Ask a Mormon, Part 3

[Eran of Arcadia]

But why would He set up such a system in the first place?

What do you mean, set up the system? He created us, in that sense he is our father. he could have created some elaborate system that did otherwise, but the only way for us to be spiritually not siblins is - ironically, considering - if we were created by different gods.

But why should we worship "our" God then, if we aren't sure that He's the original? If we, as gods ourselves, would get our greatness from the Father, wouldn't Jehovah receive His greatness from the God who created Him, and so forth? Why bother with worshiping a "lower" God at all?

We worship Him because He created us, and He is the only God we know.

I think the idea of multiple omnipotent beings is rather contradictory. Could God do so? I dunno. Would He? Well, I see no reason to believe He would.

I didn't say there would be multiple omnipotent beings. I don't think even God is omnipotent in the strictest sense of the word. And if you are going to be talking about not believing that He can do something, neither do you.

 

[Camber]

I'm a little late to the conversation, and I might muddy the waters too much, but I'll give the Jesus-Satan brotherhood question a shot.

The basic building blocks of souls is something called "intelligences" in LDS theology. If you've read the Ender's Game series by Orson Scott Card, you will see the same (or a very similar) concept labeled as aiua (read Children of the Mind), a preexisting bit of intelligence that has always been, and will always be.

God organized these intelligences into souls, what we call his spirit children. We believe as Paul stated that God is the father of all, including all of the beings that traditional Christian theology refers to as angels and demons.

Each of these intelligences had their own traits, quirks, and sensibilities. God did not give them these; he merely organized them to give them the opportunity to progress further to a more advanced state. Some have a greater capacity for learning and expansion, others have a greater tendency toward obedience, trust, and so on. Some are more rebellious, but that is not the fault of the creator.

Traditional creation-from-nothing theology puts the blame for all sin eventually on God's shoulders. If He alone created us, including giving us Human Nature, we are victims of our creation if we are sinful, fallen, etc. Traditional theology also posits that God gave us free will, thereby again putting any sin eventually on his shoulders again.

Mormon theology holds that intelligences have free will, that it isn't a God-given trait. Although He organized us, he did not did not determine our fundamental properties. Of course, this is high heresy to many Christians--to them, any God who isn't the First Cause of all things could not possibly be the real God.

Back to the topic.

When God organized our intelligences to become His spirit children, he gave us spirit bodies. Matter has substance, including the finer matter that God used to create the spirit bodies of his children. Once again, God organized this matter rather than creating it from nothing. Housed in spirit bodies, our intelligences could progress much further. We lived with Him and our heavenly Mother for eons, gaining experience and growing in our capacity to learn and become more like our parents.

Eventually, we reached a point where we could not progress much further without the experiences gained in a physical body--in mortality. God gathered together his children in a grand council and proposed that He would create an earth for us, and send us down to it to be tested and to gain experience. While on earth we would not be able to recall our earlier existence--we would have a new experience that had never been possible before when we lived with God--the opportunity to exercise faith and be decent, upstanding people without a sure knowledge of where we had come from and where we would be going after this life.

God knew that we would make mistakes under these conditions. We would sin. God is perfect and sinless--we would not be able to live with him after death if we had been sinful (nor would we want to live in His presence with our sins). God wanted us to return to Him, and to help us continue to progress after this life. God is merciful and fair--he knew it would be unfair to separate us from Him simply for being vulnerable to the conditions of mortality (sin). He proposed that one of His children would come to earth and live a sinless life and pay the penalty for our sins. Through his innocent sacrifice, we could be forgiven of our sins if we accepted his payment and did our best to follow his teachings.

The firstborn of God’s spirit children was also the greatest, and the most like Him. His name was Jehovah, and he stepped forward and offered to fulfill this needed role as Savior. Another of God’s children, one who was also great and eminent among God’s children, named Lucifer (which means “son of the morning”) also stepped forward. He wanted to be the savior, but he wanted to change God’s plan. He proposed that he be able to force all of God’s children to live sinless lives (which would negate free will, and would also negate the need for a savior--it would be like living under a totalitarian state of control beyond our imagination). He said that he would ensure that *all* of God’s children would return to heaven, not just those who “chose” to be obedient and repent.

God rejected Lucifer’s plan. He was angry, rebelled against God, and was persuasive enough to get one third of God’s children to rebel with him. Jehovah cast Lucifer and his followers out of heaven. Because of their rebellion, they would not be able to participate in mortality. They would not have physical bodies, and would not be able to progress further. Lucifer became known as Satan or the devil, and he continues to fight against God, trying to lead away as many of God’s children as possible.

In Mormon theology, the word “angel” has several meanings. We talk of “Satan and his angels” when we refer to those spirits who were cast out of heaven and are in opposition to God’s plan of progression and happiness for His children. Thus, they are also accurately called “fallen angels.”

Also, any of God’s children who are now in heaven but have not yet come to earth are also called angels. Someone asked what we do in heaven while we wait our turn for mortality. The answer is that we are angels, serving God and helping Him in His work.

A third definition of angels is children of God who have already completed their mission in mortality. They are continuing their path of progression, and playing a part in furthering God’s work. Gabriel (the angel who visited the virgin Mary and announced that she would be the mother of Jesus) was one of these--we believe that Gabriel was Noah in mortality, and we believe that Michael the archangel was Adam.

This week, in response to fmr. Gov. Huckabee raising the question of Jesus and Satan being spirit brothers, the LDS church released a statement that Satan is a fallen angel (which I have explained) and that Jesus is the son of God. As you can see, the brotherhood of Satan and Jesus is not even as close as the brotherhood of you and me. Satan never will be able to have a mortal body, and will never be able to progress further than he already is. Unlike all of us who have two mortal parents, Jesus had a divine father not just spiritually (like us), but also physically. We believe that God is the literal father of Jesus--or in other words, that Jesus is the “only begotten son” of the father in the flesh, to paraphrase the KJV of John 3:16. In this physical sense, none of God’s other children are even close to being equal to Jesus. Because of this divine sonship, Jesus was not subject to death as the rest of us--he had the power to lay down his life and take it up again at will. Only he could break the chains of death and initiate the resurrection.

So, are Jesus and Satan brothers? Yes, but the statement is clearly misleading, and has been a favorite talking point of those wishing to smear the LDS faith and its doctrines. As a pastor with a degree in theology, fmr. Gov. Huckabee knew exactly what he was doing when he raised the question. He was the keynote speaker of the Southern Baptist Convention’s (SBC) annual conference in 1998, which it held in Salt Lake City, Utah. Just prior to the convention, the SBC mailed 40,000 copies of an anti-Mormon video titled “The Mormon Puzzle” to its congregations, and another 14,000 copies of an anti-Mormon book. The conference was primarily aimed at converting Mormons to Jesus and convincing them of the error of their ways. The New York Times reporter said that when Huckabee asked the question about Jesus and Satan, he prefaced it by saying, as innocent as can be, that he didn’t know much about the Mormon religion.

I think we should expect more honesty than that from our politicians. He knew exactly what game he was playing, and he did not make the statement innocently or ignorantly. We do not need a president who will try to divide us religiously like that, who tries to use religion as a wedge issue.

 

[Elrohir]

What do you mean, set up the system? He created us, in that sense he is our father. he could have created some elaborate system that did otherwise, but the only way for us to be spiritually not siblins is - ironically, considering - if we were created by different gods.

But if we are literally the sons of God because we were created by God, then isn't everything the progeny of God, in a since, because He created us? Or if God formed us out of preexisting matter (Or intelligence or aiua or whatever you'd like to call it) how is He really our creator at all?

We worship Him because He created us, and He is the only God we know.

But aren't you interested in knowing if there are other gods out there? Wouldn't they similarly be worthy of worship?

I didn't say there would be multiple omnipotent beings. I don't think even God is omnipotent in the strictest sense of the word. And if you are going to be talking about not believing that He can do something, neither do you.

I believe in an omnipotent God, in the sense that He can do all things that are possible. We had a long discussion in Plotinus' thread awhile back on this, if you're interested.


Camber - I have read the Ender series (OSC is actually one of my favorite authors...especially living, since most of my favorite authors are dead ) including Children of the Mind, so I'm familiar with the basic fictional concept which I knew Card borrowed. A question, though - if Christ is Jehovah, the Christ is the God of the Old Testament in its entirity, correct? Then the Father, like the Holy Spirit, was unknown to the world before the time of Christ, is that right?

 

[Perfection]

I've heard (and I dont think this is docterine, but it makes some sense to me), thats its out of respect. People take God's name in vain, use it as a quasi-curse word, disrespect, talk bad about him on earth...etc. If nobody knows about Heavenly Mother, she can't be disparged like that. You know...its one thing for somebody to talk trash about you...but talking trash about your mom/wife is different.

Just what I've heard. Its all speculation really.

Yeah, that's what I heard too.

Why would God care about what some pissant mortals think about his wife (or think His wife cares)? It's not like they can hurt or truely insult her.

Since we know about her now doesn't that kinda render the insult thing invalid. I mean I can insult her know that I know about her, right? If I insult her enough, will God change his mind and reveal her? In case he does: The heavenly mother is a total slut.

 

[Nylan]

Why would God care about what some pissant mortals think about his wife (or think His wife cares)? It's not like they can hurt or truely insult her.

Because it's offensive, especially coming from his children?

 

[Perfection]

Because it's offensive, especially coming from his children?

But the offense is so pathetically minor to them! It's like a dragonfly trying to punch a person.

 

[Nylan]

I think maybe you misunderstand the significance of the relationship between parent and child in the offense.

 

[Camber]

Camber - I have read the Ender series (OSC is actually one of my favorite authors...especially living, since most of my favorite authors are dead ) including Children of the Mind, so I'm familiar with the basic fictional concept which I knew Card borrowed. A question, though - if Christ is Jehovah, the Christ is the God of the Old Testament in its entirity, correct? Then the Father, like the Holy Spirit, was unknown to the world before the time of Christ, is that right?

I don't read Hebrew, but I understand that Elohim (who LDS identify as God the Father) is mentioned in the Genesis creation story. For example, we believe that when God says "we" and "us" in the creation story, he is talking to Jehovah, who created the earth under the authority of Elohim.

But you're basically right. Jesus is the God of the Old Testament. There have been very few times when God the Father has been seen or heard on earth. At the baptism of Jesus when John heard the Father's voice, for example, and at the stoning of Stephen, when he saw Jesus in heaven on the right hand of the Father.

Was he unknown before the NT? No, like the concept of a heavenly Mother, we believe that most prophets knew about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before the NT, but that the concepts weren't always taught to the masses.

There are few OT references, but I did a quick search and located 4 in the KJV:

Neh. 9: 20 Thou gavest also thy spirit to instruct them...
Neh. 9: 30 Yet many years didst thou aforbear them, and testifiedst against them by thy spirit in thy prophets...
Ezek. 36: 27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
Micah 3: 8 But truly I am full of power by the spirit of the Lord...

On the subject of heavenly Mother, I think the point is valid that what we do is pretty puny in relation to God. Personally, I think the commandments (i.e., thou shalt not steal, etc.) are more for our benefit rather than God's. So, when we are told not to take the name of God in vain, it probably (I think) because disrespecting God lowers us and separates us more from Him spiritually--not because He is ultra-sensitive and has an ego that cannot abide any disrespect. He wants us to progress and become more like Him, and has mapped out for us the pathway to get there.

So, although Perfection may have thought he was being really cute and cheeky in his comment about this topic, I don't think it's anything to joke around with, and I think the comment illustrates why we don't particularly need to know about heavenly Mother...we seem to be prone to using knowledge like this flippantly rather than treating it with reverence and awe.

It's also noteworthy though that while the prophets have not said much about heavenly Mother, you can find plenty of LDS writings on the topic. One that stands out in my mind was a near-death experience I saw written down back in 1992 in a collection of LDS essays. The writer believed that she had seen and interacted with her heavenly Mother, and the experience was important and meaningful to her (the writer).

Needless to say, there are people in Mormonism who would like more to be said about heavenly Mother, and they aren't just feminists. But for now the official word is that knowledge of heavenly Mother isn't essential for our salvation, so we don't need to know more about Her. Just as knowledge of other gods before heavenly Father, if there are any, isn't essential for our salvation either.

In response to the question of whether we would want to reverence or worship a "grandfather" god, the question, in my opinion, misses the point that God has given us everything we need for our salvation. If we embrace it and do our best with it, the possibilities beyond this life are limitless. There will be plenty of time then to satisfy our curiosity on such topics.

 

[zxcvbnm]

As in the other thread:

Why all those bad consequences if the Fall was actually good overall?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

As in the other thread:

Why all those bad consequences if the Fall was actually good overall?

The Plan of Salvation was created as the means by which we could progress and become like God. Part of that was to become mortal; ie to come to earth, have free agency, and make choices. (We existed, in a somewhat different form, even before that.) But that required that we live in a world in which we are subject to suffering and, as a natural consequence of the free will of others, evil. Ultimately the atonement of Christ will allow us to escape this; in the meantime, the short term, we have to experience what may be, sometimes, a great deal of adversity. And the Fall was what opened the door to that. it was always God's plan that it happen, but He knew (and we knew as well) that there would be a price to pay - and as a result of having free will, some people would make the wrong choices.

(If you are saying, "wait! why should free will - or anything - result in suffering and evil? why didn't God just set it up so it wouldn't? is it really worth it?" the answer is "He can't - not in this universe. He may be all-powerful, but that still restricts Him to what can be done at all. He cannot force us to progress. But yes, it will be worth it.")

 

[zxcvbnm]

The Plan of Salvation was created as the means by which we could progress and become like God. Part of that was to become mortal; ie to come to earth, have free agency, and make choices. (We existed, in a somewhat different form, even before that.) But that required that we live in a world in which we are subject to suffering and, as a natural consequence of the free will of others, evil. Ultimately the atonement of Christ will allow us to escape this; in the meantime, the short term, we have to experience what may be, sometimes, a great deal of adversity. And the Fall was what opened the door to that. it was always God's plan that it happen, but He knew (and we knew as well) that there would be a price to pay - and as a result of having free will, some people would make the wrong choices.

(If you are saying, "wait! why should free will - or anything - result in suffering and evil? why didn't God just set it up so it wouldn't? is it really worth it?" the answer is "He can't - not in this universe. He may be all-powerful, but that still restricts Him to what can be done at all. He cannot force us to progress. But yes, it will be worth it.")

The idea is that there's a plan to return us to what we already were?

I don't understand that, it seems to me that God is a bit whatsit, when not being totally in control of things?

 

[gangleri2001]

Eran, what do you think about South Park's parodies?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

The idea is that there's a plan to return us to what we already were?

I don't understand that, it seems to me that God is a bit whatsit, when not being totally in control of things?

No, not to return us to how we were. One of the effects of becoming mortal, and making our own choices over the course of years, is that we will be much more intelligent and understand more.

And God is as much in control as it is possible to be. But he has to let us make our own choices as well.

Eran, what do you think about South Park's parodies?

Well, I never saw that episode - from what I have heard, and what I have seen of South Park (I did see the Scientology episode) they weren't really being mean about it, any more than religion in general - although they didn't really get our theology right (we don't really think we will be the only ones in heaven). Not that that is surprising.

 

[downtown]

Eran, what do you think about South Park's parodies?

There have been a couple of references to Mormonism on South Park. Personally, I thought some were pretty funny (the references to Family Home Evening My Face is Painted!!!, Mormons dancing in heaven in bike helmets), and some were not so funny (the second half of the Joseph Smith Episode). I'm not going to say that they shouldn't have made the episode (and I think South Park is funny more often than not), just that I wasn't a fan of all of it.

It wasn't as downright offensive as say, Orgasmo

 

[gangleri2001]

There's a whole episode on Mormonism you can watch right now Eran. Since the new season is going to start tomorrow, the web is having lots problems an the other episode doesn't work. Anyway, see it at:

http://allabout-sp.net/?p=season7/712

 

[Masquerouge]

So if you want to know the real truth about Mormonism, you have one day to ask and get the best answers ever, kids.

 

[brennan]

So... how many wives have you really got?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Do all Mormons spell it "Bethleem"?

 

[Masquerouge]

So... how many wives have you really got?

What is important is not the "wife" in herself but the sanctity of marriage. As such, I am indeed married to not only my wife, but my desktop and my cat. In the winter, it's a nice contest to see who will give out the more warmth in bed.

Do all Mormons spell it "Bethleem"?

Bethleem, actually Bethleem!, is the latest product of the Bleem company. It's a Christianity emulator that allows people to recreate Christian traditions in a, for instance, Mormon environment.
Pretty cool.

 

[Methos]

As such, I am indeed married to not only my wife, but my desktop
<...snip...>
In the winter, it's a nice contest to see who will give out the more warmth in bed.