What does it mean that God was once man?

[MobyMule]

There are more than one views or theories on what exactly it means that God was once a man. I think it is evident from the scriptures that God is and Exalted man, with a body of flesh and bone, which to me means that He did enter mortality and gain a body at some earlier time.

The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him. (D&C130:22-23)

Behold, I am God; Man of Holiness is my name; Man of Counsel is my name; and Endless and Eternal is my name, also. (Moses 7:35)

Some have specualted that this amounts to what has been termed, "an infinite regress of gods", meaning God the Father had a father, and his father had a father, and so forth, and that God was once a normal non-god human spirit who entered mortality and was exalted in the same manner that we will be, or that God the Father was once the Christ of previous generation. There is at least some scriptural support for the last point.

I, on the other hand, go with a different take on this. In my opinion, our scriptures currently do not mention or leave very much room for an infinite regress of "worshipped" gods, though it is clear that the children of God can be considered "gods", but not equal in honor, like the Father. There is nothing to support the idea that we will be worhsipped as the Father and Son are. The closest thing is that "angels will be subject" to us and we will "bear the souls of men" if we are exalted (see D&C 132). However, all things considered, the scriptures as a whole forbid the worship of any other God (Guide to the Scriptures: Worship).

From our modern scriptures and many of the other teachings of Joseph Smith, for example, I find compelling evidence that both God the Father and Jesus Christ are infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting, and that we too are co-eternal with God. The Book of Moses, for example paints a picture of a God and his Christ, who endlessly create worlds and bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind (see Moses 1). Joseph Smith taught that God found himself in the midst of spirits and glory, and that He authored the plan of salvation. Said Joseph:

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. (LDS.org - Ensign Article - The King Follett Sermon)

The Book of Abraham and all of scripture describe the pre-mortal Jesus, or Jehovah, as on like unto God (Abr. 3:24), and the Book of Mormon makes the case the Christ is the Eternal God, and that he himself is infinite and eternal. The Doctrine and Covenants says the following in unequivocal terms:

By these things we know that there is a God in heaven, who is infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting the same unchangeable God, the framer of heaven and earth, and all things which are in them;

...by the Holy Ghost, which beareth record of the Father and of the Son; Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen. (D&C 20:17,27-28)

Others are free to believe what they will, but I can only conclude from the scriptures that there are no other "Gods" in the sense that they will be objects of worship, and that Elohim is the "Most High God" - the "God of gods". I do believe that we can become like them in every way, but we cannot surpass them in that honor.

Jesus Christ was God before, during, and after his mortal ministry; and thus, I believe that God the Father was God before, during, and after any mortal experience that He passed through to gain his body, and like the Son, had the power to resurrect himself. I believe that exalted men and women continue the work of the Father by bearing the souls of men, and are made kings and queens, priests and priestesses unto the Most High God. We will have dominion in the Father's kingdom, and bring honor and glory to God and the Lamb forever. This is what I believe has been going on forever. We will be one with the Father and represent him in the many wolrds that we preside over, like Jesus Christ does, but Elohim will ever be the Most High God, the One True God and the object of our worship.

This is my faith as a latter-day saint. It's what I believe is in harmony with binding scripture that we have.

Regards,

Vanhin

P.S. For more info on the two prevailing thoughts on this matter, see the following article: Nature of God/Infinite regress of Gods - FAIRMormon

I find myself holding this view more as well. I find it to be in line with LDS theology and our Standard Works.

[marts1]

I would not pretend to know the answer to that.

When it comes to settled, established doctrine I restrict myself to what the standard works teach.

As far as I know, none of the Lord's prophets in any of the scriptures taught that God told them that our Heavenly Father was once a mortal like we are.

For me personally, my opinions and my beliefs are different:

My opinions are based on my ability to reason and use logic and may often be wrong.

My beliefs are founded in scriptural authority.

Wise but not much fun.:) j/k

[Just_A_Guy]

Similarly, the both suggested that Heavenly Father may not be omnipresent spiritually or, obviously, physically, but that his intelligence is everywhere, and knows all that is happening. When I asked if that really differed much from the trinitarian view that God is indeed omnipotent, in that his spirit is everywhere. They admitted that the difference was slight, and not worth debating about.

Thoughts?

I'm no expert in Protestant theology, but I think we may be using different definitions of the term "spirit". As I understand it, you see "spirit" as an "essence"--something that could be everywhere (ie "the spirit of the law"). Mormons acknowledge that usage, but we also conceptualize another form of "spirit"--the essence of a person's identity, which has a tangible form and can only be in one place at one time (a sort of "ghost", if you will, that resides inside the body while a person is alive). I'd guess that your LDS correspondents were thinking of this latter usage.

But was Heavenly Father once as Christ was?

Can't find the quote right now, but I remember reading some LDS leader teaching that John 5:19 is literal:

Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

I think the quote I'm remembering is over a century old, though; so it wouldn't be fair to say that this is established LDS doctrine.

[Vanhin]

Can't find the quote right now, but I remember reading some LDS leader teaching that John 5:19 is literal:

I personally think John 5:17-23 is teaching that the Son does the work and will of the Father. The Jews sought to take his life because he performed miracles on the Sabbath. Jesus told them that his Father also does this kind of work on the Sabbath (verse 17).

Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. (John 5:19-20)

So if the Father performs miracles and great works on the Sabbath, the Son will also, He is only being the kind of Person the Father is. His will is swallowed up in the will of the Father. And then, I think a very profound point is made:

For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. (John 5:21-23)

Both the Father and the Son have power over life - which supports the point I was making in my previous post, in my opinion. The Son has seen the Father give up his life and take it up again and also raised the dead, and the Son will do the same. They are one in purpose and love for mankind.

Regards,

Vanhin

Edited February 19, 2010 by Vanhin

[Finrock]

Unless we deny that Jesus Christ is a spiritually begotten son of Heavenly Father, then there was a time when Jesus did not command the authority and power of the Father. But, we know that, "[a]ll mankind are his [Jesus'] brothers and sisters, for he is the eldest of the spirit children of Elohim" (Guide to the Scriptures: Godhead).

Further, Jesus made it clear during His mortal ministry that His authority and doctrine was derived from the Father. Said Jesus, the "Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand" (John 3:35; see also; John 5:19, John 7:16, John 8:28, Guide to the Scriptures: Godhead). Why would the Father need to give all things to Jesus if Jesus possesed these things "eternally"? In any case, Jesus made these statements for several reasons but one of which was to demonstrate to His believers that just as He has been given all things by His Father, we too, can receive all things by attaching ourselves to His lineage, by become His (Jesus') sons and daughters.

Our missionary discussions and Gospel Principles manual make it clear that the Plan of Happiness is our Heavenly Father's plan, and new members (and sometimes long time members) are often corrected when they call the Plan of Happiness, Jesus' plan. It is the Father's plan.

Scripture and other official sources makes it clear to me that Jesus did not always possess authority of himself, but that He possess it because it is derived and given to Him from the Father, who chose Jesus to be the Anointed One. Jesus works under the direction of the Father, to whom Jesus has commanded us to give deference and all glory.

Regards,

Finrock

[mikbone]

LDS doctrine on both the past state of God and the future progression of Man is sufficiently vague to allow multiple interpretations. Most members probably haven't even considered the matter enough to have a theoretical position (which is fine as faith and repentance are much more important anyway).

A decent effort to define some of the most popular beliefs that stem from the Prophet Joseph Smith's King Follet Discourse are presented in a table format on the web page:

Talk:Lorenzo Snow couplet theology - MormonWiki.org

In the table, 4 of the main proposals are elucidated.

I am a proponent of the “one track” multiple mortal probation model. As this model answers a multitude of questions that I struggled with during my conversion and personal scripture study.

It would be interesting to see which model each poster espouses if any.

[Justice]

My beliefs are most like Lorenzo Snow's traditional model, with differences, or better stated, with some areas undecided.

For instance, I don't think the Father had to be the Savior in His generation or eternity, but it's possible.

[JohnOF123]

...I don't think the Father had to be the Savior in His generation or eternity, but it's possible.

I've always wondered something. I know we all occasionally have "what if" moments in our head. I'd like to play a little game; an exercise really. And I am willing to play this the other way too if you like. In this theoretical scenario we can try my view first... what if, and I mean if, that when we all died, it turned out that God was the only God by Himself, and our purpose in life was to seek His exaltation, rather than our own. In this scenario, God wanted us to glorify and exalt Him, but we step before Him expecting ourselves to receive exaltation and our own glory.

I know this is kind of like saying "what if Islam is right", since we turned down Allah... or like when Christians asked Richard Dawkin's (a leading atheist) what if you died and you went before God.. but Richard Dawkin's didn't answer her and everyone walked away wondering what he would have said.

Anyone feel free to play along here. I am really interested in different viewpoints here from this scenario.

[Finrock]

I firmly subscribe to the Lorenzo Snow theory as it is explained at the link provided by mikbone (link).

Regards,

Finrock

[CrimsonKairos]

If that happened, I would wake up and think, "What a weird dream."

[Finrock]

Good evening Justice. I hope you are enjoying your day! :)

My beliefs are most like Lorenzo Snow's traditional model, with differences, or better stated, with some areas undecided.

For instance, I don't think the Father had to be the Savior in His generation or eternity, but it's possible.

If you are stating that the Lorenzo Snow "model" suggests that God the Father once acted as a savior, then I just wanted to point out that the Lorenzo Snow model as described in the Mormonwiki page does not postulate that God the Father once acted in the role of a savior. In fact, the model denies that God the Father was a Savior on another earth and states that Jesus' atonement was universal and boundless.

Regards,

Finrock

[mikbone]

All 4 of the models are interesting.

I think that the majority of LDS ascribe to the traditional Lorenzo Snow model but to me it lacks internal validity.

The Ostlerian view denies that we can become like God. But is probably closest to what most "Christians" believe.

The Two Track Model has internal validity but recognizes that there are a special subset of beings that are perfect and never suscumb to sin. These perfect beings can become like Elohim (for example Jesus Christ). But we can never become like them, nor can we create a perfect being like them. In effect they are a defferent species than we are. There is an ontological gap between them and us.

The One Track Model has internal validity. It allows us to become like God is. And recognizes that God was once actually as we are now (He was a normal mortal and experienced sin and failure, etc...) Unfortunately, the only way to make this model work requires multiple mortal probations. Which makes things tricky.

[john doe]

I've always wondered something. I know we all occasionally have "what if" moments in our head. I'd like to play a little game; an exercise really. And I am willing to play this the other way too if you like. In this theoretical scenario we can try my view first... what if, and I mean if, that when we all died, it turned out that God was the only God by Himself, and our purpose in life was to seek His exaltation, rather than our own. In this scenario, God wanted us to glorify and exalt Him, but we step before Him expecting ourselves to receive exaltation and our own glory.

I know this is kind of like saying "what if Islam is right", since we turned down Allah... or like when Christians asked Richard Dawkin's (a leading atheist) what if you died and you went before God.. but Richard Dawkin's didn't answer her and everyone walked away wondering what he would have said.

Anyone feel free to play along here. I am really interested in different viewpoints here from this scenario.

I think you seriously misjudge Mormonism, its teachings and beliefs. Why do you insist on focusing on peripheral, non-doctrinal musings instead of listening to us about what our doctrinal, core beliefs are?

[JohnOF123]

I think you seriously misjudge Mormonism, its teachings and beliefs. Why do you insist on focusing on peripheral, non-doctrinal musings instead of listening to us about what our doctrinal, core beliefs are?

I've always wondered something.

I know this is kind of like saying "what if Islam is right"...

I am really interested in different viewpoints here from this scenario.

(Don't mean to offend. I was asked something similar, and I enjoyed their question.)

Feel free not to answer if you wish. But maybe i do misjudge Mormonism. I was always under the impression that you were living life in the direction of exaltation. Forgive me if I have this wrong. I enjoy difficult and challenging questions, and this question was meant to be purely philosophical; please don't take offense.

Edited February 20, 2010 by JohnOF123

[JohnOF123]

If that happened, I would wake up and think, "What a weird dream."

Lol, I looked for a "laugh" button, but for some reason, it's not there. You should hear some of my crazy dreams. I think I sleep in too late sometimes.

[Tarnished]

I believe that God was once a man much like Jesus was once a man.

"John 5: 19,

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise."

I read this as Jesus is doing what the Father has done before him, which would mean that God went down and was the Savior for his own siblings.

As for your what if scenario, if something like that happened I would feel quite confused but would accept it. However I do feel much more happy having faith in the belief that instead when I die I will be once more united with my heavenly family. It is not glory that our religion seeks when we die, it is a reunion with our family. I wish so desperately to be reunited with my heavenly family and my earthly family so much I would do anything to make sure it happens. This life is our experience with life and with having bodies and with controlling ourselves and learning to live a life that will allow us to return to our Father. How wonderful is that?

[Justice]

Good evening Justice. I hope you are enjoying your day! :)

If you are stating that the Lorenzo Snow "model" suggests that God the Father once acted as a savior, then I just wanted to point out that the Lorenzo Snow model as described in the Mormonwiki page does not postulate that God the Father once acted in the role of a savior. In fact, the model denies that God the Father was a Savior on another earth and states that Jesus' atonement was universal and boundless.

Regards,

Finrock

Yep, I was stating it's possible that He was! And, also saying that it doesn't metter whether He was or wasn't, because, He made it! I believe Christ's atonement covers all His creations.

I word things wierd sometimes... just ask my wife and kids!

[Dravin]

I know this is kind of like saying "what if Islam is right", since we turned down Allah... or like when Christians asked Richard Dawkin's (a leading atheist) what if you died and you went before God.. but Richard Dawkin's didn't answer her and everyone walked away wondering what he would have said.

What other choice is there in hypotheticals like that but to accept it? Though I'd hope that my faith in his son Jesus Christ even with the misunderstanding of doctrine was sufficient that my accepting it didn't involve eternal torment, but even if it did it isn't like there would be much to do about it.

You might be thinking explanations, but I'd be before an omniscient being, he'd know exactly why I believed as I did in life. Explanations would be superfluous.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Dravin

[Traveler]

It an evangelical board, a couple of LDS posters were trying to explain how God could have once been like us, and yet have always been perfect. They suggested that Heavenly Father may have, in long infinity past, been the Son, who was sacrificed for the sins of another creation, and that his mortality was akin to the mortality of Jesus. They both admitted this was speculation, but offered it as a possible explanation.

Similarly, the both suggested that Heavenly Father may not be omnipresent spiritually or, obviously, physically, but that his intelligence is everywhere, and knows all that is happening. When I asked if that really differed much from the trinitarian view that God is indeed omnipotent, in that his spirit is everywhere. They admitted that the difference was slight, and not worth debating about.

Thoughts?

It would seem that whenever I attempt to converse with you that I am left wondering if it would be best that we explorer our similarities in understanding or our differences.

In truth I have decided that I am not an expert in determining what our differences or similaries really are. Some day we may figure that out - but until then let us stand together in perserving families. That is one thing I know we agree.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I think it was another thread that an LDS poster said something so simple, yet so profound, that it really did help me understand some of our differences--and perhaps to clarify that which we agree on: That LDS teaching does not distinguish between humans and angels. Rather, it postulates that we are the same species. That simple statement helped me understand the role of Satan, the belief in premortal existence, and even the nature of God. Perhaps the one sticking point is my presumption that even angels had an absolute starting point--that they were created out of nothing.

[marts1]

Where does it say we were created from a matter called intelligence which always were in existance or something like that?

[JohnOF123]

Where does it say we were created from a matter called intelligence which always were in existance or something like that?

Universe

Uni - single

Verse - spoken sentence

It has been believed that God spoke the Universe into existence.

God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. So many examples of this during the creation account in Genesis and throughout the Bible.

The fact that there was a beginning establishes God as the creator of time and places all other explanations out of reach.

Not sure if this is what you were asking or not...

Edited February 20, 2010 by JohnOF123

[Justice]

PC, I find that these discussions are very useful because if we have an open mind we can understand each other. So many people feel these discussions are people trying to prove their points and prove each other wrong. I think some of that goes on, but in my case, I couldn't disagree more.

Statements like your last post make this all worthwhile. Agreeing on every detail isn't the intent of these forum discussions, but understanding makes the world a better place.

[xenic101]

I saw that thread, and your response to it. I think that is one major point that is overlooked when non-LDS try to understand LDS belief. It ties together so much, eternal progression, the nature of God and our relation to him, Christ and his role, ect.

Every intelligent being that has any bearing, relationship or part in this mortal existence (all of reality as far as it pertains to us now) are the literal spirit children of God the Father. We are his children sent to earth to learn, angels are also his children, most often after they have had their mortal existence, satan was his child 'disowned' for his rebellion, 'demons' were his children who were cast down with satan because of their rebellion. So we are all related as His literal spiritual children. Not in a 'created' sense, but in a very real sense.

We all have 'existed forever' though not as we are now. Similar to how a new born baby is created, the atoms of his body already existed, but are organized into a human being. I think it help understand most concepts to remember that we are the Father's children, every analogy that you could make relating to a perfect family (not a tv sitcom family, not even perfect as our limited understanding paints it) applies.

Angels are also His children, they are on the same path as us, they are in fact, us. Sent to earth outside of mortality to fulfill a role in God's plan. Satan and his demons, started on the same path as us as God's spiritual children, however their choices prior to this mortal existence have placed them on a different path.

You may want to look up and review the Plan of Salvation with that perspective. It has a much deeper meaning when viewed that way.

Reading claims and insinuations that my view of God somehow belittles Him by making Him the same species as us, has gotten me thinking recently, and I've come to the conclusion that my view in fact exalts both Him and ourselves higher. He is our Father, not just our creator, we are his children and he loves us as such, not simply as his creation. He created the universe, but it's us he loves. He seeks our exhalation, because that is what a perfect Father does, seeks to raise his children to his level. This is his plan because he's seen it work, having been in our place before. The plan of salvation isn't something He wants to try to see how it turns out, He very much knows that this path provides for eternal progression, because he's seen it.

Edited February 20, 2010 by xenic101

[Justice]

Universe

Uni - single

Verse - spoken sentence

It has been believed that God spoke the Universe into existence.

God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. So many examples of this during the creation account in Genesis and throughout the Bible.

The fact that there was a beginning establishes God as the creator of time and places all other explanations out of reach.

Not sure if this is what you were asking or not...

He did speak the universe into existence. But, He didn't speak the universe into existence from nothing.

If you read the creation account you will notice that God spoke many different times, over the course of 6 time periods called "days," and things "moved" and "divided" to obey His commands (you just admitted this in your post).

So many examples of this during the creation account in Genesis

The main point being if He spoke the universe into existence from nothing then why did it take 6 days to do it? Clearly it was a gradual creation that took place over time periods. That does not lend itself to the "from nothing" belief that many have.