LDS theology and cosmology

[askandanswer]

(Pearl of Great Price | Moses 1:33)

33  And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.

 

If we assume that

 

A) God wants to protect/maintain/defend his creations;

 

And

 

B) He has the power to do so;

 

Then

 

If it difficult to see how the universe could eventually shrink back into itself and become a singularity, as many cosmologists have recently believed as this would involve the destruction of God's creations.

 

There also seems to be a great deal of harmony between the idea of an infinitely expanding universe and the doctrine of eternal progression. One of the ways by which an already perfect being can continue to progress, and by which eventually, hopefully, we will also be able to eternally progress, is by bringing order and law to “spaces” where there currently only chaos and nothingness. I believe that as the universe expands, in the environment into which it expands, chaos and nothingness is being replaced by order and law.

 

I understand that many cosmologists now are of the view that because of the influence of dark energy, the universe is more likely to expand than contract. However, this is a view that they have only recently started coming to. LDS theology had the means to answer the question of whether the universe will infinitely expand or infinitely contract well before Edwin Hubble even worked out that the universe was expanding.

 

The above example may be one illustration of how LDS theology can help to shed light on problems of physics and astronomy. There may well be others. Any suggestions?

 

 

 

[zil]

In that same chapter, v35: "But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them."

 

...so clearly, not every world (or creation) is meant to be eternal.  As for what current scientists are thinking - scientists are all the time proving that what previous scientists believed was wrong.  I tend not to worry about what they think.  Eventually, they'll learn better, and whether they do or not, I'm confident God knows what he's doing.

 

That said, an infinitely, eternally expanding universe could certainly be compatible with eternal progression.  So could the idea of multiple universes, or other dimensions.  The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship may have some interesting things on this topic.

[MrShorty]

Interesting question. I'm not sure I am enough of a theologian or physicist to really add much to this, but, this is the internet where even those of us who are ignorant of deep theology and philosophy can express a meaningless opinion.

 

I believe that as the universe expands, in the environment into which it expands, chaos and nothingness is being replaced by order and law.

On the few occasions that I have studied cosmology, I recall that this is one of those things that can  be difficult to visualize and understand. Does our theory of the expanding universe necessarily include the idea of "expanding into an evironment"? Again, I have a real hard time visualizing this sort of thing, but all discussion I see on the topic treats the universe as if it is a completely self-contained concept, neither giving off energy/matter/"order" to an environment outside of the universe, nor receiving energy/matter/"order" from an outside environment. Again, I have a really hard time imagining an "expanding balloon" that is not within some greater environment. Perhaps if I better understood this "environment" that our universe exists within and how our universe interacts with that environment, but I just cannot really comprehend it. Or perhaps it is just that we cannot observe what is outside of our universe, and I have not heard of any observation of the "edge" of the universe.

 

What do you make of something like 3 Ne 26:3? Could that describe a "big crunch"? Does a "big crunch", as viewed from God's perspective, mean "the destruction of God's creation", or is it merely one possible phase in the existence of a universe God has created?

 

I will be interested to read others speculations and thoughts on this. Personally, I am not convinced that the scriptures you cite would necessarily contribute to the real questions of cosmology, because I'm not convinced that they necessarily apply to the history and destiny of the universe in exactly this way.

 

Does "world" in Moses 1:33 refer to planets, solar systems, galaxies, or universes, or dimensions of the universe?

[zil]

Mr. Shorty, I love this comment: "this is the internet where even those of us who are ignorant of deep theology and philosophy can express a meaningless opinion."  And I'll expound upon my ignorance now...

 

1) I'm with you on the expanding universe.  How can it expand unless it has bounds?  If it has bounds, what's beyond the bounds?  Cuz it can't expand into nothing (nothing can't exist - everything would have to cease to exist in order for nothing to exist, but clearly everything exists).  So what's out there?  Maybe it's not the universe that's expanding, but its content that's moving around.  No earthly clue.

 

One thing I'm sure of, mortals don't really know much of anything (even the really smart physicists), and God knows everything. :)

 

2) I don't think that 3 Nephi verse is about the destruction of anything anymore than death and resurrection is about the destruction of a person - it's just describing a change (though it's less complete than at least one other that talks about the heavens and the earth passing away - in that one, there's a new heaven and a new earth).  It appears that this world is one meant to exist for eternity.

 

3) I think "worlds" means exactly what we mean when we say it - remember, God talks to us in our own language and to our own understanding.  It goes without saying that he created everything around those worlds that they needed - stars, moons, solar systems, galaxies, etc.

 

Maybe a physicist will show up soon and "school" us...

[Traveler]

Part of the problem with cosmology is the rate at which we are learning new things. Just within the last year it was discovered that our galaxy is part of a super cluster we have named Laniakea. This super cluster is larger than what was believed to be the aggregate size of our universe 100 years ago. Most of what we have been taught and remember about our universe growing up was part of the paradigm of the universe believed to have existed 100 years ago. Trying to resolve conflicts between theology that is based in understanding from a few thousand years ago and cosmology understanding that is 100 or more years old – is bad enough. But if we continue to attempt to resolve present conflicts with out of date information and perceptions much more lacking and we are most likely to come to faulty conclusions.

Perhaps the biggest problem is trying to redefine revelation to conform to current science or attempting to redefine science to conform to revelation given in a different era of understanding things. Isaiah tells us that we learn line upon line upon line and precept upon precept upon precept. This is what makes more sense to me. As both a student of theology and science the one lesson that I have learned to be consistent is that with each answer to a question that I learn – there are a thousand new questions. I believe this to be part of what Isaiah is trying to explain about the discovery of truth – be it through science or direct revelation. The more we learn the more we learn that we do not know very much.

Jesus tells us to be like children – I believe that paradigm is that we should think in terms of revelation and understanding as being incomplete – and with much more to learn. For the most part it appears to me that religious thinkers are being left far behind in the exploration of line upon line upon line and precept upon precept upon precept. Many theologians absolutely refuse to make any effort to understand new lines and precepts of insights of truth regardless if such comes from scientific discovery or direct revelation given to modern era prophets.

But this post has already become too long for this forum. I will create another post some ideas I have – not because I have all the answers but because I have spent many hours pondering new discoveries in science and revelations to modern as well as ancient prophets. Not to suggest that I am smarter – only that I have studied and am willing to share what I have discovered.

[Traveler]

We do not know, from revelation or from science if or what our universe is contained in – or what surrounds our universe.  I do not know of any revelation that addresses this question.  Currently there is no scientific evidence of anything outside of our universe.  So all we have is theory.  The theory that makes the most sense to me is what is called a 4 dimensional sphere.  This solves the problem of what the universe is contained within with a concept similar to a Klein Bottle in 3 dimensional space.  In essence there is no inside or outside or boundaries. 

 

Using the 4 dimensional sphere as a model of our universe – if we had a star ship capable of ultra light speed we could travel in any direction we would not leave our universe but would eventually end up back at the same point that we started.  Kind of like being on the surface of the earth (a 3 dimensional sphere) – and any direction we travel on the surface, we will eventually end up back where we started.

 

But the question now is – if we could somehow exist outside of our universe – what would we find?  The theory of Black Holes and singularity offer a possibility.  This gives rise to the idea that points or the point outside of our universe is what is called singularity.  In essence a black hole folds the universe over on itself and creates a point of singularity outside of our space time universe.  Carl Sagan helped develop the concept of worm holes or the mathematical possibility that all singularities (black holes) are the same singularity and thus connected.  Thus all point outside of our universe or what surrounds our universe is singularity that is the same singularity that the space and time within a black hole.

 

When we say that our universe is expanding – it is not just matter or space but even time – thus we say space time (dimensional space time) is expanding.  What we do not know from science is if matter is also expanding.  This idea can be argued (both pro and con) from what we know from science or from revelation.  But there is another possibility – and that is that black hole singularities are in essence “gate ways” to other dimensional space time.  I have long considered and entertained the idea that spirits (spirit matter) are defined by a different dimension of space time.  Arguing this point would take volumes – so for now I will just put the idea out there for the reader.

 

My point is that the answer is not in science or religious revelation – but the best understanding comes from studying both.  And that we are a great distance from the truth.  That in order to progress and know what to ask of G-d from revelation can be helped by science but in reality we do not know enough to even have an idea of what is really going on.  Those that think to rely only and exclusively on scripture will never learn or progress in the truth.  We came to earth to experience this physical universe and we should have figured out by now that even G-d is very much involved in physical things and what is going on.  And that empirical evidence is very much a part of and evidence of what G-d has done and is doing.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Traveler

[askandanswer]

In that same chapter, v35: "But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them."

 

...so clearly, not every world (or creation) is meant to be eternal.  

 

I think I disagree with the conclusion that the passing away of a world means that it no longer exists. The reason why I disagree is that there are many scriptures which talk about this world passing away, such as the one you have referred to in 3^rd Nephi, but there are also other scriptures, and prophetic teachings, that teach that this world will also be the home of celestial beings. So I think when the scriptures talk about worlds passing away it does not mean that the world ceases to exist. I think they are more likely referring to worlds being changed in some form, perhaps becoming celestialised. The location now known as Earth might continue to exist, but its composition, or the nature of the matter that it is composed of, might no longer be the same as it is now.

[zil]

What I read about this earth seems pretty clearly to describe something akin to death followed by resurrection.  The "world will end" scriptures are about the end of the _wicked_ (according to manuals, probably the institute manuals).  But I can understand that all these things seem to say similar things.

 

If you want to throw your mind for a loop as far as matter in the universe getting used and reused, try reading Enoch the Prophet by Hugh Nibley.  Fair warning: it's the hardest of his volumes I've read thus far (have finished 1-5, and 9, and am on 6).  In places, I just had to read through it, despite not fully understanding.

[askandanswer]

My point is that the answer is not in science or religious revelation – but the best understanding comes from studying both.  And that we are a great distance from the truth.  That in order to progress and know what to ask of G-d from revelation can be helped by science but in reality we do not know enough to even have an idea of what is really going on.  Those that think to rely only and exclusively on scripture will never learn or progress in the truth.  We came to earth to experience this physical universe and we should have figured out by now that even G-d is very much involved in physical things and what is going on.  And that empirical evidence is very much a part of and evidence of what G-d has done and is doing.

 

We do not know, from revelation or from science if or what our universe is contained in – or what surrounds our universe.  I do not know of any revelation that addresses this question.  

 

 

Traveller, I agree that the best understanding comes from studying both revelation and science. What I tried to do with the OP was to give an example of how both theological knowledge – that God progresses eternally and that His creations are unlikely to be destroyed - and scientific knowledge – that the universe is expanding - can be combined to come up with a conclusion that further informs both theology and science – that an infinite expansion is more likely than an infinite contraction and that as the universe expands, divine law comes into effect where it previously was not.

 

As to what the universe is contained in, I think that a partial answer might be that the universe is bounded by the current, but ever expanding limits of God's power - within the universe there is order and law, outside of it, there is not. 

[zil]

PS: What about uninhabited planets? Are we sure our fellow-orbiters around this sun will continue to exist after the earth is exalted?  Or will their matter be reused elsewhere?  (I have no idea and can see reasonable arguments for both, just pointing out that not all worlds are inhabited (at any given moment, anyway).)

[askandanswer]

If you want to throw your mind for a loop as far as matter in the universe getting used and reused, try reading Enoch the Prophet by Hugh Nibley.  Fair warning: it's the hardest of his volumes I've read thus far (have finished 1-5, and 9, and am on 6).  In places, I just had to read through it, despite not fully understanding.

 

Thanks for this Zil, I was unaware of this source and now that you've brought it to my attention, I will certainly have a look at it. My own thoughts about the recycling of matter are that those who end up in outer darkness are consigned to a black hole where all trace of individual identity and consciousness are forever erased and the matter of which they are composed is eventually stripped or cleansed of whatever it was that led that person to be so evil. Only then is that matter available to be used as the raw material to be formed into a spirit and then joined to an intelligence to create a soul. 

 

As I said, I haven't read what Nibley's thoughts are on this question but I look forward to finding out. 

[zil]

 My own thoughts about the recycling of matter are that those who end up in outer darkness are consigned to a black hole where all trace of individual identity and consciousness are forever erased and the matter of which they are composed is eventually stripped or cleansed of whatever it was that led that person to be so evil. Only then is that matter available to be used as the raw material to be formed into a spirit and then joined to an intelligence to create a soul.

 

IMO, this directly conflicts with what Joseph Smith taught about the eternal nature of intelligences (D&C 93, and more details in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith).  Beyond that, we have no foundation for any further detail.

[askandanswer]

PS: What about uninhabited planets? Are we sure our fellow-orbiters around this sun will continue to exist after the earth is exalted?  Or will their matter be reused elsewhere?  (I have no idea and can see reasonable arguments for both, just pointing out that not all worlds are inhabited (at any given moment, anyway).)

This is not something that I have thought about before, but as I think about it now, perhaps, following on from the idea of eternal progression, and applying it more widely to uninhabited planets, perhaps uninhabited planets are made up of clumps of matter that have joined together and that are now currently learning how to, and preparing to become, inhabited planets. In their previous condition, these clumps of matter were individual and solitary comets or asteroids, but in the same way that souls progress by joining together - intelligence with spirit to form a soul, soul to body, and then body to body through temple marriage, and then all bodies to each other through temple sealings and by the abiding of eternal law until they are ready for celestial glory - so perhaps do planets progress by joining matter with other matter until a planet is formed, and then joining life to the planet and then the planet abides by eternal law until it to is celestialised.

 

See (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 88:25)

25  And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—

26  Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.

 

These verses give one example of one earth progressing from a lower state to a higher state by obedience to eternal law. I think that same prinicple might apply to uninhabited planets. 

 

[askandanswer]

IMO, this directly conflicts with what Joseph Smith taught about the eternal nature of intelligences (D&C 93, and more details in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith).  Beyond that, we have no foundation for any further detail.

 

Not quite. We don't yet know enough about the nature of intelligence to draw reliable conclusions, although speculation can sometimes be useful, In any event, my recycling of matter thoughts were about the recycling of matter, and that matter then being joined to an intelligence to form a soul. I said nothing about the origins or existence of the intelligence prior to it being joined to matter. Its also possible to speculate that an intelligence can regress back to its original condition, and is so doing, loses its sense of identity and consciousness, without actually being destroyed. Perhaps that which is gained by obedience to law can be lost or taken away by disobedience to law, and if an intelligence, in the form of a soul, and then in the form of a body, disobeys the law, then perhaps it is reduced to the state that it was in before it began to obey the law.