An interesting approach to the Book of Mormon

[Peter_John]

In the eternity in which He has created us and placed us, He is omnipotent, the same eternal, unchangeable God from all eternity to all eternity, so there was not a “progress” needed nor a need to “get a spirit”. We don’t know how He “has progeny”, but the Bible is clear that He does.

Then explain this to me: In your Faith the essence of our being – our intelligence – has always existed. Because of this He cannot act upon us without our consent: we are personal soveeigns, and He has helped raise us to a higher level of existence as Hic children. How does that make God omnipotent even i this Eternity?

Unless we believe that our very consciousness, our intelligence, was created by God we cannot appreciate that we do have free agency, but because God wants us too instead of because of our personal sovereignty. Since being co-eternal with God would mean personal sovereignty, one cannot believe in both that and God’s omnipotence. The two ideas are mutually exclusive.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

Hi, again.

The words “independently of God” would have any of a number of meanings. Of course I don’t believe I exist “independently of God”. Of course I also know that when God banishes Satan and the fallen angels to Outer Darkness for all eternity forward, then that does not mean they will then exist “independently of God”. It means they will be sent where God sends them, and they will then exist in a condition forever where they have no contact with God, so it could be said that they will exist “independently of God” in that He has no more to do with them forever, and yet it will be because their choices placed them in a permanently condemned situation where they still exist but have abject horror, and God will have sent them there.

To say that an “intelligence” was in existence before God created a spirit from that intelligence, certainly says that that spirit is dependent upon God for that spirit’s existence. God could have made a person out of a rock, and placed a spirit in that person and thus created life from the rock. The question you seem to want answered is “where did the spirit come from” and you assume that it came from nothing, just presto here it was by God’s hand. The Latter-day Saint view that an intelligence did not come from “nothing” doesn’t imply that an intelligence could progress by itself, create itself into a spirit, have progeny, or act in any way independent of God. It means God took something that was capable of enlargement, and did so–enlarged its possibilities and gave it free will choice to make progress if it chose to do so. God was still the Creator of the spirit in this enlargement, and Christ is still the Light and Life of the universe and the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and the Holy One who makes the Father’s plan of salvation possible.

Then you acknowledge believing that some things exist that God did not create, and some of those things have free wills of their own accord. He needs their consent to do anything with them. Is that correct?

 

[ParkerD]

Then you acknowledge believing that some things exist that God did not create, and some of those things have free wills of their own accord. He needs their consent to do anything with them. Is that correct?

Peter John,

Some things existed in a chaotic, disorganized and non-progressive form before God took those “things” and created them into an organized form and gave spirits free will choice. This free will choice is a precious gift, but it does not mean “He needs their consent to do anything with them.” That is incorrect–read Isaiah. God allows spirits and men to think that they exist independent of God and that they are triumphant in doing certain things which God allows them to do–but the prophetic assurance is there all along that not only are they not independent of God, but that God has used them to bring about His plan and His work and glory even when they have had thoughts of “independence from God”.

Eventually, Isaiah assures us that there will be a day of reckoning and there will be a turnaround when those who thought they were so great (typified by such terms as “Babylon” or “Egypt” or “Assyrians” have the comeuppance where those whom they thought they had triumphed over, will have been “quietly victorious” and the majesty of Zion will have prevailed on the earth in the end.

As far as God granting free will choice, He does that as a gift to us and to all. His wish that we follow His will does not mean that He obligates us to follow His will. We are in a position where we can learn that following His will is the best action for us to do, and the happiest way for us to live.

 

[ParkerD]

Unless we believe that our very consciousness, our intelligence, was created by God we cannot appreciate that we do have free agency, but because God wants us too instead of because of our personal sovereignty. Since being co-eternal with God would mean personal sovereignty, one cannot believe in both that and God’s omnipotence. The two ideas are mutually exclusive.

I completely disagree with that logic. One should read Isaiah several times. We are the clay, and He is the potter, but He allows us to choose whatever belief and whatever way we want to look at ourselves and our world that we want to do.

Some will have a “dream world” where they go to bed thinking they have been “triumphant” but when they wake up in the morning their triumph will have been seen to be only in their mind and Zion will triumph over them–but it will be done quietly and without their even knowing or realizing it until the very end.

 

[Peter_John]

I completely disagree with that logic. One should read Isaiah several times. We are the clay, and He is the potter, but He allows us to choose whatever belief and whatever way we want to look at ourselves and our world that we want to do.

Some will have a “dream world” where they go to bed thinking they have been “triumphant” but when they wake up in the morning their triumph will have been seen to be only in their mind and Zion will triumph over them–but it will be done quietly and without their even knowing or realizing it until the very end.

We ar the clay. He is the Potter. He made the clay.

Do you believe that any part of you exists independent of God? If you believe your intelligence is co-eternal and not created by God, then you do believe that part of you exists independent of Him. That part of you has its own inherent and sovereign will, and while you could not choose to exist, God did not make the essence of who you were to begin with. That is like the pot telling the potter “You made me not.”

In Catholicism we believe that we did not choose to exist, because we did not exist until God created us. In Mormonism you believe that you existed eternally with God, and he let you choose to allow him to elevate you to a higher level. Had you not so chosen, He could not have done it. That is not omnipotence.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

Some things existed in a chaotic, disorganized and non-progressive form before God took those “things” and created them into an organized form and gave spirits free will choice. This free will choice is a precious gift, but it does not mean “He needs their consent to do anything with them.” That is incorrect–read Isaiah. God allows spirits and men to think that they exist independent of God and that they are triumphant in doing certain things which God allows them to do–but the prophetic assurance is there all along that not only are they not independent of God, but that God has used them to bring about His plan and His work and glory even when they have had thoughts of “independence from God”.

Eventually, Isaiah assures us that there will be a day of reckoning and there will be a turnaround when those who thought they were so great (typified by such terms as “Babylon” or “Egypt” or “Assyrians” have the comeuppance where those whom they thought they had triumphed over, will have been “quietly victorious” and the majesty of Zion will have prevailed on the earth in the end.

As far as God granting free will choice, He does that as a gift to us and to all. His wish that we follow His will does not mean that He obligates us to follow His will. We are in a position where we can learn that following His will is the best action for us to do, and the happiest way for us to live.

So God cannot create matter from nothing. All the matter he created with already existed – so what gave him a right to use it? It must be more powerful than him if it exists independent of him. He can shape it, but it doesn’t belong to him. And all these floating intelligences that existed with him without beginning, how do they only have free agency because he gives it to them? Did he force them into spirit bodies and then say, “Now do what you want, choose right and you can get a physical body,” or did they have a choice whether or not to move up?

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

Hi, again.

The words “independently of God” would have any of a number of meanings. Of course I don’t believe I exist “independently of God”. Of course I also know that when God banishes Satan and the fallen angels to Outer Darkness for all eternity forward, then that does not mean they will then exist “independently of God”. It means they will be sent where God sends them, and they will then exist in a condition forever where they have no contact with God, so it could be said that they will exist “independently of God” in that He has no more to do with them forever, and yet it will be because their choices placed them in a permanently condemned situation where they still exist but have abject horror, and God will have sent them there.

To say that an “intelligence” was in existence before God created a spirit from that intelligence, certainly says that that spirit is dependent upon God for that spirit’s existence. God could have made a person out of a rock, and placed a spirit in that person and thus created life from the rock. The question you seem to want answered is “where did the spirit come from” and you assume that it came from nothing, just presto here it was by God’s hand. The Latter-day Saint view that an intelligence did not come from “nothing” doesn’t imply that an intelligence could progress by itself, create itself into a spirit, have progeny, or act in any way independent of God. It means God took something that was capable of enlargement, and did so–enlarged its possibilities and gave it free will choice to make progress if it chose to do so. God was still the Creator of the spirit in this enlargement, and Christ is still the Light and Life of the universe and the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and the Holy One who makes the Father’s plan of salvation possible.

The simple question: Do you believe that all intelligence is co-eternal with God, and that before being a spirit you so existed, as Joseph Smith taight? Or do you reject this teaching of Joseph Smith?

 

[ParkerD]

The simple question: Do you believe that all intelligence is co-eternal with God, and that before being a spirit you so existed, as Joseph Smith taight? Or do you reject this teaching of Joseph Smith?

Peter John,

It seems we’ve gone in circles with several of your questions. Here are simple answers:

“Co-eternal with God” does not mean “organized” nor does it mean “not organized by God”. It means that intelligences were unorganized before God organized them and brought forth spirits through creation into spirits.

It is something I don’t think about at all, zero, “that before being a spirit I so existed”. All that means to me is that Satan was not created from nothing by God, and therefore God is not the author of Satan’s rebellion. I think that anyone who thinks God created Satan from nothing and then says they somehow think God gave Satan free will choice and yet isn’t ultimately responsible if indeed He created Satan from nothing and placed every attribute of Satan’s personality and character traits into his spirit, then that particular “anyone” has chosen not to follow the trail to the source.

If you pick up the end point, you have only to follow that end point to its beginning and figure out who started the beginning point in order to understand the end point.

So I don’t reject the teaching of Joseph Smith–but I happen to understand it.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

It seems we’ve gone in circles with several of your questions. Here are simple answers:

“Co-eternal with God” does not mean “organized” nor does it mean “not organized by God”. It means that intelligences were unorganized before God organized them and brought forth spirits through creation into spirits.

It is something I don’t think about at all, zero, “that before being a spirit I so existed”. All that means to me is that Satan was not created from nothing by God, and therefore God is not the author of Satan’s rebellion. I think that anyone who thinks God created Satan from nothing and then says they somehow think God gave Satan free will choice and yet isn’t ultimately responsible if indeed He created Satan from nothing and placed every attribute of Satan’s personality and character traits into his spirit, then that particular “anyone” has chosen not to follow the trail to the source.

If you pick up the end point, you have only to follow that end point to its beginning and figure out who started the beginning point in order to understand the end point.

So I don’t reject the teaching of Joseph Smith–but I happen to understand it.

Does co-eternal mean that you existed autonomously before God took any action upon you?

 

[JeanMichel]

You state you believe that God is omnipotent. Do you believe that any part of you exists independently of God? Do you believe, as Joseph Smith affirmed, that we are all co-eternal with God? If so, you cannot completely trust in God’s omnipotence. If you believe yourself self-existent, as Joseph Smith taught we are, than you cannot believe God is omnipotent, as he only has any just power over you if you allow it. It means that our free-agency is required of God, instead of a gift from him.

I am curious Peter John, do you think if Mormons believed as you say they do does the Atonement of Jesus become negated? In other words, is Jesus’ blood become ineffectual in offering Grace to Mormons?

Also, do you think these beliefs prevent God from hearing their prayers? When does the power of God become impotent resulting directly to the incorrect beliefs of his children on earth?

On the other hand, IF God is capable of saving his children even when they possess an incorrect understanding of His Being, what is gained by a complete grasp of His Being? Further, do you think any of us can gain a complete understanding of His Being? If not, and all of us are incapable of gaining a complete understanding of His Being, meaning all fall short of full comprehension, what does it matter that some have a slightly better understanding than others?

 

[Peter_John]

All that means to me is that Satan was not created from nothing by God, and therefore God is not the author of Satan’s rebellion. I think that anyone who thinks God created Satan from nothing and then says they somehow think God gave Satan free will choice and yet isn’t ultimately responsible if indeed He created Satan from nothing and placed every attribute of Satan’s personality and character traits into his spirit, then that particular “anyone” has chosen not to follow the trail to the source.

So you affirm that God is neither omnipotent nor omniscient?

You affirm that Satan is a self-existing entity, predisposed to oppose God.
You state that were this not so God would be responsible for Satan’s rebellion.
Instead you say God organized Satan from a self-existant form into a higher form.
You affirm this makes God not responsible for Satan’s rebellion.

However, if God knew that Satan was predisposed to rebellion he would be just as responsible for Satan’s rebellion by organizing him into a higher form as if he had created him in the first place. Therefore, you have to believe in a less than omniscient God. Since you affirm God only has power to organize pre-existing matter and intelligence, then you do not believe that God has the power to create from nothing. This God is neither omnipotent nor omniscient.

 

[ParkerD]

Does co-eternal mean that you existed autonomously before God took any action upon you?

No, of course not. Is a cell “autonomous” from the standpoint of God’s omnipotence? Is a molecule “autonomous” from that standpoint? An intelligence is a pre-cursor to a spirit being–there wasn’t some voluntary action on the part of the intelligence to say “please make me into a spirit”. God was and is the Creator, who created spirits from intelligences and thus placed them into an organized condition where they could begin to be enlarged through making choices and following the truths and the Light in their universe given to them by God. But it means we have free will choice which began than and continues now.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Is the Mormon god autonomous from who or what created him?

 

[Peter_John]

I am curious Peter John, do you think if Mormons believed as you say they do does the Atonement of Jesus become negated? In other words, is Jesus’ blood become ineffectual in offering Grace to Mormons?

Also, do you think these beliefs prevent God from hearing their prayers? When does the power of God become impotent resulting directly to the incorrect beliefs of his children on earth?

On the other hand, IF God is capable of saving his children even when they possess an incorrect understanding of His Being, what is gained by a complete grasp of His Being? Further, do you think any of us can gain a complete understanding of His Being? If not, and all of us are incapable of gaining a complete understanding of His Being, meaning all fall short of full comprehension, what does it matter that some have a slightly better understanding than others?

An effective understanding of God’s nature requires first recognition of His omnipotence and omniscience. A perception of His nature that limits either His power or His knowledge – that places God in a position in which there is anything He can 't do or anything He must do creates a neither omnipotent nor omniscient God. If any part of any of us was not created by God to begin with, God has no inerrant power over that portion, no matter how small, without our consent. That then becomes something we have the inherent ability to deny God. That makes us more powerful than God in that thing. If we exist as independent entities co-eternal with God, even if not organized, He cannot give us free-agency, because we already have it. We have personal sovereignty.

Deeper in Mormon application of these teachings, God is relatively powerless, as there may be an infinite number of other gods on equal or higher standing than him, some on whom his status depends “Do you think that you could ever/Through all eternity/find out the generation/When gods began to be.” (Eliza R. Snow [a plural widowe of Joseph Smith] in “If You Could Hie to Kolob”, considered a prayer, as part of the LDS Hymnal. By LDS scripture the hymnal is a prayerbook [Doctrine & Covenants 25:12])

To answer your first question, despite their Book of Moprmon’s claims to the contrary, Mormons do not believe in Grace. Forgiveness has to be earned in Mormonism. Murderers cannot be forgiven in this life. So I do not have to say that their definition of God has any nullification of Grace. By their own definition it does. Since according to the Catechism denial of Salvation constitutes blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, the definition becomes very important.

In 2001 the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (led by then Cardinal Ratzinger) and Pope John Paul II found the crucial implications of the difference in belief sufficient to declare that Mormon baptism is not valid. It considers almost all denomination’s baptisms as valid. This does not mean they cannot receive grace through the baptism of desire, because accepted or not grace is a matter of God’s own pleasure – it just means the teachings leave many people fighting Grace.

 

[Peter_John]

No, of course not. Is a cell “autonomous” from the standpoint of God’s omnipotence? Is a molecule “autonomous” from that standpoint? An intelligence is a pre-cursor to a spirit being–there wasn’t some voluntary action on the part of the intelligence to say “please make me into a spirit”. God was and is the Creator, who created spirits from intelligences and thus placed them into an organized condition where they could begin to be enlarged through making choices and following the truths and the Light in their universe given to them by God. But it means we have free will choice which began than and continues now.

That response is self-contradictory. First you state that you do not believe you existed autonomously, then you say that the intelligence existed before God did anything to it. Did God creat the intelligence, or does the intelligence exist on its own?

 

[Peter_John]

Also, do you think these beliefs prevent God from hearing their prayers? When does the power of God become impotent resulting directly to the incorrect beliefs of his children on earth?

I think God hears the deep unspoken and unacknowledged prayers ofatheists. I think that when pagans make offerings to the Sun and Moon God recognizes the intent in those prayers as if to him, and it is his pleasure how he responds. I think that when Native Americans sweat and pray to the Creator, He recognizes that as a prayer to Him. When Muslim’s pray to Allah, same thing, or Jews to Yahweh.

Nothing we do can make God’s power impotent. What we can do is unwittingly limit our own faith by limiting our perception of God’s power. It is harder for us to have confidence in God’s ability to respond if in any degree we consider his power or knowledge limited.

 

[Arandur]

In the Mormon concept of God, can God create or destroy “intelligences?”
Is there anything that God cannot (or did not) create or destroy?

And what does it mean for Jesus to be God’s “only begotten” son? (Yes, it’s related to the other two questions, but I’ll explain after some answers)

 

[SteveVH]

In the Mormon concept of God, can God create or destroy “intelligences?”
Is there anything that God cannot (or did not) create or destroy?

And what does it mean for Jesus to be God’s “only begotten” son? (Yes, it’s related to the other two questions, but I’ll explain after some answers)

They do not believe He can create or destroy matter, much less this vague concept of “intelligences”. He is subject to the laws of physics, they believe, and since man can neither create or destroy matter or energy, then neither can God. Remember, they believe He began as a man, just like us. He is dependant upon what He finds around Him and does not create, in the normal sense of the word, rather He organizes existing “stuff” and fashions it into into something else. He is not the first cause of all that exists.

Bottom line, their god is not our God.

 

[Peter_John]

In the Mormon concept of God, can God create or destroy “intelligences?”
Is there anything that God cannot (or did not) create or destroy?

And what does it mean for Jesus to be God’s “only begotten” son? (Yes, it’s related to the other two questions, but I’ll explain after some answers)

I will respond that SteveVH has anwered the first part of your question fairly thoroughly. ParkerD or flyonthewall would probably be the better one to answer it, though ParkerD tends to frame responses to such issues in a sucha manner as to make it seem that he may not believe it as StevVH describes, without ever outright denying that it is what he believes. he won’t make a yes or no answer.

Regarding the meaning of “Only Begotten Son” it means that he is the only person born on Earth for whome God was physically, as in biologically the father. Everyone they believe existed as spiritua;l sons and daughters of God in His presence before coming to Earth. The LDS musical “Saturday’s Warrior” is actually a good cultural exposition on this theme.

 

[Arandur]

I am well aware of what most Mormons believe. I like to let them speak for themselves, though, which is why I’m waiting for ParkerD or others to respond.

In my experience, I’ve found that there’s majority Mormon belief, and then a broad variety of other viewpoints among them that differ vastly; these can make discussions with Mormons about their beliefs very…slippery, and hard to nail down. That’s why I’d like to hear answers to these questions from the current LDS participants to see what avenue we’d like to go down here.