Help With Mormon Question

[CrimsonKairos]

My question would be...does being God of nothing even qualify you as a God? If nothing knows of you, serves you, worships you, obeys you, prays to you...you're not much of a God at all.

[Doctor Steuss]

It is my contention that Old Testament writing assumes an creation that was out of nothing, and that there would have been few defenses of the view, because there was scant dissension. In other words, where there is overwhelming consensus, very little has to be said about it. With that as my premise, I cited an Orthodox rabbi who, in discussing the issue of whether creation is final or continuous, makes reference to the very assumption I speak of--ex nihilo creation. He makes no articulate defense of the assumption, because, for his community, it is a given point.

It is a given point now. It was not always so. Judaism is not as static as we would like to believe. There were many reformers from the quasi-ancient Maimonides all the way up to the 19th century Samuel Holdheim**. Judaism has gone through many changes, and to an extent, cannot even necessarily be referred to as a homogeneous religion anymore. From the changes of an anthropomorphic G-d, to that of Greek philosophy, to the battles of G-d's dwelling place, to the changing and melding of El Elyon and YHWH into one entity by the Deuteronomist reformers, Judaism has not been static. So, it's important when stating that Judaism believes in something, to distinguish between past and present. In the past, ex nihilo was not native to Judaism. It is a shame that the holy Torah that once held such high regard has been reduced to reinterpreting such plain words as bara' to mean something completely contradictory to what those who originally penned the word knew it meant.

**For a groovy article on Holdheim:

Immanuel H. Ritter, "Samuel Holdheim: The Jewish Reformer", The Jewish Quarterly Review, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Apr., 1889), pp. 202-215

You can get a copy through JSTOR

IMHO, the idea that God created the world out of nothing requires no defense. It is a basic assumption, a given, in nearly all of the Abrahamic religious communities. On the other hand, the belief that Moses really meant that God remodeled the world...that innovative belief requires some 'splaining.

It is a basic assumption to those communities now. But this wasn't always the case. Most scholars don't believe that it had any place within Judaism or Christianity until the 2nd Century. I am perfectly ok with those who hold this belief that acknowledge that it came about as a later development; after all, the LDS have several such doctrines that have no support in antiquity (such as Adam=Michael). But to claim that this doctrine has always been a part of not only Judaism, but also Christianity is not supported by the evidence.

Edited to add:

We need to be careful of going with whatever doctrine seems like a "basic assumption." After all, His ways are not necessarily ours...

[Dr T]

My question would be...does being God of nothing even qualify you as a God? If nothing knows of you, serves you, worships you, obeys you, prays to you...you're not much of a God at all.

Hi CK,

I don't believe that it is the worship, obedience, prayers, etc. that makes God, God. He is God because he, in his essence is God. Nothing I do (or don't do) adds to or diminishes what he is.

[a-train]

I think the REAL problem with the ex nihilo god is that HE could not know anyone if nobody existed. He could not know anything, because nothing existed. He could not know the future, because the future cannot exist without his creating it. He could not know creation itself because creation did not exist. He could not see, he could not hear, sight and sound did not exist. NOTHING existed under this ex nihilo doctrine. No physical or spiritual partical. No action, no word. NOTHING. That is the problem. He had no universe to govern, no time to live in, nothing. He would have been the God of nothing. HE COULD NOT KNOW ANYTHING, BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING TO KNOW. He could not have eternally governed a universe that only came into being after his creating it ex nihilo. The ex nihilists see existance as a ray. It has a beginning, but no end. LDS see a line which has no beginning or end. One is infinite, the other is infinite and eternal. Do you see the difference?

-a-train

[Doctor Steuss]

[...] the ex nihilo [G-d] is [...]

a-train,

I know this will seem silly, but could you please capitilize the "G." We all have the same G-d. We just have different understandings of Him.

Thank you,

Stu

(I really am sorry for being so silly, but it's just a sensitive thing for me).

[prisonchaplain]

I'm just trying to figure out how a god who was once the god of nothing is an eternal god.

-a-train

God is not dependent upon his creation for his state of being.

My question would be...does being God of nothing even qualify you as a God? If nothing knows of you, serves you, worships you, obeys you, prays to you...you're not much of a God at all.

Same as previous response. God is perfect in himself, independent of his creation. Taken to the extreme, the point you make would give ammo to those agnostics who say, "If nobody worships God, he becomes impotent, and will likely just go away.

[a-train]

I guess this comes down to the definition of independence. If one is dependent upon food to eat, then we can say, at least in this regard, they are dependent. However, whether necessary for the sustaining of life or not, one simply cannot eat if there is nothing to eat.

The LDS people will make no arguement that God will die without food. He indeed lives independent of any necessity to so partake in order to sustain life. However, can He eat if there is nothing to eat?

In this regard we would say that food is necessary if He so desires to eat. This is different from saying God will starve to death.

Do you see the difference I am making here? The LDS DO believe that God is independent. He will not cease to be the Ruler of the Universe regardless of whether or not it's inhabitants so acknowledge Him.

However, can any argument be made that God can be the Ruler of the Universe if there is no Universe? Can we say that God can do something as simple as eat, if there is no food in existance?

Even the ex nihilo theory itself suffers from this problem of independence. Within this theory, in order for God to eat, He must first create food ex nihilo to eat. He is therefore dependent upon His own creation in this regard.

We often call the LORD our Saviour and Redeemer and we love Him as such. Could He so be if there were none to save? Even if all things were created ex nihilo, Jesus could not yet act as our Saviour until we were so constituted and in danger of damnation. So, although He technically is dependent upon us to be the Saviour, this is not as if we therefore possess some power to exert over him. Can we cease to exist? Can we negate His position as the Saviour of all mankind? We can do nothing but either accept or reject His will, and even if all mankind so rejected Him, He would remain the one and only Saviour of mankind.

Because ex nihilo suffers from this problem of independence, I don't see how the matter can be used to support it.

-a-train

[sarah_22]

"You still didn't answer my question. Was there ever a time that God did NOT govern a universe?"

Yes..when he was floating around as eternal material waiting to be "organized"by his god.

[CrimsonKairos]

Now you've got it...if only you were being sincere and not sarcastic.

By the way, man's intelligence (D&C 93; Abraham 3) or the little "I Am" in all of us isn't composed of matter or eternal material (though our consciousnesses are eternal and uncreated). Well I guess that gets into semantics and since you're not being sincere there's no point opening that door.

[prisonchaplain]

Here's a compromise (not meant to satisfy, but rather as an idea to kick around): If God foreknew our existence for all eternity, then his plans for us would be eternal. And, in that aspect, there is something eternal about all of us--before we were made we were already in God's "heart" and plans.

This discussion becomes hard for us to fathom, because we are indeed time-bound.

[Snow]

I'm just trying to figure out how a god who was once the god of nothing is an eternal god.

-a-train

Do you own a dictionary?

Have you considered using it?

1. One of the appellations of God.

Law whereby the Eternal himself doth work. --Hooker.

2. That which is endless and immortal. --Young.

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

2. Without end of existence or duration; everlasting; endless; immortal.

That they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory. --2 Tim. ii. 10.

[a-train]

"You still didn't answer my question. Was there ever a time that God did NOT govern a universe?"

Yes..when he was floating around as eternal material waiting to be "organized"by his god.

Floating in what? Floating around what? Waiting for who? What eternal material was He made of? According to ex nihilo, there can be nothing to float in or around, nobody to do this organizing, and especially no eternal material. The ex nihilo God cannot even have benefit of any eternal vacuum. And without such, He cannot have anything to govern or be the God of. He could not be the God of the Universe until He created it.

In all honesty, do you really think that the LDS position is that God 'floated around as eternal material waiting to be "organized" by his god'? I guess I am not even certain what that even means.

Perhaps the material you have consulted is only those volumes designed to distort and misrepresent the teachings of the prophets.

Is Jesus God? Does He have a Father? Many non-LDS Christians will quickly answer yes to both. Mormons believe the Eternal God of Heaven and Earth was born of the virgin Mary and lived among men in the most humble of circumstances. A great many Christians will quickly agree. Why then is there a problem with the concept that God has a Father? It is a Biblical and Christian teaching. The Great Jehovah bowed in humble reverence to His Father and submitted His will to Him in the Garden of Gethsemane.

What a wonderful image this is. The condensension of God was so great that He was born of a woman and came among men and took upon himself our transgressions. The Great I Am, the Alpha and Omega, The Beginning and The End, The Eternal God endured the rejection, the scorn, the hatred, and violence of the Crucifixion for His children and all the Heavens wept. All the while He testified of His Father and gave all glory and honor to Him.

It is therefore difficult for me to understand why the saying that God has a Father is met with such apprehension among those who believe the Bible and that Jesus is God.

LDS do not believe that the Saviour floated around in space, waiting to be organized by His Father. On the contrary, LDS believe that the Saviour is the Eternal God, and was so long before his birth in Bethlehem. He created the Heavens and Earth just as John says: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.' (John 1:1-3) (Notice the inclusion of 'that was made'.)

The understanding of the eternal nature of Christ and the Father have been debated for centuries. The LDS declare that modern prophets have been made aware of the answers to much of these mysteries by revelation. These revelations are becoming readily available to all the world. If the LDS prophets are indeed of God, forgoing a reading of their writings and partaking only of the libel against them would be as big a mistake as consulting the Pharisees with regard to Paul and his teachings without reading the Paulstine Epistles.

-a-train

Snow, yer blowin' my cover dude! They haven't got that far!

-a-train

[Snow]

Sarah,

I note that you have studiously avoided addressing many or most of questions put to you. Perhaps you will consider answering a few for me now.

1. Why does the bible not support your view of creation ex nihilo?

2. Why did the earliest Christians not hold the ex nihilo view - it being an addition that came later?

-a-train

Snow, yer blowin' my cover dude! They haven't got that far!

-a-train

apologies...

[Doctor Steuss]

"You still didn't answer my question. Was there ever a time that God did NOT govern a universe?"

Yes..when he was floating around as eternal material waiting to be "organized"by his god.

Proverb 10:21

Here's a compromise (not meant to satisfy, but rather as an idea to kick around): If God foreknew our existence for all eternity, then his plans for us would be eternal. And, in that aspect, there is something eternal about all of us--before we were made we were already in God's "heart" and plans.

This discussion becomes hard for us to fathom, because we are indeed time-bound.

Indeed it is hard to understand and fathom. And I love thinking about it because I can feel my mind, soul, and heart stretching to new heights.

One thing that I have always found interesting is there are several passages in the Book of Mormon that speak of people receiving Christ's atonement before Christ was even born. Understanding the infinite nature of His gift, and the retroactive and eternal nature of the Son of G-d helps this to make sense. But at the same time, grasping how someone could feel the benefits of something that had not yet occurred is mind boggling.

The forward of eternity is usually easy to grasp. The backwards portion though... oi vey.

[prisonchaplain]

Floating around what? Waiting for who? What eternal material was He made of? According to ex nihilo, there can be nothing to float in or around, nobody to do this organizing, and especially no eternal material. The ex nihilo God cannot even have benefit of any eternal vacuum. And without such, He cannot have anything to govern or be the God of. He could not be the God of the Universe until He created it.

This is time-bound thinking. Consider my previous proposal. God is eternal and omniscient. Therefore, He knew He would create the universal. That creation was part of his eternal consciousness. So, in that sense, He's always been our Creator.

What you are trying to invision--and apparently finding an impossible concept--is God minus matter. I'm not sure that us grasping what that might be like is possible or necessary. Knowing, as the Psalmist said, that God knew us before we were born--that we are indeed a part of his eternal consciousness, is enough for me to be certain that even before creation we were indeed with him. He is eternally our God.

In all honesty, do you really think that the LDS position is that God 'floated around as eternal material waiting to be "organized" by his god'? I guess I am not even certain what that even means.

Perhaps the impossibility of us fathoming God before matter is not much more difficult than this? In other words, neither vision is easy for us time-bound souls to grasp. IMHO, when it comes to apparent logic, both views are a wash (equally difficult).

Is Jesus God? Does He have a Father? Many non-LDS Christians will quickly answer yes to both. Mormons believe the Eternal God of Heaven and Earth was born of the virgin Mary and lived among men in the most humble of circumstances. A great many Christians will quickly agree. Why then is there a problem with the concept that God has a Father? It is a Biblical and Christian teaching. The Great Jehovah bowed in humble reverence to His Father and submitted His will to Him in the Garden of Gethsemane. ... It is therefore difficult for me to understand why the saying that God has a Father is met with such apprehension among those who believe the Bible and that Jesus is God.

The difficulty is that non-LDS Christians are adamant that we are absolute monotheists. It's not only that we worship one God, but that we believe that there is only one eternal, true and living God, who's nature does not change. This is the crux of the controversy over God's nature. If the son's essence is absolute distinct from the Father, then there appear to be two gods. If humans are eternal in pre-existence, and at least some can expect exaltation to eventual godhood, then the number of gods increases dramatically.

Muslims and Jews do not accept that our Trinity is true monotheism. We insist that it is, because the Godhood, in our teaching, is completely distinct, alone in his eternal nature, and He is of one essence. IMHO, the more those distinctions are chipped away at, the looser the grasp on the claim to monotheism.

The understanding of the eternal nature of Christ and the Father have been debated for centuries. The LDS declare that modern prophets have been made aware of the answers to much of these mysteries by revelation. These revelations are becoming readily available to all the world. If the LDS prophets are indeed of God, forgoing a reading of their writings and partaking only of the libel against them would be as big a mistake as consulting the Pharisees with regard to Paul and his teachings without reading the Paulstine Epistles.

CK also made reference in a previous post to the apparent necessity for a latter day prophet to clear up some of the muddy theology and controversy that had arisen out of Catholicism, the Reformation, and other Christian churches. There is no questioning but that Joseph Smith provided some clear, definitive answers. Many of them are reassuring, pleasing, and offer resolution--IF he really was who he claimed to be. If not, he, like Charles Taze Russell (Jehovah's Witnesses), Mary Bakker Eddy (Christian Science), Ellen G. White (7th Day Adventists), Herbert W. Armstrong (Worldwide Church of God), etc., simply despised denominational factionalism, and in response, created yet another faction. I level this same question to "non-denominationals." I say, "You are proud that you do not belong to a denomination, and yet you do. It's just that your denomination only has one church. At least the denominations have created unifying organizations that link many churches together. :)

[gabelpa]

[Thing is Sarah if there was a time when there was nothing then was there a time where God didn't even exist? How did God come about?

[prisonchaplain]

[Thing is Sarah if there was a time when there was nothing then was there a time where God didn't even exist? How did God come about?

Nobody said there was a time when there was nothing. God is eternal. He never "came about." He always was.

[Dr T]

That is what is amazing about God. He is like no other.

[Doctor Steuss]

That is what is amazing about God. He is like no other.

And always will be.

Forever, and ever. Amen.

[darrel]

I would like to know how anyone could not now have a testimony of Joseph Smith and the Restored truth he brought to the world.

[Dr T]

Amen Dr. S :) All praises to him!

[prisonchaplain]

Das, there are two billion professing Christians in the world that do not have this testimony. Additionally, some LDS posters here seem to indicate that their testimony is more "by faith," than by a felt witness of the Spirit. For every true prophet there are hundreds, if not thousands, of professed ones. During the Seoul Olympics ('88) there were 72 self-professed "returned Christs" spreading their messages around the country.

[Doctor Steuss]

Amen Dr. S :) All praises to him!

Now you've got me in a hymn mood:

I know that my Redeemer lives;

O the sweet joy this sentence gives!

He lives, he lives, who once was dead;

he lives, my everlasting Head.

He lives triumphant from the grave;

he lives eternally to save;

he lives exalted, throned above;

he lives to rule his church in love.

He lives to bless me with his love,

and still he pleads for me above;

he lives, my hungry soul to feed;

he lives to help in time of need.

He lives, my kind, wise, constant Friend;

who still will keep me to the end;

he lives, and while he lives I'll sing,

Jesus, my Prophet, Priest and King.

He lives, all glory to his Name;

he lives, my Savior, still the same;

what joy the blest assurance gives:

I know that my Redeemer lives!

[sarah_22]

So...back to my original question.

I know that mormons believe God doesn't create out of nothing ,but does that also mean that they believe he couldn't even if he wanted to?

yay or nay?

[Doctor Steuss]

So...back to my original question.

I know that mormons believe God doesn't create out of nothing ,but does that also mean that they believe he couldn't even if he wanted to?

yay or nay?

There are eternal laws which G-d Himself obeys. It is obedience to these laws that is part of the reason He is G-d. And by obeying those laws, we can become like Him. Possibly He could create from nothing if He wanted to. But it was revealed to the Jews of old, and the Christians continued to believe until the 2nd Century that G-d does not create the pottery He uses to make pots. Thus, such speculation of whether He could if He wanted to is akin to:

Can G-d sin...

Can G-d create a stone so heavy that He can't lift it...

Can G-d stop being G-d if He wants to...

Can G-d make a copy of Himself that would be more powerful than He is...

Could He? Possibly. But He doesn’t.