the truth that all experiential existence is in the present.  We will never experience the past, and we will never experience the future, because all experience is present continually with us.    Therefore, the only way to experience God is to be present with Him.  He advised us to stop living in regret about the past and worry about the future, because God is not there - he is and always will be here, in the present.  That is the only way we can experience God by being mindful in the present moment where he is.   It always has and always will be the present.  No need to count past days for the present to exist.  All there is, and all that there will ever be is the present, and therefore the past and future do not really exist in the way that you are thinking about it.  Past, present, and future, are linear models of time that must have a beginning and an end, but eternity is not linear.  God has revealed in modern times that his course is "one eternal round".  While an imperfect descriptor of the eternal nature of the present, as the present is not a circular repeat of time, it does represent symbolically the incomprehensible nature of divine existence and intelligence which has no beginning and no end but is one eternal round which always and forever will exist in the present.    

The greenhouse represent "the universe" in your analogy, but if you try to apply it to God you will see that it falls apart and causes us to deny the eternal existence of God.  There is no beginning with God, and there will be no end.  As soon as you can find an analogy that helps you wrap your head around that reality, then all you have to do is apply it to us too and you will understand our eternal nature with God.  Good luck!

Edited March 22, 2022 by pogi

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

The infinite past idea has a logical knot in it that I'm unable to unravel.

Are you sure the knot is actually a logical knot though and not merely a theological one?

I don't see anything logically impossible about the idea of matter/energy having always existed - even if not always in the same state(s) that we are currently able to observe.

 

[mfbukowski]

On 3/21/2022 at 6:47 AM, Saint Bonaventure said:

Or doesn't have an immaterial cause? 

We also do not believe in "immaterial" anything- our scriptures tell us that matter and energy are one, but energy is described as more "refined matter".  Spirit is "refined matter"

We have no idea of Platonic dualism or different "substances" as does Catholic theology 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

My understanding of LDS teaching is that at some point it's not about continuity

Not the case.

There have been universes forever.

I'm going to give it to you straight without beating around the bush.

WE can become Gods.

Time itself is a human concept

Matter existed "before" THIS universe, think about multi-verses if you must reduce God' kingdom to human science.  Thinking sequentially is a human trait, ala Kant.

There are and always have been universes without number, but as you have only ONE human Father, you have only ONE Heavenly Father.

All this goes "back in time" and "forward" 

There is no time for God, He is Timeless.

[CV75]

48 minutes ago, pogi said:

In studying and practicing contemplative prayer as taught by a Benedictine Monk, he often emphasized the truth that all experiential existence is in the present.  We will never experience the past, and we will never experience the future, because all experience is present continually with us.    Therefore, the only way to experience God is to be present with Him.  He advised us to stop living in regret about the past and worry about the future, because God is not there - he is and always will be here, in the present.  That is the only way we can experience God by being mindful in the present moment where he is.   It always has and always will be the present.  No need to count past days for the present to exist.  All there is, and all that there will ever be is the present, and therefore the past and future do not really exist in the way that you are thinking about it.  Past, present, and future, are linear models of time that must have a beginning and an end, but eternity is not linear.  God has revealed in modern times that his course is "one eternal round".  While an imperfect descriptor of the eternal nature of the present, as the present is not a circular repeat of time, it does represent symbolically the incomprehensible nature of divine existence and intelligence which has no beginning and no end but is one eternal round which always and forever will exist in the present.    

The greenhouse represent "the universe" in your analogy, but if you try to apply it to God you will see that it falls apart and causes us to deny the eternal existence of God.  There is no beginning with God, and there will be no end.  As soon as you can find an analogy that helps you wrap your head around that reality, then all you have to do is apply it to us too and you will understand our eternal nature with God.  Good luck!

It is interesting to me that recalling/remembering (the past) and anticipating/planning (the future) are "present" exercises.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

It is interesting to me that recalling/remembering (the past) and anticipating/planning (the future) are "present" exercises.

It is also said that God experiences an eternal present.

I think we can kind of understand that when we smell a smell or witness something that triggers a vivid, vivid memory of past experience that seems as if we are "transported back" to our childhood etc.

It is as if we are re-living the experience.

In my opinion, this is something like it might be to live in an eternal present, where our whole lives are constantly "present" to us.

But the future present as well?   Of course we cannot fathom that, nor do we have perfect memories.  But perhaps we have a glimmer of what that might be like.

Edited March 22, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Saint Bonaventure]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Not the case.

There have been universes forever.

I'm going to give it to you straight without beating around the bush.

WE can become Gods.

Time itself is a human concept

Matter existed "before" THIS universe, think about multi-verses if you must reduce God' kingdom to human science.  Thinking sequentially is a human trait, ala Kant.

There are and always have been universes without number, but as you have only ONE human Father, you have only ONE Heavenly Father.

All this goes "back in time" and "forward" 

There is no time for God, He is Timeless.

We Catholics do believe that those in heaven will be "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4)

Edited March 22, 2022 by Saint Bonaventure

[CV75]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

It is also said that God experiences an eternal present.

I think we can kind of understand that when we smell a smell or witness something that triggers a vivid, vivid memory of past experience that seems as if we are "transported back" to our childhood etc.

It is as if we are re-living the experience.

In my opinion, this is something like it might be to live in an eternal present, where our whole lives are constantly "present" to us.

But the future present as well?   Of course we cannot fathom that, nor do we have perfect memories.  But perhaps we have a glimmer of what that might be like.

I am convinced that none of what God experiences can be done alone!

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I am convinced that none of what God experiences can be done alone!

I hope not. Some of my best moments are being aone with my own thoughts. 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

We Catholics do believe that those in heaven will be "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4)

Yes, I have studied that, and that is one of the things that joins us

But we believe that what you would call "divine" is simply a full development of Human nature.  There is no distinction.

Think of a Caterpillar becoming a butterfly!  Butterfly nature is a further development of caterpillars.

Also "nature" as a category of existence is a category mistake, I believe.

What is a dog's nature?

To be a dog.

an elephant's nature?

being an elephant.

God's nature? To be God!

The word "nature" adds nothing to the being itself unless one needs to bifurcate human FROM divine nature. Supposedly it explains what differentiates Christ from man, but I/we believe that we CAN "be perfect as our Father is perfect! "

We would not have been given the commandment if it was not possible!

But on earth?  Highly unlikely yet possible.

And that is why progression after death is possible! We can improve our emulation of Christ through eternity until we arrive there.

Edited March 22, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

29 minutes ago, Calm said:

I hope not. Some of my best moments are being aone with my own thoughts. 

Ok, but again ambiguity!

CV used the word "experience" while it appears you are speaking of  "thoughts".  Do we want to go down the rabbit (and duck) hole to differentiate those?

Hope not.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I hope not. Some of my best moments are being aone with my own thoughts. 

I hate to ruin the idea of solitude for you (I love my solitude as well - also some of my best moments), but God was present in your thoughts.  The more mindful of the present we become, the more we notice that we are never truly alone.  I have come to understand solitude differently through meditation. 

Edited March 22, 2022 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, Saint Bonaventure said:

The whole apostasy and restoration thing is certainly an important difference

It is, and my belief it comes out of Scholasticism, which is clearly an intrusion of Aristotlianism into the church, and also through Plotinus' Platonism.

To me the history is clear as a bell.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I am convinced that none of what God experiences can be done alone!

I tend to agree.  The concept of "oneness" ironically requires a multitude.  

[mfbukowski]

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

I hate to ruin the idea of solitude for you (I love my solitude as well - some of my best moments as well), but God was present in your thoughts.  The more mindful of the present we become, the more we notice that we are never truly alone.  I have come to understand solitude differently through meditation. 

Yes, I see meditation as an attempt to see ourselves as God sees us, as we observe ourselves from outside ourselves. Our own thoughts become our objects of study, while we remain "outside" ourselves. We are ourselves and the "other" simultaneously 

We become one with the Other as the separation disappears.

That will make no sense to one who hasn't experienced it

God can be seen as the divine "other" within, as His kingdom grows within our hearts 

 

[mfbukowski]

17 minutes ago, pogi said:

I tend to agree.  The concept of "oneness" ironically requires a multitude.  

And Catholics would understand this as the "Communion of Saints" and "Body of Christ"

We are not as far apart as some think.

Remember this Unity is what makes our Godhead One, not some abstract "substance".

Three persons/Gods become One in love and purpose 

Hence also the "Council of Gods"

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

53 minutes ago, pogi said:

I tend to agree.  The concept of "oneness" ironically requires a multitude.  

I can go with that idea of companionship…I was thinking more of acting together rather than awareness.

Or being physically present all the time like missionary companionships. 

Edited March 22, 2022 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

On 3/21/2022 at 7:47 AM, Saint Bonaventure said:

If I understand, Latter-day Saints believe that souls have always existed in some form, and even before the creation account in Genesis.

Latter-day Saint theology has it that each of us has an eternal spark of life -- coeternal with God -- and that God clothes that spark of life in a spiritual body (before the foundation of the world), and allows normal human reproduction to clothe that spirit in a physical body.  Finally, at the resurrection, all bodies will be made incorruptible and eternal.  A four-step sequence, from spark to apotheosis.

On 3/21/2022 at 7:47 AM, Saint Bonaventure said:

With this in mind, do Latter-day Saints contextualize "In the beginning" in some fashion? Is it considered "a beginning" or "just the beginning of the material universe" or something? 

I'm asking because Catholics often use a form of reasoning that puts science in its place. Specifically, "Since the universe had a beginning (the Big Bang), and by the universe I mean all time, space, matter, and energy (the stuff that science explores) the universe must have an immaterial cause that exists beyond time and space (God)."

But maybe the Latter-day Saint universe has no creation/beginning? Or doesn't have an immaterial cause? ...................

Genesis 1:1-3 is a series of circumstantial clauses, ending in a main clause.  Gen 1:1 is normally mistranslated.  It should read:  "When the Gods set about to organize the heavens and the earth, ...." from pre-existing material.  There was no beginning, there shall be no end.  God is part of space & time.  The universe is material, including spiritual material -- which is merely finer than the material we humans know about.  Nothing is immaterial.

As man now is, God once was; as God is, man may become.  All of us are of the genus and species of God.

[CV75]

13 hours ago, pogi said:

I tend to agree.  The concept of "oneness" ironically requires a multitude.  

This is where I think the Church of the Firstborn comes in, or the council(s) of Gods, etc. At the same time, the key of oneness does abide in our hearts. The analogy is made of the pearl in the elegant box, where people value the box (Church) more than the pearl (Christ). In this case, the box is our covenant practice (the form of godliness) and the pearl is this gift (the power thereof):

D&C 88 (and also 76:53)

3 Wherefore, I now send upon you another ^aComforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of ^bpromise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.

4 This Comforter is the ^apromise which I give unto you of ^beternal life, even the ^cglory of the celestial kingdom;

5 Which glory is that of the church of the ^aFirstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son

 

 

[CV75]

13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Latter-day Saint theology has it that each of us has an eternal spark of life -- coeternal with God -- and that God clothes that spark of life in a spiritual body (before the foundation of the world), and allows normal human reproduction to clothe that spirit in a physical body.  Finally, at the resurrection, all bodies will be made incorruptible and eternal.  A four-step sequence, from spark to apotheosis.

Genesis 1:1-3 is a series of circumstantial clauses, ending in a main clause.  Gen 1:1 is normally mistranslated.  It should read:  "When the Gods set about to organize the heavens and the earth, ...." from pre-existing material.  There was no beginning, there shall be no end.  God is part of space & time.  The universe is material, including spiritual material -- which is merely finer than the material we humans know about.  Nothing is immaterial.

As man now is, God once was; as God is, man may become.  All of us are of the genus and species of God.

I see another step in the sequence, where we are clothed with glory (received to the degree we are willing to enjoy -- D&C 88:32-33):

D&C 92: 22: And all those who are begotten through me are ^apartakers of the ^bglory of the same, and are the ^cchurch of the Firstborn.

D&C 88:32-33:

32 And they who remain shall also be ^aquickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are ^bwilling to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received.

33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.

Regarding this gift, I think of the analogy of the pearl in the elegant box, where people value the box (Church) more than the pearl (Christ). In this case, some are only willing to receive the box (our begotten glory), but not so much the pearl (the Giver of the gift) who abides in our hearts.

 

 

 

[CV75]

13 hours ago, Calm said:

I can go with that idea of companionship…I was thinking more of acting together rather than awareness.

Or being physically present all the time like missionary companionships. 

I keep bringing up this analogy of the pearl in the box. In this case, I might suggest that the light of Christ is the pearl and our thoughts and actions (our "being") are the box. We are all beautiful children of God, but in this world* we fashion our box, with or without acknowledging the light of Christ within us, which eventually leads as to a fulness of the promises of the Comforter, which leads us into the Church of the Firstborn (the oneness and unity under discussion).

*including the spirit world, especially for those living without a dispensation to receive the covenants in mortality

[CV75]

14 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Yes, I see meditation as an attempt to see ourselves as God sees us, as we observe ourselves from outside ourselves. Our own thoughts become our objects of study, while we remain "outside" ourselves. We are ourselves and the "other" simultaneously 

We become one with the Other as the separation disappears.

That will make no sense to one who hasn't experienced it

God can be seen as the divine "other" within, as His kingdom grows within our hearts 

 

The pearl in the box!  The light of Christ is so thoroughly connected with our spirits that we are essentially one already, and we come to realize that we need not separate ourselves from (or perhaps more importantly from the usual perspective, for) the love of Christ (Romans 8:35-39).

Edited March 23, 2022 by CV75