Sign in to follow this  
Hemidakota

The Kolob Theorem: A Mormon's View of God's Starry Universe

Recommended Posts

I have been paying attention and it is painfully obvious, from your various posts in these forums, that you are, without a doubt, the most self-righteous individual I have ever encountered.

Now when I say stuff like that, people start vaguely opining about how the thread has "spirit of contention" in it, and "some post have appeared to have had the element of anger in them".

That said, I've sparred with Hemi for quite a long time on this board. It takes a conscious choice on my part to not let his posting style bug me like it does you. I don't really know enough about him to call him self-righteous, but he certainly does appear full of zeal, and quite unalterably concluded about the correctness of his beliefs. His posting style tends to rub me the wrong way, but hey, I'm a rather abrasive poster named Loudmouth, so who am I to throw stones?

Finally, I've noticed a theme amongst certain groups of people. Folks who are very enthusiastic about topics like this thread seem to be, in greater numbers than the general posting population, rather, how should I put this, mercurial? Bipolar? Exhibiting tact while actually simmering with unrighteous assumptions and jabs?

Consider: Its_Chet's posting style is full of fluff and love, spreading fellowship and good feelings everywhere. And yet beneath his flowery words, he hurls a veiled jab at me, calling me spiritually stunted just because I don't buy what the author is saying. JayGlad observed with pained sadness about the spirit of contention in the thread, and then turns around and personally attacks a poster as "without a doubt, the most self-righteous individual I have ever encountered". Hemi is running around doing his thing, making vague points with broken sentance structures about how he's more right than everyone else, but he'll only hint at what he's claiming to be right about. And then there's me, pulling no punches, tossing around harsh judgements about people without batting an eye.

Fringe doctrine issues like the Kolob Theorem tend to pull us out of the woodwork to brawl at each other like a bunch of surly teenagers.

Anyone know why that is?

LM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now when I say stuff like that, people start vaguely opining about how the thread has "spirit of contention" in it, and "some post have appeared to have had the element of anger in them".

That was rich.

I don't really know enough about him to call him self-righteous, but he certainly does appear full of zeal, and quite unalterably concluded about the correctness of his beliefs.

I'm still waiting for Hemi to provide a link to a post where he claims he had seen planes flying into tall buildings about two years before it happened.

Fringe doctrine issues like the Kolob Theorem tend to pull us out of the woodwork to brawl at each other like a bunch of surly teenagers.

I know of one person who left the Church because he was a "conduit" to God. He still believed the gospel was true, but that it was just a stepping stone to the higher learning and understanding of God, and that God had chosen him to be the one to bring members to the higher truth.

He started seminars about this that were very successful for a time. My mother was a devout follower, but eventually the group broke apart permanently. However, you can still get his reading materials.

The man was Max Skousen, brother of Cleon Skousen. What better family to receive revelations beyond the personal?

My point is, I think some members of the Church take the concept of "personal revelation" so serious they come to drop the "personal," and think every experience, dream and thought is a direct revelation from God. They even come to think their revelations are prophetic, etc. I think it is people like this who go on to write non-doctrinal books about Kolob.

Elphaba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God bless you all, including the ones who are inclined to bash other people and their ideas. You too are children of God.

But then, so are the people you ridicule. You would do yourselves a tremendous service to ponder about how He feels when you belittle deride His own children. Allowing one's self to be wrong once in a while is an opportunity for growth. It's really not that bad an idea to be careful about how we speak about the children of God almighty. No sense in offending him by mistreating His children.

If, however, people still feel the need to be hateful to each other in these forums, consider this my appeal to the website administrators to step in and do something about it. If we want to watch people treat each other the way satan wants us to treat them, we can always go to a political website, and witness venom to our hearts' content.

I think it would be really neat if all us Latter Day Saints either started acting the part, or increased whatever efforts we're already making. There's nothing non-doctrinal about being nice to people and behaving the way we all know we're supposed to.

As for the legitimacy of this book and the right of its author to be treated the way we should all treat everyone (in a Christ-like manner), I'm not asking anyone to believe anything they're not comfortable with, but I sure would appreciate not being told that because I try to understand things that aren't taught in Primary I must be chasing after false doctrine.

"We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."

Joseph Smith knew all kinds of things he never taught, because the people weren't ready. Part of being ready means having an open mind. I do not apologize for having an open mind. If a General Authority ever comes out and says this book is inaccurate, I'll accept that cheerfully, and will comply. But until and unless that happens, there is absolutely no reason why I can't believe it. Every true thing is crazy talk to someone. Ask any convert how their relatives feel about the Gospel doctrines that we rightfully consider beyond reproach. Disbelief proves nothing but its own existence.

If someone gets prideful, and assumes that they know something the General Authorities don't, yes, that is a problem. And let's remember that just because they don't teach something doesn't mean they don't know it. They teach what they're led by God to teach, which is probably only what we're ready to hear. Joseph Smith knew about things that he didn't teach, because he knew the people just weren't ready for some of it. And some of the things he did teach caused people to get offended and leave the Church anyway. According to Brigham Young and others, Joseph Smith delayed teaching plural marriage until after an angel appeared to him with a sword pointed at him, commanding him to delay it no longer.

I do not claim the Kolob Theorem is Gospel. It is, as the author clearly states A THEOREM. It is an attempt to explain something that has not been explained to us yet. It happens to make sense to some people. It is one man's effort to understand and explain something that has no other explanation, at least beyond difficult metaphors. If it doesn't make sense to some, does that require vilifying the author and those who agree with him? Where is it written in the scripture that persecution is okay, as long as you believe your opinion is correct?

If we can't allow each other, within the Church, to explore the mysteries of the universe, especially when we feel that they have an impact on our lives and the lives of our loved ones, what kind of people are we? I'm not talking about ideas that contradict established Gospel. False doctrine is not acceptable. But nothing in this book goes against established doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Sure, it may be hard to believe. It may even sound a little crazy. But that's not enough to make it false doctrine. There are many strange and unimaginable realities waiting on the other side of the veil. Again, if we can't refrain from deriding each other, within the Church, how can we call ourselves Latter Day Saints? If we are not one, we are not the Lord's. If we are going to be fit for Zion, we have to rise above silly bickering and arguing, ESPECIALLY among each other.

If I've offended anyone, it was not intentional. I don't feel I've said anything wrong or insulting. But I do apologize if I've offended anyone. I don't have to be perfect to be right. I don't have to be without fault to be a beloved child of God. And if I am wrong, it will be made known to me in due time. Until then, there is no need to condemn my beliefs. They've served me well so far, having gotten me into the true Church. I believe in nothing that has ever been condemned as false doctrine by the Gospel or the Prophets. My conscience is clear.

God bless you all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a General Authority ever comes out and says this book is inaccurate, I'll accept that cheerfully, and will comply. But until and unless that happens, there is absolutely no reason why I can't believe it.

Why in the world would a General Authority speak out about this specific book? They don't do that. In fact, I doubt any of them have read it or even know about it.

If the GAs were in the business of reading a book, and then counseling the members about as to whether to read it or not, they'd not have time to do anything else.

Elphaba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bash other people and their ideas.

..

ridicule

...

belittle

...

offending [God] by mistreating His children.

...

hateful to each other

...

treat each other the way satan wants us to treat them

...

vilifying the author and those who agree with him

...

persecution

...

can't allow each other, within the Church, to explore the mysteries of the universe

...

deriding each other

...

silly bickering and arguing

...

If I've offended anyone, it was not intentional.

Now, what possible reason could anyone possibly have to get offended by your post...

I sure would appreciate not being told that because I try to understand things that aren't taught in Primary I must be chasing after false doctrine.

The phrase "false doctrine" has been used exactly three times on this thread, all by you. Care to be more specific?

If, however, people still feel the need to be hateful to each other in these forums, consider this my appeal to the website administrators to step in and do something about it.

No, admins consider the "report" button your appeal to the admins. It requires you actually identify a specific person and their specific statements, instead of just reciting a litany of accusations pointed everywhere and nowhere. Feel free to use it, if you think you've found a post that does the "bashing ridiculing belittling mistreating hateful vilifying persecuting deriding bickering and arguing that offends God by treating someone the way satan wants us to treat them and refusing to allow each other to explore the mysteries of the universe" that you're complaining about. I sure don't want such a post to go unmoderated - but I really don't see it on this thread. Surely, since you're so worked up about seeing it, you can find the post or posts and click the "report" button...

LM

Edited by Loudmouth_Mormon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God bless you all, including the ones who are inclined to bash other people and their ideas. You too are children of God.

But then, so are the people you ridicule. You would do yourselves a tremendous service to ponder about how He feels when you belittle deride His own children. Allowing one's self to be wrong once in a while is an opportunity for growth. It's really not that bad an idea to be careful about how we speak about the children of God almighty. No sense in offending him by mistreating His children.

If, however, people still feel the need to be hateful to each other in these forums, consider this my appeal to the website administrators to step in and do something about it. If we want to watch people treat each other the way satan wants us to treat them, we can always go to a political website, and witness venom to our hearts' content.

I think it would be really neat if all us Latter Day Saints either started acting the part, or increased whatever efforts we're already making. There's nothing non-doctrinal about being nice to people and behaving the way we all know we're supposed to.

As for the legitimacy of this book and the right of its author to be treated the way we should all treat everyone (in a Christ-like manner), I'm not asking anyone to believe anything they're not comfortable with, but I sure would appreciate not being told that because I try to understand things that aren't taught in Primary I must be chasing after false doctrine.

"We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."

Joseph Smith knew all kinds of things he never taught, because the people weren't ready. Part of being ready means having an open mind. I do not apologize for having an open mind. If a General Authority ever comes out and says this book is inaccurate, I'll accept that cheerfully, and will comply. But until and unless that happens, there is absolutely no reason why I can't believe it. Every true thing is crazy talk to someone. Ask any convert how their relatives feel about the Gospel doctrines that we rightfully consider beyond reproach. Disbelief proves nothing but its own existence.

If someone gets prideful, and assumes that they know something the General Authorities don't, yes, that is a problem. And let's remember that just because they don't teach something doesn't mean they don't know it. They teach what they're led by God to teach, which is probably only what we're ready to hear. Joseph Smith knew about things that he didn't teach, because he knew the people just weren't ready for some of it. And some of the things he did teach caused people to get offended and leave the Church anyway. According to Brigham Young and others, Joseph Smith delayed teaching plural marriage until after an angel appeared to him with a sword pointed at him, commanding him to delay it no longer.

I do not claim the Kolob Theorem is Gospel. It is, as the author clearly states A THEOREM. It is an attempt to explain something that has not been explained to us yet. It happens to make sense to some people. It is one man's effort to understand and explain something that has no other explanation, at least beyond difficult metaphors. If it doesn't make sense to some, does that require vilifying the author and those who agree with him? Where is it written in the scripture that persecution is okay, as long as you believe your opinion is correct?

If we can't allow each other, within the Church, to explore the mysteries of the universe, especially when we feel that they have an impact on our lives and the lives of our loved ones, what kind of people are we? I'm not talking about ideas that contradict established Gospel. False doctrine is not acceptable. But nothing in this book goes against established doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Sure, it may be hard to believe. It may even sound a little crazy. But that's not enough to make it false doctrine. There are many strange and unimaginable realities waiting on the other side of the veil. Again, if we can't refrain from deriding each other, within the Church, how can we call ourselves Latter Day Saints? If we are not one, we are not the Lord's. If we are going to be fit for Zion, we have to rise above silly bickering and arguing, ESPECIALLY among each other.

If I've offended anyone, it was not intentional. I don't feel I've said anything wrong or insulting. But I do apologize if I've offended anyone. I don't have to be perfect to be right. I don't have to be without fault to be a beloved child of God. And if I am wrong, it will be made known to me in due time. Until then, there is no need to condemn my beliefs. They've served me well so far, having gotten me into the true Church. I believe in nothing that has ever been condemned as false doctrine by the Gospel or the Prophets. My conscience is clear.

God bless you all.

Excellent posting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Hemi.

I hope any non members who happen upon this thread get the impression that most of us are like you. And I'm not just saying that because you were complimentary just now.

I've seen plenty of your posts and they always reflect well on the Church and yourself as an individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do the creators receive materials if not by some form of exchange conduit? Hince....BLACK HOLES. Yes?

To update my belief in each galaxy has a black hole at its core center (now taught by a few astrophysicists), it is no longer my own belief that what we are seeing at our own core galaxy based on X-ray images is truly a blackhole. Unless we can image the center of our galaxy in the range above or in the UH-Cosmic spectrum, there is an answer to this mystery if we have the technology. This is my own ponderous moment for sometime now [based on the 2nd facsimile drawn by Abraham].

Reference: Black Hole Snacks - NASA Science

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kolob Theorem suggests that there are two rings of dust and rock dividing the kingdoms from each other in this galaxy, and that the reason we cannot see Kolob is because it is enshrouded by these rings.

But I like your idea too. It would stand to reason that Father would need something to clean up the mess from novas and exploding stars (unless He simply gathered it all together during the creation process), and perhaps a black hole would accomplish that well. It would suggest a "circle of life" approach to cosmic construction, and would explain where the Savior got the materials He used to build this world.

Maybe you're both right, and there is a black hole at the center of the galaxy, and also there is a ring of dust serving as a veil between the Celestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms, and the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms as well.

I like your logical approach, Hemidakota. The Gospel as I see it is always logical, once properly understood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wel, I skimmed over the first 10 pages (excluding preface) or so of the PDF, and I don't like some of his restrictions and ideas. I haven't read all 9 pages worth of this thread, but the idea that heavenly Father is just this galaxy's God is not my understanding. I may read the rest when I get time, and give it more in-depth investigation, these are just my first impressions.

I may be wrong, but I thought that all that exists in this Universe is our Heavenly Father's creation. There may be parallel universes for other Gods, or this may be the first time around, that is how I currently understand the Universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wel, I skimmed over the first 10 pages (excluding preface) or so of the PDF, and I don't like some of his restrictions and ideas. I haven't read all 9 pages worth of this thread, but the idea that heavenly Father is just this galaxy's God is not my understanding. I may read the rest when I get time, and give it more in-depth investigation, these are just my first impressions.

I may be wrong, but I thought that all that exists in this Universe is our Heavenly Father's creation. There may be parallel universes for other Gods, or this may be the first time around, that is how I currently understand the Universe.

Everything that exists in this universe is in fact the creation of God, imo.

now when I say God I refer to the title God, not the person that is our Heavenly Father.

Christ is God, so is Heavenly Father. so is the Holy Ghost. they are all God, yet they are three distinct individuals at differing rates of progression who each have the same title.

It is easy to think that a galaxy is just so small to be the extent of Heavenly Father's personal domain, but when you really begin to grasp the scope and immensity of our galaxy alone..it isn't so small anymore. At least for me.

Our galaxy by itself has hundreds of billions of stars. So many that we can't even count them. They are innumerable and infinite to us. Not to Heavenly Father, for they are His and He knows them each and every one. Among those hundreds of billions of stars, there are countless numbers of planets, and moons, and asteroids, and comets, etc...

There are so many objects in our galaxy, it's impossible for us to truly conceive of it in any but the most general descriptive terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our galaxy by itself has hundreds of billions of stars. So many that we can't even count them. They are innumerable and infinite to us. Not to Heavenly Father, for they are His and He knows them each and every one. Among those hundreds of billions of stars, there are countless numbers of planets, and moons, and asteroids, and comets, etc...

From our vantage point, we can't see all the stars in our galaxy, as we look edge-on and our view is obscured. Our galaxy is forming new stars, and old ones are dying on a time scale that we can't comprehend. The stars are not infinite in number though, it is just not a number we are able to know with our current technology. Innumerable to man perhaps, but not infinite.

The universe is not an infinite universe either. It is a finite thing with a fixed quantity of matter+energy. We can only guess at how much there is, the Hubble deep field pictures have shown that there is so much more out there than we may think, but when we look at the sky, we are looking at a graveyard. Most of what we see by way of distant galaxy, no longer exist as we see them. It has taken millions, even billions of years for that light to reach us. A lot can change in a billion years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I said innumerable and infinite, I was referring to our inability to designate and number each and every one of them. Of course there aren't an unlimited number of them. That isn't what I meant.

As far as this book goes, I seem to think more and more than it gives many ideas that are mostly guessing, and although I agree with several things the author puts forth, there are other parts where I disagree. However, that said, the book is certainly worth reading for someone interested in the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that it was Orson Hyde that went to the Prophet Joseph Smith and asserted that he had figured-out how "it" all worked. He proceeded to expound his thesis to Joseph for about three hours. At the end of his discourse, Joseph said, "Bro. Hyde, that is the most logical and beautiful explanation that I've ever heard. There is only one problem, . . . it is wrong." So we don't know. However, there will come a time that we WILL know. I believe that the truth will be so simple, so plain, that we'll think "why didn't I think of that?" Until that time, we can conjecture and theorize, but we must remember that "it's WRONG."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Granted, this book is a self proclaimed theorem, and neither the author nor anyone on this thread is claiming that it is Gospel, it sounds like you're sumarrily dismissing it as wrong, using a story about different people discussing at least somewhat different subjects.

You make a good point, that unless a General Authority, the Gospel, or the Holy Spirit says something is true, a responsible person should at least entertain the possibility that it's not true. That's a valid point and I commend it.

Some of us are just trying to say that in absence of any authoritative statements establishing the inaccuracy of this book's claims, we find its theories to be plausible. Some of us have chosen to believe them at least for the time being, pending verification by the General Authorities, when or if that day ever comes, or opting to faithfully discard those beliefs should those same General Authorities proscribe it. No harm in that, I submit. After all, having an open mind is how I came to be a member of the Church in the first place. And that's worked out pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Granted, this book is a self proclaimed theorem, and neither the author nor anyone on this thread is claiming that it is Gospel

theorem - A general proposition not self-evident but proved by a chain of reasoning; a truth established by means of accepted truths.

The author's "galactic celestial kingdom" interpretation is in no possible sense a theorem.

Some of us are just trying to say that in absence of any authoritative statements establishing the inaccuracy of this book's claims, we find its theories to be plausible.

You're obviously deeply invested in this book, Chet. Maybe you're the author, or the author's son, or maybe you're just a True Believer. But in any case, the idea that General Authorities would spend their time reading and then approving or refuting random books on doctrine seems a bit silly. Frankly, this particular book seems so over-the-top nonsensical to me that I would be shocked if any General Authority were willing to publicly admit that he had read it at all, even to say it was bogus.

I honestly mean no offense. You are free to believe The Kolob Theorem, and I won't think you less of a brother in the gospel. But in the opinion of many of us, the book merits nothing beyond an eye-roll and an exasperated sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best reason to read such books is so that their words can provoke us to ponder, and search for revelation by the Holy Spirit.

I can't begin to tell you how often my own search for greater light and truth came because of something I read which I tend prayed and pondered and stewed over...and the Lord was able to use it to teach me.

My sister in law made a remark once about a book that I had bought, how she didn't think it was necessary to read or that it was true, and my response to her was that it was my goal to absorb as much as I can and let the Spirit sift it into categories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Anne Rice's vampire books for similar reasons. I did learn a little about humanity's relationship with evil from them.

Have you read any of the books Gillebre? My favorite character is Marius - one of the older and more powerful vampires, as well as one of the most knowledgable, optimistic, and in his own way, moral.

Mrs. Rice is an interesting person. Born Catholic, became athiest and wrote her vampire novels, returned to Catholicism near the end of those books, and wrote some fictionalized historical accounts of Jesus, and is now apparently some sort of nondenominational disciple of Christ who has renounced organized religion of any kind.

You should read and ponder on her vampire books, Gillebre, and search for revelation by the Holy Spirit. I think you'd find the effort rewarding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this