Mormons: Please explain "Pre-existence".

  • Thread starter Thread starter SteveVH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SteveVH

Guest
The doctrine of “pre-existence”, in the form of uncreated “intelligences”, co-eternal with God, seems to color the viewpoint of Mormons in a variety of areas. I am curious as to where this doctrine originated and how it is dealt with considering biblical scriptural references to the contrary.

"praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him, all His hosts . . . for He spoke and they were made. He commanded and they were created" (Psalm 148:2-5).

"For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things and in him all things hold together." (Colassians 1:16-17)
 
A related issue here is “pre-existant matter”, again, co-eternal with God. I think this can be discussed as well as it all relates to the nature of God. Was He before all things or did some things exist from eternity with Him?
 
SteveVH said:
The doctrine of “pre-existence”, in the form of uncreated “intelligences”, co-eternal with God, seems to color the viewpoint of Mormons in a variety of areas. I am curious as to where this doctrine originated and how it is dealt with considering biblical scriptural references to the contrary.

"praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him, all His hosts . . . for He spoke and they were made. He commanded and they were created" (Psalm 148:2-5).

"For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things and in him all things hold together." (Colassians 1:16-17)
Click to expand...
I think this makes the supposition that the bodies that we are wearing are all that we are, rather than a temporary manifestation of what we really are. There is not a point in time where you and I came to be, nor is there a time when we will cease to be (“I knew you before you were in the womb”). Time itself is a persistently stubborn illusion. All moments, and all things are one. No part exists without the whole, nor does the whole exist without it’s parts. That which created the whole and it’s parts is outside the realm of both, and that which created them is not someone other than you. Without an observer there is nothing to be observed other than the potential of something to be observed, and something has always been observing. That something that has always been observing is not something other than you. Nothing is ever lost, nor does anything come and go. It only changes form. That which you are is formless. The forms you create are numberless.

Your friend,
Sufjon
 
From what I understand, angels in Mormonism are humans in their pre-existence, or humans who have already lived their earthly lives who are messengers of God.
 
Hi Steve. I haven’t had much time to spare for forums lately…

I’m just going to start this off with something very simple and hopefully some other LDS people are going to chime in and expand on it.

We are 2 parts - spirit and body.

LDS believe that the spirit is eternal, the body is created. Therefore, all the verses you posted that touched on creation (heaven and earth and all that are in it) refers to the body.

A body, therefore, dies - has a beginning, therefore, it will have to end as well.

The spirit does not end - it lives on. Therefore, logically, it makes sense that it wouldn’t have a beginning as well.

I understand the spirit in somewhat the same manner that I understand energy - energy cannot be created nor destroyed - but it can be organized or transformed.

Now, the really interesting application of this doctrine is the slight difference between the LDS and Catholic views on abortion.

Because the LDS believes that the spirit pre-existed the body, we believe that the spirit “enters” the body sometime between conception and birth - when exactly that happens has not been revealed. But, existing interpretation of what has been revealed is that this happens during the “quickening” - which is around the first trimester.

Therefore, a fetus that is miscarriaged may not have been a spirit that passed onto post-mortal existence without benefit of experiencing mortality. So that, a female who conceived through rape may elect to terminate the pregnancy before the “quickening” and be sinless. LDS leadership do encourage women who are rape victims to carry the fetus to term and choose that the baby be adopted instead. But it remains a choice for the woman through prayer and an appeal to God through the power of the Holy Spirit to make this decision.

So yeah, this is possible because of the LDS doctrine of pre-existence.

Note: LDS believes that aborting a baby at any time is a grievous sin if the baby was conceived through consentual sex.
 
pinay said:
Hi Steve. I haven’t had much time to spare for forums lately…

I’m just going to start this off with something very simple and hopefully some other LDS people are going to chime in and expand on it.

We are 2 parts - spirit and body.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
pinay said:
LDS believe that the spirit is eternal, the body is created. Therefore, all the verses you posted that touched on creation (heaven and earth and all that are in it) refers to the body.
Click to expand...
"For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible".
Click to expand...
Physical bodies are, by their very nature, visible. The Scripture disagrees with you. Angels are pure spirit and intelligence and are heavenly creatures. They were also created; they had a beginning. I think it is fair to say that the plain meaning Paul was conveying is that there is nothing that exists, in heaven or on earth, that was not created by God.
pinay said:
A body, therefore, dies - has a beginning, therefore, it will have to end as well.

The spirit does not end - it lives on. Therefore, logically, it makes sense that it wouldn’t have a beginning as well.
Click to expand...
Why? Are you saying God coud not create something that does not die but will live forever?
pinay said:
I understand the spirit in somewhat the same manner that I understand energy - energy cannot be created nor destroyed - but it can be organized or transformed.
Click to expand...
It cannot be created or destroyed by man. My understanding of God is that He is all powerful, not somewhat powerful. He said “Let there be light, and there was light”.
Sounds like the creation of energy to me.
pinay said:
Now, the really interesting application of this doctrine is the slight difference between the LDS and Catholic views on abortion.

Because the LDS believes that the spirit pre-existed the body, we believe that the spirit “enters” the body sometime between conception and birth - when exactly that happens has not been revealed. But, existing interpretation of what has been revealed is that this happens during the “quickening” - which is around the first trimester.

Therefore, a fetus that is miscarriaged may not have been a spirit that passed onto post-mortal existence without benefit of experiencing mortality. So that, a female who conceived through rape may elect to terminate the pregnancy before the “quickening” and be sinless. LDS leadership do encourage women who are rape victims to carry the fetus to term and choose that the baby be adopted instead. But it remains a choice for the woman through prayer and an appeal to God through the power of the Holy Spirit to make this decision.

So yeah, this is possible because of the LDS doctrine of pre-existence.

Note: LDS believes that aborting a baby at any time is a grievous sin if the baby was conceived through consentual sex.
Click to expand...
Interesting, and related, but if you don’t mind maybe we can discuss this a little later. This issue has a tendancy to take on a life of its own. I would rather concentrate on the ramifications of anything being co-eternal with God. It speaks to His power and supremacy in all things and is a fundemental difference between Mormons and the rest of Christianity.
 
I’m curious about this subject myself.

I thought maybe it had something to do with how God created the world through the spoken word, but humankind he breathed life into. In that aspect would we not all have a spark of God’s divine eternal essence inside us?

I also have Jewish friends who believe all souls were created at the beginning of time.
 
Auriel said:
I’m curious about this subject myself.

I thought maybe it had something to do with how God created the world through the spoken word, but humankind he breathed life into. In that aspect would we not all have a spark of God’s divine eternal essence inside us?

I also have Jewish friends who believe all souls were created at the beginning of time.
Click to expand...
No, this has to do with the belief that that we are co-eternal with God. That would mean uncreated, having no beginning. In other words, God had no choice nor any part in our pre-mortal existence.

The Christian belief is that we were created at the moment of conception, body and soul. We believe that God is supreme, the first cause of all that exists. The LDS do not believe this. God himself, if I am correct, was once a man who became exalted. God was just another “intelligence” floating around prior to becoming mortal and then was exalted to a divine state. If I am wrong I am open to correction by any Mormon poster.
 
pinay said:
Hi Steve. I haven’t had much time to spare for forums lately…

I’m just going to start this off with something very simple and hopefully some other LDS people are going to chime in and expand on it.

We are 2 parts - spirit and body.

LDS believe that the spirit is eternal, the body is created. Therefore, all the verses you posted that touched on creation (heaven and earth and all that are in it) refers to the body.
Click to expand...
I’ve always thought according to LDS we are three parts; intelligence(which is eternal) spirit body, created by Heavenly Father and Mother (how we are literally the off spring of Heavenly Parents) and our mortal bodies.
pinay said:
The spirit does not end - it lives on. Therefore, logically, it makes sense that it wouldn’t have a beginning as well.

.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how a spirit having no end leads “logically” to it having no beginning.
 
SteveVH said:
No, this has to do with the belief that that we are co-eternal with God. That would mean uncreated, having no beginning. In other words, God had no choice nor any part in our pre-mortal existence.

The Christian belief is that we were created at the moment of conception, body and soul. We believe that God is supreme, the first cause of all that exists. The LDS do not believe this. God himself, if I am correct, was once a man who became exalted. God was just another “intelligence” floating around prior to becoming mortal and then was exalted to a divine state. If I am wrong I am open to correction by any Mormon poster.
Click to expand...
SteveVH,

It is significantly important if you are trying to understand the LDS belief, to understand that there is a difference between an “intelligence” and a “spirit”. We don’t know much at all about what an “intelligence” is, except knowing that Jesus was the foremost and greatest by far of all the intelligences, and was the First Born spirit as the Only Begotten Son of God.

God the Father brought each of us forth as spirits and became our Father in Heaven as our spirit Father. He had been once a Perfect Man of Holiness just like Jesus was a Perfect Man of Holiness, who lived on an earth before Jesus lived on our earth. But it is neither our place nor our need to understand how that happened eons of time ago, but it is also incorrect to think that He was an “intelligence floating around prior to becoming mortal”. “Intelligences” evidently had some ability to exercise free will choice and to comprehend truths of eternity–and Christ excelled all other intelligences in doing so perfectly.

From our vantage point, both the Father and the Son are the same “from all eternity to all eternity”, because They “comprehend all things”, and are “above all things”, and “in all things”, and “through all things”, and “round about all things” and they love us perfectly with perfect knowledge of who we are and what we can become through Them. (Doctrine and Covenants 88:6, 41, and entire section)
 
ParkerD said:
SteveVH,
It is significantly important if you are trying to understand the LDS belief, to understand that there is a difference between an “intelligence” and a “spirit”. We don’t know much at all about what an “intelligence” is, except knowing that Jesus was the foremost and greatest by far of all the intelligences, and was the First Born spirit as the Only Begotten Son of God.
Click to expand...
Parker, the reason you “don’t know much at all about what an ‘intelligence’ is” is because it flies completely in the face of reason. To believe that “intelligences” are co-eternal with God necessarily means that they were not created by God which means that we, in our essence, were not created by God. You do not seem to grasp the difference between the Creator and the creature. It is one thing to say that God has no beginning and no end. When you apply this to created things, whether “intelligences” or matter, you confuse the two and diminish God’s supremacy over all things. You are saying the painting painted itself, rather than rightly attributing it to the Artist.
ParkerD said:
God the Father brought each of us forth as spirits and became our Father in Heaven as our spirit Father.
Click to expand...
God has never “become” anything. He IS. His very name is I AM, not I HAVE BECOME.
God is eternally the Father, He has never been anything other than the Father. This is not in relationship to us, but rather in relationship to the eternal Son. It is we who will “become” adopted sons and daughters.
ParkerD said:
He had been once a Perfect Man of Holiness just like Jesus was a Perfect Man of Holiness, who lived on an earth before Jesus lived on our earth. But it is neither our place nor our need to understand how that happened eons of time ago, but it is also incorrect to think that He was an “intelligence floating around prior to becoming mortal”. “Intelligences” evidently had some ability to exercise free will choice and to comprehend truths of eternity–and Christ excelled all other intelligences in doing so perfectly.
Click to expand...
But Jesus was God before he became man so I don’t see the analogy. Or maybe you don’t believe this. Parker, this is absolute heresy. God has always been God and will always be God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit, without beginning and without end. Again, you confuse the Creator with the created. And why, if the Father was once a perfect man who progressed to a divine state, is it incorrect to say that He was first an “intelligence floating around prior to becoming mortal”. Is this not the essence of all men? Was He first God, or was He first mortal? You say that Christ was an intelligence, just a more intelligent intelligence, apparently. Why not the same with the Father?
ParkerD said:
From our vantage point, both the Father and the Son are the same “from all eternity to all eternity”, because They “comprehend all things”, and are “above all things”, and “in all things”, and “through all things”, and “round about all things” and they love us perfectly with perfect knowledge of who we are and what we can become through Them. (Doctrine and Covenants 88:6, 41, and entire section)
Click to expand...
This statement absolutely conflicts with your statement that God was first a man. Men have a beginning. If God was first a man then He had a beginning as well and you cannot say that He is the same “from all eternity to all eternity”.
 
SteveVH said:
Parker, the reason you “don’t know much at all about what an ‘intelligence’ is” is because it flies completely in the face of reason. To believe that “intelligences” are co-eternal with God necessarily means that they were not created by God which means that we, in our essence, were not created by God. You do not seem to grasp the difference between the Creator and the creature. It is one thing to say that God has no beginning and no end. When you apply this to created things, whether “intelligences” or matter, you confuse the two and diminish God’s supremacy over all things. You are saying the painting painted itself, rather than rightly attributing it to the Artist.

God has never “become” anything. He IS. His very name is I AM, not I HAVE BECOME.
God is eternally the Father, He has never been anything other than the Father. This is not in relationship to us, but rather in relationship to the eternal Son. It is we who will “become” adopted sons and daughters.

But Jesus was God before he became man so I don’t see the analogy. Or maybe you don’t believe this. Parker, this is absolute heresy. God has always been God and will always be God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit, without beginning and without end. Again, you confuse the Creator with the created. And why, if the Father was once a perfect man who progressed to a divine state, is it incorrect to say that He was first an “intelligence floating around prior to becoming mortal”. Is this not the essence of all men? Was He first God, or was He first mortal? You say that Christ was an intelligence, just a more intelligent intelligence, apparently. Why not the same with the Father?

This statement absolutely conflicts with your statement that God was first a man. Men have a beginning. If God was first a man then He had a beginning as well and you cannot say that He is the same “from all eternity to all eternity”.
Click to expand...
Bump.
 
Parker aptly lays out the whole of it, I believe. God is more of an organizer, than a creator, in my view.
ParkerD said:
SteveVH,

It is significantly important if you are trying to understand the LDS belief, to understand that there is a difference between an “intelligence” and a “spirit”. We don’t know much at all about what an “intelligence” is, except knowing that Jesus was the foremost and greatest by far of all the intelligences, and was the First Born spirit as the Only Begotten Son of God.

God the Father brought each of us forth as spirits and became our Father in Heaven as our spirit Father. He had been once a Perfect Man of Holiness just like Jesus was a Perfect Man of Holiness, who lived on an earth before Jesus lived on our earth. But it is neither our place nor our need to understand how that happened eons of time ago, but it is also incorrect to think that He was an “intelligence floating around prior to becoming mortal”. “Intelligences” evidently had some ability to exercise free will choice and to comprehend truths of eternity–and Christ excelled all other intelligences in doing so perfectly.

From our vantage point, both the Father and the Son are the same “from all eternity to all eternity”, because They “comprehend all things”, and are “above all things”, and “in all things”, and “through all things”, and “round about all things” and they love us perfectly with perfect knowledge of who we are and what we can become through Them. (Doctrine and Covenants 88:6, 41, and entire section)
Click to expand...
 
SteveVH said:
The doctrine of “pre-existence”, in the form of uncreated “intelligences”, co-eternal with God, seems to color the viewpoint of Mormons in a variety of areas. I am curious as to where this doctrine originated and how it is dealt with considering biblical scriptural references to the contrary.

"praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him, all His hosts . . . for He spoke and they were made. He commanded and they were created" (Psalm 148:2-5).

"For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things and in him all things hold together." (Colassians 1:16-17)
Click to expand...
The majority of Biblical scholarship does not believe the Bible teaches creatio ex nihilio, including some conservatives like Richard Bauckham, and the new author of The Lost World of Genesis One. The word create in Hebrew is barah, which means to fashion out of pre-existing material.
SteveVH said:
Why? Are you saying God coud not create something that does not die but will live forever?
Click to expand...
It’s funny because traditional theists use this same argument against Mormons in terms of evil. If God didn’t create evil (which Mormons don’t believe), can he get ride of it?

Immanuel Kant was the first to say that if the spirit is eternal, it must be eternal both ways.
 
CougaNova said:
The majority of Biblical scholarship does not believe the Bible teaches creatio ex nihilio, including some conservatives like Richard Bauckham, and the new author of The Lost World of Genesis One. The word create in Hebrew is barah, which means to fashion out of pre-existing material.
Click to expand...
Please provide support for the “majority of Biblical scholarship” assertion.
 
zaffiroborant said:
Please provide support for the “majority of Biblical scholarship” assertion.
Click to expand...
Here it is:
One example of these tensions is seen in Genesis 1:1-2. Biblical scholars today—including most evangelical scholars—understand the act of creation in Genesis 1:1-2 to be describing not creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) but the ordering of pre-existent chaotic material.
Click to expand...
biologos.org/blog/evolution-and-our-theological-traditions-calvinism-part-4/
 
And just for fun here are what some Catholic scholars have to save about it:

The following is from the Pontifical Institute:
■“It has long been recognized by Bible scholars that the Priestly account of creation of the world [in Genesis 1] reveals traces of Mesopotamian influence. This influence is most apparent in the cosmological presuppositions, and in this sense the Priestly account differs significantly in outlook from that of the Yahwist [in Genesis 2]. For example, where as the Yahwist record envisages the primeval state as a desert needing water to make it fertile, the Priestly presupposes the existence of an unformed chaos enveloped in primeval darkness…. The world is pictured as “being then a formless waste, with darkness over the seas,” in short a watery caos (sic). The passage concerned seems to indicate a situation in which the world is envisaged as immersed in the thwm, the ‘seas.’ As further development of the idea shows, the chief features of the primeval chaos were those of the raw material of the universe.” Luis I. J. Stadelmann, S.J., The Hebrew Conception of the World (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1970), 12.
Click to expand...
lehislibrary.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/baracreate-in-ancient-israel-what-do-the-bible-and-the-scholars-say/

The following is from a Benedictine Priest, Stanley Jaki:
The caution which is in order about taking the [Hebrew] verb bara in the sense of creation out of nothing is no less needed in reference to the [English] word creation. Nothing is more natural, and unadvised, at the same time, than to use the word as if it has always denoted creation out of nothing. In its basic etymological origin the word creation meant the purely natural process of growing or of making something to grow. This should be obvious by a mere recall of the [Latin] verb crescere. The crescent moon [derived from crescere] is not creating but merely growing. The expression ex nihilo or de nihilo had to be fastened, from around 200 A.D. on, by Christian theologians on the verb creare to convey unmistakably a process, strict creation, which only God can perform. Only through the long-standing use of those very Latin expressions, creare ex nihilo and creatio ex nihilo, could the English words to create and creation take on the meaning which excludes pre-existing matter.2
Click to expand...
fairlds.org/New_Mormon_Challenge/TNMC04.html
 
CougaNova said:
And just for fun here are what some Catholic scholars have to save about it:

The following is from the Pontifical Institute:

lehislibrary.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/baracreate-in-ancient-israel-what-do-the-bible-and-the-scholars-say/

The following is from a Benedictine Priest, Stanley Jaki:

fairlds.org/New_Mormon_Challenge/TNMC04.html
Click to expand...
Ah, quote mining from a site that quote mines, somehow I think that if one were to read both of your quotes in context a Catholic understanding would be evident.
 
zaffiroborant said:
There is nothing there to support your assertion “the majority of Biblical Scholars” and goes on to discuss how other passages can be read as creation out of nothing and saying the issue is far from settled.
Click to expand...
Well gee, if the majority of evangelical Biblical scholars (the most conservative) support the unorthodox reading, why wouldn’t the liberals? And I never claimed it was settled, just majority support.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top