Mormon Beliefs on Creation: the Earth, the Universe?

[RebeccaJ]

Polytheism is defined to be the belief in or worship of many gods. Regardless of what Mormons believe about the presence of multiple gods, they worship only one God by their own confession. At “worst” this is henotheism, though I’m not sure what it is about the epithet of “polytheism” that makes it so distasteful. Mormons also believe that the current prophet trumps whatever past prophets have said, and if the doctrine of multiple gods is no longer in particular favor, then Mormons have no problem with that. Ex-mormons have to imagine ulterior motives to that shift, and maybe they’re right. Or maybe it’s just that such shenanigans work for them.

My point exactly. And Mormons have never taught that just because there is a heavenly mother or a plurality of gods, that they are hence polytheistic. Mormons have very little to say about whatever other gods there might be out there; what their roles are and so forth. Even the idea of “heavenly mother” is fairly speculative and not taught in Mormon doctrine today. Sure, Mormons still talk about it from time to time and the old-time Mormons sure said plenty about it.

There is only one God that Mormons are taught to believe in. Other gods are mentioned and have been mentioned in the past. Brigham Young had a whole Adam-God theory, for instance, that is rejected by modern Mormon leaders. While Mormons seem to understand that there are many godly beings in the universe, we aren’t taught to “believe in them”, or to worship them, or to ask them to elevate our petitions to the Arch God, or to even give them the title of God with a capital-G. Critics make Mormons offenders for a word when Mormons use “god” to describe these beings.

Yes, you remember just like the ex-what-have-yous also remember so clearly what they were taught as adherents to their former faiths. And I remember pretty clearly too, since I regularly attend Mormon meetings and, in fact, currently instruct Mormons in their own faith–and I go by the book. Nobody comes to church to hear my agnostic rants.

Mormons don’t care what the old Mormon leaders said back in the day, so long as current leaders don’t care either.

I can hardly lay out for you what you should believe about the plurality of Gods since, in my opinion, we happen to be arguing about made-up stuff anyway. My opinion is that you and I are inevitable accidents; mere results of spontaneous complexity. We inhabit a meaningless universe and when we die, we’ll be dead.

But the Mormons would probably tell you: don’t worry about believing anything about a plethora of gods because “it isn’t important to your salvation.” Worship God the Father in the name of the Son and you will be blessed by the Holy Ghost. That’s what Mormons are into these days, in spite of how badly their critics need them to be adherents to the more shocking teachings of the past, since those are apparently easier to make fun of.

pccombs, henotheism is a form of polytheism, so what is your point.

All the rest of your post is just equivocation at best, at the worse, you’re saying Mormonism teaches its members false teachings and if such people repeat what they were taught, they’re “anti Mormons”.

I’m giving you the big capital “W”, for WHATEVER.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Sounds a lot like Aquinas’ argument from Order. Since there is order, there must have been an orderer, which is God.

But if God is a being of order and not chaos, says the philosopher, then God must have had a creator also, by the argument’s own logic… hence, the argument is either a contradiction or an infinite regress. Joseph Smith favors the regress over the contradiction, apparently.

A regression of gods has nothing to do with God (singular).

One, a regression of gods is a false god, which IS idolatry.

The other is God.

 

[RebeccaJ]

If the non-modal trinitarian God is three distinct persons in one substance (asks the Jew and the Muslim), isn’t that really polytheism too? Nowhere in the dictionary does “polytheism” make a distinction between “beings” and “persons” or the philosophical sophistries surrounding “substance.” To non Christian monotheists, all Christians are clearly and unequivocally polytheists by definition.

The Mormon idea of monotheism is broad enough for the Mormon to feel justified in classifying himself as a monotheist. When he prays, he always prays only to the Father, and ever has since the beginning of his Church in spite of whatever other ideas have surfaced about the nature of God and of gods.

Polytheism is the belief in the existence of more than one god. Whether or not extra gods are worshipped, doesn’t matter.

Christian teaching and belief is clear, there is ONE GOD. Period. No possibility of a regression of gods, or a plurality of gods or a million gods. ONE GOD, and One God alone, who is worshipped and glorified. Not because we’re ignoring a multitude of other gods, but because there are NO other gods. They don’t exist, except in the imagination of Joseph Smith, who Mormons follow.

 

[kimg901]

My point excactly. Mormons dont care what their old prophets said? So you guys believe in a " Make it as we go religion?" So your telling me J.S and his revelations dont matter as long as the current prophet doesnt care? Lets just change our history right now!!!

 

[pmccombs]

A regression of gods has nothing to do with God (singular).

One, a regression of gods is a false god, which IS idolatry.

The other is God.

I merely posited a rational point about Aquinas’ argument from Order. If the argument is sound, then either it is a contradiction, and it is possible to have order without God, or else the orderer must have had a prior orderer, and the argument itself implies that God was created by some other thing. This problem was not lost on many religious thinkers, who began to consider where God himself came from.

 

[Razanir]

I have two questions:

1. How do the LDS church explain Isaiah 44:8 [BIBLEDRB]Isaiah 44:8[/BIBLEDRB]
2. What do they teach about Bible literalism? I have a friend who’s Mormon and believes the Earth is flat, so I’m wondering how common this belief is

 

[pmccombs]

Polytheism is the belief in the existence of more than one god. Whether or not extra gods are worshipped, doesn’t matter.

What is belief? And, yes, I believe that worship does indeed matter. Some dictionaries call it out specifically, and it makes sense to me that there is no point in polytheism unless worship is involved. Mere acknowledgement of something called “gods” is a semantics hair-splitting and only important to pedants, in my view.

Christian teaching and belief is clear, there is ONE GOD. Period. No possibility of a regression of gods, or a plurality of gods or a million gods. ONE GOD, and One God alone, who is worshipped and glorified. Not because we’re ignoring a multitude of other gods, but because there are NO other gods. They don’t exist, except in the imagination of Joseph Smith, who Mormons follow.

While we’re being pedantic, the critics of Christianity say that you are flat wrong. Why do Christians say they believe one thing when really they don’t? Non-modal trinitarianism is clearly and obviously, without question, and beyond doubt or reasonable argument, polytheism because it admits there are three persons in the trinity. Three is more than one; it’s the acknowledged existence of more than one god, and the “single substance” doctrine is viewed as a weak and nonsensical excuse to appear monotheistic when in fact the whole religion is blatant polytheism. Beyond that, even Catholics believe that Saints have some sort of virtue and power in the afterlife on behalf of humanity, at least a certain influence on God. Whether these are called gods or something else, they belong in a pantheon of minor deities similar to those found in ancient religions.

Anyway, what was the problem with polytheism, again? Why is that a bad word? Mormons and Catholics think of themselves as monotheistic and get all grumpy when someone says they aren’t Why would it be a faith-destroying thing to suppose there are multiple deities of some sort?

 

[pmccombs]

My point excactly. Mormons dont care what their old prophets said? So you guys believe in a " Make it as we go religion?" So your telling me J.S and his revelations dont matter as long as the current prophet doesnt care? Lets just change our history right now!!!

 

[pmccombs]

pccombs, henotheism is a form of polytheism, so what is your point.

All the rest of your post is just equivocation at best, at the worse, you’re saying Mormonism teaches its members false teachings and if such people repeat what they were taught, they’re “anti Mormons”.

I’m giving you the big capital “W”, for WHATEVER.

Yay, I only need to win 7 more letters!

Ok, I see. I figured there is a continuum between pure polytheism and pure monotheism. But, let us simplify everything not-monotheism as polytheism, as you have done. I thus declare henotheism, modalism, trinitarianism, tritheism, and social trinitarianism as polytheistic because they all make some claim about a plural nature of God. Maybe it’s One God, but other minor gods we don’t care about as in henotheism; One God but multiple personalities as in modalism; Three Gods in One godhead as in tritheism; Three persons in one substance called God as in trinitarianism; three beings perfectly united in One godhead as in social trinitarianism. It’s all polytheism by strict definition because it introduces a multiplicity.

I admit you’re right about equivocation. If I take monotheism and polytheism at their face value, I have to admit that any Christian claiming to be monotheistic is equivocating to some degree. Monotheism is one God with no multiple personalities, or mystical unities of multiple persons in one Ineffable Substance, or multiple beings in perfect unity, or so forth. You can’t say ONE GOD and then say, “Father, son, and Holy Ghost” without equivocating. I know the difference between one and three, and no special-case metaphysics erases that distinction. Pure monotheists don’t need for their God to be fractured up to handle special roles; He’s omnipotent and can do what He needs without expressing some other Person or function–that must be theologically acknowledged–to cover all the bases.

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt when they interpret their own meaning for “monotheism,” though. I am representing what I think Mormons think about themselves. I accept that equivocation is sometimes necessary to the religiously minded, and it doesn’t bother me. I do believe there is some latitude in definitions when they are applied to religious convictions where more than mere logic is at play. If the Catholic or Mormon claims to be monotheistic, I’ll accept that. Whatever labels we feel apply to our particular beliefs, I believe ought to be understood and respected by those who also take similar liberties.

People who deliberately repeat what they were taught in a former religion, with a new understanding of what it means and a new interpretation of it that places the former belief as false and reprehensible in light of the new beliefs, are indeed “anti” with regard to the old beliefs. That seems to me a self-evident truth.

You’re also right about anti-Mormons. Naturally, the Mormons teach their people only truths, just some of them are different and contradictory truths from what Catholics teach. However, ex-members of religions don’t simply repeat what they understood in the old faith, they also attach the new-found values to that thing and interpret it according to the new worldview. Hence, the faithful Mormon can accept that the Godhead is three beings and still believe himself to be Monotheistic because of certain qualifications about the title of God the Father, or the unity of the Godhead or whatever, but the perfectly intelligent Ex-Mormon claims just the opposite and no longer allows for the considerations once accepted as a former believer. That’s why some perfectly intelligent ex-Catholics do admit they were once polytheists before they converted to Islam and that they bowed down to idols and images even though faithful Catholics stridently deny such things are ever taught in Catholicism. Same experience, different interpretations of it over time, and different allowance for former considerations. Yes, different understandings of definitions. Equivocation. It’s part of the religious experience, for we must live in the stories we weave for ourselves.

 

[Stephen168]

Polytheism is defined to be the belief in or worship of many gods. Regardless of what Mormons believe about the presence of multiple gods, they worship only one God by their own confession. At “worst” this is henotheism, though I’m not sure what it is about the epithet of “polytheism” that makes it so distasteful. Mormons also believe that the current prophet trumps whatever past prophets have said, and if the doctrine of multiple gods is no longer in particular favor, then Mormons have no problem with that.

You believe in multiple gods until the president says there are not multiple gods. There is no truth in mormonism.

 

[pmccombs]

You believe in multiple gods until the president says there are not multiple gods. There is no truth in mormonism.

I would say that is a complete mis-characterization and deliberate unwillingness to understand Mormonism. The president has never said “there are not multiple gods.” Mormons are taught to worship God and to pray to him only, and have always been taught that and never that active belief in other gods or worship of them is necessary to anything. In the past, Mormons speculated and talked about gods, it is true. The Mormon prophet isn’t talking about other gods today, nor furthering that doctrine as necessary to Mormon faith. It isn’t important to him, nor to the Mormons who follow him.

Why are such uncharitable statements made? Let us accept what you have said; it is now a falsehood that we ought to treat each other as we wish to be treated–a tenet of Mormonism in which there is no truth by your own declaration. Mormons hold high standards of moral living, all false by your assessment. Let us forsake them.

The only thing in Mormonism is truth, as it is in Catholicism and every other religion where the people are a people of good will and sincere belief. But every faith has its adherents who are converted, it seems, more against their old faith than they are toward their new one–and these have no desire to allow their former fellows to represent themselves and their own point of view. Are you one of these?

 

[RebeccaJ]

I merely posited a rational point about Aquinas’ argument from Order. If the argument is sound, then either it is a contradiction, and it is possible to have order without God, or else the orderer must have had a prior orderer, and the argument itself implies that God was created by some other thing. This problem was not lost on many religious thinkers, who began to consider where God himself came from.

This is your belief, and not an implication of Aquinas.

 

[Porknpie]

PM -

I’m going to try and simply responses…Let me know if the below is correct. I’ll rephrase the question(s) to simplify and what I understand to be the LDS belief. Remember, I’m a raised Chicago boy who likes to keep it simple.

My Question: What is LDS church teaching on who created the Earth?

Your Answer: Jesus did and this is LDS doctrine per the Gospel Principles book.

My Question: Who created the Universe?

Your Answer: “They believe that God created “worlds without number,” however. It is not uncommon for Mormons to believe that everything in the Universe is of God’s creation.”

You also responded: “their current theology posits that there is only One God with whom we have anything to do and about whom any knowledge is necessary”

My New Question #1: I’m still not clear on who is the God that you refer to above? The Father, The Son or the Holy Spirit? LivingWaters says referring to them as three Gods is OK.

Latter-day Saints believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three Divine Persons who are separate from each other (i.e. they are not each other). The Father is the Father, the Son is the Son, the Holy Ghost is the Holy Ghost. One is not the other. Because they are distinct from each other, and each is Divine, Latter-day Saints are okay with referring to them as “Gods”, or "three Gods.

My Question: is the Old Testament considered inspired and infallible?

Your Answer: It is considered inspired, but not infallible.

My New Question #2: Is the New Testament inspired and infallible? (I think you are going to say yes and no)

My New Question #3: Is there another LDS book that is inspired and infallible? (BoM, BoA etc)

I’m in Scottsdale, AZ for a couple days…then connecting through SLC on Tuesday. I’ll be sure to

 

[zaffiroborant]

There have been various emphases in Mormonism over the years, but Mormons’ beliefs today are not so much different from those of other Christian faiths. .

Nonsense, no other Christian faith believes that God the Father is dependent on a “Heavenly Mother” to create his “offspring”.

 

[Stephen168]

The president has never said “there are not multiple gods.”

Joseph Smith did, until he said there are. And God had been a man. Young said Adam was God. Then Adam wasn’t God. There is no trinity, now there is a trinity just not a Christian trinity.

I never said the president said there are not multiple gods. You said, if he said it, that would be OK with Mormons. And by Mormon history, I believe you. But it also points out another reason why Mormonism is a false religion.

 

[Razanir]

Nonsense, no other Christian faith believes that God the Father is dependent on a “Heavenly Mother” to create his “offspring”.

With this, I’ve always wondering how LDS and other non-Trinitarian groups justify their view. In Exodus and again in Isaiah, God is pretty clear that he is the only god that exists. And yet, these groups will translate John 1:1 to say “…and the word was a god” (emphasis mine).

Your Answer: It is considered inspired, but not infallible.

My New Question #2: Is the New Testament inspired and infallible? (I think you are going to say yes and no)

My New Question #3: Is there another LDS book that is inspired and infallible? (BoM, BoA etc)

What do LDS teach about biblical literalism? Again, I ask because one of my friends back home is LDS and interprets the Bible so literally as to believe the Earth is flat (which kinda breaks physics and calculus… ) So my real question with this is how wide-spread of a belief is this? Is it normal for LDS to be flat-Earthers or is this just an extreme example?

 

[RebeccaJ]

What is belief? And, yes, I believe that worship does indeed matter. Some dictionaries call it out specifically, and it makes sense to me that there is no point in polytheism unless worship is involved. Mere acknowledgement of something called “gods” is a semantics hair-splitting and only important to pedants, in my view.

The importance is:

1. Mormon belief about God informs everything else that goes on. The implications are endless.
2. A God who is not GOD, but one of many gods, is NOT omni-anything. Therefore, is not God, but a god of invention, aka, idolatry. Idolatry is a sin.

While we’re being pedantic, the critics of Christianity say that you are flat wrong. Why do Christians say they believe one thing when really they don’t? Non-modal trinitarianism is clearly and obviously, without question, and beyond doubt or reasonable argument, polytheism because it admits there are three persons in the trinity. Three is more than one; it’s the acknowledged existence of more than one god, and the “single substance” doctrine is viewed as a weak and nonsensical excuse to appear monotheistic when in fact the whole religion is blatant polytheism.

The Holy Trinity is not three Gods. That you can’t get over your Mormon idea of God, and applying your errors to Christianity, doesn’t make us polytheistic. Maybe it shows a desire to not understand.

Beyond that, even Catholics believe that Saints have some sort of virtue and power in the afterlife on behalf of humanity, at least a certain influence on God. Whether these are called gods or something else, they belong in a pantheon of minor deities similar to those found in ancient religions.

Saints are not deities, they aren’t divine. They are not gods and no one believes they are. They don’t influence God, as that is a Mormon idea of God as nothing more than some guy that can be coerced. God is not coerced.

What the Saints can do is pray on our behalf, and since we believe they are holy (what Mormons would call sanctified) in the immediate presence of God and their petitions on our behalf are heard.

There is no pantheon of Saints.

A pantheon of gods is a pantheon of gods, and that is what Mormons have. Three gods in a triad, a goddess mother, the dead who are divinized, and a clear doctrine of a Council of Gods. Who cares whether you worship them or not? God is God and there is no other God. Only in your imagination.

Anyway, what was the problem with polytheism, again? Why is that a bad word? Mormons and Catholics think of themselves as monotheistic and get all grumpy when someone says they aren’t Why would it be a faith-destroying thing to suppose there are multiple deities of some sort?

See my post above.

 

[truthseeker32]

I merely posited a rational point about Aquinas’ argument from Order. If the argument is sound, then either it is a contradiction, and it is possible to have order without God, or else the orderer must have had a prior orderer, and the argument itself implies that God was created by some other thing. This problem was not lost on many religious thinkers, who began to consider where God himself came from.

This is a very poor understanding of Aquinas that doesn’t do him justice. I recommend reading him again, if you ever did in the first place.

You are spouting the often used, and poor “who created God?” objection. It is an objection that fails to understand the god Aquinas, and all classical theists believe in. It is not an anthropomorphic and changing God. It is a god that is simple, pure act, and more a verb than a noun. The god of classical theism is the solution to the problem of infinite regression: a cause that requires no other cause, not another link in the regression change.

God is not ordered, he is order; God is not loving, he is love; God is not an actor, he is action.

For further reading on this subject, I recommend the following:
edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-incompetent-hack.html

 

[kimg901]

If you belive you yourself will be a god and others before you are gods then how are you not polythiest? You know the 10 commandments yet to try and fool everyone around you in thinking your not but your church history says otherwise. You can tell everyone here till your blue in the face but there are ex-mormons here that know the truth. When will you realize you have been decieved by a man? God would not decieve you or Jesus. But yet you limit God and Jesus simply by saying there needed to be a restoration of their church. That makes them liars and incompetent. Is that what mormonism is saying about God? The same God you say you worship and praise? Just because you say you believe in Jesus doesnt make you a christian unless you believe in the words He spoke while on this earth. You are the rock in which I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail.