Becoming Gods? Is this true?

[Dear434]

No. Do not post anti-Mormon links here. Too many of them have objectionable content.

Seraphim

Objectionable to who and in what way? Are you referring to some sites that post the details of the LDS Temple Ceremony?

[Dear434]

Malachi: You're obviously not here to engage in dialogue here, but to preach. I suggest you stop.

Seraphim

I think his dialogue with Snow has been very interesting and I don't find him "preachy" at all.

[Dear434]

Yes, but the couplet doesn't say man can become A god, it says man can become AS God. There is a major difference.

The scriptures and the prophets teach that men ARE gods. Becoming like Christ, like the Father, is not a process of going from a non-god state to a state of being a god. We ARE gods and children of the most High.

Now what about God, was He once a man? Do we have a quote that says God was once a man, but is not any longer? If we do, I have yet to find it.

'God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!' -Joseph Smith (TPJS p 345)

'...the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.' -Paul (Rom 5:15)

'in the language of Adam, Man of Holiness is his name, and the name of his Only Begotten is the Son of Man, even Jesus Christ, a righteous Judge, who shall come in the meridian of time.' (Moses 6:57)

As far as I can tell, God is not a Being who rose from the state of being a man to the state of being a non-man. God is an exalted man. Jesus of Nazareth is an exalted man. The scriptures are full of this idea that Jesus is an exalted man. He lived as a man and died as a man.

The Mormon doctrine is not that God takes a member of a species and rises him to another. The Mormon doctrine, as far as I can tell, is that God and man are the same species.

-a-train

I would have to agree with you. Mormonism teaches that God and Man are the same species. Christianity (non-Mormon) teaches that God and Man are not the same and in many ways just the opposite. God is good, holy, just, perfect. Man is fallen, unholy, unjust, imperfect, etc. It is only through the atonement of Christ and by God's grace through our faith that Man can become what God intended for Him from the beginning.

[Dear434]

>>>Originally Posted by Malachi7

Do you believe the concept of Eternal Progression is a Christian belief?

Ah, then your understanding is not yet complete. Eternal Progression is in fact a Christian belief:

Perhaps the most noteworthy writer on the subject of the eternal progression of the human person who has become a "god by grace" is the fourth-century bishop, Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335– c. 395). Nearly a century and a half before Gregory's birth, however, St. Irenaeus, in his treatise Against Heresies, had begun to speak on the topic: "And those to whom He says, 'Come, you blessed of my Father, receive the Kingdom prepared for you for eternity' (Matt. 25:34), will receive the Kingdom and progress in it for ever." [Hans Urs von Balthasar, ed., The Scandal of the Incarnation: Irenaeus Against the Heresies, trans. John Saward (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1990), 110.] In another passage St. Irenaeus, in referring to the "age to come," speaks of how God will be "always teaching and man always learning from God."[Grant, Irenaeus of Lyons, 118, 184.] Gregory of Nyssa remains, nevertheless, as the great teacher on the doctrine of eternal progression. [Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Moses, trans. Abraham J. Malherbe and Everett Ferguson (New York: Paulist, 1978), 30–31, 111–20 passim, 133; Meredith, The Cappadocians, 77; Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology, 219, 225, 226; Meyendorff and Tobias, Salvation in Christ, 63.]

In his treatise The Life of Moses Gregory explains that human perfection consists in a person's eternal growth and progress in virtuous activity.

Made to desire and not to abandon the transcendent height by the things already attained, it makes its way upward without ceasing, ever through its prior accomplishments renewing its intensity for the flight. Activity directed towards virtue causes its capacity to grow through exertion; this kind of activity alone does not slaken its intensity by the effort but increases it . . . the place with [God] is so great that the one running in it is never able to cease from his progress.

In this teaching eternal progress is rooted in the infinite nature of God. A divinized person will never stop growing and learning and doing precisely because the source of divinization, the uncreated energies of God, is limitless and infinite. Divinized persons will never exhaust God's ability to empower them for virtuous activity. [Gregory of Nyssa, Life of Moses, 113, 117.] [Vajda, Jordan, OP; Partakers of the Divine Nature]

Did you even bother to read what you quoted? How does this relate to Mormonism which, I thought, taught that God was all-knowing and therefore does not need to continue learning? If we (humans) can become "divinized" but yet we continue to learn, then wouldn't the same hold true for God (assuming he had to go through the same experiences as us). If the LDS God is "all-knowing" then He can't gain any more knowledge because he already has "all knowledge" and logically, a person who follows in his footsteps would eventually reach that end as well.

[Dear434]

well actually if you are LDS it becomes prophecy and Gods interpretation

-Charley

Now there's a leap in logic. So if I say my interpretation is God's interpretation, you would accept that at face value?

[Dear434]

his calling was to restore the Church the translation of the Book of Mormon was part of that.

-Charley

Of course you wouldn't know this if you had only the Book of Commandments to read from. Good thing Joseph Smith revised it in the Doctrine and Covenants.

"...and he has a gift to translate the book and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift." — Book of Commandments, 4:2 This passage refers to Joseph Smith in third person. However, the re-numbered Doctrine and Covenants reads:

"...and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished." — Doctrine and Covenants, 5:4 Critics assert that Smith originally claimed only to be charged with translating the Book of Mormon. According to this view, he had to revise the passage to bring it into accord with his subsequent translation of the Bible and claim to be sole prophet in the Church. An apologist would reply that this misunderstanding of the original text is precisely why it had to be clarified. Book of Commandments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[a-train]

I would have to agree with you. Mormonism teaches that God and Man are the same species. Christianity (non-Mormon) teaches that God and Man are not the same and in many ways just the opposite. God is good, holy, just, perfect. Man is fallen, unholy, unjust, imperfect, etc. It is only through the atonement of Christ and by God's grace through our faith that Man can become what God intended for Him from the beginning.

Indeed Mormonism also teaches that Our Father in heaven is different from us in these same ways. Mormonism also says plainly that 'God is good, holy, just, perfect. Man is fallen, unholy, unjust, imperfect, etc. It is only through the atonement of Christ and by God's grace through our faith that Man can become what God intended for Him from the beginning.' On this there is consensus.

-a-train

[Flyonthewall]

Job 38:7 is talking about the angels.

perhaps through the lenses of traditional Christianity, but through the lens of a living prophet, it is about you and I in the pre-mortal existence.

Jer 1:5 is simply showing God's fore-knowledge and that He is all-knowing.

Foreknowledge of....something that did not exist? No. He knew each and everyone of us in our pre-mortal life.

John 9:2, in context, is simply a misunderstanding the disciples had, believing the man was born blind because of sin. When in fact, the man was born blind because it was God's will (v. 3). Just because the disciples asked a question in ignorance doesn't mean the question validates the belief in the LDS premortal existence.

Not the greatest example of our pre-mortal life.

Eph. 1:4 again speaks of God's foreknowledge. Verse 5 says He "predestined us to adoption as sons". Does this mean Mormons believe in predestination since it uses that explicit word?

Again, this scripture shows that He knew us in our pre-mortal life.

We do not believe in predestination, we believe in foreordination.

And finally, Rev 12:7 is speaking of the war in heaven between the angels and the devil (the dragon). Again, you would have to read into the text something which is NOT there to come up with the LDS interpretation.

The angels were you and I, and the rest of humanity.

With all the scriptural references to the pre-mortal life, there is no need to read anythiing that is not there, just put the pieces together.

[Dear434]

Flyonthewall, you say Job 38:7 and Rev 12:7 (they are speaking of angels) is actually referring to us (humans) in our premortal state of being. However, are not the angels in heaven immortal? Are you mortal or immortal? Obviously, you are a simple mortal man who will die one day. Therefore, at no time have you ever been an "angel". So, consequently, the verses you quoted do NOT refer to our (mankinds) premortal existence.

What I find funny though is that you will take verses, like the ones above, completely out of context and claim they teach one thing (when they clearly don't) and then take another verse which explicitly teaches predestination (and even uses that word) and deny that is what it really means! Look, you are welcome to believe whatever it is you truly believe, however, don't tell me the Bible teaches it when it clearly does not. If you want to point to LDS "scriptures" to prove your beliefs, be my guest.

[Hemidakota]

Angels are those who will live here or died on this earth and minister to the righteous.

[Elgama]

Of course you wouldn't know this if you had only the Book of Commandments to read from. Good thing Joseph Smith revised it in the Doctrine and Covenants.

"...and he has a gift to translate the book and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift." — Book of Commandments, 4:2 This passage refers to Joseph Smith in third person. However, the re-numbered Doctrine and Covenants reads:

"...and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished." — Doctrine and Covenants, 5:4 Critics assert that Smith originally claimed only to be charged with translating the Book of Mormon. According to this view, he had to revise the passage to bring it into accord with his subsequent translation of the Bible and claim to be sole prophet in the Church. An apologist would reply that this misunderstanding of the original text is precisely why it had to be clarified. Book of Commandments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its funny that because I have faith I can't have read the documents thing is my faith is centered in Christ and comes from my Heavenly Father if I have doubts I can ask them not a book I have read the books but as an historian I know just how inaccurate histories can be even those recorded only a year ago will have gaps. My favourite saying right now seems to be God is not a book or a document - a blade of grass or a leaf can testify to God much more effectively if in doubt just ask Him. I am confident Joseph Smith was a prophet because God said so lol

-Charley

[rameumptom]

Joseph Smith had no problem with going back and correcting or enhancing a previous revelation with new information that he had received. At the time of the Book of Commandments revelation, he was only given the one gift. And until he was finished with the translation, there were no other gifts given to him of the Spirit. That is the benefit of continual revelation.

However, once the D&C was being readied for publication, the Lord had given him other gifts to use, since his responsibilities and tasks had changed.

Richard Bushman explains and demonstrates this in Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling. For Joseph, the concept of Zion was continually changing. It began as a congregation, then a place in Missouri, then it expanded to include a larger location, until Joseph finally realized that it encompassed all of North and South America. Today, the prophets tell us that Zion is wherever we find a stake or temple.

[darrel]

Dear434

Your points are not convincing. Your blinders keep you from seeing the whole picture. Your traditional view leads to misconceptions and misunderstanding. I'm sure you mean well but your position is lacking vision ( where there is no vision the people parish) Prov.29:18

The restored Gospel of Jesus Christ has the fullness of Truth and Light. Through continuing revelation we become enlightened and prepared to meet our Savior.

I appreciate Prison Chaplins position on the differences in doctrine. You would do well to posture with him and not try to pursuade us away from our faith. All the debate in the world will not change truth.

Our faith is based on a personal spiritual witness that Joseph Smith is a Prophet, Called of God to Restore the Truth that was lost to the earth. We have a Living Prophet Today who Leads this church and anyone who will listen to true principles. :)

[Dear434]

Angels are those who will live here or died on this earth and minister to the righteous.

I know of no angel who ever became a human being. But, you are entitled to your belief and opinions. I am of the belief and opinion that angels are not the same type of creature that Man is. God is different from the angels just as angels are different from Mankind.

[Dear434]

Its funny that because I have faith I can't have read the documents thing is my faith is centered in Christ and comes from my Heavenly Father if I have doubts I can ask them not a book I have read the books but as an historian I know just how inaccurate histories can be even those recorded only a year ago will have gaps. My favourite saying right now seems to be God is not a book or a document - a blade of grass or a leaf can testify to God much more effectively if in doubt just ask Him. I am confident Joseph Smith was a prophet because God said so lol

-Charley

Really? "God said so"? Did He audibly tell you in person (face to face) or did you read it somewhere? And if you read it, could you quote the passage and source?

[Dear434]

Joseph Smith had no problem with going back and correcting or enhancing a previous revelation with new information that he had received. At the time of the Book of Commandments revelation, he was only given the one gift. And until he was finished with the translation, there were no other gifts given to him of the Spirit. That is the benefit of continual revelation.

However, once the D&C was being readied for publication, the Lord had given him other gifts to use, since his responsibilities and tasks had changed.

Richard Bushman explains and demonstrates this in Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling. For Joseph, the concept of Zion was continually changing. It began as a congregation, then a place in Missouri, then it expanded to include a larger location, until Joseph finally realized that it encompassed all of North and South America. Today, the prophets tell us that Zion is wherever we find a stake or temple.

Interesting point of view. I don't find your arguments to be convincing but they are interesting nonetheless.

[Hemidakota]

I know of no angel who ever became a human being. But, you are entitled to your belief and opinions. I am of the belief and opinion that angels are not the same type of creature that Man is. God is different from the angels just as angels are different from Mankind.

In your own opinion, what do angels look like?

[Dear434]

Dear434

Your points are not convincing. Your blinders keep you from seeing the whole picture. Your traditional view leads to misconceptions and misunderstanding. I'm sure you mean well but your position is lacking vision ( where there is no vision the people parish) Prov.29:18

The restored Gospel of Jesus Christ has the fullness of Truth and Light. Through continuing revelation we become enlightened and prepared to meet our Savior.

I appreciate Prison Chaplins position on the differences in doctrine. You would do well to posture with him and not try to pursuade us away from our faith. All the debate in the world will not change truth.

Our faith is based on a personal spiritual witness that Joseph Smith is a Prophet, Called of God to Restore the Truth that was lost to the earth. We have a Living Prophet Today who Leads this church and anyone who will listen to true principles. :)

I am simply sharing my own opinions and beliefs on the topic. Am I not allowed to do that on this message board? It takes two hands to clap and I can't see the benefit in having only a one-sided discussion. Don't you think examining both sides of any story is beneficial in learning and gaining knowledge?

[Dear434]

In your own opinion, what do angels look like?

An angel can assume any form that God wills. Angels are simply the instruments of God. Therefore, they are not limited to our understanding of "form" and "shape".

[COUNTRYBEAR]

Read Genesis, it says that man was cast out from the garden of eden so that he could not eat of the tree of eternal least they become as gods.

Mankind is the product of divine parentage and thus heirs to divinity, we have a divine ancestry and thus the posability of a divine future made possible through obedience to the gospel and the atonement of chirsit. Those who inherit celestial glory may qualify for exhaultation the supreme blessing ofeternal prosperity and like the saviour are acccorded saviours on mount zion. They inherit the power to become like the father and continue the divine work of increase the posterity. The blessed will then perform divine works set forth by the pattern of our forbearers. The term God is explained as a calling like bishop or prophet and this calling is founded in the power and authority of the priesthood predicated on the covenants that bind even the father (for if god were to lie he would cease to be god).

[THIRDpersonviewer]

I am simply sharing my own opinions and beliefs on the topic. Am I not allowed to do that on this message board? It takes two hands to clap and I can't see the benefit in having only a one-sided discussion. Don't you think examining both sides of any story is beneficial in learning and gaining knowledge?

Examining both sides of any story is sometimes beneficial and sometimes it is not. In relation to the revealed word(anything testified by the power of the Holy Spirit). There is no need to examine a second source. Why? Because it is the only source of revelation from God. However in temporal or physical things, there is often more than one view. Speculation can have more than one view. So can opinions. However, when we deal with the truth, there is only truth. Truth is truth because it is truth. God reveals truth by revelation. He reveals by the power of the Holy Ghost. Why take a second look at a truth(for the purpose of knowing if it is really true) if you have been born witness that it is true? God does not lie.

[rameumptom]

I know of no angel who ever became a human being. But, you are entitled to your belief and opinions. I am of the belief and opinion that angels are not the same type of creature that Man is. God is different from the angels just as angels are different from Mankind.

Well, could you explain the three men who visited Abraham, who were also angels? Two of these went on to visit Lot and destroy Sodom and Gomorrah.

How about Jesus at the Mount of Transfiguration, where Moses and Elias appeared as angels? Peter was so impressed, he wanted to build a booth for all three.

And then there's the Jewish tradition that the man/prophet Enoch was Metatron, the archangel.

Traditionally, angels and men were the same substance as God. Different? Of course. But the same substance. I guess my three examples should help to see that.

[THIRDpersonviewer]

An angel can assume any form that God wills. Angels are simply the instruments of God. Therefore, they are not limited to our understanding of "form" and "shape".

D&C 129 1-7

1 THERE are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones—

2 For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

3 Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory.

4 When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you.

5 If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.

6 If he be the spirit of a just man made perfect he will come in his glory; for that is the only way he can appear—

7 Ask him to shake hands with you, but he will not move, because it is contrary to the order of heaven for a just man to deceive; but he will still deliver his message.

I know that was your opinion, but I noticed the conversation between you and hemidakota and I figured this clarified what he was saying and what we know.

[rameumptom]

3rdPersonViewer, thanks for reminding us that Jesus is known as the Great Angel of the Presence. Margaret Barker discusses this extensively in her book, the Great Angel.

So, if Jesus is an angel, and Moses and Elias are angels, and Enoch, then I guess angels, Gods and men are of the same substance!

[Dr T]

hmmm... OK, maybe you are seeing something I don't see.

First, I imagine God having always existed and having never had any parents or childhood experience. At some point, God created the earth and we came to this point in time. Wouldn't He have traversed infinity simply to cross His endless existance before creating earth?

Next, I imagine God having always existed but also having once had parents and a childhood experience. At some point, God created the earth and we came to this point in time. I still see God traversing infinity to cross His endless existance before creating earth.

As far as I can tell, the addition or deletion of God's parents do not somehow change the situation.

Do you see what I am asking? Perhaps you mean something else by 'transgressing an infinite'?

-a-train

Hey Train,

Wow-a lot has been added since the last time I logged in. I'm not quite sure but it seems that your assumption of the existence of the Earth (possibly that it is eternal) is leading to a misunderstanding of this issue and God. I don't see that as an issue relating to traversing an infinite. I believe God has always existed and created the world and time. It is not a progression of events/being from all of eternity such as the concept of god upon god forever back at infinitum. God is the uncaused cause and as such-started it all by the creation. Maybe a review of the logical error of traversing an infinite is needed but I don't have time to review it now. The addition of God having parents does change the situation in my mind. That is the whole issue with the traversing an infinite.