The Trinity & Premortal Existence

[Rescued One]

I engage in these discussions because I believe that all Christians are my brothers in Christ. I understand why men classify and categorize. I do it as well. But I don't do it for the sake of classification, but rather, like you, for distinction. For "he that is not against us is on our part."

How can all Christians be the brothers and sisters of LDS if non-LDS have not been baptized by one having authority? According to LDS teachings, these non-LDS have not even taken upon themselves the name of Christ.

In these three relatively obvious meanings, we see that we take upon us the name of Christ when we are baptized in his name, when we belong to his Church and profess our belief in him, and when we do the work of his kingdom...

Willingness to take upon us the name of Jesus Christ can therefore be understood as willingness to take upon us the authority of Jesus Christ. According to this meaning, by partaking of the sacrament we witness our willingness to participate in the sacred ordinances of the temple and to receive the highest blessings available through the name and by the authority of the Savior when he chooses to confer them upon us.

Another future event we may anticipate when we witness our willingness to take that sacred name upon us concerns our relationship to our Savior and the incomprehensible blessings available to those who will be called by his name at the last day...

In these great scriptures from the Book of Mormon, we learn that those who are qualified by faith and repentance and compliance with the laws and ordinances of the gospel will have their sins borne by the Lord Jesus Christ. In spiritual and figurative terms they will become the sons and daughters of Christ, heirs to his kingdom. These are they who will be called by his name in the last day.

According to this meaning, when we witness our willingness to take upon us the name of Jesus Christ, we are signifying our commitment to do all that we can to achieve eternal life in the kingdom of our Father. We are expressing our candidacy—our determination to strive for—exaltation in the celestial kingdom.

Those who are found worthy to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ at the last day are described in the great revelations recorded in the ninety-third and seventy-sixth sections of the Doctrine and Covenants. Here the Savior revealed to Joseph Smith that in due time, if we keep the commandments of God, we can receive the “fulness” of the Father. (D&C 93:19–20.) Here the Savior bears record that “all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the [Father], and are the church of the Firstborn.” (D&C 93:22.) “They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things. … Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods” who “shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever.” (D&C 76:55, 58, 62.) “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3; see also D&C 88:4–5.) This is the ultimate significance of taking upon us the name of Jesus Christ.

Dallin H. Oaks, “Taking upon Us the Name of Jesus Christ,” Ensign, May 1985, p. 80


Moroni said that “all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians … because of their belief in Christ” (Alma 46:15).

As we take upon us the name of Christ, we covenant to be obedient to the principles of the gospel. All we do should be based on Christ’s example. If we do this gladly, we will find joy in living the gospel. We will feel good about ourselves and have the desire to do what is right. At baptism we covenanted to take upon us the name of Christ. This lesson is to help you and your children realize the importance of this covenant. (See chapter 20, “Baptism,” Gospel Principles [31110], pp. 128–35.)
“Lesson Thirteen: Baptism and the Name of Christ,” Family Home Evening Resource Book, (1997), p.52

Hence, true and acceptable Christianity is found among the saints who have the fulness of the gospel, and a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom.
Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, (p. 132)

Is there an acceptable Christianity outside the LDS church?

 

[bbbbbbb]

How can all Christians be the brothers and sisters of LDS if non-LDS have not been baptized by one having authority? According to LDS teachings, these non-LDS have not even taken upon themselves the name of Christ.

In these three relatively obvious meanings, we see that we take upon us the name of Christ when we are baptized in his name, when we belong to his Church and profess our belief in him, and when we do the work of his kingdom...

Willingness to take upon us the name of Jesus Christ can therefore be understood as willingness to take upon us the authority of Jesus Christ. According to this meaning, by partaking of the sacrament we witness our willingness to participate in the sacred ordinances of the temple and to receive the highest blessings available through the name and by the authority of the Savior when he chooses to confer them upon us.

Another future event we may anticipate when we witness our willingness to take that sacred name upon us concerns our relationship to our Savior and the incomprehensible blessings available to those who will be called by his name at the last day...

In these great scriptures from the Book of Mormon, we learn that those who are qualified by faith and repentance and compliance with the laws and ordinances of the gospel will have their sins borne by the Lord Jesus Christ. In spiritual and figurative terms they will become the sons and daughters of Christ, heirs to his kingdom. These are they who will be called by his name in the last day.

According to this meaning, when we witness our willingness to take upon us the name of Jesus Christ, we are signifying our commitment to do all that we can to achieve eternal life in the kingdom of our Father. We are expressing our candidacy—our determination to strive for—exaltation in the celestial kingdom.

Those who are found worthy to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ at the last day are described in the great revelations recorded in the ninety-third and seventy-sixth sections of the Doctrine and Covenants. Here the Savior revealed to Joseph Smith that in due time, if we keep the commandments of God, we can receive the “fulness” of the Father. (D&C 93:19–20.) Here the Savior bears record that “all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the [Father], and are the church of the Firstborn.” (D&C 93:22.) “They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things. … Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods” who “shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever.” (D&C 76:55, 58, 62.) “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3; see also D&C 88:4–5.) This is the ultimate significance of taking upon us the name of Jesus Christ.

Dallin H. Oaks, “Taking upon Us the Name of Jesus Christ,” Ensign, May 1985, p. 80


Moroni said that “all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians … because of their belief in Christ” (Alma 46:15).

As we take upon us the name of Christ, we covenant to be obedient to the principles of the gospel. All we do should be based on Christ’s example. If we do this gladly, we will find joy in living the gospel. We will feel good about ourselves and have the desire to do what is right. At baptism we covenanted to take upon us the name of Christ. This lesson is to help you and your children realize the importance of this covenant. (See chapter 20, “Baptism,” Gospel Principles [31110], pp. 128–35.)
“Lesson Thirteen: Baptism and the Name of Christ,” Family Home Evening Resource Book, (1997), p.52

Hence, true and acceptable Christianity is found among the saints who have the fulness of the gospel, and a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom.
Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, (p. 132)

Is there an acceptable Christianity outside the LDS church?

To add to your statement and to return to my earlier post about not standing in the same room, I would ask if I, as a non-Mormon, would be welcomed as a brother in Christ into any Mormon temple without a temple recommend? The answer is obviously not. The reason, of course, is that I am part of the Great Apostasy and not a Christan according to the Mormon definition of the word.

 

[gort]

A grain of sand reveals that the lds theology of God being omnipotent and omniscient is in error.

 

[Rescued One]

To add to your statement and to return to my earlier post about not standing in the same room, I would ask if I, as a non-Mormon, would be welcomed as a brother in Christ into any Mormon temple without a temple recommend? The answer is obviously not.

I would imagine that a high percentage of LDS are also kept out of the temples. And in the next life, those LDS are not part of the Church of the Firstborn and are not brothers and sisters to the exalted ones.

 

[prisonchaplain]

Thanks for your point of view. It appears that the "idea of God" is indeed quite different in your own mind, as far as these attributes are concerned. In your view, God the Father (in LDS theology) is NOT omnipresent, omniscient, nor omnipotent. And this is where I believe that you do not understand fully my faith, for I do believe that He most certainly is those things. In that respect, I make no distinction whatever between the God in Trinity and the God of my faith. Interesting.

If we agree, that is great. I wonder how this is so, though. How can God both progress and be perfect? Is it your belief that the Father's spirit is both embodied and free to be omnipresent? That doesn't seem possible. And again, how can God progress if He is already all-knowing?

Your view that the LDS God (the Father) changes is also interesting. You see, I do not understand that He changes. He is God. He does not change. His laws will not change. His attirbutes will not change. His mercy will not change. His justice will not change. Nothing about Him will change. And the "progression" spoken of is not that of increasing in intelligence, for He knows all. It is not increasing in power, for He has all power. It is nothing more than the adding to Himself of glory upon glory eternally, through the exaltation of his creation (man).

Do you mean that God is progressing IN THAT we are progressing? My non-LDS ears hear Snow's couplet--As man is God once was...and cannot help but wonder if that is so, how can God be said to be perfect?

I don't see how that could possibly be construed as man exalting himself at the expense of God. God exalts man because it is His will to do so, by which He adds glory to Himself.

What I was driving at is the distinction between humanity and God seems greatly diminished in LDS theology. We become more, and God, seemingly less. You've explained why you believe my perception is at least partially in error. But, I'm still uncertain how God can be perfect, and yet have evolved.

There will never be a diminishing of Him in any way. So, I ask now, how is He truly less than God (or less than the God in Trinity?) They are each omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent, from the point of view of their respective worshipers. The only difference I see here is that, in spite of the fact that I understand the two ideas of God to be different, I believe that the God in Trinity is equal to the God of my faith in all those attributes, whereas you see "my" God as powerful, yet lacking.

I could not help but notice the bolded part. Is that a qualifier. does it mean that God is all that, only from our perspective? Because this is the crux of my concern. How can a God who is evolving, or has evolved, be perfect and all-power/knowing/present.

And yes, I believe the words of Lorenzo Snow, and of Joseph Smith, who actually taught the concept prior to Pres. Snow. The idea that God the Father was not always God the Father in no way alters the fact that He is God the Father. How could it?

Because it calls to question the eternal nature of God. If God WAS mutable, then at that time He was not God, as we understand him--not perfect, not all-knowing/powerful/present. You say he arrived at perfection and became immutable? I'm not sure how one can go from imperfection to absolute perfection. I recall the story of the fellow who tried to reach eternity. Every step he took got him halfway closer. Yet, he never arrived.

How does that lessen what He IS. I am a full-grown man. I used to be a child. My childhood cannot possibly take away my manhood. I will never, from here on out, ever be anything but a full-grown man. It is not possible. So am I not truly a man because I was once a child? Is my intelligence or capacity somehow lessened because of that past? Please don't misunderstand. I'm not trying to get you to believe this or accept it. I'm trying to help you see that WE don't believe God to be something less than you believe God to be, on the basis of our differing understanding of his substance.

I suppose you can believe two ideas that, to me, seem incompatible. The idea that a man can "grow up" to become God Almighty, Perfect in all ways, All Powerful, All Knowing, Omnipresent, and yet contained in a body...this is just so very hard for me to grasp. It's like dividing 1 by zero. Most calculators simply respond "ERROR." They are not made to contain infinity. Likewise, it seems to me that man is simply not built to become God. And yet, I know such beliefs are not rare in the world, and so do not mean to accuse you of absurdity, nor even illogic.

Only if we choose to make it so. My guess is that, barring a few obvious distinctions, you could take a sincere Mormon and a sincere Trinitarian, view their lives from a distance, and see mostly great similarities in their works and devotions. Their fruits would indicate that they were both disciples of Christ. And yet perhaps far too much effort is devoted, by the adherents of all Christian faiths, toward diminishing the goodness of the others, magnifying their supposed errors, maligning their chosen leadership, and estranging their common God.

Lines in the sand are never pleasant. Sometimes they are necessary. However, even in such cases, even if our ultimate desire is to pull people over to our side of the line, it only makes Christian sense to do so by being attractive and sincere.

Of course. I engage in these discussions because I believe that all Christians are my brothers in Christ. I understand why men classify and categorize. I do it as well. But I don't do it for the sake of classification, but rather, like you, for distinction. For "he that is not against us is on our part."

Blessings to you.

So, how do you deal with people you believe have entered apostasy or heresy? Are you not torn between compassion, and yet an inner desire to see them restored? So, you want to see your "fellow Christian brothers and sisters" enter into the Restoration, whereas those same spiritual siblings want to see you exit "unorthodox theology," and return to the "faith of our Fathers." So, we represent Christ, speak the Truth God gives us, and let the Holy Spirit direct as He will.

 

[superwimp]

Your view that the LDS God (the Father) changes is also interesting. You see, I do not understand that He changes. He is God. He does not change. His laws will not change. His attirbutes will not change. His mercy will not change. His justice will not change. Nothing about Him will change. And the "progression" spoken of is not that of increasing in intelligence, for He knows all. It is not increasing in power, for He has all power. It is nothing more than the adding to Himself of glory upon glory eternally, through the exaltation of his creation (man). I don't see how that could possibly be construed as man exalting himself at the expense of God. God exalts man because it is His will to do so, by which He adds glory to Himself.

Hello softspoken,

If according to LDS theology God doesn't change, then why is the LDS version of tithing different than the tithing from the OT? Why do you keep the WOW and not the dietary laws given through Moses? Why is the sabbath now on Sunday from midnight to midnight rather than on Saturday from sundown to sundown? In the OT many of the prophets had to place there lives in danger in order to give God's message to those in power. As far as I know the LDS prophets have never even been arrested.

 

[Rescued One]

As far as I know the LDS prophets have never even been arrested.

Joseph Smith was.

 

[superwimp]

Hello phoebe ann,

>>>In the OT many of the prophets had to place there lives in danger in order to give God's message to those in power. As far as I know the LDS prophets have never even been arrested. <<<

As you can see, the context in which I made the above statement had to do with puting yourself in harms way for an ideal. There are many who have undergone extreme hardship because they heard, or at least thaught they heard the call of God to do so. I'm not aware at this time of any of the LDS prophets who fall into this category.

 

[Ran77]

Well I'm not sure the implications of the differences are that drastic. We'll choose to stand on opposite sides of the room, and yet we're still in the same room, are we not? Does the LDS concept of God somehow change the fact that God is God? Can He only be God if his nature is as described in the Trinitarian view? If so, why? And according to whom? The Bible? I'm sure you know the Bible better than I, but I don't remember anything in there that teaches that a god with a body is any less omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent than a god without one. In fact, I believe, according to the Trinitarian view, that the opposite is claimed, unless God did become less than God while housed in Christ's mortal body. Please correct me if I'm wrong there.

I guess my point is that yes, we differ in our view, but to what extent does that particular difference have bearing on the rest of our "walk and talk" as Christians? My opinion would be that it has little bearing. Even the doctrine of the Kingdoms of Glory, which would split the common hell/heaven view into hell/heaven/heaven/heaven doesn't change much how you and I live. So why debate it endlessly? So that we can be right? You already know where I stand on that issue.

Peace to you.

Nicely stated. I think you make a very good point.

 

[Ran77]

How can God both progress and be perfect?

It will help you understand this point if you consider what it is that LDS believe that God progresses. LDS do not consider God to be progressing in perfection, since He already has it. Nor in knowledge, since He is all knowing. God progresses in His works and His glory. He can continue to create and can continue in His loving mission to mankind, where ever they may be.

Is it your belief that the Father's spirit is both embodied and free to be omnipresent? That doesn't seem possible.

Again, it will help if you consider the LDS beliefs on the topic. I have not heard that the Father sets His spirit free to be omnipresence. In fact, I am not familiar with any LDS teaching that God is omnipresent as you are presenting it. Certainly, we believe that God influece is everywhere and His ability to know what is happening everywhere and act upon the events everywhere, but I do not understand that to mean that it can only be accomplished by Him physically being everywhere.

And again, how can God progress if He is already all-knowing?

He doesn't. LDS don't believe God progresses in knowledge.

 

[Zechariah]

If according to LDS theology God doesn't change, then why is the LDS version of tithing different than the tithing from the OT? Why do you keep the WOW and not the dietary laws given through Moses? Why is the sabbath now on Sunday from midnight to midnight rather than on Saturday from sundown to sundown?

If, according to non-LDS Christian theologies, God doesn't change, then why does tithing vary among the churches of Christendom, and why is it different than the tithing from the OT? Why do the many churches within Christendom have differing (and sometimes changing) views where diet is concerned, and why do they not keep the dietary laws given through Moses? Why, for most of the churches in Christendom, is the Sabbath now on Sunday from midnight to midnight rather than on Saturday from sundown to sundown?

In the OT many of the prophets had to place there lives in danger in order to give God's message to those in power. As far as I know the LDS prophets have never even been arrested.

Being arrested (or murdered for that matter) is not requisite to being a servant of the Lord, as can be seen with a number of Old Testament prophets, but that doesn't mean that their lives were not placed in danger then, or now.

FBI: Former Mormon church president Gordon B. Hinckley had life threatened


.

 

[SoftSpoken]

Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. I had actually composed a much lengthier response to each item here, and then my browser choked when I posted it. That was a few days ago. I haven't before today been able to muster the gumption to re-do all that work; and even now it's scaled back.

If we agree, that is great. I wonder how this is so, though. How can God both progress and be perfect? Is it your belief that the Father's spirit is both embodied and free to be omnipresent? That doesn't seem possible. And again, how can God progress if He is already all-knowing?

As Ran77 points out, it is not in any attribute of himself that God progresses. Rather, He adds glory upon glory unto himself endlessly. I suppose that I'm using the verb "to progress" in the sense that God moves toward and accomplishes an objective eternally, rather than that he impoves eternally. Does that make sense?

Do you mean that God is progressing IN THAT we are progressing? My non-LDS ears hear Snow's couplet--As man is God once was...and cannot help but wonder if that is so, how can God be said to be perfect?

In a way, yes. I may have already answered that with the above?

What I was driving at is the distinction between humanity and God seems greatly diminished in LDS theology. We become more, and God, seemingly less. You've explained why you believe my perception is at least partially in error. But, I'm still uncertain how God can be perfect, and yet have evolved.

I don't believe that He evolved into God in any way. Perhaps this idea is tied to the idea of "progression," which I've pointed out was, I believe, misunderstood?

I could not help but notice the bolded part. Is that a qualifier. does it mean that God is all that, only from our perspective?

It isn't a qualifier. It is a forum courtesy. Discussions often devolve into arguments because we perceive that our God is being belittled. My recognition of your God as God keeps the discussion on track, because we don't spend so much time defending the Godhood of our Gods.

Because this is the crux of my concern. How can a God who is evolving, or has evolved, be perfect and all-power/knowing/present.

Again, I think I have answered this?

Because it calls to question the eternal nature of God. If God WAS mutable, then at that time He was not God, as we understand him--not perfect, not all-knowing/powerful/present. You say he arrived at perfection and became immutable? I'm not sure how one can go from imperfection to absolute perfection. I recall the story of the fellow who tried to reach eternity. Every step he took got him halfway closer. Yet, he never arrived.

True enough. Were we to attempt to achieve such under our own power, we'd never get there. We are raised up to such an exalted status by a God who wills to do so, and who has power to do so. Much like forgiveness/new birth is an act of God's will on our behalf, so is the exaltation of His children. Again, evolution has no part in the equation whatsoever, in my understanding.

I suppose you can believe two ideas that, to me, seem incompatible. The idea that a man can "grow up" to become God Almighty, Perfect in all ways, All Powerful, All Knowing, Omnipresent, and yet contained in a body...this is just so very hard for me to grasp. It's like dividing 1 by zero. Most calculators simply respond "ERROR." They are not made to contain infinity.

Again, the reference to some kind of evolution. You're right. It doesn't equate. And it's not what we believe.

Likewise, it seems to me that man is simply not built to become God.

And that would explain, at least in part, why the doctrine makes little sense to you personally. If you personally are not built to become God, then a doctrine that teaches otherwise cannot but be rejected, at least at the outset.

Lines in the sand are never pleasant. Sometimes they are necessary. However, even in such cases, even if our ultimate desire is to pull people over to our side of the line, it only makes Christian sense to do so by being attractive and sincere.

I'd go a bit further and say that what makes truth of any kind attractive is the sincerity of the person. Lies are attractive, and so are some liars. But they are certainly not sincere. So wouldn't a true Christian be attractive on account of his sincerity?

So, how do you deal with people you believe have entered apostasy or heresy? Are you not torn between compassion, and yet an inner desire to see them restored? So, you want to see your "fellow Christian brothers and sisters" enter into the Restoration, whereas those same spiritual siblings want to see you exit "unorthodox theology," and return to the "faith of our Fathers." So, we represent Christ, speak the Truth God gives us, and let the Holy Spirit direct as He will.

Indeed. But my resistance to argument here, which has been construed by some to be indifference to the salvation of souls, is precisely because I desire them to come back, or that I desire that others will "join up." At any rate, it seems as though I cannot truly win in either case. On one hand, I am believed to come to proselytize, which is most certainly not true. And on the other hand, when I do not proselytize as expected, I am believed to not care about people. So I like you last statement. I am here to be myself, and to defend my faith against misrepresentation. In so doing, I believe that I am doing God's work, and it is up to men individually to do with anything I say what they will.

Peace to you.

 

[prisonchaplain]

As Ran77 points out, it is not in any attribute of himself that God progresses. Rather, He adds glory upon glory unto himself endlessly. I suppose that I'm using the verb "to progress" in the sense that God moves toward and accomplishes an objective eternally, rather than that he impoves eternally. Does that make sense?

Well, let's see if I'm understanding. Do you believe that God DID progress, in his nature, UNTIL He became perfect? If so, NOW that God is perfect, He only "progresses" in terms of his continuing to DO (creating, etc.)?

I don't believe that He evolved into God in any way. Perhaps this idea is tied to the idea of "progression," which I've pointed out was, I believe, misunderstood?

Was God always perfect? I understood the part of Snow's couplet that says "As man once was..." means that God was once a man, like us, and therefore not perfect? Have I misunderstood the teaching?

It isn't a qualifier. It is a forum courtesy. Discussions often devolve into arguments because we perceive that our God is being belittled. My recognition of your God as God keeps the discussion on track, because we don't spend so much time defending the Godhood of our Gods.

I got it. You're being polite. In my drive to be clear, I'm sometimses overy direct.

True enough. Were we to attempt to achieve such under our own power, we'd never get there. We are raised up to such an exalted status by a God who wills to do so, and who has power to do so. Much like forgiveness/new birth is an act of God's will on our behalf, so is the exaltation of His children. Again, evolution has no part in the equation whatsoever, in my understanding.

Again, the reference to some kind of evolution. You're right. It doesn't equate. And it's not what we believe.

I use the word "evolution" not in a Darwinian sense, but simply to mean advancement, or progression. Computers have evolved rapidly, becoming more powerful and less expensive (thus more accessible). Likewise, I perceive your doctrine to be that faithful believers will, by God's power, become much more than they are--"gods."

I'd go a bit further and say that what makes truth of any kind attractive is the sincerity of the person. Lies are attractive, and so are some liars. But they are certainly not sincere. So wouldn't a true Christian be attractive on account of his sincerity?

I do sometimes worry that people in general, and myself sometimes, can be attracted to attributes other than sincerity--to the point that we are willing to overlook the nagging of the Holy Spirit that tells us there is insincerity.

Indeed. But my resistance to argument here, which has been construed by some to be indifference to the salvation of souls, is precisely because I desire them to come back, or that I desire that others will "join up." At any rate, it seems as though I cannot truly win in either case. On one hand, I am believed to come to proselytize, which is most certainly not true. And on the other hand, when I do not proselytize as expected, I am believed to not care about people. So I like you last statement. I am here to be myself, and to defend my faith against misrepresentation. In so doing, I believe that I am doing God's work, and it is up to men individually to do with anything I say what they will.

Peace to you.

IMHO, if you do as you intend, you do win.

 

[prisonchaplain]

It will help you understand this point if you consider what it is that LDS believe that God progresses. LDS do not consider God to be progressing in perfection, since He already has it. Nor in knowledge, since He is all knowing. God progresses in His works and His glory. He can continue to create and can continue in His loving mission to mankind, where ever they may be.

So, God progressed in his nature until He became perfect, and then, he only progressed in terms of his works?

Again, it will help if you consider the LDS beliefs on the topic. I have not heard that the Father sets His spirit free to be omnipresence. In fact, I am not familiar with any LDS teaching that God is omnipresent as you are presenting it. Certainly, we believe that God influece is everywhere and His ability to know what is happening everywhere and act upon the events everywhere, but I do not understand that to mean that it can only be accomplished by Him physically being everywhere.

I want to be sure I have this right. Today, God is all-knowing--and yet He is not omnipresent? Is that right?

 

[Rescued One]

Prisonchaplain, the LDS I meet online seldom claim to believe that Heavenly Father advanced or progressed to become God. That is what was taught when I was LDS.

And it is still being taught whether or not all LDS accept it:

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught: "When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the Gospel--you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348).

This is the way our Heavenly Father became God.

(Gospel Principles, 1992 Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. p. 305)

Gospel Principles

1 God Was Once a Man
As We Are Now
When he was a young man, Lorenzo Snow was promised by the Lord through the Patriarch to the Church that through obedience to the gospel he could become as great as God, “and you cannot wish to be greater”(Eliza R. Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow, pp. 9-10).

President Lorenzo Snow recorded this experience that occurred when he was still a young elder: “The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me—the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun shone at noon-day, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man.” Elder Snow expressed this new found understanding in these words: “As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be.” Later the Prophet Joseph Smith assured him: “Brother Snow, that is true gospel doctrine, and it is a revelation from God to you” (quoted by LeRoi C. Snow, in “Devotion to Divine Inspiration,” Improvement Era, June 1919, pp. 651-56).

The Prophet Joseph Smith said:
“...It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth” (Teachings, pp. 345-46; italics in original).

President Brigham Young elaborated on this concept: “It must be that God knows something about temporal things, and has a body and been on an earth; were it not so He would not know how to judge men righteously, according to the temptations and sins they have had to contend with” (as cited by Harold B. Lee, in Conference Report, Apr. 1969, p. 130; or Improvement Era, June 1969, p. 104).
Search These Commandments, Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, Copyright 1984, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, p. 151-152

So, how did Christ become God?

"He is the Firstborn of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked Him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent while yet in His pre-existent state."
Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 129

Jesus was not like His Father in Heaven at first. He did not know all the things His Father knew, and He did not have all the power and glory His Father had. Jesus tried hard to be like His Father. Gradually He received the power and glory of His Father.
“Chapter 33: A Revelation about Jesus Christ: May 1833,” Doctrine and Covenants Stories, p. 126

What things must we do to have the kind of life our Father in Heaven has?
To obtain eternal life means to become like Heavenly Father, to live like Him, and to receive a fulness of joy. You can receive eternal life if you abide by the same laws as God and do the things He does.
God Loveth His Children, 1167634800000
LDS.org - Lessons Chapter - God Loveth His Children

But the Lord does his work according to eternal principles and eternal laws. While he is a God of love, he is also a God of order. He does not deviate from the established principles and laws, because they are right in the first place. And he and they are the same yesterday, today, and forever.
ElRay L. Christiansen, “The Laws of God Are Blessings,” Ensign, May 1975, 23

 

[superwimp]

Hello Zechariah,

you>>>If, according to non-LDS Christian theologies, God doesn't change, then why does tithing vary among the churches of Christendom, and why is it different than the tithing from the OT? Why do the many churches within Christendom have differing (and sometimes changing) views where diet is concerned, and why do they not keep the dietary laws given through Moses? Why, for most of the churches in Christendom, is the Sabbath now on Sunday from midnight to midnight rather than on Saturday from sundown to sundown?<<<

With regards to all of these questions your free to go to any of the Christian sections, or to a Christian forum and ask the participants there.

Softspoken stated the following>>>
Your view that the LDS God (the Father) changes is also interesting. You see, I do not understand that He changes. He is God. He does not change. His laws will not change. His attirbutes will not change. His mercy will not change. His justice will not change. Nothing about Him will change. And the "progression" spoken of is not that of increasing in intelligence, for He knows all. It is not increasing in power, for He has all power. It is nothing more than the adding to Himself of glory upon glory eternally, through the exaltation of his creation (man). I don't see how that could possibly be construed as man exalting himself at the expense of God. God exalts man because it is His will to do so, by which He adds glory to Himself.<<<

Do you consider the above to be Mormon doctrine? If you do then respond to my question. If not than say it isn't mormon doctrine. What other religions do is irrelevent.

>>>Being arrested (or murdered for that matter) is not requisite to being a servant of the Lord, as can be seen with a number of Old Testament prophets, but that doesn't mean that their lives were not placed in danger then, or now.<<<

If you want to claim that the president of your church is a servant of the lord then I wouldn't necesarily agree or disagree. That isn't the claim you make for him. You claim he's a prophet. In the OT we don't have the complete biography of all the prophets, but the little we know about them it seems that putting themselves in harms way to deliver a message to those in power was a common occurance.

 

[SoftSpoken]

Well, let's see if I'm understanding. Do you believe that God DID progress, in his nature, UNTIL He became perfect? If so, NOW that God is perfect, He only "progresses" in terms of his continuing to DO (creating, etc.)?

Was God always perfect? I understood the part of Snow's couplet that says "As man once was..." means that God was once a man, like us, and therefore not perfect? Have I misunderstood the teaching?

I use the word "evolution" not in a Darwinian sense, but simply to mean advancement, or progression. Computers have evolved rapidly, becoming more powerful and less expensive (thus more accessible). Likewise, I perceive your doctrine to be that faithful believers will, by God's power, become much more than they are--"gods."

All of these comments/questions I think hover over the same concept here, so I'll address them as best I can in a lump. Let's start with this teaching of Joseph Smith:

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!" (Teachings, p. 345)

If that statement is true then the question becomes, "If God was once as I am now (a mortal man), and is now an exalted man (God... omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, etc.), how did he get that way?" If I'm understanding your questions correctly, you are under the impression that God "evolved" or "progressed" to the point that he became God. And I am doing my best to point out that such is not the case. I'll enlist Joseph Smith once more to help me explain it. Joseph also taught:

"As the Father hath power in himself, so hath the Son power in himself, to lay down his life and take it again... The Son doeth what he hath seen the Father do: then the Father hath some day laid down his life and taken it again..." (Teachings, p. 312)

There is, in LDS theology, no way for us to exalt ourselves. We have no power to do any such thing. Therefore if God was once like us, and is now exalted, then the way He arrived at such a status can be one of only two possibilities:
1. He, like the Savior, had power in himself to raise himself from mortal death to eternal life.
2. He was raised from mortal death to eternal life by someone who had such power.

Either way, He did not evolve or progress to Godhood. And neither can we. As you point out, if we attain godhood it is not by our own power. God raises us up... exalts us... by His power and in accordance with His will. And in so doing He personally progresses toward and achieves His eternal purposes of immortalizing and exalting (granting eternal life to) His children. His purpose is a never-ending round—a work of endless creation and exaltation.

Does that help?

I do sometimes worry that people in general, and myself sometimes, can be attracted to attributes other than sincerity--to the point that we are willing to overlook the nagging of the Holy Spirit that tells us there is insincerity.

Your concern is very well founded. All of us, by virtue of our fallen nature, are, in one degree or another, predisposed to find appealing various grades of falsehood. And so that "nagging" of the Holy Spirit cannot and should not be squelched.

IMHO, if you do as you intend, you do win.

Indeed.

 

[Ran77]

So, God progressed in his nature until He became perfect, and then, he only progressed in terms of his works?

I did not indicate that He progressed in nature until He became perfect. That is something you have added to my statement. I stated that He is already perfect and progresses in work and glory.

I want to be sure I have this right. Today, God is all-knowing--and yet He is not omnipresent? Is that right?

That seems a simplification of my statement. God is not omnipresent in the sense that most Christians consider Him to literally be physically present everywhere at once. He is omnipresent in the sense that His power and influence is everywhere as well as His ability to see and know what is going on at all times (of course that actually falls under the category of omnisceince).

Do you think a person has to be physically in a location to know what is going on there? Can mortal people, who do not have God's powers, know what is going on in a place distant from themselves?

 

[Rescued One]

... Joseph also taught:

"As the Father hath power in himself, so hath the Son power in himself, to lay down his life and take it again... The Son doeth what he hath seen the Father do: then the Father hath some day laid down his life and taken it again..." (Teachings, p. 312)

There is, in LDS theology, no way for us to exalt ourselves. We have no power to do any such thing. Therefore if God was once like us, and is now exalted, then the way He arrived at such a status can be one of only two possibilities:
1. He, like the Savior, had power in himself to raise himself from mortal death to eternal life.
2. He was raised from mortal death to eternal life by someone who had such power.

Who raised the Son?

1. Acts 10 : 39-40 &#8212; God raised Christ from the dead.
2. 1 Thessalonians 1 : 10 &#8212; God the Father raised the Son from the dead.
3. Romans 8 : 11 &#8212; God the Spirit raised the Son from the dead.
4. John 2 : 19-22 &#8212; God the Son raised Himself from the dead.

THE SOURCE OF PRIESTHOOD POWER. Jesus Christ is the great High Priest of God; Christ is therefore the source of all true priesthood authority and power on this earth (Heb. 5-10). Man does not take such priesthood power unto himself; it must be conferred by God through his servants (Heb. 5:4; D&C 1:38).

Before the world was created, Jesus Christ, the great Jehovah and firstborn of God the Father in the spirit world, covenanted to use the power he had obtained from the Father to implement God's program for the eternal happiness of all God's children (cf. TPJS, p. 190).
Priesthood - The Encyclopedia of Mormonism

Either way, He did not evolve or progress to Godhood. And neither can we. As you point out, if we attain godhood it is not by our own power.

Is the priesthood power not involved?

The priesthood is the eternal power and authority of God. Through the priesthood God created and governs the heavens and the earth. Through this power He redeems and exalts His children, bringing to pass "the immortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39). God gives priesthood authority to worthy male members of the Church so they can act in His name for the salvation of His children. Priesthood holders can be authorized to preach the gospel, administer the ordinances of salvation, and govern the kingdom of God on the earth.
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.j...urceId=ab839daac5d98010VgnVCM1000004d82620a__

God raises us up... exalts us... by His power and in accordance with His will.

Is His will obedient to eternal laws?


"The book of Abraham also contributes to our knowledge of the nature of our spiritual life. We learn that in premortal life we existed as individuals (intelligences that were organized) and that there was a gradation in intelligence and nobleness in that premortal world.

"This insight profoundly affects how we think of ourselves, our children, and others around us as we come to understand that earthly heredity and environment are not the only ways to explain individual behavior. It helps to know that man, in becoming something here, starts out in mortality with personality and certain predispositions. This account of Creation makes it clear that man is not merely a blank tablet provided by heredity upon which environment writes. Each of us comes into the world as a unique spirit with a capacity for becoming what our Creator is, in whose image we are formed.

"We also learn from the Abrahamic account that the intelligence and nobility we developed in the premortal world were fundamental to the callings and assignments we were given before we came into the mortal world: Jehovah was called to be God&#8217;s Only Begotten in the Flesh, with everything that implied, and Abraham was among those whom the Lord called to be his rulers. (See Abr. 3:23.) This explains the Lord&#8217;s comment to Jeremiah that before he came &#8220;forth out of the womb&#8221; he was ordained a prophet. (Jer. 1:4&#8211;5.) Joseph Smith said that all who have callings here in mortality received them in premortality. (See Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1938, p. 365.)"

Keith Meservy, &#8220;Four Accounts of the Creation,&#8221; Ensign, Jan. 1986, p. 50

Did Heavenly Father's spirit children have priesthood power in premortality?

Contributions of the Temple Account

It is in the temple account of the Creation that we learn that Adam is Michael, who helped Jehovah in the Creation. Elder Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: &#8220;Adam helped to form this earth. He labored with our Savior Jesus Christ. I have a strong &#8230; conviction that there were others also who assisted them. Perhaps Noah and Enoch; and why not Joseph Smith, and those who were appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed?&#8221; (Doctrines of Salvation, 1:75.)


If Christ obtained His power from His Father, what would prevent other priesthood holders from obtaining like power?

 

[prisonchaplain]

Ran77 & Softspoken, taking your two explanations together, you seem to be saying the following:

1. God is perfect. He was once a man, meaning one of two possibilities. A. God the Father, once died for the sins of creation, just as Jesus died for ours. He then resurrected. B. The Father was The Son, and his Father sent Him, just as our Heavenly Father sent Jesus.

2. God may not be physically or spiritually omnipresent, but he is aware of all that is happening everywhere? BTW, is that not an incredibly fine line between our saying that God is spiritually omnipresent, and your saying his intelligence is omnipresent?