Eternal Progression with DSI analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter mormon_fool
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mormon_fool

Guest
There seems to be some recent discussion difficulties in establishing just what is binding doctrine, what is a solid interpretation of this binding doctrine, what is midrashic and non -binding, but neverthe less a solid understanding, what beliefs are odds with authoritative teachings, but nevertheless permissable in the LDS church, what ideas are widely disagreed on, what speculation is helpful or unhelpful, and what is a downright mischaracterization of mormon beliefs in the regards to eternal progression.

So I propose to present and analyze mormon sources where potential docrine might be found. This narrows the focus down somewhat. For example we can’t analyze how doctrinal “Mormons believe they can become gods of their own planet and create spirit babies.” is because this exaxt quote is not found anywhere in mormon literature, but it probably can be readily found in anti-mormon literature. No, we need to start from an actual mormon source, interpret it and see how closely such a formulation matches.

First I will cite some LDS scriptures on the topic. Everyone is welcome to join in and cite their favorite ones. When we analyze the DSI score, we need to make adjustments for how frequently this passage is quoted approvingly by recent authorities and whether its interpretation to support certain tenants is straight-forward or if secondary sources are needed to extract details that support some tenant of belief.

[con’t]
 
Descriptions of God the Father’s state of being and Progress
Moses 1: 39 to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life.
Gen. 1: 27 God created man in his own image.
D&C 130: 22 Father has a body of flesh and bones.
2 Ne. 9: 20 God . . . knoweth all things, and there is not anything save he knows.
D&C 76: 70 even the glory of God, the highest of all.
D&C 76: 4 From eternity to eternity he is the same.
D&C 20: 17 God in heaven, who is infinite and eternal.
D&C 19: 6-11 I am endless. [definitions of eternal, endless given]
Abr. 3: 18 [God is the most intelligent spirit of them all.]
1 Cor. 8: 6 there are gods many. . .to us there is but one God.
John 5:19 The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do
Rev 1:16 And hath made us kings and priests unto* God and his Father.

*** Descriptions of Jesus’s state of being and Progress
John 1: 1 In the beginning was the Word . . . and the Word was God.
D&C 93: 21 I was . . . with the Father, and am the Firstborn.
Abr. 3: 27 Whom shall I send . . . the Son of Man: Here am I, send me.
D&C 76: 24 by him . . . the worlds are and were created.
Ether 3: 16 Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit;
John 8: 58 Before Abraham was, I am.
1 Ne. 19: 10 God of Abraham . . . yieldeth himself . . . into the hands of wicked men.
D&C 93: 21 I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace
John 14: 28 my* Father* is greater than I.
Matt. 26: 39 not as I will, but as thou wilt.
John 17: 21 That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me.
1 Pet. 3: 19 preached unto the spirits in prison.
Luke 24: 39 for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
John 20: 17 I ascend unto my Father, and your Father.
Acts 10: 40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly.

We are spirit children of God the Father created from always existing “intelligence”.
Ps. 82: 6 ye are gods, and all of you are children of the most High.
Eccl. 12: 7 spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Acts 17: 29 we are the offspring of God.
Heb. 12: 9 in subjection unto the Father of spirits.
D&C 131: 7 All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure.
Moses 3: 5 created all things . . . spiritually, before they were naturally.
Moses 6: 51 I made the world, and men before they were in the flesh.
D&C 93: 29 Man was also in the beginning with God.
Abr. 3: 22 intelligences that were organized before the world was.
 
Conditions, events, and proof-texts for the premortal existence
Job 38: 7all the sons of God shouted for joy.
Jer. 1: 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee.
John 9: 2 who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind.
D&C 138: 56* before* they were born . . . received their first lessons.
Abr. 3: 26 they who keep their first estate shall be added upon;
Rev. 12: 7* war* in heaven.
Moses 4: 3 Satan* rebelled* against me.
D&C 29: 36 third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away.

Our progress in earth life
Abr. 3: 24 we will make an earth whereon these may dwell.
Abr. 3: 25* prove* them herewith to see if they will do all things.
Abr. 3: 26 they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon
Gen. 1: 28 replenish the earth, and subdue it.
Gen. 3: 5,22 ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Alma 12: 24 a probationary state, a time to prepare to meet God.
D&C 130: 18 whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life [we get to keep in afterlife]
**
Progress through death, spirit world, and judgement that assigns us to judgement in a kingdom of glory.**

James 2: 26 body without the spirit is dead.
Alma 40: 11 state of the soul between death and the resurrection.
D&C 138: 27 ministry among . . . dead was limited.
D&C 138: 54 ordinances . . . for the redemption of the dead.
Alma 12: 27after death, they must come to judgment.
D&C 76 Descriptions of Kingdoms of Glory: Celestial, Terrestrial, Telestial
D&C 138: 17 [the spirit and the body reunite] that they might receive a fulness of joy.

Celestial Kingdom activities
Rom. 8: 17 heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.
2 Pet. 1: 4 by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature.
Rev. 3: 21 him that overcometh will . . . sit with me in my throne.
3 Ne. 12: 48 I would that ye should be perfect even as I.
D&C 76: 58 they are gods, even the sons of God
D&C 93: 20 you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified.
D&C 131: 1-4 in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order.
D&C 132: 19glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds.
D&C 132: 20 shall they be gods, because they have all power.
D&C 132: 29-33 [eternal increase associated with the Abrahamic covenant]
 
Whew. It took me a while to assemble that list and Ialmost had it done once only to accidently erase it. Way too many scriptures to analyze individually for how frequently they are brought up in church meeting or how to interpret them to support a specific point. But I do want to remark how poor critics’ summary of eternal progression is in the quote I made up in my first post. They move right to little understood, speculative principles when there is a mass of binding doctrine in the scriptures that paints a solid picture of eternal progression.

Now we approach the problem of how to interpret these scriptures in a systematic way. Also how do we weigh the DSI of interptretive literature. First let me quote some stuff from two sources that have high base scores as awhole from doctrinal spectrum. As they are current, we can use them without a currency penalty, even if they are quoting older sources approvingly. Because the First Presidency had some oversight, these works can be used to show the older quotes are still appropriately affecting the beliefs of the LDS. The two sources I refer to our perhaps the works in LDS church that are most like the CCC, the Encyclopedia of Mormonism and Gospel Principles. Other sources that are in good circulation and somewhat systematic in approach are Talmage’s Articles of Faith and this Doctrine Manual. These sources are all higher DSI sources then, say Mormon Doctrine, Doctrines of Salvation, and the Journal of Discourses.

I will post what the Encyclopedia of Mormonism has to say on key topics.
 
Eternal Progression

The principle of eternal progression cannot be precisely defined or comprehended, yet it is fundamental to the LDS worldview. The phrase “eternal progression” first occurs in the discourses of Brigham Young. It embodies many concepts taught by Joseph Smith, especially in his King Follett discourse. It is based on the proposition that “there is no such thing as principle, power, wisdom, knowledge, life, position, or anything that can be imagined, that remains stationary-they must increase or decrease” (Young, JD 1:350).

Progression takes many forms. In one sense, eternal progression refers to everything that people learn and experience by their choices as they progress from premortal life, to mortality, to postmortal spirit life, and to a resurrected state in the presence of God. Personal progression is possible in each of these states, but not the same kind of progression. Progression apparently occurred in the premortal life, for most spirits there chose to follow Christ and some were noble and great, while others chose to follow Lucifer. Entering mortality affords opportunities for further progression. Obtaining a physical body is a crucial step, enabling a person to experience physical sensations of all kinds and to progress in knowledge and understanding, all of which will rise with the person in the Resurrection (D&C 130:18). Brigham Young taught that even in mortality, “We are in eternity” (JD 10:22), and the object of this existence is “to learn to enjoy more, and to increase in knowledge and experience” (JD 14:228). “When we have learned to live according to the full value of the life we now possess, we are prepared for further advancement in the scale of eternal progression-for a more glorious and exalted sphere” (JD 9:168).

Life is never static. “One must progress or retrograde. One cannot stand still. Activity is the law of growth, and growth, progress, is the law of life” (A. Bowen, in Christ’s Ideals for Living, O. Tanner, ed., Salt Lake City, 1980, p. 368). A person’s attitude about "“eternal progression’ will largely determine his philosophy of life exalting, increasing, expanding and extending broader and broader until we can know as we are known, see as we are seen” (Young, JD 16:165).

At the Resurrection and Judgment, people will be assigned a degree of glory. Further progress is believed possible within each degree. Marriage and family life, however, continue only in the Celestial Kingdom, allowing “eternal increase” through having spirit children (see Eternal Lives, Eternal Increase). “All this and more that cannot enter into our hearts to conceive is promised to the faithful, and are but so many stages in that ceaseless progression of eternal lives” (Young, JD 10:5).

No official Church teaching attempts to specify all the ways in which God progresses in his exalted spheres; “there is no end to [His] works, neither to [His] words” (Moses 1:38). God’s glory and power are enhanced as his children progress in glory and power (see Moses 1:39; Young, JD 10:5). Ideas have been advanced to explain how God might progress in knowledge and still be perfect and know all things (see Foreknowledge of God; Omnipotent God).

The concept of eternal progression is a salient feature of the gospel of Jesus Christ, readily distinguishable from traditional Christian theology. The philosophical views of the Middle Ages were basically incompatible with such a concept, and the idea of progress that emerged in the eighteenth-century Enlightenment was that of social evolution (Bury, The Idea of Progress, London, 1932). The traditional Christian view has held that those in heaven enter “a state of eternal, inactive joy. In the presence of God they would worship him and sing praises to him eternally, but nothing more” (Widtsoe, p. 142). Latter-day Saints, however, constantly seek personal and righteous improvement not only by establishing Zion in this world, but by anticipating the continuation of progression eternally.

Bibliography

Widtsoe, John A. “Is Progress Eternal or Is There Progress in Heaven?” IE 54 (Mar. 1951):142; see also Evidences and Reconciliations, pp. 179-85, Salt Lake City, 1960.
LISA RAMSEY ADAMS
 
Eternal Lives, Eternal Increase

“Eternal lives” is a term that refers to the right and power to beget children after the resurrection, granted to those who are exalted in the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom. This is an aspect of eternal progression. “In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; and in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; And if he does not, he cannot obtain it. He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase” (D&C 131:1-4).

This distinctive doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was taught by Joseph Smith and was especially articulated on May 16-17, 1843, at Ramus, Illinois, where he often visited and preached. Conversing on spiritual topics with a small party of friends, the Prophet Joseph Smith shed light on the concept of eternal increase: “Except a man and his wife enter into an everlasting covenant and be married for eternity, while in this probation, by the power and authority of the Holy Priesthood, they will cease to increase when they die; that is, they will not have any children after the resurrection. But those who are married by the power and authority of the priesthood in this life, and continue without committing the sin against the Holy Ghost, will continue to increase and have children in the celestial glory” (TPJS, pp. 300-301). Doctrine and Covenants, section 131, is largely concerned with this subject, and was first included in 1876.

A husband and wife who are married in the new and everlasting covenant and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise under the proper priesthood authority are promised that they shall inherit “thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers,” and their “glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever” (D&C 132:19). They are likened to gods, having no end. They share in the promises of eternal posterity made to Abraham and Sarah: “Both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars” (D&C 132:30).

Brigham Young, in 1862, spoke of eternal lives, stating that the opportunity to become heirs to all things, and to become a “King of kings and Lord of lords is promised to the faithful, and are but so many stages in that ceaseless progression of eternal lives. There will be no end to the increase of the faithful” (JD 10:5). He described such a situation as a pleasing one, creating happiness beyond mortal comprehension. In 1864 he elaborated: “In like manner, every faithful son of God, becomes, as it were, Adam to the race that springs from his loins, when they are embraced in the covenants and blessings of the Holy Priesthood in the progress of eternal lives. We have not yet received our kingdoms, neither will we, until we have finished our work on the earth, passed through the ordeals, are brought up by the power of the resurrection, and are crowned with glory and eternal lives” (JD 10:355).

Latter-day Saints believe that all worthy men and women, through righteous living and being sealed by the power of the priesthood, will in eternal life inherit, with Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, and all the faithful, those same blessings and enjoy a continuation of seeds forever, or eternal increase.
SHIRLEY S. RICKS
 
I’m afraid you’re wasting your time with this. To us non-LDS, the DSI values of the BofM, D&C and PofGP and Mormon prophets are about -1000. So citing them to prove your position is useless.

Even the DSI value of the bible in a vacuum (no divinely guided magisterium) is only about 30 IMHO, as is evidenced by the wide variety of contraditory interpretations of it.

But if you’re having a good time, knock yourself out.

God love you,
Paul
 
40.png
PaulDupre:
I’m afraid you’re wasting your time with this. To us non-LDS, the DSI values of the BofM, D&C and PofGP and Mormon prophets are about -1000. So citing them to prove your position is useless.
Click to expand...
LOL. I am not trying to prove “my” position. I am trying to make sure the LDS position gets correctly stated. Therefore the criteria an LDS would use to determine if a given source accurately reflects LDS doctrine or belief is pertinent.

It would be interesting to develop a Catholic DSI for scriptures, the CCC, ex Cathedra statements, imprimatur (sp), writings of ECF’s, bible scholars, etc. Maybe a common ground DSI could also be created. Your suggestions would be a good start.

later,
fool
 
Your post starts out fatally flawed. It is a weak foundation to build upon when you have come to know God. Should I keep reading it?

“there is no such thing as principle, power, wisdom, knowledge, life, position, or anything that can be imagined, that remains stationary-they must increase or decrease”

This is not the God that I have come to know, that Christians has come to know.

"there is no such thing as principle, power, wisdom, knowledge, life, position, or anything that can be imagined that does not find itself created by our un changing God, We can increase or decrease here on earth while God remains stationary for all to find. This is a very good tihng for creation otherwise we may become lost, fall into ourselves and die.

Lord, you are not pleased with someone simply because that person is knowledgeable. In fact, it would be possible for one to know everything there is to know in the whole wide world, except for knowing you, and consequently know nothing. Just as another person could live in blissful ignorance of the great sum of human knowledge, but know you, and be both happy and content. After all, who is better placed - the person who owns a tree and gives You thanks for all the good things it provides; or the one who owns a similar tree and knows its weight and dimensions down to the least leaf, but does not realize that You are its Creator and that it is through You that he or she has use of it? In essence, the latter person is ignorant, though full of facts, and the former person wise, though bit short on details. St. Augustine
 
mormon fool:
LOL. I am not trying to prove “my” position. I am trying to make sure the LDS position gets correctly stated. Therefore the criteria an LDS would use to determine if a given source accurately reflects LDS doctrine or belief is pertinent.
Click to expand...
Sorry fool, but your choice of selected Mormon writings,mingled with a bit of Christian scripture, does not “correctly state” the LDS position - it only states your current position. As is clearly evident from the threads on this board and from the experience of all us ex-LDS, there is no “LDS position” - not for very long anyway. If you don’t like what the LDS Church teaches, just wait a year or two.

I applaud your efforts at preserving your Mormonism, though. Been there, done that, and it hurts like heck. I give you another 2 - 5 years in the LDS (depending on how stubborn you are). I only hope that once that house of cards falls, that you find your way home to the Catholic faith.
God bless you,
Paul
 
I don’t think my greatest misunderstandings (when and if I do misunderstand) lie within LDS scriptures - I understand that you believe them to be sacred but I also thought that you believed in continuing revelation and it is there I think, that I have a great problem in discerning that which is supposed to have been revealed by God, which is simply exposition, which is divine, which is doctrine, which is in error, which has led astray and which has not, etc. LDS scripture says that only one man holds ALL keys at a given time and that person, we are told, is the president of the LDS church. Others are said to hold other keys - including prophecy - yet there seems no authority to call prophecy true or false.

The problem is of the Mormon church’s own making, in my opinion. Don’t write or preach or have recorded and published that which is taught unless there is some authority which can declare what is divine, what is false, and what is just nonsense. Having read the JoD, how is one to discern when a prophet was speaking as a prophet in words that sound prophetical, expounding on doctrine which seems expository, or just playing ‘let’s pretend’?

The “DSI analysis” simply isn’t going to work for us who don’t believe in continuous prophecy and revelation, and who don’t believe that three of the standard works of the LDS are of divine inspiration, yet who are trying to discern what (let alone why) you believe to be doctrine and what you believe to be speculation.

In reading about the Book of Abraham, one of the only understandable explanations for the belief that it was a was divinely inspired was not, for me, found in Nibley’s “Abraham in Egypt” but in the last paragraph of Michael D. Rhodes’ review of “By His Own Hand upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri”, which he closed with:
Michael D. Rhodes:
But the certain knowledge of Joseph Smith’s divine calling as a prophet comes not from scholarly proofs, but from the workings of the Holy Ghost upon the heart and mind of people willing to humble themselves and seek the Lord’s conformation of it in prayer. I have done that and can firmly and unshakably testify that I know beyond any shadow of doubt that Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet of God and that the book of Abraham is divinely inspired, as is the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the other parts of the Pearl of Great Price, which Joseph Smith revealed to us in these latter days.
Click to expand...
While my certain knowledge of my faith isn’t quite confirmed in that way (were it, I would likely have never developed an interest in learning more about the history and theology of my faith that I did - an interest I continue in) I feel that Mr. Rhodes is being honest - just as those who know by faith know because of a ‘burning in the bosom’ (or ‘burning of the bosom’ or whatever the oft-used phrase).

By limiting, as you have in your examples, discussion of LDS doctrine to scripture it seems to me that you are denying that article of faith which reads “We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.” What we - those who do not share the LDS faith in latter day prophecy - need an answer to first is how are we to understand which prophecies, revelations, and expositions which are recorded in volumes of writings of prophets, counselors, apostles, etc., are to be understood as that revealed by God and infallible and that which is just an opinion and not guided by the Holy Spirit and that which is just simply wrong.

While your system is admirable, it is lacking in discerning where, in the LDS church, authority is to be found. Anything prior to that becomes ‘verse slinging’ in which final authority rests in my interpretation of scripture and your own.
 
Catholic-RCIA and PaulDupre (I wrote this long before Ben posted),
Unless I misunderstand MF’s purpose, this thread is about providing a solid LDS foundation for the beliefs that Mormon Fool claims to hold as a LDS. Many former LDS on this board have made the assertion that the fairly consistent LDS position on this board is incompatible with LDS theology. The continued repetition of this has lead the LDS on this board to believe that the non-LDS on this board are comfortable with not allowing LDS to define what we believe and what is the best understanding of what LDS believe. It shouldn’t be like this. Richard Mouw observed a LDS give up trying to explain to Walter Martin what they as a LDS believed and say, “You are not even trying to understand” (this was decades ago). I came to the same conclusion in a conversation I had with James White. I hope to not come to this conclusion here, but it shouldn’t be this hard.
To Catholic-RCIA’s comments: I have yet to determine to what extent a Catholic MUST believe as Catholic-RCIA seems to believe, but a LDS generally shouldn’t believe as Catholic-RCIA seems to believe.
40.png
catholic-rcia:
Your post starts out fatally flawed. It is a weak foundation to build upon when you have come to know God. Should I keep reading it?
Click to expand...
“there is no such thing as principle, power, wisdom, knowledge, life, position, or anything that can be imagined, that remains stationary-they must increase or decrease”
This is not the God that I have come to know, that Christians has come to know.
It seems to me that Catholic-RCIA is espousing the absolute immutability of God. He cannot change. The logic goes that if God changes in any way then he either becomes more or less. If he becomes more that cannot be because then he couldn’t have been the greatest logically existent being before he changed. And of course he couldn’t become less than he once was for the same reason.

A God who does in fact change is exactly the God I have come to know. When I more fully express my love for Him, He is please. Indeed when any of His children enter into or enter more fully into a loving relationship with Him, He is genuinely pleased. This is not possible for the unchangeable God formulated by many a Catholic doctor.

The God presented in the Old Testament AND the incarnate Christ both in the Old and the New World is not this totally unchanging and radically unaffected God. This is a developed understanding that has clear roots in Greek philosophy.

catholic-rcia said:
"there is no such thing as principle, power, wisdom, knowledge, life, position, or anything that can be imagined that does not find itself created by our un changing God, We can increase or decrease here on earth while God remains stationary for all to find. This is a very good tihng for creation otherwise we may become lost, fall into ourselves and die.
Click to expand...

The teachings of the early LDS and the LDS scriptures in my opinion demand that God is unchanging in His omni-benevolence and His commitment to bring about His plan. He is also omnipotent in that it is impossible for a being outside of God to affect Him such that His plan is frustrated. In fact God chooses to be affected by our love, but is not necessarily affected by our love. In addition to this, all principles, powers, wisdoms, knowledge, life, … are totally dependent upon God concurring power. We all move and carry out our wills as a direct result of God’s concurring power.

Catholic-RCIA said that some unchanging God is the God that He has come to know. The God that is actually affected (and thus changes) by my love and the love of others is the God I have come to know AND it is the God most clearly found in the pages of the Bible (and BOM, D&C, and PGP).

I should note that Catholic-RCIA may not mean that he has come to know the God that was described by Catholic doctors of the past and merely means that he has come to know the God as formulated by LDS. That is a God unchangeable in His purpose and un-frustrate-able in His power (indeed the source of all of our power), but radically affected by the love of His children.

Charity, TOm
 
I’m just going to throw my two cents into this regardless of context. I think Catholic objections to eternal progression are often as mischaracterized as eternal progression itself is. Rather than get bogged down in rhetoric, let’s just start simple from both ends.

Let’s start with the famous couplet: “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become.”

It seems to me that most mormons use this little turn of phrase to explain eternal progression (EP). I don’t know of any mormons who object to this statement even if they can’t offer a full explanation of it’s meaning. So I’ll use it as the basis of my statements below (since it contains within it the crux of Catholic objections to EP).

What is the most important belief in both the Catholic and Mormon churches? What is the most fundamental and meaningful aspect of both of our faiths? What one thing do we have in common that serves as the absolute cornerstone of our faith?

The crucifixion. Jesus’ death on the cross serves as a form of repentence which applies to all of us. God loves us so much, and his mercy is so abundant that he made himself flesh and bone, came to this Earth to live among us, suffer among us and die on the cross for our sake. His death is our redemption.

His death is our redemption… this is key. Only through Jesus, can we find forgiveness for our sins. Only through Jesus, can we find redemption and eternal salvation. This is because Jesus is Lord. “Lord” as in Kyrie, the Greek translation of Yahweh as established in the Septuagint. God died for us. And it is important that Jesus be God, it is important that he is Lord.

Jesus was a God-made-Man. He made himself like us for our sake, as an act of love. He lowered himself to our level out of love for our sake.

Now, eternal progression. God was once man. He has progressed to something higher now, but he was once like us.

The Mormon Jesus is a Man-made-God who decides to return to a humanly state for a while for our sake. Not only that, but we ourselves can aspire to a godly state. God the father is now a Man-made-God.

I have no problem with progression in the next life. I have no objections to the notion that this life is a preparatory state, a stage in our constant development. I have no problem believing that men continue to grow and advance as moral beings in the next existence.

But God was not a man. He was not a Man-become-God. For God to come down to Earth as a man and sacrifice himself on the cross for our sins is an incredible sacrifice of love. There was no other way for him to do it, no other way for him to give us his forgiveness. In spite of his omnipotence, our free will and original sin closed the possibility of salvation to us without the sacrifice of God himself. God, reduced himself to a mortal form.

He did not revert to an earlier state. He was not a man before. Had he already experienced suffering and death as a man, the sacrifice on the cross would be meaningless repetition. God can not be both God and once a man for the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross to have any meaning.

Of course, if you believe in a convoluted godhead rather than a straightforward trinitarian God, that problem might resolve itself in your mind. But if you believe in a single God as Catholics do, then Jesus and the Father have always been equals and sincee Jesus’ sacrifice would be negated by a previous mortal life, he can’t have one. Since Jesus and the Father have always been equal persons in the same God (along with the Holy Spirit of course), then the Father can not have a previous mortal life either.

Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross must be important, it must have meaning. Eternal progression robs it of that meaning. God the Father progressed to godhood without the sacrifice of Jesus. Jesus progressed to godhood prior to his death on the cross. We can too if eternal progression is true. EP negates the very core beliefs of Christianity. It contradicts the Mormon teaching that salvation can only be reached through Jesus (since it’s obviously not true if God progressed without Jesus’ sacrifice). It’s blatantly contradictory, and there’s nothing in Mormon doctrine to reconcile this contradiction.
 
40.png
catholic-rcia:
Your post starts out fatally flawed. It is a weak foundation to build upon when you have come to know God. Should I keep reading it?

“there is no such thing as principle, power, wisdom, knowledge, life, position, or anything that can be imagined, that remains stationary-they must increase or decrease”
Click to expand...
Please do. The Brigham Young quote appears to me to deal in generalities. If you read further to my underlined quote, there really isn’t an official position on how God the Father progresses. TOmNossor has already described some possibilities here and perhaps I can survey mormon ideas that are further down on the DSI scale later. The EOM article adresses the implications of Moses 1:39, which is an appropriate starting point.

Thanks for your prayers,
fool
 
40.png
PaulDupre:
Sorry fool, but your choice of selected Mormon writings,mingled with a bit of Christian scripture, does not “correctly state” the LDS position - it only states your current position. As is clearly evident from the threads on this board and from the experience of all us ex-LDS, there is no “LDS position” - not for very long anyway. If you don’t like what the LDS Church teaches, just wait a year or two.
Click to expand...
I disagree that the LDS position cannot be correctly stated. I am starting at the top. At least 90% of the scriptures I cited lead to simple formulations of doctrine that the vast majority believe, recognize as binding, and hear frequently in today’s church. They max out the DSI scale.

Your criticism only has validity in beliefs that only trace themselves to lower DSI sources. Now here is where things get interesting. When we see a range of different perspectives or interpretations on a subject, what do all ex-LDS generally do? They pick the quotations that they disagree with most or the ones that present the biggest challenge to deal with. Likewise a mormon apologist would do just the opposite, concentrating on the ones s/he agrees with most and the ones that create the fewest problems.

But this mormon fool transcends all this. Even before I thought up DSI, I generally have not restricted myself to posting my personal views. I usually try to present or engage multiple views even if there is tension between them. In some ways I am like a librarian, I know where books and articles can be found on many topics. I have developed a way to tell how current and authoritive a given source is that goes beyond whether it is favorable or unfavorable to my personal position. While some degree of subjectivity is involved, I think each step in the DSI analysis can be justified by statements in mormon literature.
I only hope that once that house of cards falls, that you find your way home to the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
If this is the case, I hope I can overlook some of the “tough love” I receive on this message board! In general, though, my experience has been pleasant and I very much would like to have a fuller fellowship someday with the posters here. Hope springs eternal!

God bless,
fool
 
It might take awhile for me to respond to ben_dy’s and MEP’s post. Some very heady ideas being discussed. I love it! Check back later this week and I’ll respond in detail. DSI does indeed shed some light on how to weight continuing revelation and how to tell when a “prophet is acting as a prophet”, but I will have to back that up later.

Meanwhile for all you Snow couplet and KFD analysts out there, I recommend the following articles so you can more fully participate in this discussion.

Gerald N. Lund, “Is President Lorenzo Snow’s oft-repeated statement ‘As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be’ accepted as official doctrine by the Church?,” Ensign, February 1982.
DSI S1:30 S2:+2 S3:-5 S4: -5 S5: -5 S6 +1 = 18
note: this is a rating on Lund’s analysis more than it is on the couplet

Joseph Smith Jr., “The King Follett Sermon,” Ensign, April 1971, 13-14.
DSI: S1: 30 S2: +18 S3: -10 S4: +5 S5: -5 S6: +2 = 40
note: some controversial parts will score a little lower, some parts quoted in current manuals much higher.

What do Latter-day Saints Mean When They Say That God Was Once a Man?. attributed to FARMS
DSI: S1: 20 S2: 0 S3: 0 S4: -5 S5: -5 S6: +2 = 12

W. John Walsh, Was God Once a Sinner?.
DSI: S1: 10 S2: 0 S3: 0 S4: -5 S5: -5 S6: +2 = 2

John A. Tvedtnes The King Follett Discourse in the Light of Ancient and Medieval Jewish and Christian Beliefs
DSI: S1: 20 S2: 5 S3: 0 S4: -10 S5: 0 S6: +2 = 17

Van Hale The Doctrinal Impact of the King Follett Discourse
DSI: S1:20 S2:2 S3: -5 S4: -10 S5:-5 S6: -3 = -1
note: fool has integrity to post an article he disagrees with!

happy reading (or not),
fool
 
I read one of your links, I will comment on this

Mormon Fool

In Christianity you come to know that no ladder exists in which to climb to reach exaltation. Only Satan offers such a ladder to Children that will never be able to make use of it. Again think of the fall in the garden.

This ladder makes a mockery out of what Christ has done for you after this fall.

There is only the Cross of Christ. Christ reaches down and pulls you up upon His back. You come to understand that only he saves you, you cannot save yourself or climb up a ladder. Knowing this allows your heart to be pierced. It is where your eyes become opened to the Gift of life. He comes to you and I as we are and loves us as we were, as we are now and as we will be tomorrow. His gift is unconditional and it is free. By coming to know that He has already saved you as you are you begin a journey to the Cross with Christ. You enter into a relationship with Him that is like no other. Because you have found yourself un worthy of His love, His love becomes real and it is very very large, and it is life altering.

You begin to receive the healing Sacraments given to the Church by her Christ because you can face your own sin and understand it without feeling less of yourself. You begin the process not of climbing up, but of going down on your knees, thanking God for Jesus, for the Holy Spirit, for the Physician, His mercy, the Church and all of her life giving streams. If you can come to see these things than your eyes will be opened and you will see pride and ego all around, destroying lives that appear to be very good.

. The Cross is where pride and ego become exposed for what they are. This is where humility, where the common bond of the Catholic Saints are found, in Christ Jesus. Exaltation, a ladder to climb is Satan’s gift to mankind because he is very envious and Jealous of His own Creator. He searches for Glory apart from God and he temps others to do the same, he is cunning and can steal you from the very gift that God, through Jesus freely gives out of pure love, by dying on the Cross, in order for you to die with him, in order for you to be risen with Him and in Him.

Can’t you see why the Cross is so hated? Stop falling for it, then you will find something much bigger, much brighter than you could have ever have imagined.

Tonight we gather at our Church at 7pm. Souls will come out of the woodwork to be there as I myself have done. They won’t find a list of ordinances to follow or be pressured in any way through a marketing program that appears to work. They will just come and share their journeys. They do not come on their own for they have been called. Most will end up staying because they will hunger for more. It is the Church in her finest hour as the new ones find themselves beneath the Cross with a family that is very happy to find them there. You may choose to climb a ladder, but Christians choose a Cross. God Bless
 
‘You will become as great as you can possibly wish—EVEN AS GREAT AS GOD, and you cannot wish to be greater.’

My mind is being with God forever, I do not desire to be great, I am a sinner whose desire is to be with Christ daily.

“As man now is, God once was:”

This is very dangerouse

“As God now is, man may be.”

*God is Creator, I am created, I will be (given) all that Christ has always had. Christ is enough for me. *

"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, the same as Jesus Christ himself did.” JS

‘God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens,’ and that men ‘have got to learn how to be Gods … the same as all Gods have done before.’

This same doctrine has of course been known to the prophets of all the ages, and President Snow wrote an excellent poetic summary of it.”
Gospel topics: Church doctrine, plan of salvation

-I- will prove that the world is wrong,(pride) by showing what God is. (pride)I am going to inquire after God; for – I- want you all to know Him, and to be familiar with Him; and if- I- am bringing you to a knowledge of Him, all persecutions against me ought to cease. (Note: Mormon Fool that it is the Holy Spirit that brings this knowledge)You will then know that – I - am His servant; for I speak as one having authority (pride). …JM

Mormon Fool when has a follower of Jesus ever commanded that persecutions cease? When you take the journey to the Cross persecutions are welcomed. How where the Apostles them selves blessed? Money? Statis? No Peter was crucifeid up side down for being a follower of Christ. He also died trying to free those who persecuted him for following Christ. He loved them as Christ loved him.
“will go back to the beginning before the world was, to show what kind of a being God is. What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open your ears and hear, all ye ends of the earth, for I am going to prove it to you by the Bible, and to tell you the designs of God in relation to the human race, and why He interferes with the affairs of man.” JS

God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! JS ** **
**I could never bring God down to a human level, to that in which He Created. In doing this my spirit would be crushed because the God I know is much bigger. **
This is from a man Mormon Fool, I wish I could get you to see this, but I can’t. Not my job! But I can promise you that if you did see it you would be on fire for Christ. If you saw what takes place in His Church you would be on fire for Christ. You would be blown away once you came to understand what He established for you to heal. I read the links you gave me and I see our fallen nature all over the writings. I know the author of these writings because I know God.

God Bless

Praying for you today
 
MormonFool: I’ve been speaking, via MSN, with a Mormon insists that the Church teaches that God the Father always has been God, and is unchanging. He is convinced that the notion that God was once a man is a false doctrine, and was not even familiar with the term ‘eternal progression’. Furthermore, he said that he had not even heard of the Adam-God theory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top