The official web site of the LDS Church has posted a transcript of the interview Apostle Dallin H. Oaks gave to Helen Whitney, maker of the PBS documentary “The Mormons” which aired earlier this year. Mr. Oaks told Ms. Whitney,
“Before the close of his ministry, in Illinois, Joseph Smith put together the significance of what he had taught about the nature of God and the nature and destiny of man. He preached a great sermon not long before he was murdered that God was a glorified Man, glorified beyond our comprehension, (still incomprehensible in many ways), but a glorified, resurrected, physical Being, and it is the destiny of His children upon this earth, upon the conditions He has proscribed, to grow into that status themselves. That was a big idea, a challenging idea. It followed from the First Vision, and it was taught by Joseph Smith, and it is the explanation of many things that Mormons do — the whole theology of Mormonism.”
The sermon of which Mr. Oaks spoke is the King Follet Discourse. The teaching Mr. Oaks referred to, in Joseph Smith’s words, is this:
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret…
“…it is necessary that we should understand the character and being of God, and how he came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity, I will refute that idea, and will take away and do away the vail, so that you may see.
“These are incomprehensible ideas to some; but they are simple. It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did;…
“Here, then, is eternal life–to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you,–namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one,–from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power.”
When Helen Whitney interviewed Apostle Oaks she asked if these teachings were the “core” of Mormon theology. Mr. Oaks replied,
“That is the purpose of the life of men and women on this earth: to pursue their eternal destiny. Eternal means Godlike and to become like God. One of the succeeding prophets said: ‘As man is, God once was. And as God is, man may become.’ That is an extremely challenging idea… it explains the purpose of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is to put people’s feet on the pathway to a glorified existence in the life to come…”
Thus, according to Mormon theology, the purpose of life is for men and women to become Gods, just like all Gods have done before, just like the “only wise and true God” of Mormonism has done.
This is consistent with teachings from other LDS sources. The August 2006 issue of Ensign magazine included an article titled “The Purpose of Life.” It said,
“We cannot understand the purpose of this mortal life–why we are here–unless we first understand who we are, where we came from, and what our eternal destiny is. These truths, found in the scriptures and restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith, teach us that we are literal spirit children of God, that we lived with Him in a premortal existence, and that we have within us the seeds of godhood, the potential to become like Him.” (64)
An LDS Church Student Manual, Achieving a Celestial Marriage, explains these Mormon beliefs this way:
“…God is an exalted man who once lived on an earth and underwent experiences of mortality… The progression of our Father in heaven to godhood, or exaltation, was strictly in accordance with eternal principles,… GOD WAS ONCE A MORTAL MAN… He Experienced Conditions Similar to Our Own and Advanced Step by Step… GOD IS NOW AN EXALTED MAN… MEN ARE GODS IN EMBRYO… We Have the Potential to Become Like Our Heavenly Parents… We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our offspring… our Father in heaven was once a man as we are now, capable of physical death. By obedience to eternal gospel principles, he progressed from one stage of life to another until he attained the state that we call exaltation or godhood. In such a condition, he and our mother in heaven were empowered to give birth to spirit children whose potential was equal to that of their heavenly parents. We are those spirit children.” (copyright 1976 Corporation of the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 129-132. Capitals retained from the original.)
So to summarize, according to Mormonism, the purpose of life for men and women is to achieve Godhood — the same type of Godhood Heavenly Father has achieved. The purpose of the LDS Church is to “put people’s feet on the pathway” to Godhood. This is the core of Mormon theology.
This really is the CORE of LDS theology…it all points to this…the exaltation of man.
Also, if you’ll notice, in the beginnings of the LDS church, they were different from “mainstream Christianity” and had no problem saying so…(all of the other churches were abominations to God)…nowadays, the thrust is to align themselves to mainstream Christianity and to present themselves as just “another sect” of Christianity…hmmm
You’ll also note that this kind of thing is NOT shouted from the roof tops when you talk to an LDS person…in fact…it’s like torture dragging it out of them. You really have to get past the semantic word games to get them to speak truthfully about this subject and many other “tough subjects” of Mormonism…
I’m not generalizing, either, I’ve talked to many many Mormons myself…
bob
I agree.
Though I would clarify that the purpose of life and God’s plan is to help and encourage all people to move towards these goals — becoming like God, one with God, and exalted. We believe God restored the fullness of his gospel and plan to the earth again through modern prophets and restored the authority and teachings of the original Christian church in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Of course we recognize that evangelicals have very different theological beliefs than this and understand the Bible differently than we do.
I should also note that the word “God” is used in different ways at different times. In most of the quotes you used in this post it is referring to divine person who God the Father, not to the unified Godhead/Trinity which is also often referred to simply as God.
(BTW – I meant I agree with the bulk of Sharon’s post.)
Geoff,
I’m sorry but your post just pumped in a lot of smoke to what I think was a very clear presentation by Sharon at the top. This is the thing that really drives Evangelicals like me nuts. Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, double talk and obfuscation. Do you believe that you have the potential to become “a god” or not? It’s really pretty simple to just say it. This messing around and playing word games is what makes you folks look like con artists.
You seem to be mistaking nuance and theological precision with “smoke” and “obfuscation” Falcon.
Do you believe that you have the potential to become “a god” or not?
Yes. With the understanding that being “a god” also means joining the Godhead in oneness. As I understand it, all who are one with the Godhead would be part of the quorum of divine persons that constitutes the One God of scriptures.
Now, see, here is where I get confused. Geoff, I understand what you’re saying, about joing the Godhead and all that jazz, but I can’t seem to reconcile it with the whole concept of “spirit children” as described in the church student manual above. I mean, maybe that’s the only way to explain it effectively, but it sure sounds different from the New-Agey feel that your theology sounds like. When I think of what is described above, I think of separate “god” entities, both male and female, populating planets, not one “godhead” of which we are all absorbed into (I get this picture of “the Borg” from Star Trek; hopefully I’m not the only one who knows what I’m talking about).
I’m sure that previous paragraph was pretty confusing, but that’s about the way my mind is spinning right now trying to figure out what this theology is teaching.
Do you believe that you have the potential to become “a god” or not?
Yes. With the understanding that being “a god” also means joining the Godhead in oneness. As I understand it, all who are one with the Godhead would be part of the quorum of divine persons that constitutes the One God of scriptures
This is where it gets really confusing for me..How can you be “a god” and part of the Godhead which you said earlier was One?
Here is a question, in the topic Sharon quotes from the JoD. I own the entire set, Why is it the King follet discourse is believed to be good honest truth and taken as scripture by the LDS, But yet the Adam God is claimed as false? I believe it is because you want to believe what you want to be true.
The excuse is given that the Adam God was written down incorrectly, yet that is all of 2 pages long, but the King Follet Discourse is 11 pages long, written down by the same “Scribe” and is with out error, seems kinda fishy to me. Plus not one bit of the K.F.D can be supported by the Bible. Rick b
Daniel,
Well we can all agree that there are plenty of mysteries of God that we don’t have answers to yet. So we all tend to speculate and theologize in the meantime (Mormons and creedal Christians alike).
The Borg complaint could just as easily be made against the three members of the Trinity, so I don’t think that is your best approach here. Creedal Christianity affirms that the trinity consists of three divine persons who combine to make up the one God after all. I doubt you are comfortable calling the Trinity “the Borg”.
But you are right to point out that there are differing schools of thought among Mormons about many non-revealed theological/metaphysical details. Until God reveals those details opinions and speculations will abound in the world.
Interested: How can you be “a god” and part of the Godhead which you said earlier was One?
This is really at heart a Trinity question that applies to all Christians — not just Mormons. I think the answer is: The same way Jesus could be “a god” while on earth and yet still be part of and pray to the One God.
Rick B,
I have read about the Adam-God discourse and one thing I can say is that prophets are given revelation from God that sometimes only he (ie the prophet) can understand because of all that he has recieved before. There are some instances in the Bible where this is the case – for example the Book of Revelation. Although some of it can be interpreted by us, most of it was written in the way that John interpreted what he saw and thus is difficult or almost impossible for us to interpret.
However, another scripture, 1 Corinthians 15:44-48, has an interesting idea taught by Paul. In this scripture, depending on which translation of the Bible you use, but most of the older translations have it this way, indicate that Adam and Jesus are the same person, until you read a little further into the verses. The word Adam in the scriptures is not just a name but a title meaning first man. God the Father is also refered to as ‘Man’ in some scriptures – for example Jesus called Himself the Son of Man. Heavenly Father, being a glorified, physically resurrected being and us as His children – He was the ‘First man’ of the Human Race. Adam (The one refered to in Genesis) was the first man of the human race on this earth. Jesus (as described in 1 Cor) was the first man of the resurrection for our human race.
But I don’t understand what Brigham Young was talking about as I was not there and I cannot interview him, but whether you want to accept this thought or not is up to you, but this is one explanation. This is not my idea, I read it from another website a couple of years ago – I think it was Jeff Lindsay.
Ralph,
There are a few problems with that thesis. First, while assuredly John’s Revelation is not easy to understand, it is also consistent with the rest of Scripture. What Joseph Smith taught is completely contrary to the Bible. If what a mormon “prophet” teaches doesn’t jive with Scripture, than one or the other is wrong.
Second, “the Son of Man” has Old Testament roots and meaning, and has nothing to do with God once being a man.
Third, what older translations are you referring to that say that Adam and Jesus are one and the same in 1 Corinthians 15: 44-48? It says that Adam is the first man, and that he was created which is consistent with Christ being eternal and uncreated (nothing was made that He did not make make) I checked the King James and the Geneva, and there is nothing about that in any of those translations.
Ralph,
You have pulled Jesus being called “Son of Man” so far out of it’s context that I will try to sift through the fog and explain this to you.
A first meaning of the phrase “Son of Man” is as a reference to the prophecy of Daniel 7:13-14:
“I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”
The description “Son of Man” was a Messianic title. Jesus is the one who was given dominion and glory and a kingdom. When Jesus used this phrase related to Himself, He was assigning the “Son of Man” prophecy to Himself. The Jews of that era would have been intimately familiar with the phrase and to whom it referred. He was proclaiming Himself as the Messiah.
A second meaning of the phrase “Son of Man” is that Jesus was truly a human being. God called the prophet Ezekiel “son of man” 93 times. God was simply calling Ezekiel a human being. A son of a man is a man. Jesus was fully God (John 1:1), but He was also a human being (John 1:14). 1 John 4:2 tells us, “This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.”
Yes, Jesus was the Son of God – He was in His essence God. Yes, Jesus was also the Son of Man – He was in His essence a human being. In summary, the phrase “Son of Man” indicates that Jesus is the Messiah and that He is truly a human being.
Another point I would like to raise is the fact that you seem to think that newer bibles are further from correct translation. Where did you come up with this idea? Remember we have the original greek text to examine if one feels something is out of context Can you say the same for t
Arthur,
I will not argue about the prophets and scripture as I believe in the prophet and scriptures but you don’t believe in the prophets, and at this point in time I don’t believe that we will agree on this point.
Yes, the term ‘Son of Man’ has OT roots and does not indicate in the scriptures that Heavenly Father is a resurrected being. But this part of the explanation fits with LDS theology and can be used as an explanation as such. Because you do not agree with our theology I understand that you cannot accept this explanation, but to understand some of the thoughts/opinions about our faith, the explanations need to come from our faith, not yours.
About your third point with 1 Cor. What I meant to say, and probably didn’t explain to well, is that in these verses, Paul has used the name ‘Adam’ in reference to Jesus as well as to Adam. I was not saying that they were the same person, just that if read incorrectly or out of context it could be construed as meaning that. As for the translations – in some translations, mainly the latter ones where they are trying to make things easier to understand, they just use the names Adam and Jesus, they do not use the ‘first Adam’ and ‘last Adam’. In some other translations they use ‘first man’ and ‘second man’.
I also know that other prophets and general authorities of the LDS church have said that this ideology is wrong. As I said in the earlier post, maybe Brigham Young had a greater understanding of this idea than others have had which is why he believed it. Maybe because it is a deep ideology that needs greater spiritual understanding and is one of those ‘mysteries’ of God that it is not being encouraged to be discussed in the general population. Maybe it was just a personal belief that Brigham Young had which was incorrect. But it was never taught as doctrine – and this point has been explained by others on the internet who are more versed than I.
Geoff,
In my opinion people who use the term “nuance” are the same ones that say “well it depends on what the meaning of the word is is.” You have to really be hip, with it and smart to do nuance. Sorry friend, it’s smoke.
Ralph, I wont derail the topic about adam god, All I will say is, I have to posts on my blog about adam god with scanned copies of the Adam god topic that very clearly sho BY said adam WAS GOD and we must all hear this and our salvation hangs upon this truth, it seems to me he was very clear in his teaching. Rick b
Ralph said:
“Maybe it was just a personal belief that Brigham Young had which was incorrect. But it was never taught as doctrine…”
Ralph,
I cannot tell you how many times I hear Mormons say this. You must understand that ones view on the nature of God is a very primary issue. Certainly if Brigham Young was truly a prophet, then his view on the very nature of God would should be accurate. But it wasn’t. His understanding of the nature of God was just as accurate as his prophecies! That’s why he’s a false prophet.
Sorry friend, it’s smoke.
Alright Falcon. Keep telling yourself that if you want.
Geoff,
Indeed I will. I prefer to deal with clarity.
Eric,
This reply:
“Maybe it was just a personal belief that Brigham Young had which was incorrect. But it was never taught as doctrine…”
is false and you know it. Brigham Young said himself that when he said something, it was “from God” end of story, in the same way you listen to the current prophet in the general conference.
There are teachings that the church would rather cover up…the “Adam-God” teaching being one of them, etc…but pretending they are not prophesy is just being downright dis-ingenious.
Don’t make the mistake of trying to rewrite history…the records are too readily available…just accept that they said these words, they claimed to be a prophet and speak for God…
Robert said
This is very true, as I said I own the entire set of the JoD, I also have scanned copies of Adam God on my blog, so those who want evidence can view it themselves. Rick b
Falcon: I prefer to deal with clarity.
No Falcon, apparently you prefer to shout down clarifications and insist they are “smoke”. But I don’t doubt you prefer your Mormons to be submissive to your attacks — all this clarifying I do must mess up your image of us as evil Satan worshippers…
Now if you would like to actually address any of my specific comments about the nature of God I’m happy to clarify even further. But belligerently accusing me of “obfuscation” and not backing up your claims in the least indicates to me that you are either unwilling or unqualified to engage in a real theological dialogue.
..image of us as evil Satan worshippers…
Geoff, I don’t think anyone accused mormons of worshiping satan but I do agree that you are trying very hard to give honest clear answers to the questions presented.
Thanks Interested.
You are right that in my annoyance I was using a bit of hyperbole there.
Geoff,
Touchy, touchy……Satan worshipers? Hold it together pal. Same old Mormon line….”I’m being attacked.” Let’s see, accuse someone of something they didn’t say and put them on the defensive. Show a little maturity please. Reading your last post suggests to me that you really don’t have much to stand-on or you wouldn’t pull that type of cheap trick. The fact of the matter is that you can believe whatever you want. I really don’t care. But don’t blow your top because someone challenges you.
Hi everyone. It’s good to know people can post here, regardless of religious affiliation. I should mention that I am LDS.
I appreciate the opportunity to leave some comments here, concerning the so-called Adam-God doctrine. As I understand it, Brigham Young was attempting to explain that Adam was “the father” of all men, in that he was the first person, of flesh, upon the earth. That interpretation, I believe would be acceptable to all Christians, but it’s difficult to say if that is what Brigham Young actually meant. Neverthless, if I believe Brigham Young to be a prophet, which I do, I would have to say his words were either misconstrued, miswritten, or he was simply giving an opinion which he likely held during at least part of his life. Since I’ve never fully studied the sources, I can’t say for sure what angle to look at them from.
I doubt my response will satisfy anyone, but I do appreciate the opportunity to express my opinion on the matter.
I would also say, in response to Rick B’s earlier question, that if a teaching is agreed upon, by LDS leaders past and present, such as man having potential to become like God, you can be assured it is an LDS doctrine.
On a side note to that, I am curious to ask how many people, not of the LDS faith, agree with the so called “Word-Faith” teachings which have surfaced among some segments of Christianity? One “Word-Faith” teaching, as I understand it, is that man does have some measure of godhood inside themselves.
In case you have no idea what I’m talking about, I invite you to go to Wikipedia and type in “Word of Faith.”
Falcon,
I see you are still avoiding the meat of my comments here. I suspect that probably means that you are indeed unwilling and/or unqualified to engage in a real theological dialogue.
But just to give you another chance to show you are either willing or qualified for such a dialogue, here again is my invitation: If you would like to actually address any of my specific comments about the nature of God I’m happy to clarify even further.
So far you have not addressed a single specific point I made.
Clark said
Whats your point? I suspect your going to say, well Many Christians feel these teachings are false, yet Just like BY he had his Opinions and so do these people. The Word of faith teaching is false and heresy, The difference between this and Adam God is this,
Christians feel if Anyone teachings something that does not line up with the Word of God, that person or teaching is false, yet the LDS Feel the Prophet is above the Word of God, So if the Prophet Speaks it is as good as if God spoke, yet if they dont agree with the teaching, (Like Adam God) then it was simply the Prophets own personal opinion.
Yet When a Christian teaches something false like the Word of faith, Others will stand up and say that is false, and The LDS in the case of the Prophet will stand up and say, that was his opinion, Vastly different here.
Plus a Christian pastor only speaks to his Church, he does not speak on behalf of Every Christian Church in the entire world, like the LDS prophet. Understand the difference? Plus in the case of Adam God, BY said our salvation depends upon what we believe about this Doctrine he taught. He called it a sermon, doctrine and said salvation hangs upon it, would he say that stuff about his mere opinion? Rick b
Easy Rick B! Take it easy. I wasn’t attempting to point fingers or get anyone defensive. I was merely curious to know if anyone was familiar with “Word-Faith” teachings and believed any of them. I very much apologize if I got you upset, since that wasn’t my intention.
Again, I can’t say anything for certain about “Adam-God” since I don’t know exactly what Brigham Young said, and I haven’t looked at the actual sources. I hope I can sometime, so that I can get a better idea of what he meant and whether or not his words were misconstrued or miswritten in anyway.
I very much appreciate you taking the time to respond to my post, Rick B. My response to your questions, and again please don’t feel the need defensive since I’m not pointing fingers at anyone, is that regardless of a religious leader’s title, be it prophet, bishop or pastor, there must be a responsiblity on their part to teach the true word of God. Otherwise, they may run the risk of losing theirs and their congregation’s salvation. To me, it’s a simple as that.
Geoff,
I’ve been waiting for the answer that I asked you way back on my first post. The question was (because I didn’t see a clear answer in your post): Do you plan on becoming “a god”. If yes, I would appreciate knowing how you plan to achieve this and what it’s going to look like when you become one (a god). I’m not a real complex person so don’t nuance the answer.
Clark,
I don’t know how you can come here and offer your opinion or even give the slightest contextual advice for the “Adam-God” sermon if you have never read the sermon for your self.
Here is what Brigham Young said:
“Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken—HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, p. 50)
Was it Young’s opinion?
Brigham Young also said:
“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 95)
I think it’s pretty clear…
In His Name,
-Eric
Falcon,
I did answer your question! Did you miss that response directly after your question?
Here is what I said again:
If yes, I would appreciate knowing how you plan to achieve this and what it’s going to look like when you become one (a god).
Obviously my answer was yes (seriously, did you not see that response?) and it will look and feel like oneness with God just as Jesus prayed all of us might someday achieve:
Let me know if that clear answer is still too nuanced or complex for you…
(Here is a cleaned up second try on that comment…)
Falcon,
I did answer your question! Did you miss that response directly after your question?
Here is what I said again:
You said: “If yes, I would appreciate knowing how you plan to achieve this and what it’s going to look like when you become one (a god).”
Obviously my answer was yes (seriously, did you not see that response?) and it will look and feel like oneness with God just as Jesus prayed all of us might someday achieve:
Let me know if that clear answer is still too nuanced or complex for you…
Eric,
Thank you for providing me with source material in relation to the “Adam-God” teaching. I hope to continue to learn more about it in the future.
However, I don’t understand this defensiveness in the things that I’ve written in my replies. I have never accused anyone of believing something which they did not, and I never dismissed the “Adam-God” teaching simply as Brigham Young’s opinion. I know there are LDS Church members who do feel “Adam God” was just Young’s opinion, but I choose not to make any final judgements on such matters until I know what the actual sources are.
If I’m upsetting people by what I write, maybe I shouldn’t write anything anymore. I certainly don’t want to anger anyone, but at the same time, I especially don’t want people to put words in my mouth.
Geoff,
Those verses you quote have nothing to do with becoming a god or anything close. For example, Jesus is praying for unity of the Body. Man you have to torture the scriptures to get that (becoming a god) out of it. Your Biblical interpretation (methodology) is seriously lacking. You know this “oneness with God” is a nice sounding platitude. Who doesn’t want to be one with God. That doesn’t mean you get to become one (a god). But give me the practical aspects of this. Are you going to have a goddess, a planet(s), people to rule. I’d like the details of the organizational structure. I know it’s a lot more fun to talk in platitudes and philosophical jargon. It make people feel good, but there’s no meat to it. It’s not definitive. Give me some solid details.
Be that as it may, what is your program that leads to becoming a god? Do you tithe, get married in the temple, do temple rituals etc.?
What exactly do Christians believe about heaven? What will we do in heaven? What will we learn? Will we learn anything new at all? If we don’t reach godhhod, what will our final, ultimate destiny and heritage be as humans who have come to earth? When the New Testament talks about man being heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ, what exactly are we to inherit?
I want to emphasize that I’m not asking these questions because I intend to mock anyone, point fingers or belittle anyone’s beliefs. I’m honestly just curious. That’s it.
First let me say to everyone, I am not skilled with computers, Here is a link to the Adam God on my blog, you can read over the scanned original documents, but because my computer skills are lacking, you will need to cut and paste the link.
http://mormonismreviewed.blogspot.com/2006/07/adam-god-doctrine.html
Maybe someone could post for me how to do it, and nest time I will, thanks.
Now Clark, You did not upset me or offended me, I was simply sharing my thoughts on BY and the word of faith. I am not upset like you think, but what people seem to forget is, when we talk by way of a computer we cannot hear tone of voice or see the facial expressions.
Then as to what we will do in heaven, if you read the Book of Revelation, after the 1000 years with Jesus, the Bible tells us He will burn up the earth, and create a new heavens and new earth. Otherwise after that it gives no info on what we will do. But dont think because the Bible does not tell us what we will do, that makes it false. Rick b
Well guys, I just found out after my post above, it makes the Hot link automaticly so I guess you can just click and go, Sorry about any confusion from my poor computer skills. Rick b
Clark,
Sorry if you feel that I am coming off harsh. I certainly do not want you to think I am making personal attacks. I am happy to read that you are willing to look into this teaching made by Young. That is very rare for LDS to take this kind of stance. Let me know if I can be anymore of an aid for biblical truth and the freedom found in Christ Jesus.
God Bless,
-Eric Hoffman
Falcon,
I’m not surprised you don’t think that oneness with God is connected to our potential as children of God to eventually grow to be like him, or “gods”, ourselves. We simply disagree on that point I suppose.
In answer to your other questions, we become one with God over time with his gracious assistance. We are first saved from an eternal hell by the grace of God when we accept Jesus as our savior. (Of course Mormonism teaches that nearly everyone on the planet will escape an eternal hell because God’s grace is so amazing that he allows people to bow the knee to Jesus even in the post-mortal spirit world. That is in major contrast to evangelical theology which holds the Jesus sends 95% of all people to an eternal hell even when he never gives them a chance to hear about and except him to begin with.) The process of becoming one with God is probably best associated with the evangelical concept of attaining “treasures in heaven” after one is saved from eternal hell. That is, by following Christ’s example and being merciful and forgiving and kind and gracious to others we slowly come to know Christ better and better and over time our oneness with God increases until at some point in the eternities to come our characters become like Jesus’s character and we become one with the Godhead.
Does all that mean that when i die, after being baptised in the temple and all that jazz, that i will become a god? And have other spirit children who will look up to me as god, as i look up to our God Elohim)? How far back does this hierarchy go? Does Elohim worship his spirit father as well?
Frankly im kinda hoping im well off the mark here.
Geoff,
Why do you have such trouble just saying it? Just say it! This is like theological root canal. This is the point I’ve been trying to make regarding Mormons. It just kills you to lay it out plainly. Let me help you out a little bit here. It’s called eternal progression. The place is the celestial kingdom. The lack of candor and unwillingness to speak simply, clearly and in a straight forward manner appears to be a major problem for Mormons.
Dave
That is how I understand mormon beliefs.
Geoff said
Geoff, you are so far off and wrong it is not funny. You will never find in the Bible where it says 95 percent of people go to hell, that was a number you made up. Then the Bible teaches, It is not Gods will that ANY should perish.
The Bible is clear, Hell was created for the devil and his angels, not us.
Now YOU keep saying all these people have never heard about Jesus. Can anyone honestly say, I know of one person who has never heard the name of Jesus, If you honestly can say that, then something is wrong with you, because if you know they never heard the name of Jesus then that tells me you did not share the gospel with them.
If you share Jesus with that person, then that means they have heard about Jesus, then they are with out excuse. So name one person you know, then after you name that person who has never heard of Jesus share the Gospel with them, and Geoff that number you made up of 95 percent of the world never hearing about Jesus drops greatly. Rick b
Falcon,
where in the world are you coming from brother? Geoff is answering you very directly. Where is the lack of candor you claim- i dont see it. Are you sure this isnt just some sort of game for you?
Besides we still havent seen anything of any real substance regarding the actual issue from you yet. Will we ever??
inhimdependent
I’m sure it’s all very clear to you because you’re a Mormon…..right? I’m not. I’m a person who is not real complex, as I’ve explained. I need linear, not nuance. Maybe you could help me out? What is eternal progression? What is the celestial kingdom? And I’ll throw in, what is Kolob and what does it have to do with the concepts being discussed here. And please, could you or Geoff give one answer that does not include the phrase “oneness with god”? I want what’s known as “operational definitions”. I’m what’s known as a “behaviorist”. I don’t do humanism feel goodism. When someone tells me they are “born again” for example, I want to know what that means in clear terms in their language.
Falcon,
If you genuinely just dont understand that is understandable and resonable. The issue i have with your comments though and what i would like you to clarify for us here, is you seem to be very accusatory of Geoff (and apparently you consider this to be a characteristic of Mormons generally) of not being direct or honest about what we are telling you. You speak of “lack of candor” and “unwillingness to speak plainly”. To people here this sure sounds like you are questioning our honesty and genuinness more than one who “just doesnt understand because hes not Mormon”.
If you are just really trying to understand what we believe you might do well to stop and consider for a moment that the “silver-bullet” of a nutshell answer that you claim to so desire may not exist in exactly the way you want it to on your terms. Yes, you may have to actually work, listen, learn and take some time to understand and grsp the doctrines and faith of another. I used to be and evangelical Christian before becomeing an LDS christian. And i know that for me it took much prayer, contemplation, study of the scriptures, prayer, learning, prayer, seeking Gods Spirit, more prayer and some time to know and come to understand what i do about the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. And i still know very little compared to all there is to know and i continue on that learning path daily. And i dont think i will ever really grasp it all- but i grow. So just becuase you dont “get it” completly from a few simple posts on a blog like this does not really surprise me- nor should it suprise you either really.
But to claim that we are not being genuine or honest is just well.. suspect. It also makes one question the value of dialogeing with one who isnt going to believe what is said anyway.
can you clarify where you stand for us?
Falcon,
Seriously — I know you have admitted you are not real complex but I have been using plain English and the smallest words I can think of to try to plainly describe these theological concepts to you. If you still can’t comprehend these things there may not be much more I can do for you here.
Still, I’ll try to answer your new set of questions too to see if that helps…
What is eternal progression?
Eternal progression is the general idea that we can spiritually progress to become more and more like Jesus in our character throughout all eternity. (Church leaders like John A. Widtsoe have pointed out that because we have free will progression is not guaranteed though and retrogression is a possibility based on our free choices)
What is the celestial kingdom?
It is what we believe is the highest “kingdom” or section within heaven. (Mormon doctrine has heaven divided into three general kingdoms or sections)
what is Kolob
In the Book of Abraham, Abraham was having a vision and said this:
So as far as I can tell it represents some “star” somewhere in the universe that is near to the throne of God.
No, this is not theologically all that significant to Mormons, though I know anti-Mormonism zealots love to constantly bring this concept up.
Clark,
From what Brigham Young stated, are you at all thinking that he must not have meant Adam to actually be God? It seemed very clear to me. It’s like when I say “The color of that dog is blue.”, is there any argument that the color of the dog is something else than blue? Especially if I say that the sermons I give are to be taken as doctrine and scripture (as Brigham young put it), and that I am the mouthpiece of God and will never lead you astray. Does that give you any right to question my authority? Here are some quotes about questioning the prophet.
“Always keep your eye on the President of the church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, even if it is wrong, and you do it, the lord will bless you for it but you don’t need to worry. The lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.”
LDS President Marion G. Romney (of the first presidency), quoting LDS President (and prophet) Heber J. Grant “Conference Report” Oct. 1960 p. 78
“When the Prophet speaks the debate is over”.
N. Eldon Tanner, August Ensign 1979, pages 2-3
“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray.”
President Wilford Woodruff (considered scripture as it is canonized at the end of the D&C)
So do you still think what BY said was personal opinion? That it was taken out of context? If something doesn’t fit into your modern beliefs, please don’t try and make up excuses for it, if thats in fact what your doing (not making accusation)
Inhim said
Honestly Inhmim I have meet many LDS who leave out key information and as a result this leads people to believe things that are not true. I am not saying you or geoff are doing this with falcon, but on this blog alone I had to point out to and lds poster, months ago he was being dishonest by not clearly stating everything.
He was saying, yes I believe the Bible to be the word of God. He left off that he believed it was the word of God, (inso far as it was translated correctly). This means you are leading people to believe something even you dont. Then after a few posts this person admited that they could see my point and promised to not do that.
Another example is, I talked with many LDS who only say, I believe Jesus is the son of God, To a strong believer of the Bible, that comes accros as you saying you believe that Jesus is God and is eternal, but if you add the rest of your believe and say, I believe Jesus and lucifer are brothers, that changes everything.
Falcon, to better help you, I would suggest buying the Book Mormon Doctrine by Bruce McConkie. It is like an A-Z of a lot of the LDS beliefes that your asking about. You can get a copy at a LDS bookstore if you have one where you live, otherwise try Ebay or maybe an LDS poster would provide links to a source. I believe they are less than 30 dollars, mine was 20, but that was years ago, and I think it would help you greatly. Rick b