Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
onefour1
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1596

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by onefour1 »

Shawn Henry wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 1:31 pm
onefour1 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 12:31 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 10:16 am
onefour1 wrote: February 1st, 2023, 9:04 pm I think we are considered gods in the sense that we are the very offspring of God. In other words gods beget gods.
Which way do you see it? Did God start out as we are doing?
Joseph Smith suggested that the Father may have been a Christ on his own planet. So there is a slight variation of those who come to worlds. The vast majority tend to be those who come short of the glory of God and are fallen mankind. However, the Christ is a special kind of being who is able to come to the world and live sin free. So what makes a Christ so much more advanced than all the rest of us? I can only attribute it to two things. First, the intelligence of a Christ was probably way more advanced than the average intelligence. Second, a Christ is the very first born of a God and probably receives a greater degree of one on one attention from the Father and is able to become the creator (organizer) of all things before ever coming to an earth. Perhaps given these two things, a Christ uses their free will to advance much more quickly than other offspring of a God. Christs are much more advanced than the rest of us so maybe as an intelligence they spent their time advancing much quickly than the rest of us before being selected as a Christ. So it appears that there are a few among the vast number of intelligences that are advanced enough to become Christs. The ability of the Gods to know the end from the beginning must allow them to choose a Christ and know that they will not fail.

I think all of us have opportunity to advance but this must be respected through each one's free will. Some never choose to advance to become a God. Those who do make it to godhood, vary in how long it takes depending on how quickly they are willing to receive the knowledge and how quickly they are willing to bend their will to become one. The vast majority of us do not qualify to be a Christ but we still have the opportunity to advance. So to answer your question, I do believe that we are all from the same cloth. The big difference is that there are those who choose to apply themselves at a more rapid pace than others and tend to excel much faster. It may be that they realize the true path much faster and are willing to take that path more quickly than others. I don't believe that Gods are a totally different species than man. I believe we are the same and the big difference is self motivation and will.

I imagine that sometime in the distant past the most motivated of all intelligences, as you stated in a previous post, figured out how to take upon themselves spirit matter and then physical matter. Perhaps this was through obedient intelligences obeying them, we don't fully know. But somehow the elements of spirit matter were organized into the shape of a man or woman and may have taken eons and eons to come about. Somehow the means of procreating came about and that knowledge tends to only be given to the Gods. I don't think those of other kingdoms or the demons procreate. mortal man is given this power temporarily as part of the plan of salvation. Abusing this power in eternity appears to be something the Gods wish to avoid. I am sure the Gods have their ways of trying and testing all to be sure that those who truly take on the path to godhood are the only ones who make it. Those who become Gods receive all power that is capable to be received and control the universe(s). That's my take.
Thanks for that. As I see it, based on your view, Red Pill's point would still stand. There was a time when all Gods started out at the bottom rungs of the intelligence ladder just like us, which means who was the first God and how did he become such. Where did it all start?
Well, I think there are differing grades of intelligence among us all. I think that intelligence, ie knowledge and truth, are something we acquire. I don't believe that any one simply has all knowledge and wisdom without acquiring it. Thus progression from a lower to a higher state is needed of us all to reach the highest possible state of knowledge. It is the same as we experience in this world. The non-LDS Christian does not believe we can ever acquire the knowledge and goodness of God. The atheist does not believe that a God exists. LDS believe that God is an exalted man. Those are the big differences. Climbing the latter of knowledge and goodness may have its similarities with the atheist but I don't think the atheist believes that his behavior has much to do with exalting himself. All of us believe that we can acquire more knowledge from those who are around us who have more knowledge to impart. The atheist, however, does not believe there is an exalted man who directs us toward goodness and knowledge. So in some ways you can claim that we are the same as atheists but in many other ways we are not.

We do not have much to go on in this life in understanding how it all began and how long ago it began. My best guess is that the knowledge was acquired. I don't believe that someone always had the knowledge and wisdom to impart it to others. That would imply a first God who never had to acquire goodness and knowledge but had it his/her entire existence. That would imply that he/she never started out as just an intelligence but already had an exalted body of flesh and bones along with all the other things that the rest of us need to acquire godhood. So if atheists believe they can eventually make themselves gods, then yes we do have that in common, but the way in which to achieve it varies greatly. LDS don't believe the atheist path will ever bring them into godhood.

This brings up a host of other questions which we simply don't have the answer to. For example, if, as I suppose, man first had to acquire the knowledge and goodness to be a God in the first place, then at first, no overall law was ruling the universe and sin may not have existed. No Savior was required for the first God to be exalted. It seems that if all intelligence were separate from all matter, then part of becoming a God was learning to combine the two to have a greater degree of joy and happiness.

Doctrine and Covenants 93:33-34
33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;
34 And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.

I would imagine that being an intelligence combined to element no matter what you exist as would also bring you a greater amount of joy. So, rocks, plants, animals, and man and all of the creations of God would receive greater joy by being an intelligence combined with matter. Perhaps the first Gods figured out how this combining could work and told other intelligences that they could receive greater joy by doing as I command and then proceeded to combine them with matter. Perhaps over the eons laws were established to maintain the confidence of the many intelligences and as we progressed the intelligences required one to be of the utmost character before they would obey another intelligent being. Once law began to be established, then broken laws meant punishment and from there it became necessary for a savior to bring about forgiveness of sin to allow the progression of law breakers. Now I'm just rambling on with my imagination but I do believe that Godhood did evolve originally and this is probably familiar to atheists way of thinking since evolution is probably one of their primary tenets of belief. If all matter were combined with intelligence, then all matter could then be obedient to a law giver. Trust and fairness seems to be something that would be a desirable trait in one who you would give obedience.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Pazooka »

Bronco73idi wrote: January 31st, 2023, 5:04 pm
Pazooka wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:40 pm Psalms 82 is the judgment of angels given power over mankind. They are sons of God. They are the shepherds of the parable of Enoch. They are in contrast to the Good Shepherd, made guardian over the nation of Israel

In John 10 Jesus talks about being the Good Shepherd and he goes on to quote Psalms 82.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?


Why are angel and “Son of God” connected in Jesus? Because Jesus is the Nazorean High Priest. The high priest was referred to as a “son of God” because he entered the Holy of Holies and was anointed, reborn, and conversed with God and was counted among the angels. This was their tradition and the people with whom He was speaking understood that. Angels, high priests, sons of God. They just happened to reject Jesus’ authority.

This has very little to do with Mormon ideas of how one becomes a god. That’s why I’m confused about why we’re using these scriptures in this way.
With my constant annoying message of reading the Bible literally and your riddle of “angel princes of nations” I have read genesis 6:1-6 in an entirely new and astonishing light.

I now see how it coincides with psalms 82, Jeremiah 31:27, John 10:34-36 precisely.

Even though we rarely agree, I do enjoy conversing with you.

I understand that no one will ever talk about Isaiah 24:4-6 and the everlasting covenant being broken by his children. The problem is that it tells us precisely why we are going to be tried and cleansed in the last days but no one wants to talk about it.


It all ties in together, one book with one author and many coauthors.
I really appreciate your patience with me. I know I can be a problem child.

Just to be clear, there’s a distinction between the fallen angels (watchers) and the angel shepherds of Enoch. In fact he lists them separately:
"Take those seventy shepherds to whom I delivered the sheep (angel princes over the 70 Gentile nations to which the Lord of the sheep abandoned the care of the sheep because of their wickedness), and who taking them on their own authority slew more than I commanded them." 23. And behold they were all bound, I saw, and they all stood before Him. 24. And the judgement was held first over the stars, and they were judged and found guilty, and went to the place of condemnation, and they were cast into an abyss, full of fire and flaming, and full of pillars of fire. 25. And those seventy shepherds were judged and found guilty, and they were cast into that fiery abyss. 26. And I saw at that time how a like abyss was opened in the midst of the earth, full of fire, and they brought those blinded sheep, and they were all judged and found guilty and cast into this fiery abyss, and they burned; now this abyss was to the right of that house (notice that this was the exact position of the altar of burnt offerings relative to the tabernacle. 27. And I saw those sheep burning and their bones burning.”
Whatever the early church fathers believed, the recorder of the book of Enoch gives validation to there being gods over the pagans who were not the God of Israel. They were immortal beings who were not obedient to the Supreme God and get stripped of their power, in the end.

So, when Paul confirms to the Gentiles that “ye are the offspring of God” and quotes passages about Zeus, this is concerning in light of the fact that there really are Gentile gods.

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3623

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Bronco73idi »

Pazooka wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 3:44 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: January 31st, 2023, 5:04 pm
Pazooka wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:40 pm Psalms 82 is the judgment of angels given power over mankind. They are sons of God. They are the shepherds of the parable of Enoch. They are in contrast to the Good Shepherd, made guardian over the nation of Israel

In John 10 Jesus talks about being the Good Shepherd and he goes on to quote Psalms 82.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?


Why are angel and “Son of God” connected in Jesus? Because Jesus is the Nazorean High Priest. The high priest was referred to as a “son of God” because he entered the Holy of Holies and was anointed, reborn, and conversed with God and was counted among the angels. This was their tradition and the people with whom He was speaking understood that. Angels, high priests, sons of God. They just happened to reject Jesus’ authority.

This has very little to do with Mormon ideas of how one becomes a god. That’s why I’m confused about why we’re using these scriptures in this way.
With my constant annoying message of reading the Bible literally and your riddle of “angel princes of nations” I have read genesis 6:1-6 in an entirely new and astonishing light.

I now see how it coincides with psalms 82, Jeremiah 31:27, John 10:34-36 precisely.

Even though we rarely agree, I do enjoy conversing with you.

I understand that no one will ever talk about Isaiah 24:4-6 and the everlasting covenant being broken by his children. The problem is that it tells us precisely why we are going to be tried and cleansed in the last days but no one wants to talk about it.


It all ties in together, one book with one author and many coauthors.
I really appreciate your patience with me. I know I can be a problem child.

Just to be clear, there’s a distinction between the fallen angels (watchers) and the angel shepherds of Enoch. In fact he lists them separately:
"Take those seventy shepherds to whom I delivered the sheep (angel princes over the 70 Gentile nations to which the Lord of the sheep abandoned the care of the sheep because of their wickedness), and who taking them on their own authority slew more than I commanded them." 23. And behold they were all bound, I saw, and they all stood before Him. 24. And the judgement was held first over the stars, and they were judged and found guilty, and went to the place of condemnation, and they were cast into an abyss, full of fire and flaming, and full of pillars of fire. 25. And those seventy shepherds were judged and found guilty, and they were cast into that fiery abyss. 26. And I saw at that time how a like abyss was opened in the midst of the earth, full of fire, and they brought those blinded sheep, and they were all judged and found guilty and cast into this fiery abyss, and they burned; now this abyss was to the right of that house (notice that this was the exact position of the altar of burnt offerings relative to the tabernacle. 27. And I saw those sheep burning and their bones burning.”
Whatever the early church fathers believed, the recorder of the book of Enoch gives validation to there being gods over the pagans who were not the God of Israel. They were immortal beings who were not obedient to the Supreme God and get stripped of their power, in the end.

So, when Paul confirms to the Gentiles that “ye are the offspring of God” and quotes passages about Zeus, this is concerning in light of the fact that there really are Gentile gods.
That is interesting thoughts, I don’t have a witness of Paul’s work. In other words the Holy Ghost doesn’t give me a burning on my bosom to learn Paul’s teachings.

There is so much more in the Old Testament that isn’t expounded on and the Holy Ghost gives me that burning in my bosom with it. Like I said in my reply, reading gen 6:1-4, it was awesome.

2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Modern theology of man would say sons of god in verse 2 is fallen angels, the witness I get is, sons of god are sons of Adam.

3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

There children (seed) can only live to 120 years old before the flood, they took the fair daughters of the hunter gathers as wives. Noah and was older then that.

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Modern theology would say sons of god (fallen angels) plus daughters of men = giants. No where does it say this.

It says giants where around before the flood and after the flood.

It then says the children of the sons of god and the daughters of men became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. Powerful, strong leaders. Nothing about giants.

Giants usually became hunted and killed off.

Back to daughters of men, Jeremiah understood the men and the seed of Abraham where different

Jeremiah 31: 27 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.

This is after the great falling away Paul talks about (I have an ex Mormon friend, talks a lot about Paul) because of the nap in verse 26. Ie 27 is about our day, when the lord gives the kingdom to the house of Ephraim verse 20.

Just the sentence about the giants tell us some people were not on the ark.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4507

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Shawn Henry »

Bronco73idi wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 2:37 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 10:26 am
Bronco73idi wrote: February 1st, 2023, 10:19 am The idea that we have always existed and our Heavenly Father has created our body for our eternal soul to acquire is far from atheism.
Did God start as we did? If not, he is an entirely different species and we can never truly become like him. If he did start like us, there was then a time when there was no God.
What god? The one of the living or the one of the dead? Mark 12:27.

Why do we be like the Sadducees and greatly err so much?

I’ll add psalms 82: 1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
How is that answering the question? Did God the Father start as we did?

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4507

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Shawn Henry »

onefour1 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 3:33 pm For example, if, as I suppose, man first had to acquire the knowledge and goodness to be a God in the first place, then at first, no overall law was ruling the universe and sin may not have existed.
This is what I was getting at. At this time, all were atheists, at least from a certain point of view. The initial intelligence or I would say, the initial group of intelligences who learned together, learned line upon line.

If we believe that though, how do we reconcile God saying he was always God?

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3623

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Bronco73idi »

Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:27 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 2:37 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 10:26 am
Bronco73idi wrote: February 1st, 2023, 10:19 am The idea that we have always existed and our Heavenly Father has created our body for our eternal soul to acquire is far from atheism.
Did God start as we did? If not, he is an entirely different species and we can never truly become like him. If he did start like us, there was then a time when there was no God.
What god? The one of the living or the one of the dead? Mark 12:27.

Why do we be like the Sadducees and greatly err so much?

I’ll add psalms 82: 1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
How is that answering the question? Did God the Father start as we did?
Our father who art in heaven = Adam

If you are asking about his father, Elohim, he has already done this.

There is a reason scriptures are written a certain way, man would delete the direct ones because they want control over other men. To say “ye are gods, children of the most high!” Gives power to the people. It takes away power from the devil!!!

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by TheDuke »

Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:27 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 2:37 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 10:26 am
Bronco73idi wrote: February 1st, 2023, 10:19 am The idea that we have always existed and our Heavenly Father has created our body for our eternal soul to acquire is far from atheism.
Did God start as we did? If not, he is an entirely different species and we can never truly become like him. If he did start like us, there was then a time when there was no God.
What god? The one of the living or the one of the dead? Mark 12:27.

Why do we be like the Sadducees and greatly err so much?

I’ll add psalms 82: 1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
How is that answering the question? Did God the Father start as we did?
Joseph said he did in KFD and other places. And your question is vague. Are you asking if he was on a mortal earth? or is we all started as intelligences then spirits? He answered both btw.

onefour1
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1596

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by onefour1 »

Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:37 pm
onefour1 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 3:33 pm For example, if, as I suppose, man first had to acquire the knowledge and goodness to be a God in the first place, then at first, no overall law was ruling the universe and sin may not have existed.
This is what I was getting at. At this time, all were atheists, at least from a certain point of view. The initial intelligence or I would say, the initial group of intelligences who learned together, learned line upon line.

If we believe that though, how do we reconcile God saying he was always God?
I would need to see the specific verse. One verse tells us he was God from everlasting to everlasting. My interpretation of that verse is that God was God before the world (mortality) and will be God after the world (mortality). I don't think that verse is saying God has for an infinite past been God.

User avatar
Redpilled Mormon
captain of 100
Posts: 664

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Redpilled Mormon »

onefour1 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 5:09 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:37 pm
onefour1 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 3:33 pm For example, if, as I suppose, man first had to acquire the knowledge and goodness to be a God in the first place, then at first, no overall law was ruling the universe and sin may not have existed.
This is what I was getting at. At this time, all were atheists, at least from a certain point of view. The initial intelligence or I would say, the initial group of intelligences who learned together, learned line upon line.

If we believe that though, how do we reconcile God saying he was always God?
I would need to see the specific verse. One verse tells us he was God from everlasting to everlasting. My interpretation of that verse is that God was God before the world (mortality) and will be God after the world (mortality). I don't think that verse is saying God has for an infinite past been God.
I just can't reconcile the description of 'from all eternity to all eternity' and the description of being eternal and unchanging with the notion that a couple of epochs back he was just a regular dude who made some good decisions and learned a few things.

And I know it's contentious that I keep using the word 'atheism' but I think it fits. It's a very naturalistic view of the universe; no one created it, all the elements already were here, but someone figured out how to organize it to its best state.

It actually gets worse, if you think about it, because it puts the notion of objective right/wrong and truth at peril. What if some other guy figures out how to tweak the way things run so they're even better? Now he gets to claim he's the new God in town because he got it even 'righter' than the first guy? This puts Lucifer in the role of potential equal or even superior to God.

Who's the God who created atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks? Who's the God who determined the atomic weight, the force of gravity, the speed of photons? The one who created it all from nothing and set it according to his order and will, that's the Real God. But if it was never created and always existed, then that's a naturalistic atheistic universe, where maybe a few intelligences were able to figure out a few things.

User avatar
Niemand
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13997

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Niemand »

Redpilled Mormon wrote: February 4th, 2023, 9:41 am
onefour1 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 5:09 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:37 pm
onefour1 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 3:33 pm For example, if, as I suppose, man first had to acquire the knowledge and goodness to be a God in the first place, then at first, no overall law was ruling the universe and sin may not have existed.
This is what I was getting at. At this time, all were atheists, at least from a certain point of view. The initial intelligence or I would say, the initial group of intelligences who learned together, learned line upon line.

If we believe that though, how do we reconcile God saying he was always God?
I would need to see the specific verse. One verse tells us he was God from everlasting to everlasting. My interpretation of that verse is that God was God before the world (mortality) and will be God after the world (mortality). I don't think that verse is saying God has for an infinite past been God.
I just can't reconcile the description of 'from all eternity to all eternity' and the description of being eternal and unchanging with the notion that a couple of epochs back he was just a regular dude who made some good decisions and learned a few things.

And I know it's contentious that I keep using the word 'atheism' but I think it fits. It's a very naturalistic view of the universe; no one created it, all the elements already were here, but someone figured out how to organize it to its best state.

It actually gets worse, if you think about it, because it puts the notion of objective right/wrong and truth at peril. What if some other guy figures out how to tweak the way things run so they're even better? Now he gets to claim he's the new God in town because he got it even 'righter' than the first guy? This puts Lucifer in the role of potential equal or even superior to God.

Who's the God who created atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks? Who's the God who determined the atomic weight, the force of gravity, the speed of photons? The one who created it all from nothing and set it according to his order and will, that's the Real God. But if it was never created and always existed, then that's a naturalistic atheistic universe, where maybe a few intelligences were able to figure out a few things.
Or alternatively it is a quasi-gnostic view, with some unknown demiurge/creator imprisoning us all in matter and these Gods trying to liberate us from that.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4507

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Shawn Henry »

TheDuke wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 2:36 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:27 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 2:37 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 10:26 am
Did God start as we did? If not, he is an entirely different species and we can never truly become like him. If he did start like us, there was then a time when there was no God.
What god? The one of the living or the one of the dead? Mark 12:27.

Why do we be like the Sadducees and greatly err so much?

I’ll add psalms 82: 1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
How is that answering the question? Did God the Father start as we did?
Joseph said he did in KFD and other places. And your question is vague. Are you asking if he was on a mortal earth? or is we all started as intelligences then spirits? He answered both btw.
Did God start out as we did, at the bottom of the intelligence ladder, working his way up line upon line? If we think this, how was he from everlasting to everlasting?

If God was always God, then he is a totally different species than we are. I'm not saying which is right, I'm simply pointing out that either scenario has some very unappealing aspects.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4507

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Shawn Henry »

Redpilled Mormon wrote: February 4th, 2023, 9:41 am I just can't reconcile the description of 'from all eternity to all eternity' and the description of being eternal and unchanging with the notion that a couple of epochs back he was just a regular dude who made some good decisions and learned a few things.

And I know it's contentious that I keep using the word 'atheism' but I think it fits. It's a very naturalistic view of the universe; no one created it, all the elements already were here, but someone figured out how to organize it to its best state.

It actually gets worse, if you think about it, because it puts the notion of objective right/wrong and truth at peril. What if some other guy figures out how to tweak the way things run so they're even better? Now he gets to claim he's the new God in town because he got it even 'righter' than the first guy? This puts Lucifer in the role of potential equal or even superior to God.

Who's the God who created atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks? Who's the God who determined the atomic weight, the force of gravity, the speed of photons? The one who created it all from nothing and set it according to his order and will, that's the Real God. But if it was never created and always existed, then that's a naturalistic atheistic universe, where maybe a few intelligences were able to figure out a few things.
Maybe some of the language like eternity has a yet to be explained meaning like everlasting punishment means God's punishment.

But, you are right. There could be entire factions of the universe managed by different Gods. Or maybe there are different plans of salvations altogether.

On the other hand, if he was always God, he was not once like man is and represents an entirely species of being.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by TheDuke »

Shawn Henry wrote: February 4th, 2023, 10:12 am
Did God start out as we did, at the bottom of the intelligence ladder, working his way up line upon line? If we think this, how was he from everlasting to everlasting?

If God was always God, then he is a totally different species than we are. I'm not saying which is right, I'm simply pointing out that either scenario has some very unappealing aspects.
According to JS teachings the fist god (grandfather) started out as we all did as simply intelligences. It is just that he was more intelligent that all others and improved himself. His path is not known or taught but he ended up a celestial being of perfection and created a process whereby other intelligences and become what he became.... Joseph then talks of "the father" and says that he was as we are and we can become like him. He also says that Jesus is in the same process but ahead of us in progression doing what "his father" did.

So, if you're asking about the grandfather god, then we started the same, but likely do not take the same path as it says he was a trailblazer. If you're talking about the Father then yes.

As far as everlasting, that is the title and as has been stated above it is relative to this creation. He was before and will be after. that is everlasting. Have you read Nibley's OT book, some parts are good others not, but he has an entire section about "time". It is well done and discusses some intricate matters of the Lord's words relative to time, seasons, days, periods, etc... It might be worth a read as it helps put some of the ancient and 1800's terminology, along with the temple terminology in place.

Lets be honest if we go down the rabbit hole where JS took off his ring and said there is no beginning and no end, then we cannot be here as something had to create us and that something has the same problem, so getting hung up on how grandfather's intelligences (and ours) were created will get no where, not that it isn't a good problem, just we cannot have or comprehend the answer at this time. I'm personally comfortable with assuming a Big Bang like start and accepting that may be wrong or nuanced.

User avatar
Redpilled Mormon
captain of 100
Posts: 664

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Redpilled Mormon »

Shawn Henry wrote: February 4th, 2023, 10:12 am
TheDuke wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 2:36 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:27 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 2:37 pm

What god? The one of the living or the one of the dead? Mark 12:27.

Why do we be like the Sadducees and greatly err so much?

I’ll add psalms 82: 1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
How is that answering the question? Did God the Father start as we did?
Joseph said he did in KFD and other places. And your question is vague. Are you asking if he was on a mortal earth? or is we all started as intelligences then spirits? He answered both btw.
Did God start out as we did, at the bottom of the intelligence ladder, working his way up line upon line? If we think this, how was he from everlasting to everlasting?

If God was always God, then he is a totally different species than we are. I'm not saying which is right, I'm simply pointing out that either scenario has some very unappealing aspects.
It just occurred to me there are 2 other possibilities.

- The scriptures which say God is from everlasting to everlasting are all false inventions of men, and neither God nor any true prophets ever said that (seems a big stretch to me).
- God is a liar who doesn't mind deceiving us (this would be terrifying, as a God that's untrustworthy is not one worth worshipping).

The only other possibilities I can think of are:

- God meant what he said, and he is indeed infinite with no starting point.
- We get some alternate definition of 'eternal', 'everlasting', 'infinite', etc all those terms he used to describe himself, which means the opposite of what those words mean, which means God is playing word games to deceive, which puts us in the bucket of 'God is untrustworthy'.

Anyone else think of any other possibilities I missed?

onefour1
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1596

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by onefour1 »

Redpilled Mormon wrote: February 4th, 2023, 9:41 am
onefour1 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 5:09 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:37 pm
onefour1 wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 3:33 pm For example, if, as I suppose, man first had to acquire the knowledge and goodness to be a God in the first place, then at first, no overall law was ruling the universe and sin may not have existed.
This is what I was getting at. At this time, all were atheists, at least from a certain point of view. The initial intelligence or I would say, the initial group of intelligences who learned together, learned line upon line.

If we believe that though, how do we reconcile God saying he was always God?
I would need to see the specific verse. One verse tells us he was God from everlasting to everlasting. My interpretation of that verse is that God was God before the world (mortality) and will be God after the world (mortality). I don't think that verse is saying God has for an infinite past been God.
I just can't reconcile the description of 'from all eternity to all eternity' and the description of being eternal and unchanging with the notion that a couple of epochs back he was just a regular dude who made some good decisions and learned a few things.
I look at it like this, God lives in eternity (a place where there is no physical death and a continuation of God's life would go on forever and ever). He also creates a temporal existence for his children to learn good and evil. After that temporal existence, God will still be living in eternity. Thus from our perspective, God is God from eternity past to eternity future or in other words, from eternity to all eternity or from everlasting to everlasting. I don't see it as meaning that he was God for an infinite past but that after acquiring his eternal life he was God in eternity before this mortality and is God after this mortality in eternity. Thus he is God from eternity to eternity and from everlasting to everlasting.
And I know it's contentious that I keep using the word 'atheism' but I think it fits. It's a very naturalistic view of the universe; no one created it, all the elements already were here, but someone figured out how to organize it to its best state.

It actually gets worse, if you think about it, because it puts the notion of objective right/wrong and truth at peril. What if some other guy figures out how to tweak the way things run so they're even better? Now he gets to claim he's the new God in town because he got it even 'righter' than the first guy? This puts Lucifer in the role of potential equal or even superior to God.
I don't see that it puts objective right/wrong or truth in peril. I see it as the discovery of objective right/wrong and truth. Intelligences simply acquire a greater objective truth which gives them greater happiness and joy and thus it seems to be a very good and right thing to do. God, who is the most intelligent and who would know greater right and wrong is simply sharing what he knows. I think part of the greater truth that can make you a God is knowing that you must abide by rules of objective right and wrong to acquire the power and confidence of all other intelligences. I don't think a bad guy could get other intelligences to follow him and that his lack of being a good being is part of his lack of knowledge of how to sustain the power of being a God. Scripture tells us that God's honor is his power.

Doctrine and Covenants 29:36
36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;

Doctrine and Covenants 75:5
5 And thus, if ye are faithful ye shall be laden with many sheaves, and crowned with honor, and glory, and immortality, and eternal life.

Thus I believe being a good being is part of the knowledge and power of being a God. Intelligences freely follow a good being who has their best interest at heart. An evil being always resorts to force or coercion to try to gain power. I believe the reason so much emphasis on having good behavior is because it is key to becoming a God. Ultimately to be a God I believe all must become one, united in the knowledge and wisdom that makes a God a God. Being a good being is an essential part of receiving the power of a God.
Who's the God who created atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks? Who's the God who determined the atomic weight, the force of gravity, the speed of photons? The one who created it all from nothing and set it according to his order and will, that's the Real God. But if it was never created and always existed, then that's a naturalistic atheistic universe, where maybe a few intelligences were able to figure out a few things.
I would imagine that if the elements are eternal as God has said in D&C 93:33, then those elements would have basic properties that were not created or made. However, if intelligence is attached to these elements, perhaps the way they interact and respond to other elements is a law which they obey. It is hard to say how it all actually works. When you say "created" do you mean out of nothing? We have never ever seen anything in mortal existence that has been create from absolute nothing. To me that would be one of the hardest of things to believe. Imagine something popping into existence from absolutely nothing. The non-LDS Christian God is one who is believed to have absolute power and can do anything imaginable. If that were true, I imagine God should have had the power to create us all perfect like himself and there would be no need for mortal life and progression. He should have created us to already be all knowing, all powerful, all good, all wise, and all these through our own free will and desire. Why all the less than perfect creations from a perfect and all powerful being who can do absolutely anything imaginable? So why didn't He skip the imperfections and just make us perfect? A God who has always been God, like Shawn Henry suggests, would be another species from mankind. He would never have had to go through what we do. Before the self-existent God ever brought his first creation from nothing into existence, He must have existed for an infinite amount of time prior to creating his first creation and was all alone for an eternity, before creating his first creation, having absolutely nothing else in existence. That would be a long time sitting on one's thumb. Such a boring existence for so so long before finally coming to make that first creation. That seems incredible for a being who has all knowledge and power. Living for an infinite past, all alone, with nothing else in existence. But with creating all things out of nothing, that must have been the case under such a belief.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4507

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Shawn Henry »

Bronco73idi wrote: February 2nd, 2023, 6:47 pm That is interesting thoughts, I don’t have a witness of Paul’s work. In other words the Holy Ghost doesn’t give me a burning on my bosom to learn Paul’s teachings.
That's curious, I've always felt the same way.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by TheDuke »

onefour1 wrote: February 4th, 2023, 1:45 pm
I would imagine that if the elements are eternal as God has said in D&C 93:33, then those elements would have basic properties that were not created or made. However, if intelligence is attached to these elements, perhaps the way they interact and respond to other elements is a law which they obey. It is hard to say how it all actually works. When you say "created" do you mean out of nothing? We have never ever seen anything in mortal existence that has been create from absolute nothing. To me that would be one of the hardest of things to believe. Imagine something popping into existence from absolutely nothing. The non-LDS Christian God is one who is believed to have absolute power and can do anything imaginable. If that were true, I imagine God should have had the power to create us all perfect like himself and there would be no need for mortal life and progression. He should have created us to already be all knowing, all powerful, all good, all wise, and all these through our own free will and desire. Why all the less than perfect creations from a perfect and all powerful being who can do absolutely anything imaginable? So why didn't He skip the imperfections and just make us perfect? A God who has always been God, like Shawn Henry suggests, would be another species from mankind. He would never have had to go through what we do. Before the self-existent God ever brought his first creation from nothing into existence, He must have existed for an infinite amount of time prior to creating his first creation and was all alone for an eternity, before creating his first creation, having absolutely nothing else in existence. That would be a long time sitting on one's thumb. Such a boring existence for so so long before finally coming to make that first creation. That seems incredible for a being who has all knowledge and power. Living for an infinite past, all alone, with nothing else in existence. But with creating all things out of nothing, that must have been the case under such a belief.
I like what you said in this post. Interesting that I don't usually subscribe that the elements are spiritual. I feel there is a spiritual and a physical universe that coexists and is only lightly interactive (i.e. by the Light of Christ talking to our spirits.) However, I read John P Pratts' discourse on Light of Christ and he makes a point that perhaps the very energy of the atoms is the LoC. He mentions ZPE Zero Point Energy (energy at absolute zero) as an example that stumps Physics about where the energy comes from to keep the subatomic particles moving. So, maybe there is spirit at even the smallest levels of physical nature? I don't really know about that. but it is a good read.

onefour1
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1596

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by onefour1 »

Thinking about the atheist, they don't believe there is an afterlife do they? Don't they believe that once we die that is the end? If this be the case, then what would give them hope of becoming a god. Do they have examples of other men or women in this life that have achieved such a goal? If a man achieved godhood in this life it would be so short lived because once they die, they don't exist anymore. Maybe over time it has not yet happened but maybe they believe that as mankind continues to gain knowledge that perhaps they believe man will overcome death eventually. Would they share the secret to immortality with others? What exactly would becoming a god in the eyes of the atheist consist of?

User avatar
Redpilled Mormon
captain of 100
Posts: 664

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Redpilled Mormon »

onefour1 wrote: February 4th, 2023, 1:45 pm
Redpilled Mormon wrote: February 4th, 2023, 9:41 am
onefour1 wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 5:09 pm
Shawn Henry wrote: February 3rd, 2023, 12:37 pm
This is what I was getting at. At this time, all were atheists, at least from a certain point of view. The initial intelligence or I would say, the initial group of intelligences who learned together, learned line upon line.

If we believe that though, how do we reconcile God saying he was always God?
I would need to see the specific verse. One verse tells us he was God from everlasting to everlasting. My interpretation of that verse is that God was God before the world (mortality) and will be God after the world (mortality). I don't think that verse is saying God has for an infinite past been God.
I just can't reconcile the description of 'from all eternity to all eternity' and the description of being eternal and unchanging with the notion that a couple of epochs back he was just a regular dude who made some good decisions and learned a few things.
I look at it like this, God lives in eternity (a place where there is no physical death and a continuation of God's life would go on forever and ever). He also creates a temporal existence for his children to learn good and evil. After that temporal existence, God will still be living in eternity. Thus from our perspective, God is God from eternity past to eternity future or in other words, from eternity to all eternity or from everlasting to everlasting. I don't see it as meaning that he was God for an infinite past but that after acquiring his eternal life he was God in eternity before this mortality and is God after this mortality in eternity. Thus he is God from eternity to eternity and from everlasting to everlasting.
And I know it's contentious that I keep using the word 'atheism' but I think it fits. It's a very naturalistic view of the universe; no one created it, all the elements already were here, but someone figured out how to organize it to its best state.

It actually gets worse, if you think about it, because it puts the notion of objective right/wrong and truth at peril. What if some other guy figures out how to tweak the way things run so they're even better? Now he gets to claim he's the new God in town because he got it even 'righter' than the first guy? This puts Lucifer in the role of potential equal or even superior to God.
I don't see that it puts objective right/wrong or truth in peril. I see it as the discovery of objective right/wrong and truth. Intelligences simply acquire a greater objective truth which gives them greater happiness and joy and thus it seems to be a very good and right thing to do. God, who is the most intelligent and who would know greater right and wrong is simply sharing what he knows. I think part of the greater truth that can make you a God is knowing that you must abide by rules of objective right and wrong to acquire the power and confidence of all other intelligences. I don't think a bad guy could get other intelligences to follow him and that his lack of being a good being is part of his lack of knowledge of how to sustain the power of being a God. Scripture tells us that God's honor is his power.

Doctrine and Covenants 29:36
36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;

Doctrine and Covenants 75:5
5 And thus, if ye are faithful ye shall be laden with many sheaves, and crowned with honor, and glory, and immortality, and eternal life.

Thus I believe being a good being is part of the knowledge and power of being a God. Intelligences freely follow a good being who has their best interest at heart. An evil being always resorts to force or coercion to try to gain power. I believe the reason so much emphasis on having good behavior is because it is key to becoming a God. Ultimately to be a God I believe all must become one, united in the knowledge and wisdom that makes a God a God. Being a good being is an essential part of receiving the power of a God.
Who's the God who created atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks? Who's the God who determined the atomic weight, the force of gravity, the speed of photons? The one who created it all from nothing and set it according to his order and will, that's the Real God. But if it was never created and always existed, then that's a naturalistic atheistic universe, where maybe a few intelligences were able to figure out a few things.
I would imagine that if the elements are eternal as God has said in D&C 93:33, then those elements would have basic properties that were not created or made. However, if intelligence is attached to these elements, perhaps the way they interact and respond to other elements is a law which they obey. It is hard to say how it all actually works. When you say "created" do you mean out of nothing? We have never ever seen anything in mortal existence that has been create from absolute nothing. To me that would be one of the hardest of things to believe. Imagine something popping into existence from absolutely nothing. The non-LDS Christian God is one who is believed to have absolute power and can do anything imaginable. If that were true, I imagine God should have had the power to create us all perfect like himself and there would be no need for mortal life and progression. He should have created us to already be all knowing, all powerful, all good, all wise, and all these through our own free will and desire. Why all the less than perfect creations from a perfect and all powerful being who can do absolutely anything imaginable? So why didn't He skip the imperfections and just make us perfect? A God who has always been God, like Shawn Henry suggests, would be another species from mankind. He would never have had to go through what we do. Before the self-existent God ever brought his first creation from nothing into existence, He must have existed for an infinite amount of time prior to creating his first creation and was all alone for an eternity, before creating his first creation, having absolutely nothing else in existence. That would be a long time sitting on one's thumb. Such a boring existence for so so long before finally coming to make that first creation. That seems incredible for a being who has all knowledge and power. Living for an infinite past, all alone, with nothing else in existence. But with creating all things out of nothing, that must have been the case under such a belief.
This was a very good post, and at least you make a cogent argument. I'm not persuaded, but I'm mulling it over.

User avatar
Redpilled Mormon
captain of 100
Posts: 664

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Redpilled Mormon »

onefour1 wrote: February 4th, 2023, 3:45 pm Thinking about the atheist, they don't believe there is an afterlife do they? Don't they believe that once we die that is the end? If this be the case, then what would give them hope of becoming a god. Do they have examples of other men or women in this life that have achieved such a goal? If a man achieved godhood in this life it would be so short lived because once they die, they don't exist anymore. Maybe over time it has not yet happened but maybe they believe that as mankind continues to gain knowledge that perhaps they believe man will overcome death eventually. Would they share the secret to immortality with others? What exactly would becoming a god in the eyes of the atheist consist of?
Well there are all brands of atheists, but there are very many of them who subscribe to the theory that immortality is just around the corner. Whether that be medical breaktrhoughs or uploading consciousness into digital form.

No, I don't believe any of them are particularly interested in sharing power though :) More like crowning themselves gods and toying with the regular people they view as insignificant. Not too different than the way the global elite behave now, come to think of it...

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by TheDuke »

NO, I don't believe that is accurate. If you are atheist, not agnostic, pure atheist, then you don't believe in anything but this earth as science that has not shown another life. Life is over, there is no after life. I have never heard of an atheist believing in an afterlife. You would need to at least believe in a soul and spirit, etc... to believe in life after death.

User avatar
Redpilled Mormon
captain of 100
Posts: 664

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Redpilled Mormon »

TheDuke wrote: February 4th, 2023, 4:37 pm NO, I don't believe that is accurate. If you are atheist, not agnostic, pure atheist, then you don't believe in anything but this earth as science that has not shown another life. Life is over, there is no after life. I have never heard of an atheist believing in an afterlife. You would need to at least believe in a soul and spirit, etc... to believe in life after death.
Buddhism. No God, but there is life (many lives) after death.

I'm not an expert, I just happened to watch a video of a guy who was born and raised Buddhist who was telling his conversion story to becoming a Christian, and it sounds like Buddhism specifically fits the bill. And I would say that's another form of atheism too.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by TheDuke »

Redpilled Mormon wrote: February 4th, 2023, 5:50 pm
TheDuke wrote: February 4th, 2023, 4:37 pm NO, I don't believe that is accurate. If you are atheist, not agnostic, pure atheist, then you don't believe in anything but this earth as science that has not shown another life. Life is over, there is no after life. I have never heard of an atheist believing in an afterlife. You would need to at least believe in a soul and spirit, etc... to believe in life after death.
Buddhism. No God, but there is life (many lives) after death.

I'm not an expert, I just happened to watch a video of a guy who was born and raised Buddhist who was telling his conversion story to becoming a Christian, and it sounds like Buddhism specifically fits the bill. And I would say that's another form of atheism too.
I don't think Buddhism has no god, perhaps not the father or Christ (but Chrisna) but they believe forefathers are spirits and I think they believe in many or plurality of gods or spirits. So, I guess not one god but many, many....... all of spirit. In the end you become spirit only, no need for a body, just thought and spirit.. Opposite of LDS in the end.

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4507

Re: Early Church Fathers believed in the doctrine of becoming Gods.

Post by Shawn Henry »

TheDuke wrote: February 4th, 2023, 6:19 pm
Redpilled Mormon wrote: February 4th, 2023, 5:50 pm
TheDuke wrote: February 4th, 2023, 4:37 pm NO, I don't believe that is accurate. If you are atheist, not agnostic, pure atheist, then you don't believe in anything but this earth as science that has not shown another life. Life is over, there is no after life. I have never heard of an atheist believing in an afterlife. You would need to at least believe in a soul and spirit, etc... to believe in life after death.
Buddhism. No God, but there is life (many lives) after death.

I'm not an expert, I just happened to watch a video of a guy who was born and raised Buddhist who was telling his conversion story to becoming a Christian, and it sounds like Buddhism specifically fits the bill. And I would say that's another form of atheism too.
I don't think Buddhism has no god, perhaps not the father or Christ (but Chrisna) but they believe forefathers are spirits and I think they believe in many or plurality of gods or spirits. So, I guess not one god but many, many....... all of spirit. In the end you become spirit only, no need for a body, just thought and spirit.. Opposite of LDS in the end.
Opposite of LDS, but in a way congruent with LoF. God the Father is a personage of spirit.

Post Reply