LDS Freedom Forum

Original_Intent wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 4:33 pm

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 3:21 pm

Original_Intent wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 2:50 pm <stuff>

This is a fairly thorough explication and seems to be internally consistent. I appreciate the consistency and that it makes sense more or less on its face. I agree personally with a number of your points. The photons bit is interesting and maybe somewhat novel which is interesting. Had never considered it before now but I believe god is highly correlated with light in this dimension and probably generally. Thank you. I think consistency is very important, most of our failings on this world is due to a lack of consistency, or in other words, integrity. Our economics is based on one set of rules for some people and another set of rules for others. Much of our politics has degenerated to the same. The beauty of celestial laws is integrity. Now, because I have striven for consistency does not make it true, and I would guess that I am either a little or a lot "off target" on a lot of this, and I look forward to not seeing thru a glass darkly, as it were, and finding out how the big picture actually works. BUT until then I have a model that serves as a placeholder for the truth for me until I receive it.

Intelligences who chose to follow become spirit children of that set of Heavenly Parents, just as when we chose to follow Christ and actually do follow Him, He becomes our Heavenly Father. Christ was the intelligence who perfectly followed Father in all things, was willing to sacrifice all things and thus following Him is exactly the same thing as following Father, but they are individuals.

I believe this or true more or less and sums up my take *personally* pretty well. Well stated imo.

I do believe God has agency in one sense but it is on a scale or plane that would be virtually inconceivable for a mortal or someone with a veiled understanding. All of creation is dependent on his power and wisdom.

Logically if we conceive god as “male” it makes sense he’d have a “female” counterpart if this creation is based on heaven’s. Again the most thorough explanation of this I’ve seen *personally* is from the Snuffer crowd but I believe there are others with different views on it too that are worth looking at though it seems highly variable and personal at that point.

Thanks again for your thoughts. If you see problems with my ideas, it is a favor you do me to point them out, not something for me to be upset about.

Yes I personally appreciated your take. One of the main things I look for *first* when considering a potential piece of doctrine or theology is consistency. I do this since so many modern religious systems are logically inconsistent or use “cheater” or “fudge” doctrine to make things connect. Most usually end up reducing to an appeal to emotion or social acceptance/bandwagon mentality alone which is unfortunate imo.

I am of the view that out current economic and political systems have degenerated pretty badly like I’ve noticed you comment on on this forum. If enough people valued consistency, integrity, and decency they could be changed overnight almost to something much more workable and fair to my mind. It would still take time to dial them in but atleast we’d have enough integrity and internal follow thru and consistency within the system to address the major issues.

I agree consistency doesn’t prove something is right but it does show that atleast it is consistent and doesn’t internally contradict itself therefore it’s plausible on its face. This is more than most modern religious systems can claim to my mind.

Telavian wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 4:33 pm

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 4:23 pm I can see this as being logically feasible and I’m not aware of any scripture that outright proves it wrong *personally* at this time.

There is also nothing that suggests it in the slightest.

It does however make far more sense than requiring everyone to go to every major step like Adam -> Christ -> Father.
This would mean that Adam is "greater" than Christ though since Adam is a literal offspring, correct?

There is also nothing that suggests it in the slightest

Valid point to my mind but he also did mention this is his personal speculative take on it.

I am not sure if I fully understand your other point. You’re saying Adam was born of the Father physically or is a direct son, so he’s greater than Christ in OI’s explication?

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 4:58 pm I am not sure if I fully understand your other point. You’re saying Adam was born of the Father physically or is a direct son, so he’s greater than Christ in OI’s explication?

I was saying if Adam is a literal child of God then that makes him more special and unique than a descendant. Christ is a half child so he is less special and unique.
Therefore I would think this belief system would be more consistent with the Adam God theory.

Telavian wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 10:54 pm

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 4:58 pm I am not sure if I fully understand your other point. You’re saying Adam was born of the Father physically or is a direct son, so he’s greater than Christ in OI’s explication?

I was saying if Adam is a literal child of God then that makes him more special and unique than a descendant. Christ is a half child so he is less special and unique.
Therefore I would think this belief system would be more consistent with the Adam God theory.

Ah I see now.

I personally think the question is not possible to answer as written. You see the term "God" is overloaded and means many different things. It can be used generically, or to reference a class of beings, or to reference the top leadership of this specific creation. I found some truth is all of the options really, and none were complete. When I reread them later, with another focus on "god", I got a completely different answer!

Good topic though.

I have received some revelation on aspects of this topic, so my views are both in line with and contrary to popular LDS current theology, but I feel directly in line with Joseph's final views near the end of his life after learning and recording line upon line, and frankly perhaps in line with BY's early understandings.

Summary:
God is a term the references any celestial being (partnership of mother and father or husband and wife) that have created literal offspring or celestial children (often misnomered as spirit children by modern LDS). These beings are in the third level of celestial, one step above the angels, which as Jesus said are celestial beings that neither marry nor are given in marriage, which is one step above citizens or joint heirs with Christ, which is above the "spirit children" level. Which leads to another definition used in scripture where all "celestial beings" have been called gods or children of the gods and confused with angels (with resurrected bodies or yet as spirits).

As far as this creation we have a few gods to deal with, all of which are a bit different in roles and power. To make matters more complicated they have both names and titles, which seem mixed! And since they all are working for the same goal, get unified in figurative speech making some verses complicated to unravel.

Here we have Elohim. LDS leaders today see Elohim as "the father" but recently determined he was "Jesus". Personally, studying JS teachings I see Elohim as the head gods or the name of the head god of the council of head gods, which Joseph called the Elohim. I don't any longer see Joseph's Elohim as the father or the son in premortal creation. Not to confuse the term "Elohim" in other scriptures. It is an ancient Sumarian/Babylonan term used for varied purposes that evolved in OT. I don't wish to argue them as we have done here-to-fore as I am sticking with Joseph's latest definition. BTW I see two heavenly councils. The council of Elohim and the premortal earth creation council. In KFD it becomes clear (to me anyway) that The Elohim commanded Jehovah to create this earth and commanded others (other Jehovah's) to create other worlds (earths). I can see premortal Jehovah earning the right of Elohim during this creation and ascending to the council of Elohim for his efforts.

Then we have then Jehovah. Again I use Joseph's Jehovah. Jehovah was commanded to create this earth. He organized it and lead it and is the "father" of this creation. Not to be confused with the many celestial male partners of gods that are also "fathers" but not of this creation. Father is a title here. I do not accept RMN change that Jehovah is Jesus. Jesus clearly says the Jews worshipped his father making his father their god who was Jehovah. Therefore premortal Jehovah and OT Jehovah and BoM before Jesus Jehovah is the Father. I don't wish to argue but I was told (multiple times to get through my head and accept it) that Jehovah, the Father, began this creation and we call him Adam or Michael. Again we are mixing premortal, post-mortal and in-mortal names and titles. To add one more complexity. I believe that after the atonement, Jesus Christ, the Son, earned the rights and title of both "the Father" and "Jehovah". so, I accept that Jesus is both the Father and the Son (now) and he is Jehovah. But he was not "the father" of the OT nor Jehovah of OT. So, we see some shift in titles as missions are completed. Making the modern statements by Joseph more comprehensible as are those of Jesus himself. But, they should not be confused with revelation received in OT times or even with some of Jesus' own words in his life, before resurrection.

Then we have Jesus. Jesus is the Son or the Word and has been Jehovah's right hand since the origins of this creation as commanded by the Elohim. He attained the rights and power and title of "the Father" And "Jehovah" by his mission of being the Son and being the redeemer. I would think some or more titles will follow after the millennium when he has been the "advocate" and has many people in his "debt" (read King Ben). I would think this title may be "Christ", but I'm not sure that I have ever seen a formal definition of "Christ" (Greek) but have seen numerous definitions of "messiah" most of which pertain only to this earth.

Then we have the Holy Ghost. I will not say much here, except the Lord once told me very clearly that every being in the premortal council and only those in the premortal council will be born on this earth and will obtain that which they were promised in the premortal earthly council. So, I accept the prevailing LDS FF notion that HG will be born, perhaps as the DS, I don't know? This is also why the Lord told me that the Father came as Adam to create this earth. Every premortal being has skin in the game. I haven't had any revelation about "Lucifer" as he is the only premortal council person not to be discussed anywhere as getting a body, but the temple does say he was "cast to the earth".

Lastly, then is Adam, who the Lord told me is also "the Father" and then "Jehovah" and will ascend as one of the Elohim.

Another thing I have been told by MY eternal father and my eternal mother, is that they are not The Father or Jesus' Father or The Father of this Creation. My celestial parents are two humble beings working to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of their handful of offspring, and are not worried about creating this world or fathering billions of children or creating worlds without number. I feel we (those who are the souls in Abraham 3) from the celestial realm here have numerous heavenly fathers and mothers, behind the scenes.

Original_Intent wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 2:50 pm I believe in a Heavenly Father and Mother, resurrected and perfected beings.

I believe Heavenly Father and Mother companionships embark on a mission of sorts to the intelligences.

Intelligences I believe are essentially photons. They can exhibit as either waves or particles. They have agency.

The Father and Mother pair essentially teach the intelligences "You can become as we are." Perhaps details on how that happens.
Intelligences who chose to follow become spirit children of that set of Heavenly Parents, just as when we chose to follow Christ and actually do follow Him, He becomes our Heavenly Father. Christ was the intelligence who perfectly followed Father in all things, was willing to sacrifice all things and thus following Him is exactly the same thing as following Father, but they are individuals.

Spirit children are not begotten in the sense of HF and HM having sex, gestating and birthing a spirit.

HF and HM DO have sex, and they beget immortal children. Their children are born into the same state as the parents aside from the fact that they are not resurrected as they have not experienced mortality. These children serve as Adams and Eves.

Every intelligence that advances to the point of a mortal, human life is open to communication from both good and evil. When communing with the mind of God and following it, we become a Holy Ghost. When we receive the Baptism of Fire and the Holy Ghost, we can have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost, or in other words be in constant communication with the Mind of God. At this point evil can only influence us if we willfully sin against the light and subject ourselves to the influence of evil. This is NOT Son of Perdition, it simply means that we have returned to a state of evil having some power over us.

The purpose of all intelligences is to become as God is and repeat this process with intelligences.

It goes without saying that much of this is conjecture on my part, and there are some points that I am quite sure about and others that it is just the best I have until further light and knowledge is received.

very interesting. Well thought out. There are many aspects in it that I have never considered.

It is my understanding that the Creator of all, (The first Creator), is the consciousness of all things, all matter, all living creatures and all sentient creatures. He is well beyond any concept of time/space and is not ruled by anything because he IS everything. Yet...he is very personal to all of his sentient creations (humans) if those creations learn how to open the door to him which is a very long process in terms of human time. . His creations are indestructible . Anything that can be destroyed was not created by him.

Humans have choice, which differentiates them from all other creations. With choice, humans can choose to evolve to the point of eventually making the leap back home, which is the real world where everybody and everything is indestructible, forever.

Christ was the first created being to return as one with the Creator and in doing this, created a bridge for others to follow. The atonement. He did the work and now all we have to do is discover enough humility to follow him....home.

The Holy Ghost may be us, just a speculation. (Our perfect self as created by God).

Our current identities are natural men which we created from the day we were born. Making decisions, having preferences, and participating in things that are fragile and corruptible. In a word, "Egos".

Gods in time are not the original creator at all. These build things out of existing matter, which can be changed, altered, corrupted and destroyed. (killed). These Gods have a job to do, as was intended by the Creator. These are Lords of worlds . Good Lords and Evil Lords. These manage planets of students (people) and guide them home through love and adversity.

As the contrast between Jehovah and Christ , so is the contrast of all the Gods in order to have a different curriculum for specific times and different worlds . Like schoolhouses with different teachers on different levels. The Gods are teachers on different levels at different times. Hence the graduation of everyone that remains through to the Millennium. The Millennial world will house those that are ready for a higher understanding and Christ shall be the instructor. (Lord). The rest go to another schoolhouse.

Some people are much more advanced than others and make quantum leaps at times. Some need more time. The difference between advanced and not-advanced is meaningless because it's just a matter of time before all return home. All of God's(the Creator's) creations are perfect and this fact cannot be changed. The Creators creations all return because the plan is as perfect as he is and we are as he is. (we just don't remember).

Jesus of Nazerath is Lord ..... Amen

Poll is *one* vote shy of 30 total votes.

• Top spot is the “hybrid view” at 24% which means those who voted for it believe some combination of the listed choices constitute the godhead.

• Second place is the traditional LDS view of the Godhead at 21%

• 3rd place is the “other” view meaning a belief in the godhead that was not mentioned or fully described in the poll options listed at 17%

I’m not sure what to surmise from these results honestly. The hybrid view is ambiguous and not well defined by its nature. I guess it’s fair to say the nature of the godhead remains somewhat of a mystery to LDSFF users. But there are certain beliefs LDSFF users do *not* believe or have ruled out.
- Most who voted believe the Father has some type of actual body and is not just an idea or “force” and that his identity is somewhat static and that he isn’t the Father *and* the Son or tripartite
- The identity or nature of the Holy Ghost is somewhat mysterious and not well agree upon on this site.
- Most believe they have *some* understanding or insight into the godhead and what it is since the votes for “we don’t know” options were so low, but there is a lot of variance as to the exact nature of what it is however.

I would have expected the polygamous options to be slightly better voted for but that could be due to a pretty small sample size skewing the results. Overall I believe it did move the needle *somewhat* for seeing what users of the site believe on this topic.

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 12:48 pm... what is the nature of the godhead?

Excellent question and topic.
What’s the difference between God & Godhead?
If scriptures are the standard of measurement, Godhead is only mentioned in the Bible 3 times… ‘God’ is used 4,473 times.

Personally I think striving to understand God may be the most important thing we do in life because it colors everything else. Is the god I imagine mean and punitive - jealous? Like addiction? Is the god I imagine loving - too “nice” so that love is tainted, too afraid to really care about what’s truly best for ourselves or others? Is God incorporating all that is within me (good and evil) so my weaknesses can be made strong?

Jacob wrestled with his ideas of God & was kind of praised for it in being renamed Is Ra El… which may represent the godhead - Father, Mother, Son. But even this likely doesn’t fully define a Intelligent Design, “God is love” and the kingdom of God within.

"I think striving to understand God may be the most important thing we do in life"

Agree. I'll add that it matters a whole lot that Jesus was the divine Son of God who performed the infinite Atonement, who was raised from the dead and who lives Eternally as our Savior and Redeemer. It matter much less to our salvation what organization or hierarchy of Gods exists in the eternal world. In fact it matters not at all, which may be why The Book of Mormon is empty of such theological presentations.

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 11:04 am

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 12:48 pm... what is the nature of the godhead?

Excellent question and topic.
What’s the difference between God & Godhead?
If scriptures are the standard of measurement, Godhead is only mentioned in the Bible 3 times… ‘God’ is used 4,473 times.

Personally I think striving to understand God may be the most important thing we do in life because it colors everything else. Is the god I imagine mean and punitive - jealous? Like addiction? Is the god I imagine loving - too “nice” so that love is tainted, too afraid to really care about what’s truly best for ourselves or others? Is God incorporating all that is within me (good and evil) so my weaknesses can be made strong?

Jacob wrestled with his ideas of God & was kind of praised for it in being renamed Is Ra El… which may represent the godhead - Father, Mother, Son. But even this likely doesn’t fully define a Intelligent Design, “God is love” and the kingdom of God within.

as you've likely pondered:

Israel

Is Ra El

Isis, Ra and El (El is God in hebrew)

FrankOne wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 1:55 pm

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 11:04 am

fractal_light_harvest wrote: ↑November 1st, 2023, 12:48 pm... what is the nature of the godhead?

Excellent question and topic.
What’s the difference between God & Godhead?
If scriptures are the standard of measurement, Godhead is only mentioned in the Bible 3 times… ‘God’ is used 4,473 times.

Personally I think striving to understand God may be the most important thing we do in life because it colors everything else. Is the god I imagine mean and punitive - jealous? Like addiction? Is the god I imagine loving - too “nice” so that love is tainted, too afraid to really care about what’s truly best for ourselves or others? Is God incorporating all that is within me (good and evil) so my weaknesses can be made strong?

Jacob wrestled with his ideas of God & was kind of praised for it in being renamed Is Ra El… which may represent the godhead - Father, Mother, Son. But even this likely doesn’t fully define a Intelligent Design, “God is love” and the kingdom of God within.

as you've likely pondered:

Israel

Is Ra El

Isis, Ra and El (El is God in hebrew)

Yes! Exactly! Not that it changes reality - or the nature of God. But it’s good to understand the background of traditional beliefs we’ve adopted.

Isis: “one of the most important goddesses of ancient Egypt…whose power transcended that of all other deities.”

Ra: “Sun god”/Son

El: “deity stands above all others as the focal point of worship - El, the supreme god”


More importantly, Israel was the new name given for daring to wrestle with (his incorrect ideas of) god.

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 5:05 pm

FrankOne wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 1:55 pm

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 11:04 am
Excellent question and topic.
What’s the difference between God & Godhead?
If scriptures are the standard of measurement, Godhead is only mentioned in the Bible 3 times… ‘God’ is used 4,473 times.

Personally I think striving to understand God may be the most important thing we do in life because it colors everything else. Is the god I imagine mean and punitive - jealous? Like addiction? Is the god I imagine loving - too “nice” so that love is tainted, too afraid to really care about what’s truly best for ourselves or others? Is God incorporating all that is within me (good and evil) so my weaknesses can be made strong?

Jacob wrestled with his ideas of God & was kind of praised for it in being renamed Is Ra El… which may represent the godhead - Father, Mother, Son. But even this likely doesn’t fully define a Intelligent Design, “God is love” and the kingdom of God within.

as you've likely pondered:

Israel

Is Ra El

Isis, Ra and El (El is God in hebrew)

Yes! Exactly! Not that it changes reality - or the nature of God. But it’s good to understand the background of traditional beliefs we’ve adopted.

Isis: “one of the most important goddesses of ancient Egypt…whose power transcended that of all other deities.”

Ra: “Sun god”/Son

El: “deity stands above all others as the focal point of worship - El, the supreme god”


More importantly, Israel was the new name given for daring to wrestle with (his incorrect ideas of) god.

when a person can open up to understand this , things fit in place better. Most would simply shrug it off as coincidence.

Different curriculum for different periods of time of man. In the beginning, angry and jealous Gods instilling guilt and fear. But...then came Christ and still today, people , in general, can't wrap their minds around what or who he really was.

Christ referring to the Son of Man in third person doesn't clear today's confusion any. ...yet....it could if one lets it sink in.

A Disciple wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 11:17 am "I think striving to understand God may be the most important thing we do in life"

Agree. I'll add that it matters a whole lot that Jesus was the divine Son of God who performed the infinite Atonement, who was raised from the dead and who lives Eternally as our Savior and Redeemer. It matter much less to our salvation what organization or hierarchy of Gods exists in the eternal world. In fact it matters not at all, which may be why The Book of Mormon is empty of such theological presentations.

It’s kinda as Joseph Smith said,

• “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

That’s cool that you agree about seeking to understand God. As a child I had so much faith in Heavenly Father that I wrote a Christmas card for him. I say this more as a reminder to me that I do have faith - though what I imagine God to be has evolved as I’ve learned more. Jeffrey Olsen went through some very traumatic experiences but learned to switch from asking “why me.. “ to “What can I learn?” And each is as precious/loved as his child. https://youtu.be/VEzqgPZ56cI?feature=shared

I believe Christ is not the great exception but the great example - mind you, we may need to sort through the “dung” as Thomas Jefferson suggested regarding the twisting of scripture - to realize that indeed we can and ideally do follow Christ.

FrankOne wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 6:02 pm

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 5:05 pm Yes! Exactly! Not that it changes reality - or the nature of God. But it’s good to understand the background of traditional beliefs we’ve adopted.

Isis: “one of the most important goddesses of ancient Egypt…whose power transcended that of all other deities.”

Ra: “Sun god”/Son

El: “deity stands above all others as the focal point of worship - El, the supreme god”


More importantly, Israel was the new name given for daring to wrestle with (his incorrect ideas of) god.

when a person can open up to understand this , things fit in place better. Most would simply shrug it off as coincidence.

Different curriculum for different periods of time of man. In the beginning, angry and jealous Gods instilling guilt and fear. But...then came Christ and still today, people , in general, can't wrap their minds around what or who he really was.

Christ referring to the Son of Man in third person doesn't clear today's confusion any. ...yet....it could if one lets it sink in.

When you state, “Son of Man in 3rd person,” in the context of adding to confusion, do you mean that Christ is intended to be applied to us personally (1st person)?

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 7:52 pm

FrankOne wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 6:02 pm

Thinker wrote: ↑December 10th, 2023, 5:05 pm Yes! Exactly! Not that it changes reality - or the nature of God. But it’s good to understand the background of traditional beliefs we’ve adopted.

Isis: “one of the most important goddesses of ancient Egypt…whose power transcended that of all other deities.”

Ra: “Sun god”/Son

El: “deity stands above all others as the focal point of worship - El, the supreme god”


More importantly, Israel was the new name given for daring to wrestle with (his incorrect ideas of) god.

when a person can open up to understand this , things fit in place better. Most would simply shrug it off as coincidence.

Different curriculum for different periods of time of man. In the beginning, angry and jealous Gods instilling guilt and fear. But...then came Christ and still today, people , in general, can't wrap their minds around what or who he really was.

Christ referring to the Son of Man in third person doesn't clear today's confusion any. ...yet....it could if one lets it sink in.

When you state, “Son of Man in 3rd person,” in the context of adding to confusion, do you mean that Christ is intended to be applied to us personally (1st person)?

I implied that the Son of Man is not Jesus the Christ. I speculate that Christ wasn't referring to himself, he was referring to someone else.

Is the intent of the OP to discuss the nature of "god" or our "godhead"? Seems like the godhead. as nature of god has nothing to do with the god head that runs this creation.

For example the temple says Lucifer/Satan is the god of this world. but not a member of the godhead.