Uncomfortable Doctrine

[Hemidakota]

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.

How can you say President Young was thinking out loud? Did the Lord tell you? Hmm....this is what I am referring too in my previous posting; a prevalent problem in the church from Joseph Smith day. Even I look at this comment and had to come to grips in asking the FATHER whether it is true or not. This pattern of asking should always be the course for all the Saints. But that is not case I keep seeing. Even most arrogant Astro Physicist can’t see behind there own noses, thinking there own academic learning will provide the appropriate answer to every universe questions.

Now, I do see this as a problem in the church. If I cannot accept it, then no one else should. If I don’t have understanding, then no else should. See my point? We need to careful of what was spoken; whether you think it was out of jest or any other label you may add.

[EarthyAngel]

Originally Posted by MarginOfError

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.

D&C 132:19-20

19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths— ... and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

[bmy-]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

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.

I agree with the rest -- the topic of worship is speculation. I've got my personal ideas about it through logic.. and it so happened to be complimented by prayer. It's enough for me I suppose.

OTOH.. That quote comes from doctrine and could be considered doctrine in itself. If it's not taught it's to avoid making members and investigators feel uncomfortable.

I think it's something we 'know' but we don't teach often for fear of ridicule.

[Hemidakota]

I am looking at various general authorites that sustain that comment in regards to the King Follet discourse and what President Snow remarked. Do I believe in the leaders of the church or simply, some elses deductions?

[Vanhin]

I'm with Misshalfway on this one. I see her saying that it is simply speculation and perhaps a logical conclusion that some people have come to based on their interpretation of exaltation, but it is not taught in the scriptures that we will be worshiped or that we should seek to be worshiped, therefore we should not teach it. Some even think that we will become the father of our own universe and have christs of our own, which is not supported by scripture. The scriptures that are binding upon us teach that we will continue the work of the Father and glorify Him, and that we will bear the souls of men.

I can also understand the point that Traveler is making, because I use the same argument to explain one of the ways that we worship both the Father and the Son; in emulating them, that is... However, I think it is stretching that definition to say that it applies to all cases of emulation, or that we, as children of God, should seek to be worshiped. In fact, I would argue that there is evidence in the scriptures that suggests otherwise.

I think one of the strongest cases against such a desire would be to look at what Lucifer sought after. He sought to exalt his "throne above the stars of God", and "sit also upon the mount of the congregation" (2 Ne. 14:13, Isa. 14:13). After he had been cast out of heaven for rebellion, he appeared to Moses and said, "Moses thou son of Man, worship me.", to which Moses ultimately replied, "Depart from me, Satan, for this one God only will I worship, which is the God of glory." (Moses 1:12-20).

I guess I'm with PrisonChaplain too. When we enter our exaltation, if God says he wants me to be worshiped, then I will do his will. Or if binding revelation is received before that time that suggests that we should seek it, then I will. But as it stands, the scriptures are quite clear on this matter.

It is interesting that the references to us becoming gods in the hereafter are spelled with a lower case "g". It is at least slightly significant to me.

I believe Elohim is the Supreme Ruler and his Son Jehovah is the Lord and Savior of all that exists, and that their work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind. I believe that worlds without number have passed and men and women have been entering their exaltation for eternities past under their direction and because of the merits of Jesus Christ. I believe that just like the Saints do in mortality, the righteous will continue to assist in this work forever. I think scriptures are in harmony with this belief of mine, and I am happy to just keep it at that until (or if) we receive further light and knowledge on the matter.

Sincerely,
Vanhin

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by bmy-

I agree with the rest -- the topic of worship is speculation. I've got my personal ideas about it through logic.. and it so happened to be complimented by prayer. It's enough for me I suppose.

OTOH.. That quote comes from doctrine and could be considered doctrine in itself. If it's not taught it's to avoid making members and investigators feel uncomfortable.

I think it's something we 'know' but we don't teach often for fear of ridicule.

I think it is because we don't know enough to teach it correctly and for it to be understood correctly. I think it is because of what MOE said. It isn't a saving doctrine. It doesn't pertain to our earthy work other than to steer the direction of our goals.

Why not ask the question and think the thoughts. Why not pray and ask on our own! Why not read the words of the brethren. But when someone such as the OP comes here with a concern.....why do we feel it is ok to thru up the deepest of speculatory exploration as doctrine?

Sometimes I think with all of our learning we forget what wisdom and perspective is.

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by Vanhin

I'm with Misshalfway on this one. I see her saying that it is simply speculation and perhaps a logical conclusion that some people have come to based on their interpretation of exaltation, but it is not taught in the scriptures that we will be worshiped or that we should seek to be worshiped, therefore we should not teach it. Some even think that we will become the father of our own universe and have christs of our own, which is not supported by scripture. The scriptures that are binding upon us teach that we will continue the work of the Father and glorify Him, and that we will bear the souls of men.

I can also understand the point that Traveler is making, because I use the same argument to explain one of the ways that we worship both the Father and the Son; in emulating them, that is... However, I think it is stretching that definition to say that it applies to all cases of emulation, or that we, as children of God, should seek to be worshiped. In fact, I would argue that there is evidence in the scriptures that suggests otherwise.

I think one of the strongest cases against such a desire would be to look at what Lucifer sought after. He sought to exalt his "throne above the stars of God", and "sit also upon the mount of the congregation" (2 Ne. 14:13, Isa. 14:13). After he had been cast out of heaven for rebellion, he appeared to Moses and said, "Moses thou son of Man, worship me.", to which Moses ultimately replied, "Depart from me, Satan, for this one God only will I worship, which is the God of glory." (Moses 1:12-20).

I guess I'm with PrisonChaplain too. When we enter our exaltation, if God says he wants me to be worshiped, then I will do his will. Or if binding revelation is received before that time that suggests that we should seek it, then I will. But as it stands, the scriptures are quite clear on this matter.

It is interesting that the references to us becoming gods in the hereafter are spelled with a lower case "g". It is at least slightly significant to me.

I believe Elohim is the Supreme Ruler and his Son Jehovah is the Lord and Savior of all that exists, and that their work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind. I believe that worlds without number have passed and men and women have been entering their exaltation for eternities past under their direction and because of the merits of Jesus Christ. I believe that just like the Saints do in mortality, the righteous will continue to assist in this work forever. I think scriptures are in harmony with this belief of mine, and I am happy to just keep it at that until (or if) we receive further light and knowledge on the matter.

Sincerely,
Vanhin

I am reminded of a scripture in Moses when he, after experiencing great visions exclaims that man is nothing ..... something that he had never before supposed. I am also reminded of how many times in scriptures man is put in his place.....reminded of his puny arm.....told to remember who does have all the power. It is only thru the Savior that we can do anything here.......or anything there!

And Vanhin...I thanked you for validating all positions and bringing the conversation into balance.

[bmy-]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

I think it is because we don't know enough to teach it correctly and for it to be understood correctly. I think it is because of what MOE said. It isn't a saving doctrine. It doesn't pertain to our earthy work other than to steer the direction of our goals.

Why not ask the question and think the thoughts. Why not pray and ask on our own! Why not read the words of the brethren. But when someone such as the OP comes here with a concern.....why do we feel it is ok to thru up the deepest of speculatory exploration as doctrine?

Sometimes I think with all of our learning we forget what wisdom and perspective is.

I think with her concerns.. the only way to reconcile them would be to study the subject thoroughly. After she's exhausted her temporal supply of knowledge.. she can turn to her Heavenly Father and ask once more.

That's the course of action I hope she takes at least.

Best of luck to you OP.

EDIT: "Sometimes I think with all of our learning we forget what wisdom and perspective is.
Reply With Quote" (really good point, I liked it alot)

[tomk]

Originally Posted by fiona84

Christ's atonement IS enough for me. It is everything for me! That's why I don't want to be a god. I worship Heavenly Father and His Son for what they did for me. No one is ever going to worship ME.

Saying 'Our Father' when addressing him in prayer is different than saying 'Be nice to your spouse as this is what Father told us to do. Father wants us to be gods and godesses and in order to be like Father we need to be good,etc,etc.'

His whole talk was basically chatting about how good we should be for Father so we can be like him.

I apologize for my defeatest attitude. I am earnestly trying to get to the bottom of this issue. I'm doing that because I sincerely don't want it to bother me so much. I was hoping to find a way to come to terms with this in the way that God wants me to. I want to believe it, I wish I could. I'm finding this really upsetting.

Your "comfort level" with this doctrine will increase as you become closer and closer to your Savior.

I am not sure of all the reasons why this doctrine upsets you so much, but it is a doctrine that Christ taught during his mortal ministry. Before and After His mortal ministry. It IS the Gospel. It is our destiny! We must claim it as ours.

My advice would be -- do not go to man for the understanding and level of comfort that only GOD can give you. Pray unto the Father, in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and explain your reasons to Him of why you do not accept this doctrine that we can be gods and godesses. The Father will send you peace and comfort and understanding. Perhaps not overnight, or even over a matter of weeks or months....but the understanding WILL COME if you seek it. That is His promise! That He gives liberally to those that ask and will not upbraid (will not condemn you for asking).


We can give you words. But only Father can reveal it to your mind and heart.


Please feel free to contact me in a PM if you want to discuss this further.



Tom

[prisonchaplain]

Originally Posted by richlittell

My perspective, then, begins with God not as some omnipotent being who is unreachable and exists for the purpose of worship, but as our "Father" in heaven. And just like I want my kids to have none of my bad qualities and more than all of my good, Heavenly Father wants that for his children as well. To become like Him someday means to have all his good qualities so that I can assist him in his eternal mission, which is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life and happiness of humankind. No one can ever replace God nor supplant his position. ... We are not sure that if we help to build and populate other planets, are we the gods of those planets or is Our Heavenly Father still the God of all planets, will there be a new Christ for those planets, or will Jesus be the Christ worshipped by all. None of this matters, what matters is my eternal relationship with my Heavenly Father, who is to me "Father" first, and "God" second.

Great point! But, to clarify, my understanding of the LDS teaching concerning our Heavenly Father is that he is literally our Father, in the same sense humans parent their children. In other words, we are meant to become all that He is. Ultimately, that would seem to mean that we will become Gods, and that our Heavenly Father will take great joy in the worship we receive as we create our worlds, and eventually become "Heavenly Father" of the Gods we birth.

In contrast, most Protestants and Catholics understand God, not as unreachable, but as our "Creator Father." Rather than being a biological parent, birthing more Gods, we see him as the perfect Maker, who treasures us as his masterpieces. We are not what He is, but we are finest work, and He delights in us, and we in Him.

I suppose this could all dovetail into a discussion of creation ex nihilo vs. the LDS teaching of God creating our opportunity, as eternal intelligences, to experience corporeal existence, and engage our free agency as we strive for the eternal heavenly kingdom most appropriate for us. Enough to say, these teachings do overlap, don't they?