Uncomfortable Doctrine

[Hemidakota]

It was posted on previous threads and written many times in explaining it. The problem as Joseph Smith reported that other doctrine and principles could not be given to the church during his time due to the Saints immaturity. It is no different today. If anything is out of content, it is the Saint who are quick to judge and slow to research and finding the HG confirmation in prayer. I will remind those individuals here; President Young had two seer stones during his tenure as prophet, seer, and revelator. Even he had problems with the immature Saints who were not ready to receive additional revelations.

Note the emphasis upon man being created from the dust of the earth. The early brethren (especially Brigham Young) taught that Adam was brought here from another planet. This appears to be in conflict with the scriptural statement that Adam was "formed from the dust of the ground," but there may be some subtle way to reconcile the two ideas. Was Adam brought here in some embryonic form, using the substance of this earth to grow to maturity? Journal of Discourses, 7:285-86; 11:122

Again, do you still feel uncomfortable? As to canonization, I offer up those questions for a reason since we simple don't canonized everything that the HG confirms to the President of the church. Is it really neccessary? No....we simple add it to our daily lives as part of our character as the gosepl.

Another tidbit of information...historical fact that Eve was the oldest living human on this earth. She died after Adam and not before.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by fiona84

I believe that we are to worship God. I believe that the only person ever on earth that has been fit to worship is Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God.

I want to be 'Christ-like' and strive for perfection even though I know as a sinner, I will never be perfect like Christ.

So...I feel in heaven that even though we are created in God's image and will be able to inheret the kingdom of God, etc, he is still our one and only God, and we are not worthy to be deemed gods and godesses, even with a little 'g'.

I find the idea that my husband or I will one day be worshipped to be a sick idea.

I vaguely remember hearing that saying about...as man now is, God once was, etc....

so that means God was once a man? Not our God? I thought He has always existed as God?

This whole thing still makes me squirm.

I have a testimony of the church, and even when I 'tried' to go to other churches I could not deny this church...and I mean, all you have to do is look at our church and know it is from God.

Which is why this bothers me so much.

Thanks everyone. I'm going to keep praying about it and also focus on things I DO know to be true.

This high council speaker....spoke about God as if he were just a next door neighbor or something. There was no reverence to his words about 'Father', just ramblings about how we should be good so we can be gods and godesses like 'Father'. It was like he put us on equal footing or someting. He couldn't even call him 'Heavenly Father' or GOD.

I'm going to try to forget about this talk. Thanks for your insight, everyone!

PS. What is that madness about God landing on earth and his wife giving birth to Adam? Again, I'm ignoring it.....

Like Prison Chaplin, I am not concerned about taking honors upon myself. I am concerned with the good that we can do for others. Having experienced parenthood I realize that young children will worship their parents through emulation, especially if their parents are goodly as mine were. Acting like or trying to be like, is in my mind the highest form of worship.

Perhaps there are misunderstandings of what constitutes worship. For example, we may think of prayer as a form of worship. However, prayer is the only form of communicating with G-d that we can initiate – Would we not want our children to initiate communications with us as parents, asking us for help, directions in their lives, for things they need and thanking us for what we have done for them?

As for the concept of “As man is G-d once was and as G-d is man may become.” Jesus is the only example of G-d that man has. It is through Christ (the mediator) that we learn anything and all things about G-d. So let us review the above statement:
As man is G-d once was. => As man is Jesus Christ once lived. As we suffer and die so did Christ suffer and die.
As G-d is man may become. => As Jesus Christ was raised from the dead and glorified to ascend to heaven to sit on the right hand of G-d the Father so can man be resurrected from the dead and glorified to ascend to heaven to sit at the right hand of G-d.

Let me assure you that we should seek after every good thing and that everything about G-d is good. There is not one thing about G-d that is evil and should not be sought. And yet there are some that would tempt us to not seek after all that is good. G-d the Father and his Son, Jesus Christ are indeed the example of all that is good and we should seek in every way to be like them. This is the doctrine as I understand it and I do not know why anyone would pervert such a beautiful concept of shun such a doctrine.

For me it is very simple – if something is a true nature and attribute of G-d it is good and we should seek to obtain that goodness – no exceptions – none. This is not uncomfortable to me – it is good news beyond anything that I have ever known and something I am the most comfortable with beyond anything that I have ever heard. I also believe that G-d will not force even his greatest and most valuable goodness on anyone – we will all live in eternity with whatever goodness we are comfortable.

The Traveler

[Misshalfway]

It is clear to me from what I have learned about the godhood idea is that I would inherit the fullest of God's blessings, continue to progress in the eternities and become part of the creative process. There is nothing in that idea that means that I would be worshipped. I think that progressing and perhaps even taking on some appointed stewardships or responsibilities in that realm make sense. But there is nothing that says that we will all be worshipped.

You know we throw around these ideas and make some really gross assumptions. In my opinion, Brigham Young was thinking out loud. Not all of our prophets speak prophetically every time they open their mouths. Even today our leaders produce books and sell them at popular book stores. But they are not part of the canon and do not have the church's endorsement. We must be very careful about this area and what we post here as official church doctrine.

Hemi....I am afraid what you have said falls in this catagory.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

It is clear to me from what I have learned about the godhood idea is that I would inherit the fullest of God's blessings, continue to progress in the eternities and become part of the creative process. There is nothing in that idea that means that I would be worshipped. I think that progressing and perhaps even taking on some appointed stewardships or responsibilities in that realm make sense. But there is nothing that says that we will all be worshipped.

You know we throw around these ideas and make some really gross assumptions. In my opinion, Brigham Young was thinking out loud. Not all of our prophets speak prophetically every time they open their mouths. Even today our leaders produce books and sell them at popular book stores. But they are not part of the canon and do not have the church's endorsement. We must be very careful about this area and what we post here as official church doctrine.

Hemi....I am afraid what you have said falls in this catagory.

Just so I am clear - is to be worshiped a evil attribute of G-d and therefore we should not seek such a thing? Should we not seek after all that is good and righteous? For me - everything about G-d is good and should be sought - no exceptions - regardless of any spin by any man or anyone for that matter.

The Traveler

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by Traveler

Just so I am clear - is to be worshiped a evil attribute of G-d and therefore we should not see such a thing? Should we not seek after all that is good and righteous?

The Traveler

I am not saying it is evil. I am saying that such an idea is an assumption. Perhaps even a logical assumption if you don't at look traditional definitions and terminology. But I am not convinced nor does this church teach that becoming a god (with a little g) in the eternities MEANS that we will be worshipped.

And then I could ask you if seeking to be worshipped is a righteous pursuit. Dude....being worshipped should be the last thing on our list of righteous pursuits!

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

I am not saying it is evil. I am saying that such an idea is an assumption. Perhaps even a logical assumption if you don't at look traditional definitions and terminology. But I am not convinced nor does this church teach that becoming a god (with a little g) in the eternities MEANS that we will be worshipped.

And then I could ask you if seeking to be worshipped is a righteous pursuit. Dude....being worshipped should be the last thing on our list of righteous pursuits!

Seeking something that G-d is or does or something he seeks is good. If G-d does something I define that as good. Many may seek to be worshiped but not for the same reason or purpose that G-d does. I do not know all things but I trust and believe in G-d. I do not believe he is a do as I say - not as I do - kind of G-d. I trust him, his methods and all he asks, all that he allows and all that he does. If it is really a part of him - I am comfortable with being a part of him and I seek it - no exceptions - none.

You can seek what you will but for me - I seek the goodness of G-d - whatever that is.

The Traveler

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by Traveler

Seeking something that G-d is or does or something he seeks is good. If G-d does something I define that as good. Many may seek to be worshiped but not for the same reason or purpose that G-d does. I do not know all things but I trust and believe in G-d. I do not believe he is a do as I say - not as I do - kind of G-d. I trust him, his methods and all he asks, all that he allows and all that he does. If it is really a part of him - I am comfortable with being a part of him and I seek it - no exceptions - none.

You can seek what you will but for me - I seek the goodness of G-d - whatever that is.

The Traveler

Seeking the goodness of God.........you are going to have to show me where in official church doctrine the pursuit of being worshipped is listed.

Becoming like God......and becoming God himself are two different ideas. The scriptures use the term "gods" with a little g. It seems to me there is a great disparity in our human ability to comprehend what this means. It hasn't been revealed completely and isn't taught as doctrine. It lies in the realms of intelligent speculation. You yourself, traveler, make some assumptions that seem to feel right to you. But they are not church doctrine and shouldn't be presented as such. That is my only point.

[bmy-]

I don't see where the misconception about the 'little g' comes from. Everything i've read and studied points to us being full blown Gods with all the baggage attached.

Gordon C. Thomasson, “Becoming Saviors on Mount Zion: The Place of Suffering in the Gospel of Unselfishness,” New Era, Apr 1973, 11

On February 16, 1849, Brigham Young stated to the Twelve, “As God was, so are we now; as he is now, so shall we be.” (Manuscript History.) One of the greatest blessings of the restored gospel is the knowledge that we can become perfect, even as our Father in heaven is perfect. We know that through living certain principles we can approach perfection
LDS.org - New Era Article - Becoming Saviors on Mount Zion: The Place of Suffering in the Gospel of Unselfishness

… What is [man]? He had his being in the eternal worlds; he existed before he came here. He is not only the son of man, but he is the son of God also. He is a God in embryo, and possesses within him a spark of that eternal flame which was struck from the blaze of God’s eternal fire in the eternal world, and is placed here upon the earth that he may possess true intelligence, true light, true knowledge,—that he may know himself—that he may know God—that he may know something about what he was before he came here—that he may know something about what he is destined to enjoy in the eternal worlds.
LDS.org - New Era Article - Becoming Saviors on Mount Zion: The Place of Suffering in the Gospel of Unselfishness

He did not originate from a chaotic mass of matter, moving or inert, but came forth possessing, in an embryonic state, all the faculties and powers of a God. And when he shall be perfected, and have progressed to maturity, he will be like his Father—a God, being indeed His offspring. As the horse, the ox, the sheep, and every living creature, including man, propagates its own species and perpetuates its own kind, so does God perpetuate his.
LDS.org - New Era Article - Becoming Saviors on Mount Zion: The Place of Suffering in the Gospel of Unselfishness

[MarginOfError]

Some of these ideas may or may not be true. I don't really care either way. The issue I take is that a lot of these ideas are being extracted from statements, discourses, journals, etc by people who haven't done the work to earn them. A prime example: Mormon Doctrine -- I can't tell you how many times I've heard people quote that book as if it were official Mormon doctrine. But mind you, that book has been edited almost as much as the history of the papacy (my apologies ceeboo). At the same time, they have no idea where the basis of those conclusions is. If you ask them to support the conclusion with scripture, they look at you blankly and say, "well, someone smarter than me said it." Well, Plato was smarter than you too, and his Republic experiment failed miserably.

My suggestion is to stick to the Standard Works, and the addresses at General Conference. You'll find everything you need to know in there, and if you study very carefully and with faith, you'll learn everything you want to know about these 'deep and mysterious doctrines' right from the source.

As for whether we might be worshipped some day, this is all I have to say: the people we worship are those that have the power over our salvation. The only way we would ever be worshipped is if we had power over others' salvation. So, if indeed we can become Gods and create worlds in this same model, then we would be worshipped in our role regarding those people's salvation.

The advancement into godhood, however, is not a principle of the Gospel. The endpoint of the Gospel in our doctrine is overcoming spiritual death and returning to live with God the Father, and Jesus Christ. Any perks that may or may not be associated with such exaltation are corollary at best, and very often speculative. And they certainly have no place in talks coming from our pulpits.

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by bmy-

I don't see where the misconception about the 'little g' comes from. Everything i've read and studied points to us being full blown Gods with all the baggage attached.

Let me be clear. I am not disagreeing with the quotes you listed below. But none of them define specifically what it means to be a god in the hereafter. They just tell us of our divine heritage and potential. I am just not convinced that that means precisely the we will be in position to be worshipped. I may have God as my spiritual father and if obedient may inherit great riches and privilages. But will I be worshipped? That is not defined.

It is a great question. A question that opens many wonderful possibilities. And those who have tried to answer this question do so under the umbrella of speculation NOT official doctrine. That is my point.

Saying that these ideas mean "full blown Gods with all of the baggage" is an assumption.....as intelligent and as logical as it may seem.

And that ever famous statement "As man is God once was....as God is man may become" is something we talk about NOT something we teach. YOu get that? We don't know! We just think.