Of Harps And Heresy

[Christos]

<div class='quotemain'>

The weakness of God is stronger than the strongest strength of Man.

A simple statement but a great truth. I liked the way you phrased it.

Just so everybody knows where I stand. I do not think that G-d really created us just so we would praise him. I do not think he needs our praise or that our praise makes any difference what-so-ever to his kingship or kingdom...Otherwise his sacrifice seem somewhat stupid in that he could create praisers with much less effort and I do not think him stupid.

Bee-eye-en-gee-oh, and bingo was his name-oh. :) Nail on the head, bullseye, checkmate, et al.

I wrote down what I heard from the Holy Friday service.

1 Corinthians 1:25 (K.J.V.)

25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

<div class='quotemain'>

However, we musn't think of serving in the sense of a king in a castle and his lowly servants, God is greater than we will ever be. The weakness of God is stronger than the strongest strength of Man.

Are we to believe G-d is greater than we will ever be - because he does not have the power to do such a thing or because he is not smart enough to do such a thing - or is G-d selfish and cannot allow greatness like his to exist anywhere else? Or perhaps such greatness is not really a good thing?

My friend - I submit that even the creation was a great act of love and service and that everything G-d has done is less for him (who needs nothing) including his pleasure, than it was a divine act of service and love for our benefit. I also submit that when we learn to love and serve as he; that he will still love and serve us and welcome us to his side as his friends and will withhold nothing of his greatness from us. And this is the purpose for which he created us and the greatest praise that we or anyone could ever give him. Emulation is the greatest of all possible praise.

The Traveler

Unless we become higher than the Cherubim and the Seraphim (the highest rank of the angelic host) and become as divine as God and not men, then yes, God will be greater than we will ever be.

If there are many Gods, there will become a need for a head God. There may also become rebellious Gods (Satan was the greatest of all the Archangels).

We would end up with a three tier system of the rebellious, the Godly and the head God.

Worship would become abolished because there will be no master and hedinism will prevail. Heaven will become the new Earth and so a new Heaven would need to be created. Those who rebelled would be cast out of the new Earth.

But what would become of the unfaithful or those in the Terrestial and Tellestial kingdoms? They will become the lowest of the low, lower than the new Hell itself for that would contain the ones who were once called Gods.

Woah! This would make great novel material!

Basically what I am saying is that if we continue as men, we can never become Gods and if we did, a heirarchy would be natural.

<div class='quotemain'>

Ahem!

Corrections are in order......according to LDS Doctrine.

2. Rule and reign with Christ? He has His Kingdom, we will have ours. We can enjoy His perfect presence based on His judgement of our actions or inactions in pursuit of His Gospel plan. The Plan of Salvation is available to all who partake of His saving ordinances from His Church.

Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. KJV

3. We'll judge angels? No, Christ is the Judge. They will have their reward according to His perfect judgement. We will have our own work to do.

1 Cor 6:3: 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

KJV

4. Earth was created in six time periods. We don't know how long those periods were, but we are told that one day is like a thousand years in Heavenly reckoning. Since creation the Plan has been in place to bring His children back to His Presence, according to their obedience to the Plan. 2000 years? Just a blip in time in the eternities.

Genesis speaks of 6 days. One possible understanding is that the days are periods of time. I wasn't aware that the LDS took that as an official interpretation. Regardless, I doubt anyone will be complaining about our new residence.

Genesis 1:14

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

one day is the distance between the setting and setting of the sun.

I know that scientifically it is difficult to accept but this is an omnipotent God we are talking about.

[prisonchaplain]

Looks like we'll be playing harps after all

Today's Sunday School lesson included the following:

Rev 15:2: And I saw what looked like a sea of glass mixed with fire and, standing beside the sea, those who had been victorious over the beast and his image and over the number of his name. They held harps given them by God NIV

Perhaps we need to add harp playing to our church programming?

[shanstress70]

Perhaps we need to add harp playing to our church programming?

I for one LOVE the sound of a harp!

[tifflovespurple]

I think heaven - would be like many gardens and outdoors that I love - like forest areas and taking walks with Christ and talking and learning from him. I just know there is lots of the artistry of nature and science all around. Look at the universe it's full of wonderful art - gorgeous light/fire/etc. so - i am sure heaven has the best of all of these things. The prettiest flowers, softest grass, beautiful rays of light - colored, rocks, huge waterfalls -etc. learning all about it and everything else is what I'd be "doing" there. - Oh - and of course my babies, many more children - the four I miscarried, the four i have, and many more. That is definitely heaven like - Christ always mentions the central importance of babies, children, science-intelligence, happiness. We can't have happiness without babies and beautiful nature. not truly -

Tiffany

We could use many Orchestra instruments. They are so beautiful - Celestes, harpsichords, french horns, violas. wow. that kind of makes you think of the "Tab Choir" - ha.

Tiffany

[Traveler]

Unless we become higher than the Cherubim and the Seraphim (the highest rank of the angelic host) and become as divine as God and not men, then yes, God will be greater than we will ever be.

If there are many Gods, there will become a need for a head God. There may also become rebellious Gods (Satan was the greatest of all the Archangels).

We would end up with a three tier system of the rebellious, the Godly and the head God.

Worship would become abolished because there will be no master and hedinism will prevail. Heaven will become the new Earth and so a new Heaven would need to be created. Those who rebelled would be cast out of the new Earth.

So many things here that do not make sense.

1. Where did you learn that Cherubim are angels?

2. If there was another being like G-d they (or G-d) would become rebellious? I see no logic at all in this. If G-d is rebellious how can anyone trust him. If he is not rebellious why would beings like him be rebellious?

3. There would have to be a head G-d? Why? If several bishops are united in purpose must there be one greater than all the others? Are G-d's more incapable of such things than bishops?

4. Worship would be abolished? Emulation is the highest form of worship - Worship would be divinely pure.

The Traveler

[Christos]

Unless we become higher than the Cherubim and the Seraphim (the highest rank of the angelic host) and become as divine as God and not men, then yes, God will be greater than we will ever be.

If there are many Gods, there will become a need for a head God. There may also become rebellious Gods (Satan was the greatest of all the Archangels).

We would end up with a three tier system of the rebellious, the Godly and the head God.

Worship would become abolished because there will be no master and hedinism will prevail. Heaven will become the new Earth and so a new Heaven would need to be created. Those who rebelled would be cast out of the new Earth.

So many things here that do not make sense.

Look harder.

1. Where did you learn that Cherubim are angels?

The Cherubim are not angels, they are a higher rank than the angels...but they are still part of the heavenly host. The word Cherubim or Cherub (singular) is mentioned 96 times in the K.J.V.

2. If there was another being like G-d they (or G-d) would become rebellious? I see no logic at all in this. If G-d is rebellious how can anyone trust him. If he is not rebellious why would beings like him be rebellious?

I am not talking about Jehova. I am referring to your idea of these "Gods to be".

My God cannot be rebellious, God would have to rebel against something and there is nothing to rebel against.

This is the verse I think about.

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Isa 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Isa 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

(Oh and by the way, Lucifer is the old latin name for "Venus", NOT a name of Satan. )

It amazes me how Mormons are always trying to be better than everyone else, to gain favour with God and hope to become a god themselves.

What happened to humility and reverence?

God is our master, and we are an unworthy servant.

3. There would have to be a head G-d? Why? If several bishops are united in purpose must there be one greater than all the others? Are G-d's more incapable of such things than bishops?

There is an Arch-bishop, then a Metropolitan, then a Patriarch.

However, the Patriarch is the "first among equals", NOT "the boss of the bishops" because there is no heirarchy on Earth. To be honest, I could never be a Patriarch, it is a role that requires complete humility and that is something that very few people can ever grasp.

4. Worship would be abolished? Emulation is the highest form of worship - Worship would be divinely pure.

I suppose you could worship yourself.

To worship is to serve. To become a god yourself, of whom no-one is higher, there will be no need to worship, we (as gods) would turn to worship only ourselves, this would leave us with a hedinisitic divine society.

Would Jehova allow that.

BTW, use referred to God as Jehova to make the distinction between "gods" and God. (I use the small g for god and a large G for God, the Father almighty.....)

(why aren't my quote tags working )

[Traveler]

The Cherubim are not angels, they are a higher rank than the angels...but they are still part of the heavenly host. The word Cherubim or Cherub (singular) is mentioned 96 times in the K.J.V.

.............

It amazes me how Mormons are always trying to be better than everyone else, to gain favour with God and hope to become a god themselves.

What happened to humility and reverence?

God is our master, and we are an unworthy servant.

Just a few notes:

1. Concerning the divine ranking of cherubim: The numerous scriptures give no such ranking of a cherub as suggested. There is a scripture that suggest the ranking; in designating a cherub as “anointed” which in particular Hebrew means Messiah. I would point out that this is the same ranking given to Jesus. I find this most interesting, because in every case that I have found that a cherub is linked to religious symbolism – that same symbolism is also used with Jesus. I am curious that a cherub in reality may be a divine title and not a peculiar class or kind of being.

2. I learn a lot about a person’s belief in G-d when they find out that LDS seek to become “like” G-d. For example – here we are accused of arrogance. This tells me that the person making the accusation believes that G-d is arrogant. When someone says that being like (or one with) would spawn rebellion – implies to me that they believe G-d is rebellious by nature. I find such arguments unreasonable, unfounded and desperately prejudice. I am not sure how to respond to such actuations because in all critical cases I find the accusation to be something very different that what I believe G-d to be.

3. Scriptures that indicate that G-d expects us to become like him. Matt 5:48. This can also be understood as completeness implying that in every way we should be like G-d. In addition and in light of the ancient Near Eastern Suzerain, servant or vassal relationship has direct meaning referring to a servant that has “taken upon” the name of the Suzerain. The relationship of Jesus to his followers was that of master and disciple. The word disciple is similar to apprentice. The purpose of religion is to learn of G-d and his ways – The more religious or enlightened we become the more like G-d we become – not the less like him we become. Why would anyone hold to such a ridiculous doctrine???

4. Worship. One type of worship given is scripture is praise. Often heaven is depicted by numerous beings praising G-d. If praise is worship note that G-d himself worships the righteous in heaven with the phrase “Well done thou good and faithful servant”.

5. Satan sought to be “like” G-d. This is actually a quote from Satan whose very name is liar. This is a quote of his lie because Satan never intended to be like G-d but to end such as a possibility.

6. If someone believes that man should not be like G-d please indicate in what manner we should seek not to be like him. For example of G-d is the master and we are servants – does this mean man should never be in authority (have dominion over the plants, animals or resources of earth – or be a parent {father or mother} of children). I believe man should exercise dominion or authority in the same manner that G-d exercises dominion and authority.

We should be like (one with) G-d.

The Traveler

[Christos]

Man should be Like God, but NOT Gods.

As it was in the beginning, so shall it be.

[Traveler]

Man should be Like God, but NOT Gods.

Please explain the difference. If I have something that in every way there is or can be like a car - we should call it a boat? Or a NOT car?

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

<div class='quotemain'>

Man should be Like God, but NOT Gods.

Please explain the difference. If I have something that in every way there is or can be like a car - we should call it a boat? Or a NOT car?

The Traveler

A dog can be loving, kind, gentle, obedient, etc.--just like his/her Master, and yet not be human. We shall be like Christ, for we shall see Him as He is. It does not necessarily mean that we shall join Him as the only begotten Sons of God.

[Traveler]

A dog can be loving, kind, gentle, obedient, etc.--just like his/her Master, and yet not be human. We shall be like Christ, for we shall see Him as He is. It does not necessarily mean that we shall join Him as the only begotten Sons of God.

I beg to differ - I do not believe dogs are loving, kind, gentle obedient, ect -- just like his/her Master. There my be some remote resemblance but this simply is not true or even close to truth. Please do not make up stuff that is not the truth and pass it off as truth - there are commandments concerning such things. I have a hard time even believeing you would even suggest such a thing.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I beg to differ - I do not believe dogs are loving, kind, gentle obedient, ect -- just like his/her Master. There my be some remote resemblance but this simply is not true or even close to truth. Please do not make up stuff that is not the truth and pass it off as truth - there are commandments concerning such things. I have a hard time even believeing you would even suggest such a thing. The Traveler

Okay, let's first be clear on what I've stated. The question was how non-LDS believers could say that we are in the image of God, and yet not be of the same essence as Him.

My response included no Scripture citations, nor did I claim to be speaking a revelation, dream, or other direct word from God. I stated an example of how I thought such was possible. So, it won't do to suggest I'm making stuff up, or violating God's commandments, when all I'm doing is giving my opinion in response to your question.

And, yes, I do believe animals are capable of love, loyalty, fear, etc. Furthermore, our ability to love, create, etc. is also a mere "remote resemblance" to the Father. Look at our history, see the brokeness, the betrayals...the incredible contrast between the Triumphal Entry (Hosanna in the highest) and Pilate's courtyard (Crucify him!).

BTW, it's possible to blaspheme God, but, if I read you correctly, what struck a cord with you is that I was verging on blaspheming humanity? Did I get that right? Are you hinting that by disagreeing with you about our natures (whether or not we are of the same essence as the Heavenly Father), I am blaspheming humanity???

[ALatterDaySaint]

Have you noticed that when you see someone in dire need you think "Oh I wish I could help them" and sometimes you do actually try to help "as much as you can". For people in need you will donate time, energy, money,...but for a family member, a child a brother or sister, you dont say "I'll do what I can" instead you say "I'll climb up on this cross and die for you" "I'll make sure this is resolved"

If we are just little things that God has made and fell in love with like a divine pet, why would He do what He does for us? PrisionChap, you compair us humans to dogs and Christ as the only begotten of God Almighty...why then does it make sense for the Master to sacrifice His "only" son for the family pets?

I am a son of God. Created in the simlitued of the Begotten. My potential is to recieve All that the Father has as a joint heir with Christ.

If I were the devil, I too would attack your most precious attribute, who you are. Thou son of man.

[Traveler]

Okay, let's first be clear on what I've stated. The question was how non-LDS believers could say that we are in the image of God, and yet not be of the same essence as Him.

My response included no Scripture citations, nor did I claim to be speaking a revelation, dream, or other direct word from God. I stated an example of how I thought such was possible. So, it won't do to suggest I'm making stuff up, or violating God's commandments, when all I'm doing is giving my opinion in response to your question.

And, yes, I do believe animals are capable of love, loyalty, fear, etc. Furthermore, our ability to love, create, etc. is also a mere "remote resemblance" to the Father. Look at our history, see the brokeness, the betrayals...the incredible contrast between the Triumphal Entry (Hosanna in the highest) and Pilate's courtyard (Crucify him!).

BTW, it's possible to blaspheme God, but, if I read you correctly, what struck a cord with you is that I was verging on blaspheming humanity? Did I get that right? Are you hinting that by disagreeing with you about our natures (whether or not we are of the same essence as the Heavenly Father), I am blaspheming humanity???

I have raised dogs and children and I see lots of differences. I had hoped that my prejudice between people and animals would in reality shine a light. First off I would never refer to any dog (regardless of how much I love them) as one of my children (although I know people that would, I am not impressed with their perception abilities or their excuses why - I know what my wife went through for our children to have life and I think it is a dishonor to her and her sacrifice to call a dog one of my children). I will give general difference between dogs and children in hope that there can be understanding. Dogs are trained and children are taught. Furthermore, the love, loyalty, fear, etc. you think you see in dogs is more breeding and instinct - In children it is more in the upbringing and enlightened learning.

I am most concerned with the "CAN"T" attitude many religious thinkers express in man's abilities to seek and master divine traits and behavior. I believe it to be true doctrine that "With G-d, all things are possible". I believe to teach otherwise is heresy and a denial of G-d, his love and kindness as well as his power. If there is something man cannot become with G-d influence, direction and help that is not a shortcoming of man but of G-d. To put it bluntly - I do not believe that a one of a kind G-d is a real G-d because such a being must lack the power or intelligence of reproduction that exist in every other existing thing.

PC - I did not think I would have to explain these things to you, but since I must - Please do not take them wrong. I say them only because I think you can understand them. I am not sure if everyone on this forum can.

If there is something of G-d that man should not seek, then let us speak it so we can all shun it and reject it but if G-d is what we should be then let us see it.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

...but for a family member, a child a brother or sister, you dont say "I'll do what I can" instead you say "I'll climb up on this cross and die for you" "I'll make sure this is resolved"

If we are just little things that God has made and fell in love with like a divine pet, why would He do what He does for us? PrisionChap, you compair us humans to dogs and Christ as the only begotten of God Almighty...why then does it make sense for the Master to sacrifice His "only" son for the family pets?

I am a son of God. Created in the simlitued of the Begotten. My potential is to recieve All that the Father has as a joint heir with Christ. If I were the devil, I too would attack your most precious attribute, who you are. Thou son of man.

I will say that this is perhaps the most straightforward explanation of the LDS view I've seen. My response?

You will see the same surprise, shock even, when you explain to us that you believe you are are actually God-essence, that you not only existed before your physical birth, but that you are eternal--and that you shall become the same as Christ (GOD, not god, in our view).

You use two terms that diminish our significance in the Heavenly Father's eyes: "pets" and "little things." The problem is that these two examples distance us from our CREATOR. Better to compare us to a prized creation--the artist's greatest masterpiece, the crafter's greatest craft, the writer's opus, etc. In us is the heart, the love, the passion, the nobility of God's highest creation. We are his masterpiece, his opus, his finest production. Yes He is in us--and we are in that dearest place in his heart.

Bottom-line: and this is simple, but profound. You accuse non-LDS believers of diminishing humanity and elevating God, while we see you exalting humanity and diminishing the Heavenly Father.

[Ray]

Bottom-line: and this is simple, but profound. You accuse non-LDS believers of diminishing humanity and elevating God, while we see you exalting humanity and diminishing the Heavenly Father.

Nothing we do, and nothing we can ever do, will diminish who and what He is.

And to put simply. He is really our Father... but we won't all become like Him.

[Christos]

The simple answer is,

God is the Creator

We are the Created.

God is divine, we are not.

God the father is spirit, we are physical.

God is perfect, in no need of repentance by his very nature. We are full of sin, in desperate need of salvation.

In short, we are not God. We are not Gods. We cannot become Gods.

[prisonchaplain]

I have raised dogs and children and I see lots of differences.

All right, dogs were not the best example. Since we are creation, it would have been better to speak of us as masterpieces, opuses, or simply greatest creation. God's heart, passion, love, and character, and yes 'breath of life' is in us. We swell with righteous pride when we write a successful book, paint a poignant painting, take a life-capturing picture, sing an audience to tears, etc. Magnify that sense of accomplishment infinitely, and you understand the love of the Heavenly Father for us, His creation.

I am most concerned with the "CAN"T" attitude many religious thinkers express in man's abilities to seek and master divine traits and behavior. I believe it to be true doctrine that "With G-d, all things are possible". I believe to teach otherwise is heresy and a denial of G-d, his love and kindness as well as his power. If there is something man cannot become with G-d influence, direction and help that is not a shortcoming of man but of G-d. To put it bluntly - I do not believe that a one of a kind G-d is a real G-d because such a being must lack the power or intelligence of reproduction that exist in every other existing thing.

At its worst, we see in the efforts of humanity to become GOD as the very sin Satan tempted Adam & Eve with--take the fruit and you'll be just like GOD, knowing good from evil. Our human mother and father were not cast out of the garden for curiosity, but for rebellion. They understood that if they became LIKE God, then they would no longer NEED God.

It's not negative thinking, or an inferiority complex on the part of Christians, when we see God is God, and we are his highest creation. It was so in the beginning, and it will always be so. Our goal is not an = partnership, but reconciliation with the Master.

PC - I did not think I would have to explain these things to you, but since I must - Please do not take them wrong. I say them only because I think you can understand them. I am not sure if everyone on this forum can.

I understand the spirit, or thinking, behind "humans as gods" theology. Even some of our prosperity preachers have wandered into this spiritual field. There are strains of many religions that approach this idea. I understand it, but find it dangerous. Yes, I cast my lot with Jesus! I place all my eggs in his basket--my very life for that matter. If need be, I'd join the host of martyrs throughout the ages. And thus, I will inherit a kingdom with him. BUT, I shall never literally be him--he is the ONLY begotten Son of God.

The mormon.org website says that LDS worship Jesus. Do you really believe that will ever stop? IF you go beyond saying you'll inherit WITH Him, and say you will inherit AS Him...like I said before, I fear we're back in the garden staring at the forbidden fruit.

[Ray]

We cannot become Gods.

Yes, we can. And I'm on my way to becoming knowing that God is there to help me. :)

And btw, if you want to respond by saying "We can't" and keep repeating that thought for infinity, I'll go ahead and say "We can" and apply that thought for infinity... forever... because I know it's true... because our Father has told me it's true... regardless of what you say.

[prisonchaplain]

Nothing we do, and nothing we can ever do, will diminish who and what He is.

If your God was once a man and has evolved, and if his essence is on a level shared by many, then this is a lesser God than the one most Christians envision: unique, all-knowling, all-powerful, infinite, without beginning or end, and unchanging. So, it's true you cannot truly diminish God, but your definitions can make him appear to be less than what He is.

[Ray]

Okay, let's see if another rephrase might help you to "see" by giving you some more to pray about.

God has always been God, and God has never been Man, but Man may become what is known as God by becoming who and what God is.

Or, in other words, God has always been God, and God has never been Man, but our Father became what is known as God, even though He was once like us, or Man.

Or, in other words, God has always been God, and God has never been Man, but Man may become to be known as God by becoming as "unique, all-knowing, all-powerful, infinite, without beginning or end, and unchanging"... exactly like God is now.

...and once you know who God really is you will know we can be like Him.

[prisonchaplain]

Okay, let's see if another rephrase might help you to "see" by giving you some more to pray about.

God has always been God, and God has never been Man, but Man may become what is known as God by becoming who and what God is. Or, in other words, God has always been God, and God has never been Man, but our Father became what is known as God, even though He was once like us, or Man. Or, in other words, God has always been God, and God has never been Man, but Man may become to be known as God by becoming as "unique, all-knowing, all-powerful, infinite, without beginning or end, and unchanging"... exactly like God is now. ...and once you know who God really is you will know we can be like Him.

I think that the person who said it originally (last name Snow, I believe) said it more directly: As man is, God once was. As God is, man can become." What you seem to be offering, is that God was once LIKE man, and man can become LIKE God. Correct?

If so, I simply tell you that all other Christians believe God's nature is unchanging--that he was never 'like man.' Furthermore, while we shall be exalted, and become, perhaps, 'godlike,' we shall never be = in essence with the Father or the Son.

[Ray]

Yes. I know. We clearly do not agree.

Now what?

[Traveler]

Thought: One of the interesting concepts that came from the Roe vs. Wade decision that made abortion legal in the United States is that a human fetus (embryo) in the first trimester of existence is not human. After months and months and hundreds of expert testimonies in the fields of science, religion and social politics it was determined that an embryo is not human life. That what defines human life; including cognition, thought and ability to learn and to function as a sentient human was not present in the embryo.

Thought: Though G-d created man, G-d does not referred to man as a creation. I wish in this discussion we would all concede that mankind is the “children” of G-d and that he is our “Father in Heaven”. The concept that we cannot be his “only begotten” is ill advised. G-d only had one “only begotten in the flesh” that is Jesus Christ. This is true but I would point out that being an “only begotten” is not the criteria of what a G-d is, for G-d was G-d and a complete G-d with all that defines G-d, prior to the event that produced an “only begotten”. Though you may think so, this “only begotten concept” does not define what is G-d, only something G-d has done (like the difference between a creator and a creation).

Back to the human embryo. With all the arguing there was no proof that an embryo is a human. Likewise there is no proof that a human is a g-d. This however, is not the point. The point is that even though a human embryo exhibits nothing that can legally be used to identify it as human – Not one single thing (Otherwise there would be no legal abortion); so a human exhibits nothing that can be argued to identify it as a g-d. But such arguments miss what is being presented. It is not that man, as we understand him, is some kind of a g-d – it is that G-d just as G-d can make a human from an embryo, G-d can make a g-d from man. Christos says NO!! but has yet to say or admit that it is because G-d can’t (lacks the power or knowledge or ability or something) or won’t (because he is selfish and wants g-dness all to himself or really does not love us that much or he cannot stand anybody or anything like him or something else).

At its worst, we see in the efforts of humanity to become GOD as the very sin Satan tempted Adam & Eve with--take the fruit and you'll be just like GOD, knowing good from evil. Our human mother and father were not cast out of the garden for curiosity, but for rebellion. They understood that if they became LIKE God, then they would no longer NEED God.

It's not negative thinking, or an inferiority complex on the part of Christians, when we see God is God, and we are his highest creation. It was so in the beginning, and it will always be so. Our goal is not an = partnership, but reconciliation with the Master.

.....

I understand the spirit, or thinking, behind "humans as gods" theology. Even some of our prosperity preachers have wandered into this spiritual field. There are strains of many religions that approach this idea. I understand it, but find it dangerous. Yes, I cast my lot with Jesus! I place all my eggs in his basket--my very life for that matter. If need be, I'd join the host of martyrs throughout the ages. And thus, I will inherit a kingdom with him. BUT, I shall never literally be him--he is the ONLY begotten Son of God.

The mormon.org website says that LDS worship Jesus. Do you really believe that will ever stop? IF you go beyond saying you'll inherit WITH Him, and say you will inherit AS Him...like I said before, I fear we're back in the garden staring at the forbidden fruit.

First - the sin of Adan and Eve was not trying to become like G-d. The Sin was in being disobedient to his commandment not to take the fruit.

I do not understand why you quote Satan as a reliable and truthful source. Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and that did not make them G-ds. It brought about the fall. It should be obvious that Satan was lying, again. If we can understand that man cannot overcome his fallen state or his sins without G-d’s help – why are we to think man can become “like” G-d, one with G-d or a g-d, all on his own without G-d’s help. No one can aspire to or become like G-d, especially on their own. I also submit that: as easy as G-d can make a human embryo to become a human being so can G-d make a man to become a g-d. Despite the efforts of Satan, that hates G-d and what G-d intends and plans to do with man. (This last thought is very interesting to me in that many in various religious places think that the whole purpose of man’s creation is to have man running around heaven without sins. Why would anyone, including Satan, oppose that? But if someone like Satan that thinks or even knows he is better than everybody else is suddenly faced with the prospect that the great society would be comprised of “equal” citizens – That could cause a war, even in heaven.)

If G-d cannot make a g-d out of a man – then say so openly, let us all admit it – that G-d has his limitations. If he can – why do some of you oppose it as impossible?

The Traveler

I think that the person who said it originally (last name Snow, I believe) said it more directly: As man is, God once was. As God is, man can become." What you seem to be offering, is that God was once LIKE man, and man can become LIKE God. Correct?

If so, I simply tell you that all other Christians believe God's nature is unchanging--that he was never 'like man.' Furthermore, while we shall be exalted, and become, perhaps, 'godlike,' we shall never be = in essence with the Father or the Son.

Jesus is the answer and the proof to the question. As man is (Jesus) G-d once was. As G-d (Jesus) is , man can become. I do not understand why all other Christians have such a problem with this?

The Traveler

[Christos]

<div class='quotemain'>

We cannot become Gods.

Yes, we can. And I'm on my way to becoming knowing that God is there to help me. :)

And btw, if you want to respond by saying "We can't" and keep repeating that thought for infinity, I'll go ahead and say "We can" and apply that thought for infinity... forever... because I know it's true... because our Father has told me it's true... regardless of what you say.

How has this "father" told you that it is true?

I just want to know because if it is this "warm feeling in the bosem" thing again I think I'll go mad!

I get warm feelings in my bosem when I listen to Beethoven, when I read good literature, when I am very pleased.