LDS Faith Monotheistic?

[HEthePrimate]

The difference is that we do not believe that's God's "point" or purpose is to glorify himself, ie God exists that we might worship him. On the contrary we believe: “For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.”

That is: God exists for the benefit of others, not that others exist for the benefit of God.

Snow, I really like that. :)

Perhaps because of my LDS upbringing, I tend to put theological matters in "familial" terms, viewing God as our Parent, etc. Parents support, nurture, protect, teach, and raise their children, not the other way around. Likewise with God. Of course, most parents want their children to grow up, become more independent, have their own children, and so forth. I think it's a good idea for us not just to think of God as our Great Supplier in the Sky, but as a person. We can thank him for what he has done for us. We can talk with him about our challenges, and also about our joys and interests. We can attempt to "grow up" and treat other people as He treats us, and have children of our own to take care of. I think that parents enjoy nurturing their children, but they also like seeing their children nurture other people.

HEP

[Snow]

The purpose of the question was that the word changed and I wasn't aware that they were all the same word. I've never, as I said before, heard of any of them. That was the only purpose...

Oh - I ask because you were sarcastic {"And Snow, is it deification now, or divinization?" ... bold added] and it seems odd that you would be sarcastic if your real intent was to clarify words that you had never heard before. Most people are not sarcastic if they have genuine questions. Perhaps you are different that most people.

[Guest Believer_1829]

Kawazu-

I believe the authors of this article are being disingenuous in their analysis of LDS beliefs concerning multiple Gods. They are trying to make it appear, from what I read, that they merely believe in the physical separation of the members of the Godhead.

LDS teachings have been clear (at least in the past) that there are a multitude of Gods, and that our God worships His God just as we worship Him. So according to this (perhaps former) teaching our God is, in deed, subservient to a God over Him.

[pam]

Hep I liked your response. By the same token..we are taught to teach our children to be righteous and walk before God. Children are taught to honor thy mother and thy father..and to not do anything that would bring shame to them. That being said..we don't become parents for the sole purpose of having our children bring honor to us so that we might be praised etc.

[Snow]

Kawazu-

I believe the authors of this article are being disingenuous in their analysis of LDS beliefs concerning multiple Gods. They are trying to make it appear, from what I read, that they merely believe in the physical separation of the members of the Godhead.

LDS teachings have been clear (at least in the past) that there are a multitude of Gods, and that our God worships His God just as we worship Him. So according to this (perhaps former) teaching our God is, in deed, subservient to a God over Him.

What kind of apostate, heretical nonsense is that? "Our God worships his God." Uh-huh - and I have some prime marshland in New Jersey I'd like to sell you.

[Guest Believer_1829]

What kind of apostate, heretical nonsense is that? "Our God worships his God." Uh-huh - and I have some prime marshland in New Jersey I'd like to sell you.

Has it not been taught that our Heavenly Father passed through mortality just as we are passing through it now?

** Seems you may need to stick to science and scriptural nit-picking and avoid theology **

[Snow]

Has it not been taught that our Heavenly Father passed through mortality just as we are passing through it now?

** Seems you may need to stick to science and scriptural nit-picking and avoid theology **

You have no clue what you are talking about. You cannot find a single Church manual or lesson or canonized scripture or official doctrine that teaches: "Our God worships his God."

As I recall, falsely representing doctrine is contrary to the rules of this site.

[Dr T]

Wow, I was away for a few hours and come back to a new thread that has 6 pages already. Without going back to each of the other posts, I'll just start here and say Orthodox Christianity is about monotheism and spoke against polytheism actually. Snow, you were using some names from people that did not believe in monotheism but heresy (because of that polytheism). Yes, Christians believe in one God. That one God is in three persons, The Father, Son and Holy Ghost. That is the Trinity. Belief in henotheism or only worshiping one God does not side step the definition of polytheism if the belief in "more than one God" is still there. Finally, I wanted to say again that "gods" is used a lot but in each case they are false gods or like judges and not meaning Gods.

[Guest Believer_1829]

You have no clue what you are talking about. You cannot find a single Church manual or lesson or canonized scripture or official doctrine that teaches: "Our God worships his God."

As I recall, falsely representing doctrine is contrary to the rules of this site.

You didn't answer my question...

"Has it not been taught the our Heavenly Father went through a mortality just as we are now?"

And trying to get me a demerit is pretty telling. Since when are you worried about the rules of this site? You constantly run down scriptures and quotes from LDS church leaders.

[Snow]

Wow, I was away for a few hours and come back to a new thread that has 6 pages already. Without going back to each of the other posts, I'll just start here and say Orthodox Christianity is about monotheism and spoke against polytheism actually. Snow, you were using some names from people that did not believe in monotheism but heresy (because of that polytheism). Yes, Christians believe in one God. That one God is in three persons, The Father, Son and Holy Ghost. That is the Trinity. Belief in henotheism or only worshiping one God does not side step the definition of polytheism if the belief in "more than one God" is still there. Finally, I wanted to say again that "gods" is used a lot but in each case they are false gods or like judges and not meaning Gods.

What on earth are you talking about - Athanasius and Clement were heretics? Right. And when they said that man may become god, they were referring to man becoming false gods?

Go get yourself educated and then come back and talk about it.

[Kawazu]

Kawazu-

I believe the authors of this article are being disingenuous in their analysis of LDS beliefs concerning multiple Gods. They are trying to make it appear, from what I read, that they merely believe in the physical separation of the members of the Godhead.

LDS teachings have been clear (at least in the past) that there are a multitude of Gods, and that our God worships His God just as we worship Him. So according to this (perhaps former) teaching our God is, in deed, subservient to a God over Him.

Howdy,

I thank you for reading. Your concerns are addressed on a different page of the LDS FAQ. The section which I posted specifically addresses concerns that the LDS belief in the Godhead, (three distinct beings/1 overarching purpose), is polytheistic. Another section talks about polytheism and the divine potential of human beings. Here is an excerpt:

Mormon Answers (LDS FAQ): The Divine Potential of Human Beings - or Do Mormons Believe They Can Become Gods?

Does LDS doctrine teach that there are multiple gods??

There is a widely denounced LDS concept known as the "plurality of gods" which teaches that humans are sons and daughters of God - His offspring (Acts 17:28) - capable of becoming more like Him by accepting the fullness of the Gospel and grace of Christ (see also John 10:34,35; Matt. 5:48). The possibility of multiple "godlike" beings may be what Paul referred to when he said there are "gods many and lords many, but to us there is but one God, the Father" (1 Cor. 8:5,6) and what David meant in Psalm 8:4,5 when he said that man is "a little lower than the gods" (KJV gives "lower than the angels" but the Hebrew word is "gods" - I guess it was just too painful for the translators to put down the correct word).

If we fully follow Christ, we can become joint-heirs with Him (Romans 8:14-18), becoming like him (1 John 3:2) by putting on the divine nature (2 Peter 1: 4-10). Such Christ-centered beings are sons and daughters of God (Acts 17:28; Heb. 12:9) who can become the kind of beings that Christ called "gods" in John 10:34. In 1 Corinthians 8:5,6, Paul notes that there are many gods (in the small "g" sense), but these are not beings that we worship, for to us, there is only one God, the Eternal Father. We believe that there may be and will be many resurrected beings who have become joint-heirs with Christ and can thus be called "gods," but they are not our Savior, our Creator, our Lord, and our God. To us, there is and always will be but one God, that Being who is properly called the "God of gods" (Deut. 10:17), the Almighty God, even Elohim, the Eternal Father. We will always worship and follow Him. A son growing up to be more like his father in no way detracts from the father or weakens their relationship - but can add to the joy and glory of the father. Indeed, helping that to happen is what being a good father is all about. There is a reason why God's most preferred title seems to be "Father."

Critics abhor our doctrines on this issue and claim that we are polytheistic. It is true that we believe the Father and the Son are separate beings, but they are one and comprise, with the Holy Ghost, one united Godhead. I consider myself a monotheist, a worshiper of the one true God. Rejecting the "one in substance" concept of post-biblical creeds does not make me a polytheist, in my opinion.

And also:

Mormon Answers (LDS FAQ): The Divine Potential of Human Beings - or Do Mormons Believe They Can Become Gods?

Why do you try to distinguish between believing in "God" and believing in the existence of multiple "gods"?

The distinction appears to be part of the biblical record and part of the beliefs of early Christians. The Bible, may I remind you, bears witness of God the Father who is the "God of gods" (Deut. 10:17) and who said to mortals receiving the law that they are "gods" (Ps. 82:6 and John 10:33-35). But these "gods" are subservient beings, like angels, and are not the source of salvation to us. Thus Paul could say that there are "gods many," but to us there is but one God (1 Cor. 8:5-8), indicating a clear difference between "gods" and "God."

This approach was taken by other early Christians, such as Origen. Origen's words and those of the Bible are discussed below in e-mail I received from Eugene Seaich, Oct. 11, 1998, and which I quote below with his permission:

"Men should escape from being men, and hasten to BECOME GODS" (Origen, Commentary on John, 29.27,29).

"Thou shalt resemble Him...having made thee even God to his glory"(Refutations, X.30).

Note that Origen's "gods" are THEOI. Both Clement and John called the Father HO THEOS, "the God" (with the definite article). Origen explains this important grammatical distinction by pointing out that The True God...is "the God" (HO THEOS, with the article), and those who are formed after him are "gods" (THEOI, without the article), "images," as it were, of him, the Prototype (Commentary on John, 7.2).

It is very likely that Lorenzo Snow's famous aphorism, "As man now is God once was; and as God now is, man may be, should also be interpreted in light of this critical distinction between HO THEOS and the other THEOI. President Snow's "God who was once a man" would accordingly belong to the same category as Origen's THEOI, those who have BECOME gods after the Father's Prototype. But his "God who now is" would be HO THEOS, the Prototype himself, or "the God of all other gods" (D&C 121:32), the one who has always been God (Ps. 90:2; D&C 20:12), and to whose eternal likeness all others aspire. Indeed, there can never have been a time when HO THEOS was not God, nor has he ever been anything but what he now is (Mormon 9:19; Moroni 7:22; D&C 20:17).

Edited August 20, 2009 by Kawazu

[Snow]

You didn't answer my question...

"Has it not been taught the our Heavenly Father went through a mortality just as we are now?"

And trying to get me a demerit is pretty telling. Since when are you worried about the rules of this site? You constantly run down scriptures and quotes from LDS church leaders.

I didn't answer your question because everyone knows about the Snow doublet and the King Follett discourse but YOU claimed that our teachings are clear that "our God worships His God just as we worship Him."

I say that is untrue; that is not normative in the Church. I further ask you to provide proof of your claim (he who makes the claim bears the burden of proof) using official, authoritative LDS sources, specifically that "our God worships His God just as we worship Him."

Prediction: Can't and won't.

[Dr T]

Nice poisoning the well post there Snow. That's fine. I was just educating others who have not read up on this stuff about other people that defined God in incorrect ways, not orthodox Christianity. You are a smart guy and I like you Snow. I think you usually call it straight and I really love that. With others you try and "push them around"and they often back down for some reason. I was just saying what I said. If u don't want to believe it-don't. I know some of the history and am confident that my understanding is correct and what is taught in scripture. That's all I really need. Thanks for playing though. :)

[Guest Believer_1829]

Kawazu-

By appearances this seems to contradict previously held teaching of our Heavenly Father progressing to His current station, I hope they are be completely upfront. This seems more palatable to me then my previous understanding of LDS teachings and goes along somewhat with my current belief about the purpose of this Earth and ultimate destiny of man.

[Guest Believer_1829]

I didn't answer your question because everyone knows about the Snow doublet and the King Follett discourse but YOU claimed that our teachings are clear that "our God worships His God just as we worship Him."

I say that is untrue; that is not normative in the Church. I further ask you to provide proof of your claim (he who makes the claim bears the burden of proof) using official, authoritative LDS sources, specifically that "our God worships His God just as we worship Him."

Prediction: Can't and won't.

If God went through a mortality, as we are currently experiencing, and progressed to His current station, that means:

A) He has a Heavenly Father

B- He worshipped that Heavenly Father

c) He continues to worship Him, because we never stop worshipping our God

Do you believe our Heavenly Father went through mortality as we are?

[Kawazu]

If God went through a mortality, as we are currently experiencing, and progressed to His current station, that means:

A) He has a Heavenly Father

B- He worshipped that Heavenly Father

c) He continues to worship Him, because we never stop worshipping our God

Do you believe our Heavenly Father went through mortality as we are?

Hi,

For me, LDS theology begins with the Preexistence/Council in Heaven and ends with the notion of becoming, "joint heirs with Christ."

Just my thoughts...

Cheers,

Kawazu

[Snow]

If God went through a mortality, as we are currently experiencing, and progressed to His current station, that means:

A) He has a Heavenly Father

B- He worshipped that Heavenly Father

c) He continues to worship Him, because we never stop worshipping our God

Do you believe our Heavenly Father went through mortality as we are?

Guess my prediction came true: CAN'T and WON'T

[Snow]

Nice poisoning the well post there Snow. That's fine. I was just educating others who have not read up on this stuff about other people that defined God in incorrect ways, not orthodox Christianity. You are a smart guy and I like you Snow. I think you usually call it straight and I really love that. With others you try and "push them around"and they often back down for some reason. I was just saying what I said. If u don't want to believe it-don't. I know some of the history and am confident that my understanding is correct and what is taught in scripture. That's all I really need. Thanks for playing though. :)

I don't even know what you were trying to say in your first post. The fact is that deification was a widespread orthodox belief in the early church. It wasn't taught by heretics or fringe groups. It was believed and taught by the Church Fathers. They weren't teaching that by salvation, man might become a "judge." Rather they taught that man, through salvation, would become a god, divine.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Snow

[Snow]

Here's an old post of mine I break out from time to time

1. Deification:

By deification, Latter-day Saints (Mormons) believe that God intends to transform those who are saved by Christ to be like Christ. We believe that God will succeed in what God intends. We take literally the idea that we are children of God and will grow up to be like God and will share in God's divinity and become co-inheritors, along with Christ, of everything that God has, including his divine nature.

People that want to poke fun at Latter-day Saints use language that sounds odd, like become a god of your own planet, and with your god-wife make spirit babies for the rest of eternity. Actually, earlier statements by some LDS figures are probably the source of such ideas, but there is no official justification for such in the LDS canon. I do not suppose that the saved that share in God's divine nature will ever be separate and independent from God.

2. LDS Doctrine:

LDS doctrine is contained in our canon (The Bible, The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price). That is from there that we take our beliefs. Doctrine of the Church does not extend beyond these tomes. Certainly all Protestants can understand the difference between the Bible and the excellent interpretive writings of Luther, Calvin or Wesley. That is not to say that which LDS authorities have taught outside the canon is necessarily wrong, just that the non-canon source do not define our beliefs and we are not bound to them. The LDS-only sources for the idea of deification are these:

1. D&C 76:58, 59, "Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God. Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ's, and Christ is God's." This is essentially the same as Psalm 82:6, John 10: 34-36, Romans 8:38, and 1 Cor 3:22-23.

2. D&C 121:28, 32. You can look it up, but no proposition about deification is asserted, strictly speaking it is not a doctrine. Rather, it is a promise of an explanation of all things, including things speculated, at some future time.

3. The main scriptural authority comes from section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants. You can find it in the scripture section at lds.org.

"... they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fullness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever. Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them."

To the above I would add Joseph Smith' King Follett address and a Lorenzo Snow epigram about man becoming as God now is - because, even though those two are not canonical, they are both so widely accepted, they have become normative for the Church. They both assert that there will be a time after the resurrection and judgment that the saved and exalted will be gods.

All else is speculative or interpretive and non-binding.

3: Biblical and early Christian support:

We take seriously the language about becoming the Children of God (Rom 8:16). It makes sense to us that children grow up to be like their Father. God is the Father of our spirits (Heb 12:9) We are his offspring (Acts 17:29) and offspring grown like to be what their parents are. Through the atonement of Christ we are begotten sons and daughters of God (1Peter 1:13). We partake of his divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) and we have been designated heirs to all that he has (Roman 8:15-17, Rev 21:7) which is all that the Father has (Jn 3:35).

You can accuse us of taking the scriptures too literally but the doctrine is scriptural. The same passages have led others in the Christian tradition to the same conclusion:

Clement of Alexandria said that those who are perfected through the gospel of Christ "are called by the appellation of 'gods' being destined to sit on the thrones with the other gods that have been first installed in their places by the Savior." You can say that we misinterpret the NT but that means that it is matter of interpretation, not that the idea isn't in there.

So, when Christ appears, the sons and daughters of God will be like him (1 Jn 3:2) changed from glory to glory (2 Cor 3:18). We receive his glory (Jn 17:22-23) and sit on his throne (3:21) We become joint heirs with Christ to ALL that the Father has (Rom 8:15-17, Rev 21:7, 1 Coir 3:22) and we "partake of his divine nature." What could "partake of his divine nature" possibly mean if the divine nature is not extended to us and does not become part of us?

To us the logic is inescapable 1. Christ is divine. 2. Through the atonement and grace of Christ the saved become one with Christ and become like him (Jn 3:2) and receive his image and glory (Jn 17:21-23; 2 Cor 3:18) Therefore, 3. Through the atonement of Christ the saved become, in some sense, divine. If A equals B and B equals C, then I conclude that A equals C.

4. What it All Means:

We do not deduce, as a philosophical argument, that the barriers will be reduced to make the saved like God. It is stated flatly in the Bible:

"John 17:21-23

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one;"

We become one with them as they are one with each other. Whatever their relationship is, it is explicitly stated in the Bible that we will share it. We will participate in the life of God through Christ's atonement. You may argue that we really aren't God's children and that we can't really be like him but such a view is philosophical, not biblical. (references - Stephen Robinson HWTD)

[StallionMcBeastly]

Great post, Snow.

Thanks.

[bytor2112]

Snow, is it GOD that you find self-centered and shallow for creating us for His glory? Wow...when see all He has done for me, I want to give Him glory. He alone is deserving of it. He is not arrogant or self-centered. He is humble and self-sacrificing. Scripture teaches me that I was made to worship! Cool! Isaiah 43:21 "The people whom I formed for Myself, will declare my praise." 1 Corinthians 10:31 "Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." Psalm 86: 9 "All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worhip before thee, O Lord; And they shall glorify Thy name."

How do you "give" HIM glory? How do you worship HIM? What is it exactly that Heavenly Father wants you to do? What is your purpose here in mortality? Were you created at the time of your birth or did you exist before?

[Guest Believer_1829]

Guess my prediction came true: CAN'T and WON'T

Why are you refusing to answer my basic and clear question?

Do you, Snow, believe our Heavenly Father lived a mortality similar to ours?

You can try to divert the issue and make calls for "official" documents (which is strange coming from you), but a belief in eternal progression for our Heavenly Father makes it simple arithmetic.

[randoman]

I just don't understand the entire 9 pages of discussion.

LatteLady, if you understand that our Heavenly Father is our literal spiritual Father; and that He sent His son to do the will of His Father; and that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit act as a Godhead with one purpose, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man, then do labels matter?

When you pray at night, you pray to your Father in heaven through the name of jesus Christ. "No one cometh unto the Father but by me." So does it really matter in your personal life what the Lord thinks and why he did something. The important thing is to live his commandments and increase your relationship with Him through prayer and scripture study.

All the rest of this theistic discussion really is pointeless in our individual worship. God is our Father. End of story. We could never possibly understand his ways. We should stop trying and start living.

Contention is of the devil

[desirexnoel]

Nice poisoning the well post there Snow. That's fine. I was just educating others who have not read up on this stuff about other people that defined God in incorrect ways, not orthodox Christianity. You are a smart guy and I like you Snow. I think you usually call it straight and I really love that. With others you try and "push them around"and they often back down for some reason. I was just saying what I said. If u don't want to believe it-don't. I know some of the history and am confident that my understanding is correct and what is taught in scripture. That's all I really need. Thanks for playing though. :)

I read your other post and I completely agree with you. n_n

[Snow]

Why are you refusing to answer my basic and clear question?

Do you, Snow, believe our Heavenly Father lived a mortality similar to ours?

You can try to divert the issue and make calls for "official" documents (which is strange coming from you), but a belief in eternal progression for our Heavenly Father makes it simple arithmetic.

Who is trying to divert?

YOU.

You claimed that "our God worships His God just as we worship Him." YOU bear the burden of proof. If it is true you should be able to prove it. But instead you are asking me questions. Prove your claim and I'll answer any question you like.

The reason you can't prove it (show us scripture, lesson manuals, official doctrine) is because YOU ARE JUST MAKING IT UP. YOU ARE FABRICATING NONSENSE. I have never talked to a Mormon, ever, that believes what you falsely proclaimed.

Prediction number three: Can't and Won't