Unchangeable God

[mtpop]

My faith is in a unchangeable God, are we expected to have faith in a changeable church?

[CaptainM]

See viewtopic.php?p=1295885#p1295885 for those who agree with you versus those who follow the Profit$.

[Thinker]

My faith is in a unchangeable God, are we expected to have faith in a changeable church?

I agree with your implication (how the church is caving to praises of men - lowering the bar).


Still, I see contradictions in the notion that God is unchangeable…

“For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living.” - Luke 20:38

Whatever lives changes.
Whatever is dead doesn’t change.

[John Tavner]

My faith is in a unchangeable God, are we expected to have faith in a changeable church?

I agree with your implication (how the church is caving to praises of men - lowering the bar).


Still, I see contradictions in the notion that God is unchangeable…

“For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living.” - Luke 20:38

Whatever lives changes.
Whatever is dead doesn’t change.

You left off the the end of the verse.
38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”

[BuriedTartaria]

Welcome to the Mormon revolution

[mtpop]

Moroni 8: 18 For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.

How can we have faith in a God if he is not unchangeable?

[Silver Pie]

Moroni 8: 18 For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.

How can we have faith in a God if he is not unchangeable?

Lectures on Faith is an excellent resource on this subject.

It would be incredibly difficult to have faith in a God who changed with the waves of the sea, much like the current Church(TM) does.

[Thinker]

I agree with your implication (how the church is caving to praises of men - lowering the bar).

Still, I see contradictions in the notion that God is unchangeable…

“For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living.” - Luke 20:38

Whatever lives changes.
Whatever is dead doesn’t change.

You left off the the end of the verse.
38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”

True. Good point. I believe that we all do live before and after life. And possibly “God is not a god to the dead” points to spiritual death… but then again - all are alive to him.

So, I think the meaning is that THIS LIFE is the time to exercise faith, repent etc. Once we die, we return to that God who gave us life and are again part of God so there is no perceived separation requiring faith. Earlier in the same book (Luke 9)…

• “… but he said, lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. 60 Jesus said unto him, let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of god.”

This suggests that all that temple work for the DEAD is way less important than servicing THE LIVING - who are suffering and in need of what we can do to help.

Life IS CHANGE - the one constant. And this life full of change was created by God. Maybe outside this life, God/reality is unchanging- but within this life (all we know) life is change. And exercising faith in God is not supposed to be stale like repeated church lessons ad nauseam. It’s supposed to get the blood flowing - get us moving trying new things - towards betterment of ourselves & circumstances.

[Thinker]

...How can we have faith in a God if he is not unchangeable?

How can we - who live in lives full of change - have faith in a God if he stays the same as we grow?

Consider this fact:
God is however YOU see God. That changes. How did you see God when 5 years old compared to now? If it doesn’t change, then there’s trouble in clinging to “old wine bottles.” Jacob “wrestled with God” - or rather wrestled with his old distorted ideas of God. We should too.

[mtpop]

So, we grow and change either closer to God or away from God. The goal post is solid we are the moving one on our way to the goal.

[Durzan]

The way I look at it is that God is changing, learning, growing in knowledge and power... Its just at a rate outside our comprehension, outside our own Telestial flow of time. After all, the scriptures also say that one day to God is as 1000 years to mankind. And what ultimately is time really besides the measure of change?

Compared to him, WE change in the blink of an eye, so fast that to Him it may seem like one second we were a human baby, and the next fraction of a second we are an adult. From our point of view however, on our timescale while in this mortal life, God doesn't appear to change for us, presumably because our mortal lives are extremely short and fast. To see the changes in God from this mortal realm, we would have to be around for hundreds of thousands of years and watching Him very closely.

[Mindfields]

A God who changes, learns and grows is not a God in my opinion.

[mtpop]

In the Lectures on Faith, JS taught about the character of God in the 3rd lecture.
Question. What things do we learn in the revelations of God respecting his character?

A .a. We learn the six following things:

b. First, that he was God before the world was created, and the same God that he was after it was created.

c. Second, that he is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, abundant in goodness, and that he was so from everlasting, and will be so to everlasting.

d. Third, that he changes not, neither is there variableness with him, and that his course is one eternal round.

e. Fourth, that he is a God of truth and cannot lie.

f. Fifth, that he is no respecter of persons;

g. and sixth, that he is love (Lecture 3:12-18).

[MikeMaillet]

My faith is in a unchangeable God, are we expected to have faith in a changeable church?

Gos is perfect and perfection is an absolute. If God was not perfect, then to what are we to aspire? The church, being us rather than the corporate entity, are not perfect and therefore must continually change until our course is true and aligns perfectly with God's.

Mike Maillet
Ingleside, Ontario

[Thinker]

So, we grow and change either closer to God or away from God. The goal post is solid we are the moving one on our way to the goal.

We do grow and change - in relation to God.
But what/who is God?
The Bible alone lists +800 attributes of God… love, truth, life, good…

Let’s say God is active faith toward the highest GOoD. Then, the goal posts do need adjusting as the higher good becomes clearer.

Eg… Years ago, my goalpost for God was set according to church leader dictates. They said, “Jump!” I quickly replied, “How high?” as I immediately began jumping to magnify the call to jump. If I hadn’t realized my goalposts for God were missing the mark by following fallible men - I’d probably be dead or sick (based on personal revelation) from the experimental shot they tried medically coercing members to take.

I’m still not clear on goalposts for God… but line upon line, here & there a little - I’m learning.

[Thinker]

The way I look at it is that God is changing, learning, growing in knowledge and power... Its just at a rate outside our comprehension, outside our own Telestial flow of time. After all, the scriptures also say that one day to God is as 1000 years to mankind. And what ultimately is time really besides the measure of change?

Compared to him, WE change in the blink of an eye, so fast that to Him it may seem like one second we were a human baby, and the next fraction of a second we are an adult. From our point of view however, on our timescale while in this mortal life, God doesn't appear to change for us, presumably because our mortal lives are extremely short and fast. To see the changes in God from this mortal realm, we would have to be around for hundreds of thousands of years and watching Him very closely.

I can see truth in that.
We’re children (not parents) of God… with lots yet to know. Often we don’t even realize how little we see of the big picture.

I’ve tried debating with various people about what time is… like what is it without the sun/solar system? One conclusion is that time measures CHANGE.

If as we are God once was… & if there is indeed eternal progress, then it makes sense God too is still growing, progressing. Maybe God has this world down (is Creator/Intelligent Design/Spirit here) but has more in other worlds. Maybe there are higher Gods to our God…

Someone suggested the phrase “Son of God” suggests a bit lower than God, & that Christ may be the highest personification of GOoD we have on this earth, but there’s more.

[MikeMaillet]

I used to think that the scriptural "reckoning" of time was related to time dilation and the way we experience time. I now believe that the discussions of time probably have something to do with the amount of time angels spend on worlds of various degrees of glory. Christ descended below all and has arisen to the highest degree of glory possible, that of His Father. The temple has filled Mormon minds with the idea that we will become Kings and Queens and rule over lesser kingdoms. How can we possibly judge another unless we have first experienced what that person has experienced? If God is perfect it will take more than just attending one's meetings and doing your home/visiting teaching. I get the feeling that the road to perfection is a rather lengthy one and maybe this is why Lucifer wanted to jump the queue, so to speak.

Mike Maillet
Ingleside, Ontario

[mtpop]

I used to think that the scriptural "reckoning" of time was related to time dilation and the way we experience time. I now believe that the discussions of time probably have something to do with the amount of time angels spend on worlds of various degrees of glory. Christ descended below all and has arisen to the highest degree of glory possible, that of His Father. The temple has filled Mormon minds with the idea that we will become Kings and Queens and rule over lesser kingdoms. How can we possibly judge another unless we have first experienced what that person has experienced? If God is perfect it will take more than just attending one's meetings and doing your home/visiting teaching. I get the feeling that the road to perfection is a rather lengthy one and maybe this is why Lucifer wanted to jump the queue, so to speak.

Mike Maillet
Ingleside, Ontario

Well spoken, I agree.

[TheDuke]

Well, my dad was a man when I was born, he never changed. but, surely my relationship with him from when I was a baby, todler, teen, adult, married, etc... made it look like he changed.

And I think all the scriptures about god changing are relative to this creation (i.e.6-7000 years), I doubt he changes much if at all during this time.

[JLHPROF]

In the Lectures on Faith, JS taught about the character of God in the 3rd lecture.

Joseph Smith didn't write this. Sidney Rigdon did.
And even if Joseph signed off on the LoF theology by the Nauvoo period he had learned better.

[JLHPROF]

A God who changes, learns and grows is not a God in my opinion.

I'm quite the opposite. I see far more to worship in a mortal man who diligently improved until reaching Godhood than I could ever find in a supernatural being so far removed from his children as to be incomprehensible. I'll take the King Follett Discourse over the Lecture on Faith every time.

[Redpilled Mormon]

A God who changes, learns and grows is not a God in my opinion.

I'm quite the opposite. I see far more to worship in a mortal man who diligently improved until reaching Godhood than I could ever find in a supernatural being so far removed from his children as to be incomprehensible. I'll take the King Follett Discourse over the Lecture on Faith every time.

It strikes me as an awfully atheistic version of God: He didn't create the universe, it was always there, he just evolved into consciousness, learned how to operate the buttons and levers, and ascended to godhood, then started helping other co-eternal intelligences start an infinite number of conveyer belts of gods ascending, etc, etc.

There's something about that the infinite conveyer belt of gods ascending that seems so much like a naturalistic viewpoint; ie primordial soup, evolution to godhood. It also makes it sound like gods are just another component of universes, like protons, electrons, quarks...

The other thing I wonder about is any god that has a 'start date'. Doesn't that also make God a liar though? I mean, didn't God say he was from everlasting to everlasting; that he'd always been God, and always would be God, and that he knew no other gods besides himself?

Something about the idea of a God that is constrained by the universe, who merely re-organizes the elements instead of creating them from scratch, just seems a bit off to me.

[Mindfields]

Certainly a bit off if based on the scriptures rather than the ramblings of man.

[Silver Pie]

In the Lectures on Faith, JS taught about the character of God in the 3rd lecture.

Joseph Smith didn't write this. Sidney Rigdon did.
And even if Joseph signed off on the LoF theology by the Nauvoo period he had learned better.

But while a committee was working on the D&C, changing it, and making it more flowery than it had been as the Book of Commandments, Joseph was working on editing the Lectures on Faith, thus he can be said to be the one who was teaching.

I disagree that he "knew better". He saw God very early on. He knew what God was.

[Silver Pie]

The Blind Man And The Elephant
John Godfrey Saxe

It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined,
who went to see the elephant (Though all of them were blind),
that each by observation, might satisfy his mind.

The first approached the elephant, and, happening to fall,
against his broad and sturdy side, at once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the elephant, is nothing but a wall!"

The second feeling of the tusk, cried: "Ho! what have we here,
so very round and smooth and sharp? To me tis mighty clear,
this wonder of an elephant, is very like a spear!"

The third approached the animal, and, happening to take,
the squirming trunk within his hands, "I see," quoth he,
the elephant is very like a snake!"

The fourth reached out his eager hand, and felt about the knee:
"What most this wondrous beast is like, is mighty plain," quoth he;
"Tis clear enough the elephant is very like a tree."

The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said; "E'en the blindest man
can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an elephant, is very like a fan!"

The sixth no sooner had begun, about the beast to grope,
than, seizing on the swinging tail, that fell within his scope,
"I see," quothe he, "the elephant is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan, disputed loud and long,
each in his own opinion, exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right, and all were in the wrong!

So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween,
tread on in utter ignorance, of what each other mean,
and prate about the elephant, not one of them has seen!