Questions concerning deification

[Dorian]

I was reading Mormonism and the nature of God/Deification of man - FairMormon and noticing that the website uses a lot of quotes from the Early Church fathers that speak about the process of theosis to support LDS belief in the literal deification of mortals. I do see how one could use certain quotes from the Early Church to support the LDS position however my question is if the LDS doctrine goes further than the Early Church's conception of theosis. For example the Early Church view of deification never included anything like this:

"The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fulness of his kingdom. In other words we will have the privilege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood;' thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children. who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fulness of exaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring. We will have an endless eternity for this."

—Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.48

So, questions

1) is it LDS belief that deification isn't limited to becoming like God and living in communion with Him for eternity but also includes inheriting the power to create and populate other worlds?

2) Do Temple Worthy Mormons expect to one day be worshipped by others just as we worship God the Father? When you're an exalted god will you still worship your current God?

3) If God the Father went through this process does He still currently worship His God in addition to being our God?

Edited January 31, 2014 by Dorian

[Just_A_Guy]

First, a note: The answers I propose to your questions are highly speculative. Mormon theology doesn't flesh out a lot of details about precisely what exaltation entails.

So, questions

1) is it LDS belief that deification isn't limited to becoming like God and living in communion with Him for eternity but also includes inheriting the power to create and populate other worlds?

Correct. I think there are some individual Mormons who either reject the idea or qualify it to some degree, but you have accurately stated the mainstream LDS belief.

2) Do Temple Worthy Mormons expect to one day be worshipped by others just as we worship God the Father?

We see God as primarily a father figure; and we anticipate exaltation as building our own families and having familial relationships with our children where we love, teach, and assist them on their own eternal paths. I personally don't really relish the prospect of being ritualistically "worshipped" (AWKWARD!!!). But then again--is your three-year-old "worshipping" you when she hugs you and says "I love you, daddy!"? 'Cause I'll take that. :)

And how do we define "worship", really?

When you're an exalted god will you still worship your current God?

I believe so. Mormon theology offers no hints that this wouldn't be the case.

3) If God the Father went through this process does He still currently worship His God in addition to being our God?

We just don't know.

Edited January 31, 2014 by Just_A_Guy

[bytebear]

Whenever I am asked this question, I usually refer to the LDS Topical guide to the scriptures.

Man, Potential to Become like Heavenly Father

Some verses to ponder, and decide for yourself how far the promise goes.

Romans 8

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Galatians 4

7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

Acts 17

29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.

1 John 3

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Revelation 3

21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

[The Folk Prophet]

1) is it LDS belief that deification isn't limited to becoming like God and living in communion with Him for eternity but also includes inheriting the power to create and populate other worlds?

Yes.

2) Do Temple Worthy Mormons expect to one day be worshipped by others just as we worship God the Father?

Yes. Temple worthy is only part of the equation and a bit of a distractor though. Also, so is the word "expect". More accurate: Mormons hope to one day be father/mother to children who will, indeed, view them in the same light as we view our Father.

When you're an exalted god will you still worship your current God?

Always and forever,

3) If God the Father went through this process does He still currently worship His God in addition to being our God?

Unknown. Presumed. There are quotes by Joseph Smith that indicate this is so.

[The Folk Prophet]

Mormon theology offers no hints that this wouldn't be the case.

I disagree. Not only are there hints, but it is explicitly understood. He will always be our God and our Father and we will always give our glory to Him.

[Vort]

So, questions

1) is it LDS belief that deification isn't limited to becoming like God and living in communion with Him for eternity but also includes inheriting the power to create and populate other worlds?

2) Do Temple Worthy Mormons expect to one day be worshipped by others just as we worship God the Father? When you're an exalted god will you still worship your current God?

3) If God the Father went through this process does He still currently worship His God in addition to being our God?

1) This is a common LDS belief, yes. I do not know of any settled teaching on this matter. In other words, I do not know if this is "official doctrine". I do believe it is the common perception.

2) Doubtless some do, yes. If the answer to #1 is positive, so then would be the answer to #2. As with #1, I do not know that there is any settled, revealed answer to this. I do think that your average Mormon does not go through life with this as his desired goal.

Does an exalted being continue worshipping his Father? Of course.

3) I assume he does. That is merely an assumption, though. In fact, though I believe the couplet "As man is, God once was, and as God is, man may become", I do not take this to necessarily imply either that God was once exactly as we are now or that we may one day be exactly as God is. In other words, I am not 100% sure that our Father has "a Father", though that is the obvious implications of the doctrine and appears to have been the belief of the prophets. There may be explicit doctrinal teachings on this very point, which I am either not aware of or not remembering.

[bytebear]

The notion of what life is like from God the Father's perspective is an interesting one. LDS scriptures state that God (the Father) has created worlds without end, and will continue to do so. And they teach us that ministering angels for this Earth are only associated with this Earth ("there are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it." D&C 130:5), so when I read the Bible, I realize it is written from our perspective, and only about our world. "In the Beginning" is only our beginning, and only relates to our world and our plan of salvation. But as D&C 130:5 implies, I believe there are angels of other worlds who are also God's children but who minister to other worlds unrelated to ours. From the traditional Christian perspective, that opens a whole universe of possibilities, all speculative but fascinating. I think Joseph Smith had some insight that he shared, but I think we aren't even close to understanding the nature or workings of the universe (i.e. God) beyond our small blue-green marble. Once we thought we were the center of the universe, and it was heresy to believe otherwise, but after a few hundred years, Christianity has come to accept that we are not the only creation. Perhaps God (the Father) is the center of all creation. Certainly Christ is the center for our world and our salvation, but perhaps God is larger than God the Father, and God is the universe, but God the Father is not alone in being God.

Edited January 31, 2014 by bytebear

[The Folk Prophet]

1) This is a common LDS belief, yes. I do not know of any settled teaching on this matter. In other words, I do not know if this is "official doctrine". I do believe it is the common perception.

What do you think the last line in D&C 132:19 means then? "...which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever." Seems pretty settled and official to me. I suppose the creation of worlds isn't implicit therein.

I do think that your average Mormon does not go through life with this as his desired goal.

That's a fairly bold assertion on behalf of some 15+ million people.

3) I assume he does. That is merely an assumption, though. In fact, though I believe the couplet "As man is, God once was, and as God is, man may become", I do not take this to necessarily imply either that God was once exactly as we are now or that we may one day be exactly as God is. In other words, I am not 100% sure that our Father has "a Father", though that is the obvious implications of the doctrine and appears to have been the belief of the prophets. There may be explicit doctrinal teachings on this very point, which I am either not aware of or not remembering.

Explicit teachings, yes. Doctrinal? Well, there's a lot of back and forth and arguing on what constitutes doctrine. Really, it's meaningless to debate, for various reasons. However, I think it safe to say that this philosophy does fit quite well into LDS theology, "doctrinal" or not.

"If Abraham reasoned thus--If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and John discovered that God the Father of Jesus Christ had a Father, you may suppose that He had a Father also. Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way. Paul says that which is earthly is in the likeness of that which is heavenly, Hence if Jesus had a Father, can we not believe that He had a Father also? I despise the idea of being scared to death at such a doctrine, for the Bible is full of it." - Teachings of Joseph Smith - Section Six 1843-44, p.373

[Vort]

What do you think the last line in D&C 132:19 means then? "...which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever." Seems pretty settled and official to me. I suppose the creation of worlds isn't implicit therein.

"Eternal increase" and "continuation of the seeds forever and ever" does not necessarily equal "being a God to others just as our Father is God to us". I'm not saying the idea is false; I'm saying that, as far as I know, that sort of absolute identity has not been publicly revealed and does not constitute the current doctrine of the LDS Church.

That's a fairly bold assertion on behalf of some 15+ million people.

"I think X" constitutes a fairly bold assertion?

[Just_A_Guy]

I disagree. Not only are there hints, but it is explicitly understood. He will always be our God and our Father and we will always give our glory to Him.

Sorry; I shouldn't have deployed the double-negative. I was trying to indicate that nothing in Mormonism suggests we'll ever get to a point where we no longer worship our Father. In other words--you and I agree.

[The Folk Prophet]

"Eternal increase" and "continuation of the seeds forever and ever" does not necessarily equal "being a God to others just as our Father is God to us". I'm not saying the idea is false; I'm saying that, as far as I know, that sort of absolute identity has not been publicly revealed and does not constitute the current doctrine of the LDS Church.

Clearer. Thanks.

"I think X" constitutes a fairly bold assertion?

Bold referring to the nature of the assertion rather than the means it was asserted.

[dahlia]

Yes. Temple worthy is only part of the equation and a bit of a distractor though. Also, so is the word "expect". More accurate: Mormons hope to one day be father/mother to children who will, indeed, view them in the same light as we view our Father.

Really? I had no idea. I didn't think I was being sealed to my late husband, and maybe one day, to my son, in order to have him view us as gods. I thought we were just going to be together, which is enough. Hmmm....

[The Folk Prophet]

Really? I had no idea. I didn't think I was being sealed to my late husband, and maybe one day, to my son, in order to have him view us as gods. I thought we were just going to be together, which is enough. Hmmm....

Do you honestly believe I was talking about our earthly children?

[dahlia]

Yes. What else would I think based on the way you phrased it? I'm a convert. Explain it to me like I'm a 4 yr old.

[The Folk Prophet]

Yes. What else would I think based on the way you phrased it? I'm a convert. Explain it to me like I'm a 4 yr old.

Spirit children. Just as we are spirit children of our Heavenly Father.

[Anddenex]

Really? I had no idea. I didn't think I was being sealed to my late husband, and maybe one day, to my son, in order to have him view us as gods. I thought we were just going to be together, which is enough. Hmmm....

Our children on this earth, who become exalted themselves, will be on a equal plain as us. As Church emphasized, read his words in light of this quote already provided by the OP from Joseph Smith, "To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood;' thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children. who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fulness of exaltation and partake of the same blessings." (emphasis added)

[dahlia]

Is believing this a temple worthiness issue?

[Guest]

Is believing this a temple worthiness issue?

No. Temple worthiness is solely a condition of your covenant. The covenant is solely contained within Jesus Christ as our Savior and Redeemer.

Nothing in our covenants, our temple worthiness, or our Salvation/Exaltation requires that you believe in anything beyond Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

[Vort]

This is a good example of why I personally find such speculation pointless and potentially harmful. Some of this stuff may be true, most of it is almost certainly false, and practically none of it is revealed doctrine.

These things form part of what are commonly called "the mysteries", and in my judgment are mostly best left alone or, at most, speculated on in private. There are real mysteries of Godliness, and we should seek after those. Whether the pearly gates swing or slide is really of no relevance to us.

[The Folk Prophet]

This is a good example of why I personally find such speculation pointless and potentially harmful. Some of this stuff may be true, most of it is almost certainly false, and practically none of it is revealed doctrine.

These things form part of what are commonly called "the mysteries", and in my judgment are mostly best left alone or, at most, speculated on in private. There are real mysteries of Godliness, and we should seek after those. Whether the pearly gates swing or slide is really of no relevance to us.

I disagree that it is entirely pointless or harmful. Some of these things are at the very core of the plan of salvation. Others are natural questions that stem from those core concepts. I find the idea of, just ignore it if it doesn't directly apply to your salvation, patronizing to anyone with a basic level of intellect. Frankly, there are a lot of things that aren't necessary for our salvation that have been revealed to us that are freely discussed and considered important to our understanding of the gospel. Does God have a body? How many kingdoms of glory are there? Who are the judges of the 12 tribes of Israel? Where will the New Jerusalem be? And so forth.

The only things that are important to know for salvation are the ordinances, principles, and commandments that we must follow. Beyond that all information is for our benefit and understanding. But discussion and understanding of the gospel and the details of the plan of salvation beyond this are entirely appropriate and useful.

I also disagree that anything complicated, or what might be categorized as "meat" of the gospel, means it also falls into the category of a "mystery" of the gospel.

There are many things about the nature of God in relation to these questions that have been revealed and clearly taught.

• The righteous will inherit all the Father has.
  
• Then shall they be gods.
  
• They shall they be above all. All things are subject unto them.
  
• They will have all power.
  
• They shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths.
  
• Their glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
  
• God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens.
  

All of these are directly from the scriptures, of course, except the last one, which is however clearly taught in manuals and other sources.

These things are complicated, sure. They are certainly deeper doctrine. But they are not mysteries. Mysteries are more akin to questions like: How will the Holy Ghost get a body? Things where there are no clear teachings or revelations whatsoever.

Some of the outlier questions that naturally stem from the revealed teachings do fall into "mysteries". And with those, of course, it is appropriate to respond that we don't know.

But to naturally infer from "All things are subject unto them" that we will, indeed, be worshiped at some level is not some crazy theory that shouldn't be discussed.

Along the same lines, if we know that God was once as we are now, it is a natural follow-up question to ask if that means God had a Father. If there had never been a single thing said in regards to this, then sure...we don't know. But there has been things said on this. There have been teachings that have never been repudiated, disregarded, disavowed, or otherwise contended by other prophets and apostles. Sure, the teachings have never been officially canonized, but that's true of a lot of teachings that we accept. It's not important to accept these teachings as far as worthiness goes, but it certainly isn't wrong to accept them and share with others what has been taught by our prophets concerning the matter.

[Guest]

I keep doing a double-take at the title of this thread. That first "i" is REALLY important.

[Anddenex]

I keep doing a double-take at the title of this thread. That first "i" is REALLY important.

Haha, glad I am not the only one...

[NeuroTypical]

Mormons hope to one day be father/mother to children who will, indeed, view them in the same light as we view our Father.

Just for the record, I'm a Mormon, and I have never come within a million miles of this hope.

I have zero desire to be worshipped by anyone for anything. The only time I ever even entertain such notions, is when someone asks a question like the OP's.

[The Folk Prophet]

Just for the record, I'm a Mormon, and I have never come within a million miles of this hope.

I have zero desire to be worshipped by anyone for anything. The only time I ever even entertain such notions, is when someone asks a question like the OP's.

Personal hope and theological principles do not need to coincide for the theological principle to remain as a viable reality. Moreover, desire has no bearing on truth whatsoever.

But, fairly enough, I did put it in terms of "Mormons believe". To declare that all Mormons believe anything is invalid. And even presuming what most Mormons believe is invalid (a point I called Vort on earlier). So my phrasing may have been unfortunate in my attempt to express the idea.

Nonetheless, a sense of awkwardness and pseudo-humility concerning a principle does not render the said principle illogical. Read of it what you will. But "all things subject unto them" reads to me as worship. It's not arrogance. The words just mean what they mean. Unless, of course, we're presuming that our seed will be subject to us because we are monstrous tyrants. We know that is incompatible with Celestial existence. So....well, there you go.

[Finrock]

Good Afternoon Loudmouth_Mormon. I hope you're having a good Friday! :)

Just for the record, I'm a Mormon, and I have never come within a million miles of this hope.

I have zero desire to be worshipped by anyone for anything. The only time I ever even entertain such notions, is when someone asks a question like the OP's.

That is because the hope isn't to be worshipped. The hope is to be able to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. That is God's work. If we truly are seeking after God's will and to be as God is then we will have no greater desire than to uplift and bring a fulness of joy to those who do not currenly possess such.

The Eternal Economy of God is one of bringing about a fulness of joy to intelligences. God's glory is dependent upon His children becoming exalted as He is. The only way that I can see how we can glorify God forever (as is stated in the scriptures) is to assist in that great work.

Worship is far from my hope. My hope is not only to have a fulness of joy but to also be filled with charity and assist God in His glorious work. The few times in my life when I have experienced even just a portion of God's spirit within me, I have always had a desire to share the joy, hope, glory, light, and knowledge that I feel with others who may not know or possess such things.

-Finrock