Is LDS theology becoming for 'traditional' 'orthodox'?

[Guest]

@Steve Noel, @prisonchaplain,

On the flip side, I'd ask three related questions:

1. What is your concept of what an angel is?
2. What are the substantive differences between an angel and a god?
3. What are we going to be doing in heaven throughout eternity?

In answering the second question, I'd particularly ask, not just the concept, but at the literal, logical, definitions that separate them.

[Steve Noel]

7 hours ago, Carborendum said:

@Steve Noel, @prisonchaplain,

On the flip side, I'd ask three related questions:

1. What is your concept of what an angel is?
2. What are the substantive differences between an angel and a god?
3. What are we going to be doing in heaven throughout eternity?

In answering the second question, I'd particularly ask, not just the concept, but at the literal, logical, definitions that separate them.

I am very busy for the next several days so I will not get to this for a while, but I will get to it.

[Steve Noel]

On 4/21/2016 at 10:15 AM, Carborendum said:

1. What is your concept of what an angel is?

Angels are spirit beings created by God (Ps. 148:2-5; Col. 1:16). The word angel in both Greek and Hebrew means "messenger." Heb. 1:14 says that angels are "ministering spirits" that are "sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation." Though they do not have a physical body, in Scripture they often appear in bodily form (e.g. Jos. 5:13-15). Angels do not marry or die (Luke 20:34-35). Angels are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3).

On 4/21/2016 at 10:15 AM, Carborendum said:

1. What are the substantive differences between an angel and a god?

The most substantive difference is that God is the Creator and angels are creatures (created beings) of God. Rev. 5:11-14 tells of a scene in heaven where "every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them" are worshiping the Father and the Son. The Father and the Son are not included in "every created thing." So there is the Creator - creature distinction. The implication is that God is uncreated, but angels are part of the creation of God. God is omniscient, angels are not. God is omnipotent, angels are not. God is omnipresent, angels are not. God is eternal (meaning had no beginning and will have no end), angels are not. Angels and humans worship God, but angels are not to be worshiped by humans (Rev. 22:8-9).

On 4/21/2016 at 10:15 AM, Carborendum said:

1. What are we going to be doing in heaven throughout eternity?.

I don't know that I can answer that. The Bible teaches that at the end there is some kind of merger between heaven and earth. Rev. 21 tells about the dwelling of God coming down to the new earth. It says that the children of God will be with God for eternity. I try not to speculate beyond what is written regarding what we will be doing. There are texts that speak of humans ruling and reigning. There are texts that speak of humans judging the world and angels. There are texts that speak of greater and lesser rewards. I have not studied this out too much, so I can't venture an in-depth response.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Steve Noel

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

 Angels are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3).

So, in your belief system, humans do NOT become angels?

[Steve Noel]

22 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

So, in your belief system, humans do NOT become angels?

Correct. 

[Guest]

Interesting.  Then the usual argument I make about the topic doesn't apply to your belief.  Excellent.

[Steve Noel]

28 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Interesting.  Then the usual argument I make about the topic doesn't apply to your belief.  Excellent.

I am not aware of any group outside of the Latter-day Saints that teach this. I read through the article on angels in the Zondervan Pictoral Bible Dictionary when answering this question. My copy is older (1967) than the one in the link. This is what it says,

"They are not glorified human beings, but are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb. 1:14)" (39).

Edited April 25, 2016 by Steve Noel

[Steve Noel]

In LDS Beliefs: A Doctrinal Reference the article on angels states:

"Angels are not, as traditional Christians aver, special creations of God. Rather, they are human beings who minister for the Lord." (36)

 

[tesuji]

4 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

I am not aware of any group outside of the Latter-day Saints that teach this. I read through the article on angels in the Zondervan Pictoral Bible Dictionary when answering this question. My copy is older (1967) than the one in the link. This is what it says,

"They are not glorified human beings, but are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb. 1:14)." (39)

Of course, you are free to believe as you want.

But the LDS doctrine on angels is one of the reasons I find LDS doctrine so logical, if you accept some premises:

1. There is a God

2. God is the father of our spirits (Hebrews 12:9)

3. We lived before birth as spirits. Birth is the clothing of our spirit with a body of flesh.

4. After death, our spirit (which is who we really are) goes to wait the resurrection.

5. After resurrection, our spirit is again joined with an immortal body.

 

With this doctrine, angels are just people like us.

There's no need for a different class of beings, who may or may not have wings, etc. Angels are simple messengers sent from God - they are either spirits not yet born with a body, or spirits who have passed into the next life, or resurrected people.

 

[tesuji]

52 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

I am not aware of any group outside of the Latter-day Saints that teach this. I read through the article on angels in the Zondervan Pictoral Bible Dictionary when answering this question. My copy is older (1967) than the one in the link. This is what it says,

"They are not glorified human beings, but are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb. 1:14)." (39)

Of course, you are free to believe as you want.

But the LDS doctrine on angels is one of the reasons I find LDS doctrine so logical, if you accept some premises:

1. There is a God

2. God is the father of our spirits (Hebrews 12:9)

3. We lived before birth as spirits. Birth is the clothing of our spirit with a body of flesh.

4. After death, our spirit (which is who we really are) goes to wait the resurrection.

5. After resurrection, our spirit is again joined with an immortal body.

 

With this doctrine, angels are just people like us.

There's no need for a different class of beings, who may or may not have wings, etc. Angels are simply messengers sent from God - they are either spirits not yet born with a body, or spirits who have passed into the next life, or resurrected people.

 

Edited April 25, 2016 by tesuji

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

I am not aware of any group outside of the Latter-day Saints that teach this.

Then the divide is even wider than I imagined.

[Steve Noel]

7 minutes ago, tesuji said:

Of course, you are free to believe as you want.

But the LDS doctrine on angels is one of the reasons I find LDS doctrine so logical, if you accept some premises:

1. There is a God

2. God is the father of our spirits (Hebrews 12:9)

3. We lived before birth as spirits. Birth is the clothing of our spirit with a body of flesh.

4. After death, our spirit (which is who we really are) goes to wait the resurrection.

5. After resurrection, our spirit is again joined with an immortal body.

 

With this doctrine, angels are just people like us.

There's no need for a different class of beings, who may or may not have wings, etc. Angels are simple messengers sent from God - they are either spirits not yet born with a body, or spirits who have passed into the next life, or resurrected people.

 

Evangelicals cannot accept this because the Bible teaches that angels were created by God and are distinct from human beings. One of the interesting things I noticed in the article on angels in LDS Beliefs: A Doctrinal Reference is that it does not reference the Bible at all. It references Doctrines & Covenants and the Book of Mormon, but not the Bible. It would be interesting to see how Latter-day Saints handle the biblical texts on angels. In LDS Beliefs they do not try. They simply state that what traditional Christians believe about angels is not correct.

[Steve Noel]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Then the divide is even wider than I imagined.

Indeed. The first time I read the story of Joseph Smith I was perplexed because he was claiming a former human (Moroni) was now an angel. This was not consistent with what I understood to be the biblical teaching on angels. It is one of those things that jumps out to one who is familiar with the Bible. It immediately produces suspicion in the student of the Bible. 

Edited April 25, 2016 by Steve Noel

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Steve Noel said:

Indeed. The first time I read the story of Joseph Smith I was perplexed because he was claiming a former human (Moroni) was not an angel. This was not consistent with what I understood to be the biblical teaching on angels. It is one of those things that jumps out to one who if familiar with the Bible. 

I believe you meant "was an angel"?

[Steve Noel]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I believe you meant "was an angel"?

Yeah, I just corrected it and added a bit more.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

Evangelicals cannot accept this because the Bible teaches that angels were created by God and are distinct from human beings. One of the interesting things I noticed in the article on angels in LDS Beliefs: A Doctrinal Reference is that it does not reference the Bible at all. It references Doctrines & Covenants and the Book of Mormon, but not the Bible. It would be interesting to see how Latter-day Saints handle the biblical texts on angels. In LDS Beliefs they do not try. They simply state that what traditional Christians believe about angels is not correct.

I'm not sure if we want to get into it in this thread -- maybe it is appropriate in this thread -- but we do have explanations for such references.  But it is all about interpretation and perspective.

[Steve Noel]

13 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'm not sure if we want to get into it in this thread -- maybe it is appropriate in this thread -- but we do have explanations for such references.  But it is all about interpretation and perspective.

I may start a thread on this later. It is an interesting topic that I haven't seen covered very often in debates/discussions by Latter-day Saints and Evangelicals.

[tesuji]

I haven't read every post in this thread, and maybe I'm off base.

I do not want to offend, but:

In my opinion, discussing doctrine is fine, to get a better understanding. But arguing or Bible bashing leads nowhere. If that's what's happening in this thread then I suggest that it's not leading anywhere.

If a person wants to know if the the LDS church is true, the best way is to ask God. Who else but God knows for sure what truth is? I think the best approach is to read the Book of Mormon carefully and with an open mind, then pray to God and ask if it's true. Millions of Mormons have done this and have felt the confirmation of the Holy Spirit that it's true. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith was a true prophet.

Edited April 25, 2016 by tesuji

[Steve Noel]

9 minutes ago, tesuji said:

I haven't read every post in this thread, and maybe I'm off base.

I do not want to offend, but:

In my opinion, discussing doctrine is fine, to get a better understanding. But arguing or Bible bashing leads nowhere. If that's what's happening in this thread then I suggest that it's not leading anywhere.

If a person wants to know if the the LDS church is true, the best way is to ask God. Who else but God knows for sure what truth is? I think the best approach is to read the Book of Mormon carefully and with an open mind, then pray to God and ask if it's true. Millions of Mormons have done this and have felt the confirmation of the Holy Spirit that it's true. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith was a true prophet.

As far as I can tell, there hasn't been any carnal arguing or "Bible bashing" in this thread. We've already taken this thread off track a good bit. I may start a new thread later about angels, but we should probably not derail this any further. 

[Guest]

@Steve Noel

I'd agree that, thus far, it has been civil.  As long as we can keep it that way, I don't see any reason we can't discuss it.

@tesuji,

So far, I'm not worried that Steve is anything like "Tobeloved".  He seems genuinely curious.

[tesuji]

Just now, Carborendum said:

@Steve Noel

I'd agree that, thus far, it has been civil.  As long as we can keep it that way, I don't see any reason we can't discuss it.

@tesuji,

So far, I'm not worried that Steve is anything like "Tobeloved".  He seems genuinely curious.

Yes, I think I actually confused those two people. My bad

[Guest]

To get back on topic...

I just discussed this very topic with my Home Teaching family.  We discussed Pres.Hinckley's 60 Minutes interview.  The conclusion was interesting.

When answering gospel questions, we try to look for the "question behind the question".  Sometimes, the question the person (especially an outsider) is asking is very different than the stock question we're used to discussing within the faith.  Thus the stock answer would in no way answer the question that they are actually asking.  So, to answer the question to the questioner is different than answering the question to one who has additional background.

This isn't duplicity.  It is answering the questioner's intent rather than the question which we see on the face.  It is about looking at the heart rather than the outward appearance.  With each person being different, the same question can be answered differently.

And I certainly hope we're not becoming like every other Christian faith.  Why would we bother?

Edited April 25, 2016 by Guest

[LeSellers]

8 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

"They are not glorified human beings, but are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb. 1:14)"

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

Heb 1:13  "But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 14  Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?"

I''m just not seeing how you can reach the conclusion that "[angels] are not glorified human beings". Neither passage speaks about the topic at all.

On the other hand, one passage that antimormons use trying to prove that we Saints are in error is Jesus' saying in Matthew 22:30  "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." They then tell us outright that men will be resurrected as angels. I know "they" are not you, and that you are not making this argument. I raise it to show that we Saints are not the only ones who see angels and men as being of the same race.

Lehi

 

Edited April 26, 2016 by LeSellers

[Jane_Doe]

2 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

I am not aware of any group outside of the Latter-day Saints that teach this. I read through the article on angels in the Zondervan Pictoral Bible Dictionary when answering this question. My copy is older (1967) than the one in the link. This is what it says,

"They are not glorified human beings, but are distinct from man (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb. 1:14)" (39).

I'm noticing some interesting difference in translations here.  The KJV renders it:

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

Heb 1:14   14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

That might be something I look into more when I have the time...

[Jane_Doe]

1 hour ago, Steve Noel said:

Evangelicals cannot accept this because the Bible teaches that angels were created by God and are distinct from human beings. One of the interesting things I noticed in the article on angels in LDS Beliefs: A Doctrinal Reference is that it does not reference the Bible at all. It references Doctrines & Covenants and the Book of Mormon, but not the Bible. It would be interesting to see how Latter-day Saints handle the biblical texts on angels. In LDS Beliefs they do not try. They simply state that what traditional Christians believe about angels is not correct.

Speaking from my personal and admittedly biased LDS perspective: I find that D&C and BoM fill in a lot of unaddressed things from the Bible (such as the species/substance of angels), so that's one way that they are useful.