The Christian God is of spirit, like the Holy Ghost.However, isn’t the God of orthodox Christianity so transcendent, that He is literally immaterial?
Interesting that you would call reasoned discourse as harsh and you would have to engage in irrational discourse to be harsh.I can be harsh, too!
How about Christ? Catholics view Him to be God and not a spirit. This physical body in no way makes Him “less”.The Christian God is of spirit, like the Holy Ghost.
IMHO an immaterial being is a non-existent being.
How about the Holy Ghost?How about Christ?
Christians have always believed the Holy Ghost and God the Father are spirit AND that they exist.Catholics view Him to be God and not a spirit.
I’m noticing how you’re trying to deflect my question rather than answer it.How about the Holy Ghost?
gazelam is suggesting that Mormons do not believe in the Holy Ghost because there is no body, which is not true, therefore is being irrational.
I don’t have a question. I just said:I’m noticing how you’re trying to deflect my question rather than answer it.
Note: I can’t answer your deflected question about gazalam’s quote cause I’m not him/her.
Actually you asked:I don’t have a question. I just said:
Christians believe God is transcendent and one being.
How about the Holy Ghost?
Yes, rhetorically to point out the ignorance of gazelam’s statement. By your silence, you must agree with me.Actually you asked:
I do not believe i have mistated what Mormons believe fundamentally. Certain statements like God having a body, God’s human existence before his current state of divinity and marriage being essential to achieve the highest existence are all well founded in Mormon resources. I am however going beyond those resources and probing their implications. For instance if we must marry to achieve the Celestial Kingdom it implies there is a place for sex and child bearing even if that sex or Childbearing is nothing like ours in the next life. If Heavenly Father has a wife or wives that implies that he required her to create us. If God has a body then he can be comprehended and seen quite easily, like how Joseph Smith describes. I could go on.Before I spend all my time replying to this, I have a question for you: IgnatianPhilo are you interest in getting your facts straight and actually learning what LDS believe?
Redefining immaterial to mean non existence doesnt make it so. But if you reject immateriality what are our souls? Are they literally vapor or something akin to mist or smoke? What were we as intelligences if we were not immaterial?I appreciate that you want to ascribe to God the maximum amount of interaction with all of the departed faithful. However, isn’t the God of orthodox Christianity so transcendent, that He is literally immaterial? I can be harsh, too! IMHO an immaterial being is a non-existent being. I’m not sure how an immaterial/nothing being is going to make anyone’s afterlife a joyous place. I’ll leave you a quote from Joseph Smith: “Could you gaze into heaven five minutes, you would know more than you would by reading all that ever was written on the subject.” Take care.
This is not an answer to my question: are you interested in learning what Mormons ACTUALLY believe?I do not believe i have mistated what Mormons believe fundamentally. Certain statements like God having a body, God’s human existence before his current state of divinity and marriage being essential to achieve the highest existence are all well founded in Mormon resources. I am however going beyond those resources and probing their implications. For instance if we must marry to achieve the Celestial Kingdom it implies there is a place for sex and child bearing even if that sex or Childbearing is nothing like ours in the next life. If Heavenly Father has a wife or wives that implies that he required her to create us. If God has a body then he can be comprehended and seen quite easily, like how Joseph Smith describes. I could go on.
The logic is straightforward and is born out of those basic Mormon beliefs. I see no reason as of yet for why my conclusions are wrong.
IgnatianPhilo Is factually correct about Mormon belief.This is not an answer to my question: are you interested in learning what Mormons ACTUALLY believe?
If i weren’t interested i wouldn’t be commenting or reflecting on actual Mormon beliefs. Of course i am interested.This is not an answer to my question: are you interested in learning what Mormons ACTUALLY believe?
Jesus is fully divine and fully human.How about Christ? Catholics view Him to be God and not a spirit. This physical body in no way makes Him “less”.
Ok, let’s discuss then. I’m going to take your previous post and hit the really big points first. After that, we can gradually work on the finer points. I’m also going to be pretty blunt here, and hope that doesn’t offend you.If i weren’t interested i wouldn’t be commenting or reflecting on actual Mormon beliefs. Of course i am interested.
Looking through a pagan lens will only distort your view of LDS theology. Same with Catholic lens, Muslim lens, Baptist lens, Hindu lens, etc. The only effective way to understand a group’s theology is through that group’s view.I’m applying a term which has a meaning beyond “Catholic” theology and is widely accepted of being applied to divinity since the time of the ancient Greeks.
LDS theology: your epistemology is faulty here, Man may speculate on Truth but those are always flawed speculations incredibly inferior to Truth. Truth is given by God, when and how He chooses. Man and his flawed speculations does not determine doctrine, God does.I speculate…
Again, having a body of flesh does not limited or confine God. Prime example: Christ.Infinite how? Your God has a body of flesh and bone
Ummm, that isn’t the point. Maybe it would help to use the terms created and uncreated. Creatures, us, have limits. We don’t create, we are created. We are not infinite in nature we have a beginning.Again, having a body of flesh does not limited or confine God. Prime example: Christ.
In LDS theology “spirit” is refined matter.Redefining immaterial to mean non existence doesnt make it so. But if you reject immateriality what are our souls? Are they literally vapor or something akin to mist or smoke? What were we as intelligences if we were not immaterial?
Immaterial only means not material. It doesnt mean not existent.
I’ve bolded your last sentence. While I do not in any way accept LDS theology, I think many of my Catholic brethren are unfair to you in many of these debates. You are exactly right that Christ sits with His physical, glorified body at the right hand of the Father and yet, at the same time, is truly, physically, sacramentally present on thousands of Catholic / Orthodox altars around the world in the Eucharist.Ok, let’s discuss then. I’m going to take your previous post and hit the really big points first. After that, we can gradually work on the finer points. I’m also going to be pretty blunt here, and hope that doesn’t offend you.
Looking through a pagan lens will only distort your view of LDS theology. Same with Catholic lens, Muslim lens, Baptist lens, Hindu lens, etc. The only effective way to understand a group’s theology is through that group’s view.
LDS theology: your epistemology is faulty here, Man may speculate on Truth but those are always flawed speculations incredibly inferior to Truth. Truth is given by God, when and how He chooses. Man and his flawed speculations does not determine doctrine, God does.
Again, having a body of flesh does not limited or confine God. Prime example: Christ.
Actually two things of matter can occupy the same spot (remember what we consider “matter” is >99% empty space). For example, light is matter (and energy). Every time you shine a light through your hand, that light is occupying the same space as your hand.It is logically and physically impossible for two material things to exist in the same space. Therefore, if one believes a human is both soul and body, both cannot be material.