LDS Doctrine of Eternal Progression/Catholic View

[Peter_John]

I have not read the entire thread here, but I read the first few and the last few and I have noticed that there is a slight misconception about what Mormons believe about eternal progression.

Let me summarize as briefly and wholly as I can.

We believe that our highest goal is to gain eternal life, the greatest of all the gifts of God. This gift is only received through the grace of Jesus Christ. It cannot be achieved by any other name or means. We believe that eternal life, by definition, is a life like God has and that we may be heirs with Christ of all things. (see Romans 8:32 and Revelation 21:7)

We believe that we are literal sons and daughters of God. We believe that he is our eternal father and we have an inherent potential to become like him, just as a newborn prince has the potential to become a king.

God has five primary characteristics:

1. He is Immortal
2. He is Perfectly Good and no unclean thing can dwell in his presence
3. He is a Perfect Father - a [pro]creator of children and a creator of worlds
4. He has Perfect Knowledge of all things
5. He enjoys Eternal Life - a life with all glory, all power, all might, and all dominion

Before this life every person who is born on earth had a desire to become like God. When man (and woman) were first created they enjoyed the following:

1. Immortality
2. The Presence of God - He was with them and spoke to them in the Garden of Eden

Man was presented with commandments and given the ability to choose. Man transgressed one of the commandments and was no longer worthy to dwell in the presence of God being subject to sin. Because of his transgression, man also became mortal–subject to death. Through the fall of man, however, mankind was granted the following blessings:

1. The ability to procreate
2. Knowledge of Good and Evil

Through his atonement, Jesus Christ overcame sin, death, and the effects of the fall of Adam for all men, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:22) Through Christ, every human being will be given back what was lost through the fall of man:

1. Immortality - all will be resurrected
2. The Presence of God - all will return to God’s presence to be judged of their works

If we are guilty of sin and have not allowed Christ’s grace to cleanse us, we will be cast out of God’s presence again for our own deeds, not for Adam’s transgression. This judgment is a gift from Jesus Christ.

Through his atonement, Jesus has also improved upon the gifts of mortality:

1. Eternal Families - Christ has made it possible for families to be together forever
2. Perfect Knowledge - Through Christ we may attain perfect knowledge of all things

Finally, if we simply believe in him, love him, and keep his commandments, Christ has promised us the greatest of all gifts:

1. Eternal Life - a life like God has in glory, honor, majesty, and power

This is not a gift received through our own merits. All Jesus requires is that we come unto him and receiving of his grace “without money and without price.” (Isaiah 55:1) We come unto him by joining ourselves to his church through baptism and obeying his word. When we are willing to forsake all and follow him (Matthew 19:21), he will lead us to eternal life.

The last thought I will leave with you is that God the Father’s title in the original Hebrew was Elohim, a plural word which being interpreted means “the gods” or “the head of the gods”. The term God is properly, though not exclusively, defined as a divine family unit. That is how a Son and a Father can be one. That is how we can become heirs of all that God has. That is how we can be equal with God and still submit to him. (see Philippians 2:6) That is how both men and women can become gods but only together as a family. That is how there can be many gods and one true God at the same time.

Many have correctly observed that Mormons are “all about the family.” This is absolutely true. The grand secret of Mormonism is not that we arrogantly believe in the deification of ourselves individually, but that we believe in the exaltation of the human family and claim the authority to seal or bind worthy families to God for eternity.
“And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:19)
To him be all glory, honor, and holiness forever.

What you have missed in the intervening pages is that several posting try to make it look like these teachings are more consistent with the rest of Christianity , in this and other threads, with such things as denying it has ever been taught as doctrine, that the Adversary and his minions are among our spiritual brothers and sisters.

You likely perceive that much of what you listed is fairly consistent wiht the beliefs of the rest of Christianity. This is not the case. For example, you believe that everyone born had a pre-mortal life in the presence of god and that we are literally sons and daughters of god as spirit beings. Christians in general do not believe in a pre-mortal estate for humanity (Angels are not mortal and are a separate creation) so we were created when we awere conceived – though we did exist as a dream in the heart of God, we had no literal existence. We also believe that we become Children of God through baptism, and are not born so.

 

[Peter_John]

1. He has Perfect Knowledge of all things
   .

Can you prove to me by your Doctrine and Covenants that you believe God has a perfect knowledge of all things. I find that this book shows quite otherwise.

 

[Lefty0908]

Rats. I just stumbled on to this thread and note by the dates of the posts that it’s probably already “dead in the water.” But for the record I’d like to state that Soren1’s post, though eloquently stated, has nonetheless fundamentally misrepresented LDS doctrine. So as to try and stay focused, I want to respond to his mistaken comment that “in Mormonism personal effort is logically and actually prior to grace.”

In fact, LDS doctrine warmly embraces the concept of prevenient grace (grace that is given prior to any act of human will). In our view, it is not because we are by nature free and cpable of choosing to repent and turn to God. Instead, we are free because Christ has freed us to make that choice through His atonement. Humans are free to choose to accept the redeming relationship offered by God only because God has graciously offered the relationship without waiting for us to “earn it” and has made us free to choose to accept it. From the Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 2:26-27:

“And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good and evil; to act for themselves and not be acted upon” (italics mine).

Redeeming grace is thus necessary prior to any act of human will precisely because there is no free will in the absence of such grace. So I would agree with Soren1 that our salvation is ultimately the result of prevenient grace – the grace that precedes every act of human will.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The problem with this is the Mormon idea that freedom is equated to knowing/understanding evil. It is a foundational sort of problem, that clouds Mormon understanding of everything.

The rest of what you have going there is a twisting of what Redeeming Grace is, to something it is not.

 

[Lefty0908]

Then help me understand in what meaningful sense choices can be made if there is no concept of what is good and evil. That seems to me to be entirely irrational.

 

[RebeccaJ]

No, it is irrational for you to believe that God wills evil in order that you can be free.

God is Good. Evil is an absent of what is good, it is not a presence, it is not something that is Created by God. It is the lacking of God’s Presence. Evil is ultimately: nothing.

True freedom is found in always choosing good, and forsaking evil entirely. In the Garden, Adam and Eve did not know evil, and God commanded them to obedience. That is, to choose to align themselves to the Will of their Creator. He didn’t set them up into choosing evil, as Mormons believe.

By choosing evil, Adam and Evil put all of mankind in the chains of sin and death, which is not freedom, never has been, and never will be. This is what Jesus Christ Redeemed us from, reconciling us to God, and restoring us to Grace.

We are called to always choose what is Good. Freedom is never found in the choice of evil, and more freedom is not achieved by having ever more evil choices. More of nothing is still, nothing.

Free Will, is a gift, a grace from God, given to us that we may love God freely, not that we may know evil more intimately.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Cross is the only answer to suffering and evil in this world.

And as Jesus’ last coming was on the Road to Emmaus, this represented the new dimension of God – that now He walks with us in companionship…being the Living Word, being our Nourishment in the Eucharist.

Nobody gets to heaven on the foundational construct they have to invalidate a historical people as Christianity, and in particular the Roman Church. We all know the inferences are in relation to the Catholic priesthood.

 

[Lefty0908]

But Rebecca, it seems as though you’re making my point. If evil is defined as “nothing” in the ultimate sense of the “nothingness” from which God created everything ex nihilo, then how is a mere mortal like myself ever able to choose between that kind of evil and what might be considered “good”? I can’t forsake evil and choose good, because I can’t even conceive of what evil might be in this sense (what mind can grasp the “nothingness” outside of time, space, etc?). If this kind of “nothing” is ultimate evil, then every choice I make and everything I do would logically be considered “good” and I know that’s not the case.

Your position is that Adam and Eve chose evil. But that choice was between two realities or verities (to partake/not partake), not between one reality and “nothing.”

And I’m not sure how you concluded from anything I said that “* believe that God wills evil in order that * can be free.” I don’t believe that. And I agree that “Freedom is never found in the choice of evil, and more freedom is not achieved by having ever more evil choices.” What did I say that made you conclude otherwise?

I already argued above and totally agree with you that free will is a gift and grace from God. But I don’t believe that God “set up” Eve and Adam to choose evil.

I’m probably missing something here having to do with the way I grasp your understanding of evil. How’s about instead of demagoguing me, you actually try one time and help me along? I’m no philosopher or theologian, but this does interest me.**

 

[RebeccaJ]

But Rebecca, it seems as though you’re making my point. If evil is defined as “nothing” in the ultimate sense of the “nothingness” from which God created everything ex nihilo, then how is a mere mortal like myself ever able to choose between that kind of evil and what might be considered “good”? I can’t forsake evil and choose good, because I can’t even conceive of what evil might be in this sense (what mind can grasp the “nothingness” outside of time, space, etc?). If this kind of “nothing” is ultimate evil, then every choice I make and everything I do would logically be considered “good” and I know that’s not the case.

This is because Mormonism has dualist qualities about it, which manifests itself in different ways, but in this instance, it is the Mormon teaching that evil is required in order for good to exist.

How do we know what is Good? This would be a very long conversation, indeed, as Mormon morality and Catholic morality are 10 shades apart, at least. But there are simple ways, taught by Jesus. Love thy neighbor as thyself. Love God. From this (love) everything else flows.

Your position is that Adam and Eve chose evil. But that choice was between two realities or verities (to partake/not partake), not between one reality and “nothing.”

To choose to go against the Will of God is a choice to embrace nothing. As without God, we are nothing.

I don’t know how Mormons could ever grasp this within Mormon teaching, as at a base level, there isn’t any belief that the Mormon god(s) are different than mankind. For Mormons, both gods and humans are eternal in nature.

And I’m not sure how you concluded from anything I said that “* believe that God wills evil in order that * can be free.” I don’t believe that. And I agree that “Freedom is never found in the choice of evil, and more freedom is not achieved by having ever more evil choices.” What did I say that made you conclude otherwise?**

I know Mormon doctrine/“theology”.

I already argued above and totally agree with you that free will is a gift and grace from God. But I don’t believe that God “set up” Eve and Adam to choose evil.

I’m probably missing something here having to do with the way I grasp your understanding of evil. How’s about instead of demagoguing me, you actually try one time and help me along? I’m no philosopher or theologian, but this does interest me.

shrug LDS who come here have presented Mormon doctrine re: Adam and Eve as a double bind. It is what I was taught as a Mormon.

Perhaps start a new thread on “understanding what evil is”. Though perhaps, it is best explained as something that it is not.

 

[Telstar]

Then help me understand in what meaningful sense choices can be made if there is no concept of what is good and evil. That seems to me to be entirely irrational.

Hi, Lefty,

From the way I see it, the premise stated in your long explanation above is mainly flawed by two things. First, by the way LDS seem to define man’s freedom and what that entails, and second, by misunderstanding just what constituted Adam & Eve’s fall from grace. Allow me to give it a try and see if you can understand what I mean. I’ll try to be as clear as possible.

“And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good and evil; to act for themselves and not be acted upon”

To me, this passage from the BoM seems like a complete contradiction of itself when we understand what the fall actually was. That’s where the confusion seems to lie, and it’s one of the important things that makes me question LDS theology. (I have to admit that I also have a huge problem trying to understand much of the BoM, at all. A lot of it just seems to repeat some things over and over, again. But, that’s a subject for another thread.)

In the first sentence, it says that the Messiah comes, “that he may redeem the children of men from the fall”, then, in the very next sentence says, “And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good and evil”. The key to understanding how this is a contradiction is by knowing that the fall came about when they ate the fruit and received the knowledge of the difference between good and evil. That was what they learned from their sin. But, the sin itself, was disobedience, because God had told them that they must not eat it. They were not ready to handle that knowledge, but God would have granted it to them when they were ready. It seems that LDS have a different view and somehow believe that the fall had something to do with the knowledge itself or their loss of free will. (I admit that I’m not really sure what they think “the fall” was.)

The fruit of their disobedience was the first (original) sin committed by man. They chose to succumb to the temptation of the serpent and disobeyed God’s clear instruction. That’s what separated them from God because nothing evil can ever remain in the presence of God. That’s why they hid themselves from Him, when they realized their own guilt. They didn’t recognize the face of evil in the serpent, because they didn’t really know what evil was until they ate the fruit. They were as innocent and pure as a very young child. But, if they had listened to God, they never would have sinned and all of creation would have been accomplished without the pain and suffering of this world that has been distorted by that sin.

But, Adam & Eve already possessed the free will (freedom) to choose to obey, or not to obey God’s Will. He gave them free will when He created them. It was their own free choice to commit sin, and they paid for it by losing Paradise to themselves and all mankind. That’s when God withdrew His Grace (help) from them and sent them out on their own. They would not regain grace, or the chance for sharing eternal life with God, until Jesus could come to reverse the process, by offering us a way to receive God’s forgiveness and bring man closer to God, again. That way is by following Jesus.

LDS doctrine is what completely removes Adam & Eve’s freedom of choice by its doctrine on the pre-existence, that claims that they had no choice in disobeying God (thus being “set up” for the fall). That belief completely contradicts the actual truth, and indicates that God was the one that formulated that evil act by influencing their decision in that direction. That would be impossible because God is good and can never do anything evil. It’s completely against His nature as God. You cannot justify the end result by those means, because that would mean that man was completely innocent and God was evil. In effect, that act would negate God’s Holy Justice and make Him imperfect, which is entirely contradictory of all of Holy Scripture.

Throughout this whole process, man never lost his free will to choose between good and evil, so by no means did he need to get it ‘back’, ever. (You can’t get back what you never lost.) What he lost was God’s Grace (His active help) to know and understand how to make the right choice. He never lost his knowledge of evil, but when he lost God’s Grace, his understanding of it became more clouded thus making him more susceptible to its influence. Jesus came down from Heaven as a mediator between God & man, to teach us exactly how to do that, again, so we could be welcomed back into God’s company and fellowship.

Through our Baptism we receive the gift of Grace through the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit remains with us, as the fountain of Grace that continues to remind us, internally, how to remain in God’s Grace, through our partaking of the Eucharist. The Eucharist (the actual Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus) is the food for our souls that keeps God’s Grace alive and active in all of us.

I hope that helps.

 

[Tony888]

What you have missed in the intervening pages is that several posting try to make it look like these teachings are more consistent with the rest of Christianity , in this and other threads, with such things as denying it has ever been taught as doctrine, that the Adversary and his minions are among our spiritual brothers and sisters.

You likely perceive that much of what you listed is fairly consistent wiht the beliefs of the rest of Christianity. This is not the case. For example, you believe that everyone born had a pre-mortal life in the presence of god and that we are literally sons and daughters of god as spirit beings. Christians in general do not believe in a pre-mortal estate for humanity (Angels are not mortal and are a separate creation) so we were created when we awere conceived – though we did exist as a dream in the heart of God, we had no literal existence. We also believe that we become Children of God through baptism, and are not born so.

LDS do not think we match the RCC and other Christian denominations on every point, obviously there are differences (or we’d all be in the same church)

LDS do believe we have additional revelation that you are missing. Take your example, please show me your source of doctrine that confirms our spirits had no premortal existence. I expect this is your supposition but the RCC has no revelation on the topic, hence the LDS could be right (additional revelation).

 

[Stephen168]

Take your example, please show me your source of doctrine that confirms our spirits had no premortal existence.

The ever popular Mormon argumentum ad ignorantiam

I expect this is your supposition but the RCC has no revelation on the topic, hence the LDS could be right (additional revelation).

Jesus Christ and the Apostles gave no revelation on the topic, hence Mormons made it up.

 

[Tony888]

The ever popular Mormon argumentum ad ignorantiam
.

Stephen,
So you also agree that RCC scripture does not contradict LDS theology (and you are deflecting).

Jesus Christ and the Apostles gave no revelation on the topic, hence Mormons made it up

Since you are not LDS, I obviously don’t expect you to agree.
Can you show me in your scripture where God said there would be no more revelation?
I don’t think you can, so you must remain open to God continuing his historical practice of guiding his people with revelation (this doesn’t mean you must believe in JS though)

 

[Stephen168]

Can you show me in your scripture where God said there would be no more revelation?

The ever popular Mormon argumentum ad ignorantiam

 

[Peter_John]

But Rebecca, it seems as though you’re making my point. If evil is defined as “nothing” in the ultimate sense of the “nothingness” from which God created everything ex nihilo, then how is a mere mortal like myself ever able to choose between that kind of evil and what might be considered “good”? I can’t forsake evil and choose good, because I can’t even conceive of what evil might be in this sense (what mind can grasp the “nothingness” outside of time, space, etc?). If this kind of “nothing” is ultimate evil, then every choice I make and everything I do would logically be considered “good” and I know that’s not the case.

Your position is that Adam and Eve chose evil. But that choice was between two realities or verities (to partake/not partake), not between one reality and “nothing.”

And I’m not sure how you concluded from anything I said that “* believe that God wills evil in order that * can be free.” I don’t believe that. And I agree that “Freedom is never found in the choice of evil, and more freedom is not achieved by having ever more evil choices.” What did I say that made you conclude otherwise?

I already argued above and totally agree with you that free will is a gift and grace from God. But I don’t believe that God “set up” Eve and Adam to choose evil.

I’m probably missing something here having to do with the way I grasp your understanding of evil. How’s about instead of demagoguing me, you actually try one time and help me along? I’m no philosopher or theologian, but this does interest me.**
“Evil” is a failure to trust God. Sin is failure to trust God. Your argument assumes that God intended to test men in the first place, and this is not in the Biblical account of the fall.

Mormonism teaches that people are accountable for their sins according to their knowledge. It also teaches that Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil until after partaking of the forbidden fruit – and it teaches this as literal, not figurative. If, therefore, they were punished for being enticed by evil, how could they be accountable for this as they lacked knowledge of good and evil when enticed?

They did not trust God, and trust or lack of it is not a matter of knowledge of good or evil. This failure to trust broke their perfect communion with God, as a natural consequence, even before they partook of the fruit. PArtaking of the fruit merely manifested the lack of trust, It was not a matter of opposites.

Your argument is based on false assumptions.

 

[Peter_John]

LDS do not think we match the RCC and other Christian denominations on every point, obviously there are differences (or we’d all be in the same church)

LDS do believe we have additional revelation that you are missing. Take your example, please show me your source of doctrine that confirms our spirits had no premortal existence. I expect this is your supposition but the RCC has no revelation on the topic, hence the LDS could be right (additional revelation).

Tony, you cannot prove a negative thesis. Please provide a Biblical reference that can ONLY be interpreted to mean there is a premortal life.

Having said that:

1. There is no mention of the existence of man before the creation. There are references to god knowing us, but not to our having an independent existence. Hence, we existed as a dream in the heart of God, not as autonomous beings, and certainly not as intelligences co-eternal with God.
2. God breathed the breath of life into man, and man became a living soul (I realize LDS interpret “soul” as spirit and body – but it does not say God placed Man’s spirit in the body and man became a living soul. It says God breathed life into man, hence having no spirit before having a body)

3)Jesus stated that nobody but himself came down from Heaven.

1. Paul calls God the Father of our Spirits in Hebrews, but in 1 Corinthians 15 specifically states that first came the physical, then the spiritual. LDS teaching reverses that.
2. Zechariah begins Chapter 12 by stating that God forms “the spirit of man within him”, not forming the spirit first and then placing it within man.
3. In light of these references alone, any Biblical reference to God knowing us before we were born, like Jeremiah, have to be interpreted to mean that this was his having planned on us, not on his having created us already.

The Catholic Church has countless revelations on this. Ancient Saints, including Jerome, and countless popes have referred to it. Older writers refer to it as creation at birth, newer since science learned more of human gestation refer to it as creation at conception. It is why we hold such a strong anti-abortion stance. We do not have the room to consider that the spirit of an unborn child may get a chance to be born to someone else – we have no discussion over when the spirit enters the body. The spirit is created with the body, and each is unique and special, and when dead is gone to mortality.

 

[Tony888]

Tony, you cannot prove a negative thesis. Please provide a Biblical reference that can ONLY be interpreted to mean there is a premortal life.

Having said that:

1. There is no mention of the existence of man before the creation. There are references to god knowing us, but not to our having an independent existence. Hence, we existed as a dream in the heart of God, not as autonomous beings, and certainly not as intelligences co-eternal with God.
2. God breathed the breath of life into man, and man became a living soul (I realize LDS interpret “soul” as spirit and body – but it does not say God placed Man’s spirit in the body and man became a living soul. It says God breathed life into man, hence having no spirit before having a body)

3)Jesus stated that nobody but himself came down from Heaven.

1. Paul calls God the Father of our Spirits in Hebrews, but in 1 Corinthians 15 specifically states that first came the physical, then the spiritual. LDS teaching reverses that.
2. Zechariah begins Chapter 12 by stating that God forms “the spirit of man within him”, not forming the spirit first and then placing it within man.
3. In light of these references alone, any Biblical reference to God knowing us before we were born, like Jeremiah, have to be interpreted to mean that this was his having planned on us, not on his having created us already.

The Catholic Church has countless revelations on this. Ancient Saints, including Jerome, and countless popes have referred to it. Older writers refer to it as creation at birth, newer since science learned more of human gestation refer to it as creation at conception. It is why we hold such a strong anti-abortion stance. We do not have the room to consider that the spirit of an unborn child may get a chance to be born to someone else – we have no discussion over when the spirit enters the body. The spirit is created with the body, and each is unique and special, and when dead is gone to mortality.

Peter, I agree one cannot prove a negative, but that was Stephen’s doing.
I asked Stephen to show me where the LDS teaching was against his scripture. If it is not clearly against RCC doctrine, then it simply means there is a possibility the LDS are right, not a guarantee - remember, even a stopped watch is right twice per day

Thank you for sharing how the RCC has interpreted scripture to imply the soul is created at fertilization.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter, I agree one cannot prove a negative, but that was Stephen’s doing.
I asked Stephen to show me where the LDS teaching was against his scripture. If it is not clearly against RCC doctrine, then it simply means there is a possibility the LDS are right, not a guarantee - remember, even a stopped watch is right twice per day

Thank you for sharing how the RCC has interpreted scripture to imply the soul is created at fertilization.

While I think your description of my references still minces words, consider this:

These references, particularly those by Paul which lack ambiguity, fly on the face of the teachings of Joseph Smith.

Consider this: Joseph Smith taught that our intelligence is “co-eternal with God”. This means some small part of us, the essence of who and what we are, exist independently of God. As long as any part of us exists independently of God, we can believe in God’s absolute omnipotence, because something exists which he did not create, and hence over which he has no independent authority.

Such a being could only have relative omnipotence – that is complete power within specific realma, but not absolute power over everything. He would need our permission to do certain things with us, even to create our bodies. We could thwart his plans by choosing to reject his words. The Bible demonstrates a God who achieves all he intends whether men do his will or not, and even uses their disobedience as means to achieve his will anyway. That is omnipotence. The Doctrine and Covenants specifically makes it, within your faith, scriptural doctrine that when men do not do God’s will, God has to change his plans: "Behold this is my will, but men do not always do my will … ".

 

[Peter_John]

While I think your description of my references still minces words, consider this:

These references, particularly those by Paul which lack ambiguity, fly on the face of the teachings of Joseph Smith.

Consider this: Joseph Smith taught that our intelligence is “co-eternal with God”. This means some small part of us, the essence of who and what we are, exist independently of God. As long as any part of us exists independently of God, we can believe in God’s absolute omnipotence, because something exists which he did not create, and hence over which he has no independent authority.

Such a being could only have relative omnipotence – that is complete power within specific realma, but not absolute power over everything. He would need our permission to do certain things with us, even to create our bodies. We could thwart his plans by choosing to reject his words. The Bible demonstrates a God who achieves all he intends whether men do his will or not, and even uses their disobedience as means to achieve his will anyway. That is omnipotence. The Doctrine and Covenants specifically makes it, within your faith, scriptural doctrine that when men do not do God’s will, God has to change his plans: "Behold this is my will, but men do not always do my will … ".

Correcting a typo: As long as we believe any part of us exists independently of God we cannot believe in God’s absolute omnipotence.

 

[Peter_John]

The ever popular Mormon argumentum ad ignorantiam

Or in other words, “Not soap. Radio.”