Do God the Father and God the Son have physical bodies?

[Katzpur]

Very well said and scripturally sound!!!!!!

How can something be scripturally sound when the Bible is silent on it?

 

[ayani]

So God did not exist prior to creating the universe?

God was there "in the beginning". He already existed. the Bible opens not with God's creation, but with God's first act of creation.

If matter is created, why doesn't the Bible say this? It only says that God created the heavens and the earth. It doesn't say one way or the other whether He created from nothing or using pre-existent matter.

Katz, is the universe composed of matter? is the universe created? did God create the universe? if so, we can say that logically, God created matter. the entire issue of "pre-existent matter" is entirely absent from the Bible, which states that God created the heavens and the earth, which are made of matter / stuff. it mentions nothing existing before God, nor does it describe God using anything (except His voice and will) to form the cosmos.

 

[Katzpur]

God was there "in the beginning". He already existed. the Bible opens not with God's creation, but with God's first act of creation.

That's right. He already existed. The Bible starts with His act of creating the universe. It does not say, however, that this was His "first act," nor does it give us any indication of what He may have been doing prior to the Creation. It's only logical to assume that if He already existed, He was doing something. The fact that the Bible doesn't tell us what that might have been is probably because it had nothing to do with His plan for us. It certainly doesn't make Him any less great if our universe was his second creation or His two millionth creation. LDS doctrine leaves the matter unresolved, whereas traditional Christianity insists upon something that is never explicitely stated in the scriptures.

Katz, is the universe composed of matter?

Yes.

is the universe created?

Yes.

did God create the universe?

Yes.

if so, we can say that logically, God created matter.

You can say that, but you don't have to. God could very well have created the universe from chaos, and the original Greek indicated that He did. If you want to do the research, you'll find that this belief is older than the belief in an ex nihilo creation.

the entire issue of "pre-existent matter" is entirely absent from the Bible, which states that God created the heavens and the earth, which are made of matter / stuff. it mentions nothing existing before God, nor does it describe God using anything (except His voice and will) to form the cosmos.

And if something is absent from the Bible, it's false? Ayani, if you want to discuss the Creation, why don't you start another thread? I'd seriously enjoy talking about it, but I just don't see how it ties in with the OP. It's a fascinating topic and I'm sure it would lead into a great discussion. By the way, the Bible does tell us that Jesus Christ created the universe under the direction of His Father. That's what we Latter-day Saints believe.

 

[ayani]

not untrue, perhaps, but absent. any church can teach anything that is not explicitly spelled out in the Bible, and teach it as truth, and ask / recommend that it be put into practice.

many Muslims site the teachings and words of Mohammad as being truthful and worthy of practice, despite their absence from the text of the Quran. what it comes down to is the divine inspiration, internal truthfulness and reliability, and completion and sufficiency of what the entire text is saying. it's an important set of issues, and every issue should be considered respectively. the Bible says a lot. there are things it is silent on.

yet there are certain statements about God's nature which every Christian can draw conclusively from the Bible itself. the question of God's nature and purpose is an important one- it's a question that haunts and often divides the three Abrahamic faiths, and a question that needs to be clearly answered.

 

[Katzpur]

not untrue, perhaps, but absent. any church can teach anything that is not explicitly spelled out in the Bible, and teach it as truth, and ask / recommend that it be put into practice.

many Muslims site the teachings and words of Mohammad as being truthful and worthy of practice, despite their absence from the text of the Quran. what it comes down to is the divine inspiration, internal truthfulness and reliability, and completion and sufficiency of what the entire text is saying. it's an important set of issues, and every issue should be considered respectively. the Bible says a lot. there are things it is silent on.

yet there are certain statements about God's nature which every Christian can draw conclusively from the Bible itself. the question of God's nature and purpose is an important one- it's a question that haunts and often divides the three Abrahamic faiths, and a question that needs to be clearly answered.

I agree with most everything you said, ayani. The fact that there are so many things Christians disagree on (even though they are all, to some extent) basing their beliefs on the Bible) is reason enough for me to believe that God continues to be in contact with a living prophet, a man to whom He speaks just as He did to the prophets of old. I can't conceive of why God would have been in constant contact with mankind for four thousand years and then have suddenly decided that a book was enough for us to go on. I respect your belief, but that's how I feel personally.

 

[ayani]

Katz ~

as i understand, you are refering to the current living LDS prophet, and those who preceded him, beginning with Joseph Smith.

you are right- God did not leave us alone.

I am telling you these things now while I am still with you. But when the Father sends the Advocate as my representative—that is, the Holy Spirit—he will teach you everything and will remind you of everything I have told you. I am leaving you with a gift—peace of mind and heart. And the peace I give is a gift the world cannot give. So don’t be troubled or afraid.

Jesus also promises that He Himself will be with us, even till the end of the age. Muslims believe that His true message got lost in all those denominations and in the trinitarian creed- and that God sent Mohammad to rectify the message. Mormons believe similarly, and point to Jospeh Smith as that rectifier. Christ Himself has promised to personally abide with and give His peace to every believer- and He has promised to give us the Spirit of Truth to guide us, convict us, remind us, and teach us what He has taught us. the same Spirit of His Father, the same Spirit by which Jesus worked His miracles and signs, the same Spirit called the Spirit of Jesus in Acts 16:7.

so i agree, God would never and has not left us as orphans, without guidance or living instruction. Christ the Living Word is alive, and the Spirit He has given us is the Spirit of the Living God. we also have the Bible, and the brotherhood of Christian believers. none of us is alone, and none of us with access to the Word and the Spirit have been left without the resources and guidance to diligently seek the truth, and apply it.

 

[roli]

This is a question that is not addressed by LDS doctrine. Certain individuals, including Joseph Smith, have speculated that there was a time when God lived on an earth such as ours (presumably in an entirely different universe, since He created ours). If Joseph was right, this would have been at a time which is not mentioned in the Bible.

It's certainly hard to decipher whether you agree with your prophet or are in opposition with him.
I am confused at how Joseph Smith being the "prophet" who God supposedly revealed his message to and how down through the years the LDS family esteem so high, can be considered second rate in the LDS church today.
It's apparent how several of his views have become almost taboo among LDS today.
I mean if he was the be all prophet and the man with whom God chose to establish the new and pure church, how can what he had revealed be trumped by today's president and apostles.
Why are'nt his views, revelations, opinions, comments and writings considered fixed and unchangable, was'nt he the "Prophet", "the choosen one"

It''s like saying, Isaiah, with all his writings and revelations from God and who is known by all the people of his unique relationship to his God and have had his words listened to and followed for centuries is trumped by this new prophet who has come on the scene, claiming new revelation and divine appointment.
Then, within 100 yrs, his words have been changed by these new, self professing prophets and all the people who once followed Isaiah, are not taken him so serious as they do these new revealtions from others.
It just seems a bit suspicious, to say the least, I mean when many of the doctrines revealed to Joseph Smith begin to be questioned of there validity. It seems his own forsake him and his writings and take a new stance in accordance with the new prophet who has taken the duty of damage control. He begins to rewrite new doctrine to counteract the previous and at the same time appease the people who opposed the original teachings.

The Bible says that God has existed since the beginning. But what is "the beginning"?

Maybe this beginning was for our understanding, seeing how we are in this relam called "time", not him. He is eternal,maybe we should define this word. I personally think it is self evident, but I'm sure you'll have a different spin.

Whether or not there was a time "prior to the beginning" when God had His own beginnings, .

You start with a question and end with an assertion as to his having a beginning.

We don't believe it matters greatly. If it did, God would have told us more. At any rate, you will find no reference to this concept in any of our "Standard Works" (i.e. the official LDS canon).

Believe me, it matters greatly that we know he is eternal and self existing

 

[Katzpur]

Katz ~

as i understand, you are refering to the current living LDS prophet, and those who preceded him, beginning with Joseph Smith.

you are right- God did not leave us alone.

And yet, even leaving the LDS Church out of the equation entirely, Christianity is more splintered than at any time in the past. No two churches teach exactly the same doctrines. If the Holy Ghost testifies to all sincere believers, it makes you wonder why there is not more agreement among us all.

 

[Katzpur]

It's certainly hard to decipher whether you agree with your prophet or are in opposition with him.
I am confused at how Joseph Smith being the "prophet" who God supposedly revealed his message to and how down through the years the LDS family esteem so high, can be considered second rate in the LDS church today.

You're confused all right. Joseph Smith definitely is not considered second-rate.

It's apparent how several of his views have become almost taboo among LDS today.
I mean if he was the be all prophet and the man with whom God chose to establish the new and pure church, how can what he had revealed be trumped by today's president and apostles.
Why are'nt his views, revelations, opinions, comments and writings considered fixed and unchangable, was'nt he the "Prophet", "the choosen one"

I believe this has already been answered numerous times, roli. I can't understand why you continue to raise the same issue again and again when several of us have addressed this topic extensively. Now, let's get back to the topic of the OP.

You start with a question and end with an assertion as to his having a beginning.

I made no assertion one way or the other. I specifically stated that the matter is unresolved according to LDS doctrine. The Bible doesn't say one way or the other. Do you understand now?

Believe me, it matters greatly that we know he is eternal and self existing

Why? Suppose we didn't know. Would that somehow invalidate Jesus Christ's atonement?

 

[ayani]

And yet, even leaving the LDS Church out of the equation entirely, Christianity is more splintered than at any time in the past. No two churches teach exactly the same doctrines. If the Holy Ghost testifies to all sincere believers, it makes you wonder why there is not more agreement among us all.

i can answer that in part. quite simply, humans enjoy listening to their own ideas. they enjoy disagreeing with one another, they enjoy de-emphasizing or over-emphasizing certain parts of scripture which either dismay or appeal to them, and they enjoy splintering off and forming new groups. it's part of our sinful nature which enjoys haggling, disunity, and feeds on pride.

there's more agreement than one might realize, K. the issue is not "which church is right?" the issue is not the denomination, whether Catholic, Weslyan, Lutheran, Coptic, or Mar Tomasi. all of these denominations have their quirks, unque traits, good points, and flaws, and arise from certain historical and human contexts. the issue is not human doctrine, human reformers, or a unique church culture. the issue is Jesus Christ, the Living Son of God.

many, many Christians have chosen to bunk individual church cultures, and opt for Christ Jesus. for believing Him to be the Son of God, believing Him to be risen from the dead, the One whom God wants us to know and follow, and doing one's best to live a new life as His disciple and apostle. faith in Christ, and the choice to take up one's cross and follow Him, makes one a Christian. it is a life-changing act of God's grace which begins a walk of discipleship, not something absorbed through cultural osmosis while belonging to a speific church, nor something worked at by worshipful deeds.

Christ is what unites the believers within those splinters- not human interpretation, doctrine, in-fighting, or pride, which divde rather than unite. my husband has told me "there will always be a remnant", and he is right. disciples are all over the world, and of any or no deniomination. i would argue that church does not make us Christians- Christ does.

 

[Katzpur]

i would argue that church does not make us Christians- Christ does.

Well, you won't get any argument from me on that.

 

[ayani]

and yet, if one bases one's relationship to Christ on the church one belongs to / believes in, one potentially falls into a kind of trap. i witnessed it growing up as a Lutheran- there was a church culture, a worship service, a feeling of being spiritually "more correct than" Catholics, to put it kindly, etc. yet i did not have Christ in all my years of ging to Lutheran churches. is it possible for one to walk away from a specific church / denomination and lose one's nearness to Christ in the process? not if Christ is who he says He is.

the denominations are many. yet multiplicity does not neccesrily mean that there is a need for another church, or a different church, or a church to restore something lost. what it means is that the focus needs to be shifted- from churches and human developments, to Christ.

 

[Scott C.]

Here are some of my thoughts in response to several posts in the thread...

In 2007 the LDS Church published a book called Teachings of Presidents of the Church – Joseph Smith. The church has asked its congregations throughout the world to study from this manual each Sunday during classroom time. The LDS Church pays much attention to the teachings of Joseph Smith and respects him as a great prophet of God.

Chapter 2 is called God the Eternal Father. Here are some quotes from Joseph Smith which are included in this chapter:

“While one portion of the human race is judging and condemning the other without mercy, the great Parent of the universe looks upon the whole of the human family with a fatherly care and paternal regard; he views them as His offspring, and without any of those contracted feelings that influence the children of men, causes ‘His son to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.’ [Matthew 5:45]

“We admit that God is the great source and fountain from which proceeds all good; that He is the perfect intelligence, and that His wisdom is alone sufficient to govern and regulate the mighty creations and worlds which shine and blaze with such magnificence and splendor over our heads, as though touched with His finger and moved by His Almighty word…..The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork [see Psalm 19:1]; and a moment’s reflection is sufficient to teach man of common intelligence, that all these are not the mere productions of chance, nor could they be supported by any power less than an Almighty hand.”

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

Everything a prophet says can’t be taken as scripture. While these quotes are not in our canon of scripture, personally I believe them to all be true.

The way I personally interpret this, somewhere in an eternity past, God progressed to become what He is now, which is omnipotent and omniscient, the God of eternity, the everlasting to everlasting God, who is without beginning and without end. I believe God to possess every power and ability and infallibility as perceived by the Christian world. God’s physical nature, form of a man, and previous progression in an eternity past does not detract from any of this.

For me, to know that I am literally in God’s image and to know that when I die I will see God as He is, and see that His form is my form, and He will embrace me in His arms as His literal child and offspring is unspeakably wonderful. “I am a child of God” is in my opinion the most sublime and important truth that was restored to the world through the Prophet Joseph Smith. I can’t understand everything this implies and there are great mysteries associated with all of this. But, I believe God wants us to know this much with certainty: “We are children of God”.

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

“God Himself was once as we are now"- Joseph Smith

Scott, how many members of the LDS Church believe this? Such a belief is, without a doubt, a final departure from Christianity.

 

[Scott C.]

Scott, how many members of the LDS Church believe this? Such a belief is, without a doubt, a final departure from Christianity.

I honestly don't know how many LDS believe this is absolutely true, might be true, or is not true. I find different LDS put different weight on what Joseph Smith taught outside of what the scriptures (Bible and others) specifically say. I will say, however, that it is not uncommon for LDS to believe this.

I want to put this in perspective (which is just my perspective). Our doctrine is clear that we believe the Father is a physical Being. Our doctrine is also clear that we believe all of us are the offspring of God, literally. Those are indisputable LDS doctrines.

I hear very little discussion on statements like "God was once a man like us" at church. When it does come up, people usually say something like, "that's a mystery so let's move on and talk about what we do know, which is that Heavenly Father has a physical body and we are His children."

I want to say again, IMO one of the greatest truths ever revealed from God to man, which I believe with all of my heart and soul, which if it's not part of traditional Christian thought, should be, is that: "I am a child of God".

All of us lived with God before we were born. Somehow and somewhere in eternity, the details of which are not revealed, we became spirit children of Heavenly Father before we were ever born on earth. We lived with God as a family, you and me together, before we embarked on this journey we call mortality.

I fear that the beauty, simplicity, and importance of the basic fact of the Fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, and our life with God before we were born get lost in tangental and philosophical mind bending exercises whenever we discuss the subject in places like this.

 

[ayani]

but honestly, don't all these teachings, presumptions, ideas, theories, and rarely-discussed possibilities just complicate things unnecesarily? there's so much, it seems, in Mormon theology that is admitted as defining doctrine (that which makes Mormonism distinct from and perhaps truer than all other Christian groups), yet is rarely discussed, and rarely elaborated on.

for examle, the concept of Heavenly Mother. the exact dimentions and levels of the celestial kingdom, and who is going where once that kingdom is reached. the origins and eventual discontinuation of polygamy within Mormonism. this idea apparently speculated on by Joseph Smith that God is in some way a man like ourselves who is created... so much is there, present, yet even LDS here report than when some of these issues are mentioned in their churches, the topic is quickly changed on the basis of its being a mystery, and perhaps not knowable in this life.

if all of these things are cosmologicaly true, and neccesary to LDS belief, and if Smith began his minitry based on the Bible's promise that all who lack wisdom should ask God, why does a lot of the specific wisdom of the LDS church seem to lack clarity and definition?

 

[Scott C.]

but honestly, don't all these teachings, presumptions, ideas, theories, and rarely-discussed possibilities just complicate things unnecesarily? there's so much, it seems, in Mormon theology that is admitted as defining doctrine (that which makes Mormonism distinct from and perhaps truer than all other Christian groups), yet is rarely discussed, and rarely elaborated on.

for examle, the concept of Heavenly Mother. the exact dimentions and levels of the celestial kingdom, and who is going where once that kingdom is reached. the origins and eventual discontinuation of polygamy within Mormonism. this idea apparently speculated on by Joseph Smith that God is in some way a man like ourselves who is created... so much is there, present, yet even LDS here report than when some of these issues are mentioned in their churches, the topic is quickly changed on the basis of its being a mystery, and perhaps not knowable in this life.

if all of these things are cosmologicaly true, and neccesary to LDS belief, and if Smith began his minitry based on the Bible's promise that all who lack wisdom should ask God, why does a lot of the specific wisdom of the LDS church seem to lack clarity and definition?

Here's how I look at it. Suppose God reveals 100 facts to me that I previously did not know. Suppose also that as I learn each fact, the new information causes me to come up with 10 new questions which have not been answered.

When I started, I had no facts and no questions. I now have 100 facts and 1,000 questions. Do I know more or less than when I started? Was I better off at the beginning or now? I think I'm better off now with 100 new facts, even though those new facts raised 1,000 new questions. When did I have greater wisdom and clarity, back with no facts and no questions or now with 100 facts and 1,000 questions? When was I more inspired?

I believe this is what is happening with the restoration of the gospel. God is opening the windows of heaven (a crack or so) and shedding more light. There are many more answers and as a result, there are also many more questions. There are limits to what God is willing to reveal and answer for now. I accept with faith that the answers will come later. In my example, the 100 facts are those things that God deems necessary for us to know and which are available through our seeking for greater wisdom. I'm just happy to have all of the new information and that there is so much that I can understand and use in my life.

Remember: "You are a child of God". That is the great doctrine. It's a very important fact, revealed by the restoration. Yes, it raises lots of new and unanswered questions. Savor what is known and wait patiently for what is not known.

 

[roli]

You're confused all right. Joseph Smith definitely is not considered second-rate.

This Mormon site seems to think he was'nt much worth listening to, hind sight is 20/20.
No Salvation Without Joseph Smith | Mormonism Research Ministry

Scott is now sharing what Smith has to say about God the FAther.

I guess my question was, "if the new president's words are considered doctrine, it really does'nt matter what Joseph Smith had to say about it, i mean being the first prophet of the Mormon church you think his words would be unchanging and true enough to believed

I made no assertion one way or the other. I specifically stated that the matter is unresolved according to LDS doctrine. The Bible doesn't say one way or the other. Do you understand now?

What would you like to know about what the word has to say about God's eternal existence, that is if you take eternal literally !!!
Answer this Katz," Was God the Father once flesh and blood as we are?
Give reference if you could!!

Why? Suppose we didn't know. Would that somehow invalidate Jesus Christ's atonement

Let's just say, if God is not eternal than what makes one think he can be eternal through this atonement.

 

[roli]

scott, how many members of the lds church believe this? Such a belief is, without a doubt, a final departure from christianity.

absolutely!!!!!!

 

[Scott C.]

absolutely!!!!!!

Roli, your posting a link to an anti-Mormon website is not the way to invite continued thoughtful dialog on what I believe. I had hoped we would pursue a higher course.