Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Our Mormon Brothers? Part 6 (God is an exalted man)
The Reformed Evangelist ^ | June 25th, 2007 | James White

Posted on 11/10/2007 7:22:46 AM PST by Gamecock

God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible,I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in formlike yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another.[1]

There are few passages in all of LDS literature more often cited, quoted, and discussed, than this one. This, and the two paragraphs that follow, rank right next to the First Vision in their impact upon LDS theology to this very day. The first phrase, God himself was once as we are now, has been so often repeated that it has become a given in LDS teaching. This, and the saying of Lorenzo Snow that we will examine later, “As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become,” have attained a status in Mormon theology that ranks them as carrying as much authority as any other statement about God.

God himself was once as we are now. The full impact of this statement must be understood. Here we have a man who is claiming to stand as a prophet of God, as a Christian prophet, who is proclaiming that God once existed in a corporeal, human state. God was once a man like us. A number of things must then be true. First, God has not eternally been God. From this we develop the idea of exaltation, a process that even God Himself has undergone. Secondly, if God has not eternally been God, then obviously there must have been a God or gods before Him (unless one embraces the idea that the universe sprang into existence without divine assistance).[2]

“God is an exalted man.” From this assertion we see the coming together of the thought process we observed in the earlier sections of the Doctrine and Covenants, that being the exaltation of man to a high status. God and man are the same species, the same kind of being, differing in level of exaltation. We are not yet exalted; God has undergone this process, and this is why He differs from us. But, since He was once where we are, obviously the door is opened for us to undergo the same process and hence, someday, become a God as He is.

God has a physical body, for He is an exalted man, just as the 1838 edition of the First Vision had asserted. This physical body is not just an unnecessary addition or accessory. It is definitional of God Himself, just as our body is vital to what it means to be a human.

These statements would have been enough, but Joseph Smith was just warming up. He leaves us with no room for misunderstanding his intent.

In order to understand the subject of the dead, for consolation of those who mourn for the loss of their friends, it is necessary 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 take away the veil, 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; and I will show it from the Bible.[3]

When speaking of the character of God, Smith insists that God came to be God. This continues the idea that God was once something other than what He is today. Smith then strikes directly at the heart of Christian orthodoxy–at a belief held by Christians from the very beginning–in saying that he will refute the idea that God has been God from all eternity (Psalm 90:2). Obviously, then, it is perfectly permissible to understand Smith as positively saying that God has not eternally been God.[4] How else could it be? The drive to make it possible for man to become exalted must of necessity result in this kind of assertion about God Himself. The God of Christian orthodoxy, because He is eternal, unchanging, and exhaustive of every category of perfection, power, and being, simply leaves no room for the kind of future Smith envisioned for man. Hence, the God of Christian orthodoxy had to be refuted.

We cannot lightly pass over Smith’s assertion that it is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know…that he was once a man like us. I have often heard LDS say that we shouldn’t discuss such deep issues as exaltation to godhood, yet Smith says it is the first principle of the Gospel. It is clear that Joseph Smith did not view this as an optional belief at this point in his life and teaching. This is not just a side-issue upon which we may or may not agree with him. This is doctrine, pure and simple, and it is not something upon which a person can disagree and remain a follower of the Prophet.

Further, we cannot miss the emphasis upon the similarity of the pre-exaltation existence of God with our own current earthly lot. Smith insists that God’s time as a man is parallel to the life of Christ here upon earth. Obviously, then, Smith means what he says: God was a man like we are men, human beings, going through the same experiences of life that we are.[5] Some modern LDS are uncomfortable with the clarity and force of such statements. Some wish to pull the veil back across the Prophet’s teachings so as to not have to defend such doctrine. But this is his teaching, without question.

———————————————

[1] Ibid., p. 345. Italics in the printed edition.

[2] Many Christian philosophers have pointed out the obvious flaw in such a concept: if every God was once a man, then, what about the first God? If the law is inviolable, did not this God have to be a man before becoming a God? Some LDS have said that there was never a first, but that the regression is eternal. But such an argument is irrational on many grounds. The simplest means of demonstrating this is to point out that the number of exalted beings is increasing as time passes. If the number increases with the passing of time, and cannot then decrease (Gods don’t cease to be Gods, do they?), then as we go back in time the number decreases. Eventually, one must come to the first God who began the process. That this idea has been found in LDS writings is fairly simple to document. Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt noted in his book, The Seer, p. 132 (from September of 1853):

We were begotten by our Father in Heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten by a still more ancient Father and so on, from generation to generation, from one heavenly world to another still more ancient, until our minds are wearied and lost in the multiplicity of generations and successive worlds, and as a last resort, we wonder in our minds, how far back the genealogy extends, and how the first world was formed, and the first father was begotten. But why does man seek for a first, when revelation informs him that Gods works are without beginning? Do you still seek for a first link where the chain is endless? Can you conceive of a first year in endless duration? . . . The Fulness of Truth, dwelling in an endless succession of past generations, would produce an endless succession of personal Gods, each possessing equal wisdom, power, and glory with all the rest. In worshipping any one of these Gods we worship the whole, and in worshipping the whole, we still worship but one God; for it is the same God who dwells in them all; the personages are only His different dwelling places.

It seems to me that Pratt here goes well into the realm of speculation, though again, the Mormon is left to deal with the difficulty of an Apostle teaching on religious truth and yet, in so doing, not providing authoritative counsel and doctrine.

[3] Ibid., pp. 345-346. Italics in printed edition.

[4] Hence, when one sees LDS writers referring to God as eternal, they are normally referring to God’s existence en toto, that is, on the same level as being able to say, as Mormons do, that man is eternal as well.

[5] K. Codell Carter, writing on the subject Godhood in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, (New York: Macmillan Publishing, 1992), Latter-day Saints believe that God achieved his exalted rank by progressing much as man must progress and that God is a perfected and exalted man. He then cites from the King Follett Discourse as evidence of this belief.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Current Events; Evangelical Christian; Other Christian
KEYWORDS: lds; ldschurch; mormon; whoisgod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last
To: Michael Knight
I dont see Mormons on here posting hit pieces on other churches.

So, one FREEPER elects to hold a mirror up to LDS doctrine & it's a "hit piece." But LDS training & sending almost 70,000 some world-wide missionaries to go door-to-door, where the training inherently focuses on 1 of 3 major doctrines--the accusatory apostasy of all Christians (& restoration)--& that's not 70,000 daily "hit pieces" at the door?

Jehovah's Witnesses who go door to door are called "publishers" (& that's essentially what LDS missionaries are).

Do you tithe? Then, your $ has gone toward publishing & distributing world-wide millions of copies of the Pearl of Great Price...including multiple-language translations? Wanna flip through the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, vv. 18-19 to find out what your tithe is paying for description-wise of the entire non-Mormon churches?

Those verses tell us (a) all Christians who profess their faith are "corrupt"; (b) all Christians creeds are an "abomination to God." Furthermore, LDS missionaries are taught to teach as one of the top three doctrines the tall tale that all Christian churches & its members are apostates of the faith (kind of like Muslims referencing all Christians as "infidels").

To peddle this kind of obscene publishing nonsense worldwide thru millions of printed pages til Christ returns and thru perhaps billions of man-hours til Christ returns...and then you compare all that to one measly post like this one?

21 posted on 11/10/2007 10:33:03 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; Michael Knight
Perhaps it's because while you may share my politics, you worship a false deity.[Gamecock]

Yes or no, MK, does the possibility exist that Mitt Romney will one day be his own god of a planet and receive worship from those spirits he's been involved in pro-creating?

22 posted on 11/10/2007 10:35:05 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

As a serious response, we need to guard against the idea that there is a common God that all the religions worship.

By definition, Allah is NOT Yahweh.

By definition, the Cosmos is NOT Yahweh.

By definition, the Mormon god is NOT Yahweh.


23 posted on 11/10/2007 10:36:21 AM PST by fishtank ("Patriotic Nationalism?" - YES!!!....."Globalist Multiculturalism?" - NO!!!,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Michael Knight

We have a Religion Forum here on Free Republic so that religious issues can be discussed.

Over the years, the protocol and manners for the Forum have developed into a pretty fair discussion room.

Please stay for the conversations!!!


24 posted on 11/10/2007 10:40:22 AM PST by fishtank ("Patriotic Nationalism?" - YES!!!....."Globalist Multiculturalism?" - NO!!!,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Abigail Adams

In answer to your repeated question that I think I answered already, I believe the church doctrine on that subject and see nothing wrong with it so long as its an accurate quote from one of our prophets. It has not been changed or backed away from in the history of the church. It is central to understanding the rest of the gospel and I see nothing about it that doesnt make sense or is un-Christian. To not think that we came from our God is to think that we just came from nowhere and I dont accept that.

I created in a manner of speaking both my engine in my truck and my 3 kids. Which one do you think I love more?

I didnt come here with an attitude looking for an argument, I just asked a question and tried to remind you guys we are on the same side. So how do I get all forums besides this one to show up?


25 posted on 11/10/2007 11:11:58 AM PST by Michael Knight (Get off my back government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

Well, it doesnt do a lot to make members of our church feel welcome here is my point. I still believe in the conservative movement even if I disagree with some things I may see on the site, but if I was on the fence I wouldnt come back. Of course, there are only over 12 million members world wide, so its not like a big group of people or anything.


26 posted on 11/10/2007 11:13:59 AM PST by Michael Knight (Get off my back government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

There seems to be a delay in my posts getting posted or else I violated a rule I dont know about. I dont mind reading others opinion and I even submit that you shouldnt agree with my church, because if you do, you better change over quick! Just like if I agreed with your church I would be duty bound to convert.

The short answer of your question that didnt get posted from before is yes. And to answer your follow on question, no I dont see that as in any way taking away from the glory of our creator, in fact I see it as increasing that glory. You’ll notice that children are celebrated all throughout the bible as a sign of how great a man was.

My underlying point is just that there are a lot of these type posts and I dont want to see a site with so many positive aspects push aside a large group of voters who need to hear/see the conservative side. I think many of the posts here are unnecessarily harsh and intended to inflame rather then discuss.


27 posted on 11/10/2007 11:14:00 AM PST by Michael Knight (Get off my back government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
Dear fishtank,

I don’t have any interest at all in discussing theological matters with you.

Thanks,


sitetest

28 posted on 11/10/2007 11:15:28 AM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Michael Knight
Dear Michael Knight,

“Well, it doesnt do a lot to make members of our church feel welcome here is my point.”

Well, it doesn’t do a lot to make members of the Catholic Church feel welcome here when folks criticize our theology.

But, this is the RELIGION Forum. If you can’t take a fair critique of your religious beliefs, then go hang out in the other parts of Free Republic.

Mind you, I’m dead set against folks mocking other folks’ religion, or the members of other religions. I’m dead set against nastiness, name-calling, refraining from giving the benefit of the doubt, ascribing evil motives.

There were folks who used to be here at Free Republic who used to mercilessly mock the LDS, and that which LDS folks hold holy. They were banned, and rightly so, even if I considered some of them friends. There are others here who mercilessly mock Catholicism and what we Catholics hold holy. These, typically, haven't been banned, and in my own opinion, that doesn't reflect well on the moderation of this forum. Posters like that very well should be banned, just as those who mocked the LDS were banned.

But good, honest presentation and debate of religious differences are part of what the Religion Forum is about.

“I still believe in the conservative movement even if I disagree with some things I may see on the site, but if I was on the fence I wouldnt come back.”

Then perhaps you would be someone insufficiently thick-skinned to be a conservative. After all, we receive far worse in the lamestream media every day.

“Of course, there are only over 12 million members world wide, so its not like a big group of people or anything.”

From my Catholic perspective, no, it doesn’t seem to be a big group of people at all.


sitetest

29 posted on 11/10/2007 11:24:07 AM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; colorcountry; FastCoyote; MHGinTN; Pan_Yans Wife; svcw; Elsie; aMorePerfectUnion; ...

Ping


30 posted on 11/10/2007 11:43:10 AM PST by greyfoxx39 (I have a tagline . I just don't think the forum police will allow me to use it. THEY'RE EVERYWHERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

“Secondly, if God has not eternally been God, then obviously there must have been a God or gods before Him “

Even better, there must have been multiple Goddesses stretching back to eternity to bear spirit children.

Wackier and wackier, Alice follows the rabbit down the hole.


31 posted on 11/10/2007 11:53:44 AM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

“This is where the rubber hits the road. As a Mormon, I believed this doctrine, but I don’t think I ever felt comfortable with it.”

You obviously see the problem. I believe, through experience, that certain Mormons (Harry Reid being one) end up believing they “got their planet early” and their egos expand indefinitely. That is my difficulty with a Mormon at the presidential level. My Governor here in Nevada is Mormon and seems to be trying to do a creditable job, but the man-God thing can cloud the judgement.


32 posted on 11/10/2007 11:59:49 AM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Michael Knight

“I dont see Mormons on here posting hit pieces on other churches.”

That’s because they claim to be the same as everyone else, though they consider all others apostates. A schizophrenic situation.


33 posted on 11/10/2007 12:02:34 PM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote

So other churches dont think we are all brothers and sisters then? Wow.

Oh well, I’ll look all you guys up in the hereafter to say I told you so. ha ha. Have a good day!


34 posted on 11/10/2007 12:15:56 PM PST by Michael Knight (Get off my back government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
but the man-God thing can cloud the judgement.

I suspect that most politicians have a god complex. Romney is not the only one. Everyone on the democrat side has one, and many of the republican candidates seem to have similar egos. I mean you've got to have a huge ego to run for president in the first place.

35 posted on 11/10/2007 12:18:29 PM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

“I suspect that most politicians have a god complex. Romney is not the only one. Everyone on the democrat side has one, and many of the republican candidates seem to have similar egos. I mean you’ve got to have a huge ego to run for president in the first place.”

Quite true. But in Romney’s case, his ego problem is compounded by Mormon doctrine. Rigid perfectionism can be quite brittle. Whether you like it or not, the White Horse Prophecy begins to rear its head.


36 posted on 11/10/2007 12:30:29 PM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: restornu
ping-a-ling-a-ling :^)
37 posted on 11/10/2007 12:37:26 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael Knight; greyfoxx39; colorcountry; aMorePerfectUnion; Revelation 911; Colofornian; ...
"Anything can be explained to sound like the stupidest idea ever if you want to explain it that way." That such sincere people believe these heretical teachings is far from being about making something sound stupid.

Satan wants people to ridicule the idea of his existence and ignore his heretical inveiglings. Opposition to Mormonism is all about eternal destiny. A true spiritually alive serving Christian is acutely interested in the fate of those caught in heretical teachings. And all the more when one sees such sincere, conservative, loving people perishing.

38 posted on 11/10/2007 12:50:28 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Reaganesque; Grig; sandude; Saundra Duffy; Utah Girl; Spiff; tantiboh; 2pugs4me; ...
Is not Jesus an exalted man?

1 Tim 3
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory

When one receives their glory from God the Father they become exalted!

2 Peter 1
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

39 posted on 11/10/2007 1:08:03 PM PST by restornu (Improve The Shining Moment! Don't let them pass you by... PRESS FORWARD MITT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: restornu; MHGinTN; Reaganesque; FastCoyote; Gamecock; Michael Knight
Is not Jesus an exalted man?

Jesus did not start out as a man and then later become an exalted man/god. Jesus was God (from all eternity) and he lowered himself and took on human flesh.

The Mormon god is a man who (through hard work and obedience to the laws and ordinances of the council of the Gods on the planet Kolob) ultmately was given the opportunity to become one of the legion of gods in the universe.

The Mormon god is not God Almighty who became Man.

Don't confuse the two.

40 posted on 11/10/2007 1:18:00 PM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson