Playground Theology

[Rhi_Bran_y_Hud]

This question (if it could be called that) is so ridiculous I can't believe I'm actually writing it down. But it's been on my brain for months and won't go away, so here goes:

Who would win in a fight? The God of the Latter Day Saints, or the God of Protestant (Evangelical) Christianity? It's stupid, I know. It sounds like I'm about to say, "my dad can beat up your dad!" And to certain extent, I am saying just that. But that is not the real question, just the starting point, stay tuned.

First, someone might say we really worship the same God, only with different ideas about him. But after a point, different ideas amount to different gods... and different gospels...

In this corner: we have the Heavenly Father of the Mormon faith! Having worked his way up from humble beginnings as a mere man of flesh and blood, has become an exalted man, a God whose glory continuously brightens. Though he himself is made of matter and spiritual intelligence he has the power to form it into new creations!

And in this corner, we have the Triune God around whom Christians throughout the world have united for 2,000 years! His glory and power are infinite, and always have been. Being immaterial Himself, he is the source and sustainer of all matter, the father of all spirits, the ultimate giver of life and death. He spoke and it was!

Quick summary: LDS God is made of matter, is potentially infinite (his progression does not cease) but he is not actually infinite. The triune God on the other hand is actually infinite, and not made of matter but the source of it.

So who would win? I think you know what I'm about to say: the traditional Triune God of course! It wouldn't even be a fight, he would simply "unmake" the LDS God and that would be it. Or being infinite in every way, He would be infinitely more powerful and able to beat down the other. It would not be a fair fight at all. Yes, I do realize this is total silliness, even irreverent silliness, but bear with me.

Now here comes the real question: if the LDS God were true and the the Triune imaginary, how then can a person, a creation of his, imagine something greater than his/her creator?

Of course, I don't believe I am imagining things, but that I believe in the God the Bible reveals. But if the eternally infinite God is fake, then at some point he was a product of someone's imagination. How is this possible?

[MarginOfError]

I imagine it would look like this

[Rhi_Bran_y_Hud]

Lol!

[Dravin]

How is this possible?

Because it's easy to ascribe a status to something you imagine.

I just imagined Chuck Norris roundhouse kicking the triune God to death. What he's immortal? Not to Chuck Norris's roundhouse kicks. Immaterial? Also not an issue. Ready to become a Chuckian yet?

[Rhi_Bran_y_Hud]

But Chuck Norris (blessed be his name) didn't create me.

[Dravin]

But Chuck Norris (blessed be his name) didn't create me.

Says who? I imagined he did, in fact I imagine he created the triune God whom he kicked to death. So even in your belief system he's your Granddad.

Edit: I'm sure you get the idea by now. It's like a couple of kids with toy guns arguing back and forth, "I shot you first! You're dead!" That someone can imagine something that they imagine to be unfathomable, or infinite, or all powerful, or what ever quality you want to attach to it is easy.

Edited May 1, 2011 by Dravin

[volgadon]

Monty Python already tackled this (forgive the pun).

[applepansy]

Monty Python already tackled this (forgive the pun).

I need a laugh button.

[RipplecutBuddha]

This question (if it could be called that) is so ridiculous I can't believe I'm actually writing it down. But it's been on my brain for months and won't go away, so here goes:

Who would win in a fight? The God of the Latter Day Saints, or the God of Protestant (Evangelical) Christianity? It's stupid, I know. It sounds like I'm about to say, "my dad can beat up your dad!" And to certain extent, I am saying just that. But that is not the real question, just the starting point, stay tuned.

First, someone might say we really worship the same God, only with different ideas about him. But after a point, different ideas amount to different gods... and different gospels...

In this corner: we have the Heavenly Father of the Mormon faith! Having worked his way up from humble beginnings as a mere man of flesh and blood, has become an exalted man, a God whose glory continuously brightens. Though he himself is made of matter and spiritual intelligence he has the power to form it into new creations!

And in this corner, we have the Triune God around whom Christians throughout the world have united for 2,000 years! His glory and power are infinite, and always have been. Being immaterial Himself, he is the source and sustainer of all matter, the father of all spirits, the ultimate giver of life and death. He spoke and it was!

Quick summary: LDS God is made of matter, is potentially infinite (his progression does not cease) but he is not actually infinite. The triune God on the other hand is actually infinite, and not made of matter but the source of it.

So who would win? I think you know what I'm about to say: the traditional Triune God of course! It wouldn't even be a fight, he would simply "unmake" the LDS God and that would be it. Or being infinite in every way, He would be infinitely more powerful and able to beat down the other. It would not be a fair fight at all. Yes, I do realize this is total silliness, even irreverent silliness, but bear with me.

Now here comes the real question: if the LDS God were true and the the Triune imaginary, how then can a person, a creation of his, imagine something greater than his/her creator?

Of course, I don't believe I am imagining things, but that I believe in the God the Bible reveals. But if the eternally infinite God is fake, then at some point he was a product of someone's imagination. How is this possible?

I would just like to focus on this part of your statement for now;

Quick summary: LDS God is made of matter, is potentially infinite (his progression does not cease) but he is not actually infinite. The triune God on the other hand is actually infinite, and not made of matter but the source of it.

Here's my question, how can something exist if it's not made of matter? Even our emotions and thoughts have substance as electro-chemical reactions within our minds. Yet further, how can nothing Be the source of anything?

I understand that the triune God is one that exists outside our normal expectations of reality and existence, however Jesus did say that "This is life eternal that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3)

The root of my question would then be this; If eternal life is expressly dependant upon our understanding of, or knowledge of, the one true God of creation, how then are we to lay hold upon that eternal life if the God in question exists outside our capacity to understand? Would that not thus place eternal life forever beyond our reach?

Conversely, if we look at the existence of the LDS idea of God, we see a supreme being to whom we owe our very existence (just as with the triune God), however the existence is one with which we have an immediate understanding, in principle at least.

When the bible then says that we were created in God's image, and after his likeness, we can state that it is exactly what is being said. Believing that God has a physical body should not lead to any lessening of his power, perfection, or glory. For my own part, why should I posess something God does not have? (meaning a physical body)

To conclude, I am grateful to know people who are sincere followers of Christ, whatever the specific denomination. So long as we focus on following in His footsteps, we cannot fail to please Him.

[rameumptom]

I agree with Dravin: It is a really silly question. What if the Christian God doesn't really exist? What if Buddhism or the Norse Gods are the actual reality? Are we really willing to get into such an endless and silly discussion as that?

IF the traditional Christian Trinity and the Christian Mormon Godhead were not the same, then obviously, one is imaginary. The problem does not lie with the Gods, but with man's lack of imagination.

[Rhi_Bran_y_Hud]

Says who? I imagined he did, in fact I imagine he created the triune God whom he kicked to death. So even in your belief system he's your Granddad.

Edit: I'm sure you get the idea by now. It's like a couple of kids with toy guns arguing back and forth, "I shot you first! You're dead!" That someone can imagine something that they imagine to be unfathomable, or infinite, or all powerful, or what ever quality you want to attach to it is easy.

Yes, I do get the idea, that's why I said from the beginning that it's a silly question. Yet I think it brings out a very serious issue.

Why did you feel the need to immediately think of something better than my idea idea of God? By doing so you admitted that my imaginary God beats yours. In fact, it seems so far that you and all of the posters have admitted the same, unknowingly or backhandedly, that in some way the Triune God (imaginary or not) is above the LDS God, and then cry foul. In other words, you realize that your God presently has a similar set of limitations as you do, and that while his glory and power are ever expanding, they do have a frontier. Neither is true of mine, and that puts Him in a category above and beyond your own.

Now of course, none of you would say that this unfathomable immensity of my God is a good thing because you falsely assume that since I cannot fully comprehend the nature of His being, I cannot therefore know Him as closely as any loved one. Yet I do, and by Him I am fully known, which is a much more encouraging idea.

So if my God is greater, why should I downgrade?

[Gwen]

If both Gods are imaginary then there is no need to "downgrade". Imagine whatever you want.

The issue becomes if one of them is the real God while the other is an imagined spin off version of the real thing. Is it downgrading if you go from believing in the imaginary to believing in something that is real?

[JudoMinja]

Yes, I do get the idea, that's why I said from the beginning that it's a silly question. Yet I think it brings out a very serious issue.

Why did you feel the need to immediately think of something better than my idea idea of God? By doing so you admitted that my imaginary God beats yours. In fact, it seems so far that you and all of the posters have admitted the same, unknowingly or backhandedly, that in some way the Triune God (imaginary or not) is above the LDS God, and then cry foul. In other words, you realize that your God presently has a similar set of limitations as you do, and that while his glory and power are ever expanding, they do have a frontier. Neither is true of mine, and that puts Him in a category above and beyond your own.

Now of course, none of you would say that this unfathomable immensity of my God is a good thing because you falsely assume that since I cannot fully comprehend the nature of His being, I cannot therefore know Him as closely as any loved one. Yet I do, and by Him I am fully known, which is a much more encouraging idea.

So if my God is greater, why should I downgrade?

It would not be a downgrade at all, because we are talking about the same God. Do you believe that Christ took on the form of a Man? Then what is so orraneous about believing that God also has the form of a Man? God is just as infinite and powerful as you presently believe Him to be, if not more so. We cannot comprehend infinity and so cannot comprehend His power.

I understand you are trying to advocate for your own faith here- support your own beliefs, just as we are supporting our own. But there is no need for you to say "my God is better", because we are talking about the same God.

Think about what happens when you read a book- the author describes the main character and you create a picture in your mind of that character. Will the picture you create in your mind be the same as the one the author used to write their description? Probably not. And any of your friends or family who read the same book will come up with their own different picture of the character. The obvious traits pointed out by the author will be the same, but the details will be different for each individual within their own respective imaginations.

Does this mean each person is picturing an entirely different character? That they are not in fact thinking of the same person but "creating" their own character? No. The character does not change. Each individual just fails to perceive the entire picture and see exactly what the author had in mind when writing the description. Does this lessen the material of the book? Of course not. That is why imagination is so wonderful- because it allows us to personalize the characters.

It is the same with God. The way you see Him and the way we see Him is different, but He is still the same God. We are all striving to "imagine" Him in a way as close to what the "author" intended as possible, but because our senses and perceptions are limited we miss the mark. Our different imaginings do not make the God we are thinking of any different. It just proves the limits of our senses and imagination to provide the whole picture- something we will not have until after this life and these "limits" of mortality are lifted from us.

[zippy_do46]

We know what we know to be true. In your words you know what you believe to be true. Time will tell what is true.

[Dravin]

Why did you feel the need to immediately think of something better than my idea idea of God? By doing so you admitted that my imaginary God beats yours. In fact, it seems so far that you and all of the posters have admitted the same, unknowingly or backhandedly, that in some way the Triune God (imaginary or not) is above the LDS God, and then cry foul.

No, we (or I rather) admit that you claim that you imagine the Triune god is more powerful and point out it's a pointless claim. I wasn't addressing if your concept of a triune God was somehow more powerful I was addressing that somehow the fact that you can imagine something more powerful than X if X created you isn't mind boggling. By your own logic, how can I, a creation of the triune God, imagine something (Chuck Norris) that is more powerful than he? It's an inane question really, not only is it possible, it's trivial.

So if my God is greater, why should I downgrade?

Why should a Chuckian downgrade to your triune God? If what one claims of their God isn't true, or if their God just plain only exists within the minds of those who believe him then he isn't as powerful as one imagines. I am more powerful than Zeus, why? Because Zeus doesn't exist as an actual entity and I can actually manipulate the universe around me more than he can. Which brings us right back to the question of which idea of God (or which God if you prefer) is correct, which one actually represents reality rather then merely what we can imagine. Which is a debate in and of itself, and this little trip through the playground doesn't particularly take us anywhere in regards to it.

Edited May 2, 2011 by Dravin

[rameumptom]

So if my God is greater, why should I downgrade?

It only seems greater because you use a different set of measurements than we do.

The Trinity is defined by many Trinitarians to be "without body, parts, and passions." That means we have a God without love, joy or kindness.

The Trinity is viewed as the Unmoved Mover. That is, he isn't touched by us in any way. He does not care or notice if we are happy or sad or angry. He only cares that His will is done in this experiment he began.

For many Trinitarians, it leads to Calvinism's TULIP. In this thought, few are saved by Christ, and God really doesn't care what we think about it. For almost all Trinitarians, it leaves open the question of salvation for those who have never heard of Christ. Does the unbaptized baby burn in hell, as insisted St Augustine? Do good people born in nations without Christianity rot in hell, simply because they did not hear the chance to know God?

The issues and problems go on and on, but I'll stop here. If God is so beyond our comprehension; if the Trinity is unlike us in all ways; then we can never truly be like the Trinity. We will resurrect, but the Trinity is still something different that we can never approach nor understand in this life or the next.

Whereas there is strength in the LDS Godhead. We can understand God. We are truly made of the same substance and stuff God is made of - because he created us literally in His image. We can understand God as anthropomorphic. We can understand Christ's resurrection without a requirement for duality (Council of Chalcedon), because it comes naturally. God is the Most Moved Mover, and therefore does feel our pain and sorrows. He cares, just as a good mortal parent cares about his children.

Because God also has a body, we can see that Christ's resurrection was literal, and not a symbolic act of dualism for a being without a tangible substance.

Again, I could go on and on in this regard.

It boils down to these questions: 1. Why should I worship a being who does not feel empathy nor love towards me? 2. If God is omnipotent, why did he make us out of a different substance, so we could never really be like Him? 3. If God loves us, why does he insist in keeping himself forever a mystery to us? 4. Is it better to be raised as a forever servant of God, or as a literal son and heir of God? 5. Why would I think God just if he tosses innocent babies into hell, as St Augustine insisted; or good people into eternal fire as John Calvin taught? 6. If God is not just, merciful, nor loving as a mortal parent can be; then why is he considered perfect and why should we worship Him?

For me, it isn't a matter of which God can beat up on the other. It is an issue of which God is most loving and caring towards his creation. If a God has no charity, or likes tossing babies into burning infernos, then it doesn't matter how powerful he is, I'm not going to worship him.

[Traveler]

...

Now here comes the real question: if the LDS God were true and the the Triune imaginary, how then can a person, a creation of his, imagine something greater than his/her creator?

Of course, I don't believe I am imagining things, but that I believe in the God the Bible reveals. But if the eternally infinite God is fake, then at some point he was a product of someone's imagination. How is this possible?

The answer is far more simple than what you seem willing to consider. Lucifer does imagin that himself (a fake) greater than the Father as the one and only eternally infinite G-d.

The Traveler

[Gramajane]

The interesting question/fact in this is that where did the "Trinity" idea of God come from?

since the word "Trinity" is not even IN the KJV

and the balance point that the MEN of the council of Nicea used to oust those who didn't agree with THEIR conclusion about deity

= insisting that the Father Son and Holy Ghost be of one "essence"

also isn't found in the KJV

and the VERY council was called together by a Pagan, wanting to force the Christians who had apostatized so considerately to unite- so he could use that to hold together his empire

BY FORCE not true conversion-- which is hardly a Christian teaching--

I think the poster of the original post is really worrying about the wrong questions.

When I read the Bible I see that an apostasy was totally prophesied before Jesus Second Coming.

what more diabolical thing could Satan do than mess with the VERY definition of God?

Also-- the original poster do NOT represent the full stance of what LDS belief in God is either!

but God may be working to help the original poster get closer to the truth by using this very forum! :)

[volgadon]

Gramajane, the word trinity not being in the Bible is a weak argument. Also, Constantine wasn't baptised but he wasn't quite considered a pagan either.

[Mute]

This question (if it could be called that) is so ridiculous I can't believe I'm actually writing it down. But it's been on my brain for months and won't go away, so here goes:

Who would win in a fight? The God of the Latter Day Saints, or the God of Protestant (Evangelical) Christianity? It's stupid, I know. It sounds like I'm about to say, "my dad can beat up your dad!" And to certain extent, I am saying just that. But that is not the real question, just the starting point, stay tuned.

First, someone might say we really worship the same God, only with different ideas about him. But after a point, different ideas amount to different gods... and different gospels...

In this corner: we have the Heavenly Father of the Mormon faith! Having worked his way up from humble beginnings as a mere man of flesh and blood, has become an exalted man, a God whose glory continuously brightens. Though he himself is made of matter and spiritual intelligence he has the power to form it into new creations!

And in this corner, we have the Triune God around whom Christians throughout the world have united for 2,000 years! His glory and power are infinite, and always have been. Being immaterial Himself, he is the source and sustainer of all matter, the father of all spirits, the ultimate giver of life and death. He spoke and it was!

Quick summary: LDS God is made of matter, is potentially infinite (his progression does not cease) but he is not actually infinite. The triune God on the other hand is actually infinite, and not made of matter but the source of it.

So who would win? I think you know what I'm about to say: the traditional Triune God of course! It wouldn't even be a fight, he would simply "unmake" the LDS God and that would be it. Or being infinite in every way, He would be infinitely more powerful and able to beat down the other. It would not be a fair fight at all. Yes, I do realize this is total silliness, even irreverent silliness, but bear with me.

Now here comes the real question: if the LDS God were true and the the Triune imaginary, how then can a person, a creation of his, imagine something greater than his/her creator?

Of course, I don't believe I am imagining things, but that I believe in the God the Bible reveals. But if the eternally infinite God is fake, then at some point he was a product of someone's imagination. How is this possible?

That's a tough one. Trinity God is three in one but I also think he's suffering from multiple personality disorder. Then again, if you've been alive for that long, who wouldn't be? Prays to himself, knows but doesn't know, asks himself questions and wants us all to become one as he and his father is one, which isn't one in purpose as the lds believe but one literal being. So we would all become what? Is this accurate?

So the real question is, would he break down in the middle of the fight and start asking his father what he should do, who is actually himself? Seems a little offensive doesn't it? But at least the lds don't go to outside your places of worship and say it with microphones on the street. Ya, I'd say those two ideas are pretty far different but they still believe in the same God. It's just different ideas about him. I don't see how that is so hard to understand in all honesty.

You can both be talking about the exact same thing but still hold totally different beliefs. If we both look in a house window down a street and you believe you see a Sony 32 Inch Trinitron TV with a Mitsubishi VCR on their table and I believe the same object on the table is actually a Arc-shaped 48-inch curved Alienware monitor with 2880 x 900 pixels. You're still BOTH talking about the same thing that house has in it's living room. You just believe it's not the same physically and can do slightly different things or has slightly different things. One believes a tv can do more, less. One believes the tv has done more or less. It's still the same thing.

WHAT?! YOU BELIEVE THAT? GOD CAN'T GET THOSE HIGH OF PIXELS! BLASPHEMY! YOU BELIEVE IN A DIFFERENT TV! No. It's the same bleeping tv as yours and we just believe different things about it. Honestly, I got tired of hearing that argument when I was lds.

It's still the same God whether or not you think he is three in one, consisting outside of time and space, incomprehensible (but apparently not incomprehensible enough to know he doesn't have a body). People who believe in black Jesus still believe in the same Jesus as you or anyone else. They just believe he was black instead of the same skin color as others. If I went outside their places of worship to tell them they weren't Christian because of it, do you know what I'd be? A major **** and that's the impression I got from other Christians who were soo intolerant of my beliefs when I was lds. I didn't go out of my way to tell them they believe in a mutant God though.

[JudoMinja]

You can both be talking about the exact same thing but still hold totally different beliefs. If we both look in a house window down a street and you believe you see a Sony 32 Inch Trinitron TV with a Mitsubishi VCR on their table and I believe the same object on the table is actually a Arc-shaped 48-inch curved Alienware monitor with 2880 x 900 pixels. You're still BOTH talking about the same thing that house has in it's living room. You just believe it's not the same physically and can do slightly different things or has slightly different things. One believes a tv can do more, less. One believes the tv has done more or less. It's still the same thing.

WHAT?! YOU BELIEVE THAT? GOD CAN'T GET THOSE HIGH OF PIXELS! BLASPHEMY! YOU BELIEVE IN A DIFFERENT TV! No. It's the same bleeping tv as yours and we just believe different things about it. Honestly, I got tired of hearing that argument when I was lds.

It's like the three blind men and the elephant. One was touching the tail and thought it was rope. One was touching the side and thought it was a wall. One was touching the trunk and thought it was a snake. They were all touching the same thing, but they were all short of the mark because their perceptions were limited.

[Rhi_Bran_y_Hud]

Because it's easy to ascribe a status to something you imagine.

I just imagined Chuck Norris roundhouse kicking the triune God to death. What he's immortal? Not to Chuck Norris's roundhouse kicks. Immaterial? Also not an issue. Ready to become a Chuckian yet?

Wow, lots of posts since last we met. But first a brief note on why I'm not a Chuckian just yet.

Fuzzy wuzzy was a bear

Fuzzy wuzzy had no hair

Fuzzy wuzzy wasn't fuzzy was he?

What does that have to do with anything? If your version of Chuck Norris delivered a roundhouse kick to my God and actually made contact, killing him instantly, then should we conclude that Chuck can kick the un-kickable and kill the un-killable? No, that's actually nonsense by definition. Instead Chuck would have proved that my God was not in fact what He said He was: neither immortal nor immaterial.

In other words, you did not actually succeed in imagining anything better than my already infinite and totally awesome, round house proof God. Instead, you had to change the definition of what my God is: you had to make Him both mortal and material before your Chuck could take Him. After all, if he can be kicked, he is not truly immaterial, and if he can be killed he was never truly immortal. So your Chuck never met my God, but instead took out another of your own imagination. Fuzzy wuzzy wasn't fuzzy was he?

But in the scenario of my God versus LDS God, I did not have to change anything around. Instead I've gone along with the framework laid out by Joseph Smith in the KFD: "you have supposed and imagined the God was God from all eternity... but I will remove the veil" (paraphrase). He quite candidly tosses out the "old" idea of an eternal, infinite God and tries to substitute it with a not so eternal, ever progressing God.

[mordorbund]

*pew* *pew* *pew* *p-p-p-p-pew*

*brrrrrRRRRRRRR-KKKSSHHHHHHHHHHHH-BOOOOOOM*

[Bini]

MOE.. talk about page stretch! Holy cow.. Lol.

[ztodd]

Hi Rhi- The King Follet Discourse is an interesting part of our history, but it is not part of our official canon of scripture. I'm not sure that the idea of God having progressed into Godhood is actually part of our official doctrine.

Here's what our official doctrine states, from our official canon of scripture -

Doc & Cov 20:17

By these things we aknow that there is a bGod in heaven, who is infinite and ceternal, from everlasting to everlasting the same dunchangeable God, the framer of heaven and earth, and all things which are in them