How did God become God?

[Gerasim]

Abr 3:18-21

18 Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal.

19 And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all.

20 The Lord thy God sent his angel to deliver thee from the hands of the priest of Elkenah.

21 I dwell in the midst of them all; I now, therefore, have come down unto thee to declare unto thee the works which my hands have made, wherein my wisdom excelleth them all, for I rule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen.

D&C 93:21-30

21 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn;

22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.

23 Ye were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is Spirit, even the Spirit of truth;

24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;

25 And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

26 The Spirit of truth is of God. I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth;

27 And no man receiveth a fulness unless he keepeth his commandments.

28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things.

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

LDS.org - New Era Article - People on Other Worlds

[gabelpa]

That is a very good question. There is no doctrinal answer other than what is there, that God has always been God. Anything more as far as I am concerned is idle speculation

[Hemidakota]

I think the answer lies with Joseph Smith; seeing GOD in person more than one occasion. Not only that, he seen the state prior to GOD becoming a FATHER - see D&C 76. It was more or less, a eternal movie projected on the Johnston wall in the upper room, revealing the past, present, and the future. GOD's domain and worlds that have come and gone. Then, receive knowledge of which, him and Sidney were commanded in not to write about in D&C 76.

D&C 93 gives the answer on how to reach perfection in this life. The Savior provided the keys for anyone who has an ear to listen and who eyes are open.

Edited July 2, 2010 by Hemidakota

[Gerasim]

I ask the same question as here in these thread one of missionary and the reply was ''What about verse in Alma 12:31 ? Because they transgressed the first commandments they becoming as Gods and would you also read verses from Alma 42:5,8.''

[mnn727]

The simple fact is, we don't have any doctrine declairing the answer. We do have lots of speculation and guesses, along with some unclear hints in scripture.

[Hemidakota]

The answer lies with personal desire...

[Hemidakota]

I ask the same question as here in these thread one of missionary and the reply was ''What about verse in Alma 12:31 ? Because they transgressed the first commandments they becoming as Gods and would you also read verses from Alma 42:5,8.''

Alma 12:31 - This is about Adam and Eve partooking the forbidden fruit and were thus unable to remain in the Garden of Eden or see Moses 4:11.

Alma 42:5 - God has all the attributes of godliness in their perfection. It is not within his nature to do that which is less than godly. He cannot create that which is unwholesome or evil. That which he creates is without corruption or sin of any kind. Thus it was requisite with the plan of salvation that Adam fall, that he introduce mortality and corruption, that he, through the Fall, create a condition in which men might know opposition and knowingly and deliberately seek God. Had Adam not partaken of the forbidden fruit, had he not transgressed, had he not introduced death and corruption into a world where it had not existed in any form, had he not thereby imposed upon his posterity both a temporal and a spiritual death, the plan of salvation would have been of none effect. Had there been no fall, there could be no atonement; and if there were no atonement, there would be no Savior; and if there were no Savior, there could be no plan of salvation. See Alma 12:26

Alma 42:8 - to whom reference is made in this verse is the man Adam. It was not expedient that he be allowed to partake of the fruit of the tree of life and thus void the Fall and frustrate the plan of salvation. Hence the angel with a flaming sword was placed at Eden's gate to prevent Adam and Eve from returning in their fallen state to eat of the tree of life.

It is a matter reading the entire content to understand what Alma was talking about.

[Dr T]

The answer lies with who He is not about our desire Hemi. God always was from everlasting to everlasting.

[Hemidakota]

So were you....

You can see where Enoch and Abraham had the desire and it was answered. It is also the Savior that told the Apostles of the Nephites to have a desire first. As it was asked of the Apostles in the New Testament. Yes! It is a personal desire that is answered. The example is before us, as was the Moses Staff was for the Israelite. Whether or not a person heed this simple principle, is given the answer.

[Vanhin]

If it is our doctrine that God was once "not God", then you should be able to demonstrate it from our scriptures.

Regards,

Vanhin

[Hemidakota]

The scriptures inform us that Jesus said, as the Father hath power in himself, even so hath the Son power—to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious—in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. . . .

. . . What did Jesus do? Why, I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence. My Father worked out His kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to My Father, so that He may obtain kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt Him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take His place, and thereby become exalted myself. So that Jesus treads in the tracks of His Father, and inherits what God did before; and God is thus glorified and exalted in the salvation and exaltation of all His children. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 Vols. 6:305, 306)

(Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings by Donald Q. Cannon, Larry E. Dahl, Joseph Smith)

[spamlds]

I posted this earlier on another thread, but this relates to the question posed earlier as well as this one. Joseph Smith preached what is known as the King Follett Discourse, at a funeral sermon of a member of the Church. It was the last public sermon he preached before his martyrdom. Here's the link to it:

Mormon Literature Sampler: The King Follett Discourse

I disagree with the premise of Vanhin's statement that all of our doctrines must be demonstrated from the scriptures. Much of our doctrine comes from Joseph Smith's sermons. Some true revelations such as Section 137 and 138 were around for decades before they were officially added to he canon of scripture, yet they were true revelations. When living prophets are among us, they supersede scripture.

This Church constantly needs the guidance of its head, the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. This was well taught by President George Q. Cannon, formerly a member of the First Presidency: “We have the Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants; but all these books, without the living oracles and a constant stream of revelation from the Lord, would not lead any people into the Celestial Kingdom of God. This may seem a strange declaration to make, but strange as it may sound, it is nevertheless true.

In a First Presidency Message from President James E. Faust, he cited President George Q. Cannon:

“Of course, these records are all of infinite value. They cannot be too highly prized, nor can they be too closely studied. But in and of themselves, with all the light that they give, they are insufficient to guide the children of men and to lead them into the presence of God. To be thus led requires a living Priesthood and constant revelation from God to the people according to the circumstances in which they may be placed” (Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, 2 vols., selected by Jerreld L. Newquist, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1974, 1:323).

We must constantly be aware of the danger of allowing scripture to override the teachings of living prophets. That's one of the things that happened in the Great Apostasy. It's how Catholicism and Protestantism got so far off-base. The same can happen to us if we're not careful.

One of the best things a member can study is the "Teachings of the Presidents of the Church" books that we used in Relief Society for the past decade or so. If you don't have all of those books in your home library, you should order them from the Distribution Center. We should know what the prophets have taught in our dispensation because they have said much that is not contained in our scriptures. Paul said that "the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets." (1 Cor. 14:32) However a living prophet is not restricted to teach only what is in the scriptures.

We know way more about eternity, the gospel, the second coming, etc. from the sermons of latter-day prophets than is contained in our holy books. We should never seek to limit a true prophet to what was written by his predecessors.

[Vanhin]

I posted this earlier on another thread, but this relates to the question posed earlier as well as this one. Joseph Smith preached what is known as the King Follett Discourse, at a funeral sermon of a member of the Church. It was the last public sermon he preached before his martyrdom. Here's the link to it:

Mormon Literature Sampler: The King Follett Discourse

The King Follett discourse, or the version that we have, has been quoted extensively in the many discussions we have had concerning the topic - by both sides of the debate. It is clearly not sufficient enough to settle the matter. I have quoted from it while making my case in recent active posts.

I disagree with the premise of Vanhin's statement that all of our doctrines must be demonstrated from the scriptures. Much of our doctrine comes from Joseph Smith's sermons. Some true revelations such as Section 137 and 138 were around for decades before they were officially added to he canon of scripture, yet they were true revelations. When living prophets are among us, they supersede scripture.

On the surface, your challenge of my "premise" seems accurate. I do maintain that the official doctrine of this Church is found in our scriptures. However, I have not, nor do I discount the fact that living prophets can supersede scripture. However, until a doctrine has gone through the process that makes it binding, and it is added to our canon, it is not the official doctrine of this Church, and we are not bound by it. There have been many things said by prophets and apostles in their many sermons that are not "true revelations". You are not just disagreeing with me, and this concept is not original with me. It is the policy of the Church.

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted. (Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom)

I am reminded about a quote from the Preach My Gospel manual:

As you pray for inspiration, you should also confirm your feelings. For example, compare your decisions with the scriptures and the teachings of the living prophets. Be certain that the feelings are consistent with the assignment you have; for example, you will not receive revelation to tell a local bishop how he should perform in his calling. Discuss your decisions and conclusions with your companion, your district leader, or your mission president when appropriate. (http://www.lds.org/languages/additionalmanuals/preachgospel/PreachMyGospel___11_04_RecognizeTheSpirit__36617_eng_011.pdf)

The most recent encounter a living prophet had with the question of the origin of God, as it pertains to this disagreement, happened with the late President Gordon B. Hinckley. In a 1997 Time Magazine interview President Hinckley was asked about the couplet, "As man is now, God once was; as God is now man may be", his answer cause quite a stir. He said:

I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don't know a lot about it and I don't know that others know a lot about it. (see Nature of God/Hinckley downplaying the King Follett Discourse - FAIRMormon)

Obviously he is referring to the first part of the couplet (As man is now, God once was) in his response. That is something we do not know much about. Obviously we know much more about the second part - concerning exaltation. President Hinckley's answer was correct, and was in harmony with the scriptures.

Not only that, I have been in a Q&A session with a General Authority when he was asked the questions, "Does God the Father have a father?", and the answer was a sharp "We do not know.", followed by a discussion on avoiding speculation and about how sometimes "I don't know." is the right answer.

This Church constantly needs the guidance of its head, the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. This was well taught by President George Q. Cannon, formerly a member of the First Presidency: “We have the Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants; but all these books, without the living oracles and a constant stream of revelation from the Lord, would not lead any people into the Celestial Kingdom of God. This may seem a strange declaration to make, but strange as it may sound, it is nevertheless true.

In a First Presidency Message from President James E. Faust, he cited President George Q. Cannon:

“Of course, these records are all of infinite value. They cannot be too highly prized, nor can they be too closely studied. But in and of themselves, with all the light that they give, they are insufficient to guide the children of men and to lead them into the presence of God. To be thus led requires a living Priesthood and constant revelation from God to the people according to the circumstances in which they may be placed” (Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, 2 vols., selected by Jerreld L. Newquist, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1974, 1:323).

We must constantly be aware of the danger of allowing scripture to override the teachings of living prophets. That's one of the things that happened in the Great Apostasy. It's how Catholicism and Protestantism got so far off-base. The same can happen to us if we're not careful.

One of the best things a member can study is the "Teachings of the Presidents of the Church" books that we used in Relief Society for the past decade or so. If you don't have all of those books in your home library, you should order them from the Distribution Center. We should know what the prophets have taught in our dispensation because they have said much that is not contained in our scriptures. Paul said that "the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets." (1 Cor. 14:32) However a living prophet is not restricted to teach only what is in the scriptures.

We know way more about eternity, the gospel, the second coming, etc. from the sermons of latter-day prophets than is contained in our holy books. We should never seek to limit a true prophet to what was written by his predecessors.

Anything spoken from the pulpit in this Church, that is considered doctrine of this Church, has been in harmony with the scriptures. I don't know of any exceptions.

I maintain that if it is the doctrine of this Church, you can demonstrate it from the official sources of doctrine, which are - the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.

Regards,

Vanhin

[Justice]

A while back, I was involved in a discussion with an investigator where they used the exact same scripture the missionaries used to argue their point. Both used the same scripture but understood it so differently. Even with myself, over the years I have been deeply amazed at how much more I get out of the scriptures as I re-read them again.

I encourage people to read the scriptures as often as they can, and ponder them throughout their day as often as they can. It does very little good to read them one day, and never ponder or consider them again until they are read again the next day.

I maintain that it is impossible to read the scriptures everyday with a sincere desire to know their mysteries, ponder them intently with sincere prayer, and NOT be enlightened in some way by the more difficult passages.

I believe it is a mistake to read and concentrate only on what we know, waiting for the leaders of the church to reveal more. But, we should be cautious when and where we discuss what we learn.

So, I see both sides.

[Hemidakota]

A while back, I was involved in a discussion with an investigator where they used the exact same scripture the missionaries used to argue their point. Both used the same scripture but understood it so differently. Even with myself, over the years I have been deeply amazed at how much more I get out of the scriptures as I re-read them again.

I encourage people to read the scriptures as often as they can, and ponder them throughout their day as often as they can. It does very little good to read them one day, and never ponder or consider them again until they are read again the next day.

I maintain that it is impossible to read the scriptures everyday with a sincere desire to know their mysteries, ponder them intently with sincere prayer, and NOT be enlightened in some way by the more difficult passages.

I believe it is a mistake to read and concentrate only on what we know, waiting for the leaders of the church to reveal more. But, we should be cautious when and where we discuss what we learn.

So, I see both sides.

If we had the opportunity to look at the complete doctrines of the gospel, the number of which pales what is given to us today in the church. Even the prophet cautiously, did not release everything he learned by the hands of the Savior or those who had the keys. As the church progresses into the millennium, more doctrine will be given to the members based on their spiritual maturity but not all. For anyone stating the scriptures are complete and that is all we need for an answer, is a naive and foolishness. More sermons I read and learn from the latter day prophet, more I see there is much more that was not given to the church in those early days.

I do agree with your thinking. It always starts with our own personal desire to know a specific subject, history, same example which Abraham and others did. With diligent studying, constant prayer for guidance, often times, we can be guided by the Spirit to where to find the answer, which would bring a greater clarity to the question. The means of the ways of Lord is still mysterious even for me, how it is delivered at times and why it was used to convey the answer.

I for one, will sit gladly to the table of feast, to grab any crumb of morsel when it falls to the floor. Being grateful here, for even the smallest morsel to be fed like manna from heaven.

[Hemidakota]

We must constantly be aware of the danger of allowing scripture to override the teachings of living prophets. That's one of the things that happened in the Great Apostasy. It's how Catholicism and Protestantism got so far off-base. The same can happen to us if we're not careful.

One of the best things a member can study is the "Teachings of the Presidents of the Church" books that we used in Relief Society for the past decade or so. If you don't have all of those books in your home library, you should order them from the Distribution Center. We should know what the prophets have taught in our dispensation because they have said much that is not contained in our scriptures. Paul said that "the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets." (1 Cor. 14:32) However a living prophet is not restricted to teach only what is in the scriptures.

We know way more about eternity, the gospel, the second coming, etc. from the sermons of latter-day prophets than is contained in our holy books. We should never seek to limit a true prophet to what was written by his predecessors.

Good point...having the first comforter, the Holy Ghost, should always be our constant companion.

[TheAngelPalmoni]

God was the Christ of the Last Plan of Salvation and the Holy Ghost in the Plan of Salvation before that...

[Hemidakota]

How could one prove this case with scriptures or from a dispensation prophet?

[TheAngelPalmoni]

I can pretty much prove it to an LDS person but not to anyone else wearing difference glasses...

[gabelpa]

I can pretty much prove it to an LDS person but not to anyone else wearing difference glasses...

Go on then. I think Hemidakota will rip you to shreds, but go for it.

[Justice]

I would like to see it as well, whether here or in a private message.

[Vanhin]

I ran accross a couple of quotes that have been shared before, but I think they are worth mentioning again.

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil was rent to-day, and the Great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible,—I say, if you were to see him to-day, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image, and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another."—Joseph Smith; see Compendium, p. 190.

"As the Father hath power in himself, so hath the Son power in himself, to lay down his life and take it again, so he has a body of his own. The Son doeth what he hath seen the Father do: then the Father hath some day laid down his life and taken it again; so he has a body of his own; each one will be in his own body."—Joseph Smith; see Hist, of the Church, vol. 5, p. 426.

It is evident from those quotes that God the Father entered mortality, and being God, had the power to lay down his life and take it back up again - just like God the Son did.

Though I can see how an infinite regress of gods can be specualted from what we have, the understanding is not specifically implied in the above quotes. The main points seem to be something else. From them I get:

1) God is an Exalted Man who has an immortal, glorified body of flesh and bone.

2) He gained his body by entering mortality, like the rest of us.

3) He was God before, during, and after said mortal experience, where he had power to lay down his life and take it back up again, like the Son.

4) He is the God of all worlds and all things.

I think those truths can be established from the scrpitures. Beyond that, I think it is safe to say we know very little.

Regards,

Vanhin

[Justice]

I had prepared a long post to discuss these issues more, but I'll just say some of those things can be understood differently... especially 1,3, and 4.

[Hemidakota]

I had prepared a long post to discuss these issues more, but I'll just say some of those things can be understood differently... especially 1,3, and 4.

I am curious. Justice, prepare a fresh post based on Vanhin remarks. Though, I do not agree with 4 but 3 I can see truth behind it if GOD was called as a 1st councilor of the Godhead prior to that earth.

[Justice]

OK, I'll try to be brief.

As far as 4, it's not that I disagree, but that I'd have to finish it with "... in this eternal round."

Now, with 3, we can use a section of "Jesus the Christ" by Elder Talmage, as Vanhin posted it in another thread...

"It now becomes our purpose to inquire as to the position and status of Jesus the Christ in the antemortal world, from the period of the solemn council in heaven, in which He was chosen to be the future Savior and Redeemer of mankind, to the time at which He was born in the flesh."

Notice this says nothing of what Christ was before He was chosen to be the Redeemer in the Grand Council.

One can speculate that He was God before, and what that might mean. I believe ALL children of God are "god" by a loose definition, because that is the "race of man." But, there was a period before Christ was chosen to be the Redeemer where He was the same as the rest of us: no physical body, no calling of Redeemer, no calling to the Godhead.

I believe He was chosen simply because He was the best; the most pure, holy, and obedient son. I don't believe He existed as a conscience prior to being "born" as offspring to Heavenly Parents. I think the scriptures that refer to Him as "alpha and omega," infinite and eternal, are all true and proper.

I think we need to understand what infinite and eternal are, as well as who we are as a race. We are God's children, meaning the Father. All who are ever born of a mortal mother in this eternal round are His literal offspring (spiritual)... including the great Jehova.

Edited July 8, 2010 by Justice