Mormon Speculation: Becoming a God.

[Katzpur]

Doctrine is becoming LIKE God, not becoming A God.

So apparently you see a distinction between becoming like God and becoming a god. Could you explain what the difference would be between someone who was like God and someone who was a god? What attributes would a god have that someone who was like God would not have?

 

[zippythepinhead]

I must admit, if I think about this concept too much, it does my head in.



That, I found interesting. But IMO I don't think we would be saviours of our own world. To me it wouldn't make sense. Unless of course God would do this all over again. Actually that brings up a question. Would he do this all over again? But not with us?

I would like to think that I would become god of my own world. That'll be cool.

Like I said, If I think about this too much, I get a sore head.

Katya is right. It is almost incomprehensible to think about. I beleive God can make us like Him. We can't become like Him without His making it happen

 

[YmirGF]

So apparently you see a distinction between becoming like God and becoming a god. Could you explain what the difference would be between someone who was like God and someone who was a god? What attributes would a god have that someone who was like God would not have?

Precisely Kathryn. Imho, Mormon doctrine is closer to reality than even Mormons may be willing to believe. The truth is, "god-like" is the most accurate, in the same way that you can take a jug and fill it with water from the ocean. The contents are arguably "like" the ocean and yet cannot be reasonably considered to be the totality of the ocean. In that context, living beings, who are actually spiritual beings clothed in flesh and bone, are "god like", but can hardly be considered to be the totality of what "god" is. I hope that makes some sense.

In closing, such an exalted being would never claim to be the totality of "god" by saying, "I am god", as that is simply not the case and they would, by default, understand that small detail. What it does mean is that personality if far beyond our wildest dreams and we will have freedom to explore our "good natures" any way we see fit.

I perceive a very bright future for the human animal. Now, if only, they could learn to feel most worthy of that bright future.

 

[Francine]

According to scientists this has already happened, suggesting that God was once a child himself...

But he was a headstrong Child. One time when He was twelve He stayed behind in Jerusalem and gave His Mother quite a fright!

 

[Sola'lor]

So apparently you see a distinction between becoming like God and becoming a god. Could you explain what the difference would be between someone who was like God and someone who was a god? What attributes would a god have that someone who was like God would not have?

Some one who was like God would be perfect and probably have some form of power. But the distinction i make is that someone who is like God would not have a realm of their own nor would they have creations, or spirit children of their own. That's the distinction I make between being like God and being a God.

 

[Starfish]

Okay, here's my opinion. Becoming a goddess is not something I want to do. It's really not. Consequently, I don't think I've ever going to be one. If by any chance I reach the Celestial Kingdom and if by any chance God is merciful enough to give me my children, I'll be plenty satisfied.

I kind of relate to this, Katzpur. I don't want godhood either. (It seems like a lot of responsibility and heartache.) Like you, I just want to be with my family. That's all.
However, I realize I know very little (nothing really) about it, so I don't worry about it. Someday I may want to be a god alongside my husband. Who knows?

 

[Katzpur]

The truth is, "god-like" is the most accurate, in the same way that you can take a jug and fill it with water from the ocean. The contents are arguably "like" the ocean and yet cannot be reasonably considered to be the totality of the ocean.

You speak of "the ocean" as if it is a single, unique entity. Any body of water that is large enough is "an ocean." It's not just "ocean-like." There is only one "Pacific Ocean," though. Do you see what I'm saying?

 

[Scott C.]

Like you, I just want to be with my family. That's all.

My thought is a little off topic, but - is there anything in LDS doctrine that says a man and a woman who were married in this life and who both are in, say, the terrestrial kingdom, will not be together, in the sense that they won't see one another and associate with one another? I know they will not be sealed and they will therefore not enjoy eternal marriage and all that this entails. But, does not being sealed to someone mean you won't "be with them" in some way or another?

 

[Francine]

You speak of "the ocean" as if it is a single, unique entity. Any body of water that is large enough is "an ocean." It's not just "ocean-like." There is only one "Pacific Ocean," though. Do you see what I'm saying?

The earth is 71% water, and it is all connected into one World Ocean, but men have given names to parts of it.

 

[Katzpur]

The earth is 71% water, and it is all connected into one World Ocean, but men have given names to parts of it.

Fair enough.

 

[Katzpur]

My thought is a little off topic, but - is there anything in LDS doctrine that says a man and a woman who were married in this life and who both are in, say, the terrestrial kingdom, will not be together, in the sense that they won't see one another and associate with one another? I know they will not be sealed and they will therefore not enjoy eternal marriage and all that this entails. But, does not being sealed to someone mean you won't "be with them" in some way or another?

I'm not absolutely positive, but I don't think it's supposed to work that way. I think that might be the case for people who attain the Celestial Kingdom, but not the highest degree of celestial glory.

 

[Scott C.]

I'm not absolutely positive, but I don't think it's supposed to work that way. I think that might be the case for people who attain the Celestial Kingdom, but not the highest degree of celestial glory.

I have a hard time understanding how people will be physically separated from each other in the Terrestrial or Telestial kingdom. We know there will be sociality. If I could not see my wife, that would mean that my friend could see my wife and I could see his wife, and we could see each other, but we could not see our own wives. This does not make sense to me. I think the key difference between exaltation and everything else is that only in exaltation do we enjoy a "married" state with our spouse, which is different from a social state. While I don't understand all of the implications of Celestial marriage and exaltation, I would think that not receiving the blessings of a celestial union with the one we love would be very difficult, perhaps even more so, if we are with that person in an unmarried state.

I admit I might be completely wrong about this, but I'd like to read something definitive on the issue.

 

[Sola'lor]

I have a hard time understanding how people will be physically separated from each other in the Terrestrial or Telestial kingdom. We know there will be sociality. If I could not see my wife, that would mean that my friend could see my wife and I could see his wife, and we could see each other, but we could not see our own wives. This does not make sense to me. I think the key difference between exaltation and everything else is that only in exaltation do we enjoy a "married" state with our spouse, which is different from a social state. While I don't understand all of the implications of Celestial marriage and exaltation, I would think that not receiving the blessings of a celestial union with the one we love would be very difficult, perhaps even more so, if we are with that person in an unmarried state.

I admit I might be completely wrong about this, but I'd like to read something definitive on the issue.

I don't think there's anything official other than people will not be sealed to their spouses or children. I don't know if there will be a physical seperation or what.

 

[Orontes]

This thread feels like the tower of Babel.


Before we proceed, show me the church doctrine that says we can become "a God." I always thought the teaching was that we could become "like God." Potentially, that's a huge difference.

Hello,

There is no verbiage in the LDS Canon that uses "like God". Deification references are explicit identity statements. Here are a few from D&C 132:

-"...(I)t shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever. Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them." D&C 132: 19-20​

-"Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exhaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods." D&C 132: 37​

I think one can note that the canon's language on the subject tends toward inclusion rather than attempting to draw distinction. This can be seen in everything from Genesis through Pslams, to John's Gospel, to Modern revelation.

Deification is not unique to LDS Thought. Theosis is fundamental to the Greek Christian Tradition and also finds place in the Catholic Catechism though it is not a doctrinal stress. This does not mean LDS conceptions and those of Greek/Catholic positions are synonymous. They are not, but deification is as old as Christianity itself.

 

[nutshell]

Hello,

There is no verbiage in the LDS Canon that uses "like God". Deification references are explicit identity statements. Here are a few from D&C 132:

-"...(I)t shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever. Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them." D&C 132: 19-20​

-"Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exhaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods." D&C 132: 37​

I think one can note that the canon's language on the subject tends toward inclusion rather than attempting to draw distinction. This can be seen in everything from Genesis through Pslams, to John's Gospel, to Modern revelation.

Deification is not unique to LDS Thought. Theosis is fundamental to the Greek Christian Tradition and also finds place in the Catholic Catechism though it is not a doctrinal stress. This does not mean LDS conceptions and those of Greek/Catholic positions are synonymous. They are not, but deification is as old as Christianity itself.

I see a difference between being a god because I am "like God" and being a god became I am God.

Do you see the difference?

 

[Orontes]

I see a difference between being a god because I am "like God" and being a god became I am God.

Do you see the difference?

I understand your idea, but the canon does not make that distinction. My guess is you want to draw a line between the Father and what is not the Father. I think one can see the scriptures are equivocal in the use of God. God may be a being or a way of being. 2 Nephi 31: 21 and D&C 93:15-17, 20 are illustrative:

"And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen."​

​

-"And I, John, bear record, and lo, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove, and sat upon him, and there came a voice out of heaven saying: This is my beloved Son. And I, John, bear record that he received a fulness of the glory of the Father; And he (Christ) received all power, both in heaven and on earth, and the glory of the Father was with him, for he dwelt in him. And it shall come to pass, that if you are faithful you shall receive the fullness of the record of John...For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulnes, and be glorfied in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.."

​

The being of the Father or Son is maintained, yet any who fully participate in that way of being are God.

 

[Kristoffer]

I think you have a better understanding of this doctrine than most Latter-day Saints, to tell you the truth.

But can exalted mormons create their own planets, or universes? This is something i read on much different medias. Is it true, or doesn't Mormons believe this?

 

[Katzpur]

But can exalted mormons create their own planets, or universes? This is something i read on much different medias. Is it true, or doesn't Mormons believe this?

That would be a reasonably accurate statement. However, not only Mormons will be exalted.