All of God's creations (speaking of living creations) are a testimony of life producing life after its kind. That life begets life, in kind.
Is the God of orthodoxy unable to do this himself?
Printable View
All of God's creations (speaking of living creations) are a testimony of life producing life after its kind. That life begets life, in kind.
Is the God of orthodoxy unable to do this himself?
I thought this was clear on the other thread:Quote:
IS 46:9 For I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is no one like Me,
Ripped from Answers.com:
Like:
prep.
1. Possessing the characteristics of; resembling closely; similar to.
2.
1. In the typical manner of: It's not like you to take offense.
2. In the same way as: lived like royalty.
3. Inclined or disposed to: felt like running away.
4. As if the probability exists for: looks like a bad year for farmers.
5. Such as; for example: saved things like old newspapers and pieces of string.
adj.
1. Possessing the same or almost the same characteristics; similar: on this and like occasions.
2. Alike: They are as like as two siblings.
3. Having equivalent value or quality. Usually used in negative sentences: There's nothing like a good night's sleep.
n.
1. One similar to or like another. Used with the: was subject to coughs, asthma, and the like.
2. Informal. An equivalent or similar person or thing; an equal or match. Often used in the plural: I've never seen the likes of this before. We'll never see his like again.
Blessings,
MacG
Quote:
You imply that makes God somehow less than "omnipotent", that He's "unable" to do this or that.
Again, you've done the Mormon "thing" and made a CATEGORICAL ERROR. You have likened the eternal, UNCREATE SELF-EXISTENT UNIQUE GOD unto created, mortal beings.
JS certainly succeeded in his DIMINUTION of God...that he's nothing more than a once-mortal schmuck who earned his godhood merit badge at some celestial jamboree. :rolleyes:
The short answer is "yes" to the original question.
But the answer is "yes" in Mormonism as well. In Mormonism, God does not really create after his own kind. In fact, his own kind are beings that are co-eternal and self-existent. Our particular God didn't given them their existence, and at spirit birth (if you affirm the traditional view of viviparous spirit-birth) he doesn't technically "make them after his own kind"; he merely clothes an existing co-eternal self-existent being already of the same fundamental species with a spirit-body.
Put more succinctly, the Mormon God doesn't have the ability to create beings of the same species. He only has the ability to clothe co-eternal beings of the same species with different kinds of bodies.
But you guys are missing an important implication of Fig's question:
Is the deity you believe in able to give lower beings the same abilities (knowledge, immortality, etc.) that the deity has?
The answer has to be either yes or no, and you guys are saying it's no, which is "interesting." CS Lewis and REAL Orthodox Christianity have taught that God IS able to do theosis--the glorification and edification of humans to the point of virtual deification. So the reader is forced to judge whether they--or you guys--are correct. I choose them. Logically, any omnipotent being should have the ability to share His abilities with other beings that He judges would be a good idea to share them with.
If you wanted to claim "Yes, God, being literally omnipotent (except in the case of irrational dilemmas like the rock one) is ABLE to do it, but He just doesn't WANT to" then that would have been another debate, that you ALSO would have lost, but you didn't choose that option. You chose "God is UNABLE to fully share His knowledge and abilities with any other being, and He never will be able to do it." So you are stuck with your statement.
No. God does that through the biological process He created.Quote:
I'm just saying, it's not logical that an "uncreated" being could be created. God has no beginning or end, so He was not created...He has always existed. How could, even HE, "create" something that has always existed?
I don't know from implications (perhaps you are used to looking for deficiencies where there are none) but Figs question is can God reproduce God? As in cats beget cats and man begets man etc reproducing after their own kind. The answer is no unless one takes the Q episodes of The Next Generation as gospel. The point that you raise though is different in this subtle way - those that He imparts gifts of knowledge and healings and glory as in Moses shining face, and the glorified bodies of flesh and bone in the future to etc. are not God the imparter/source of such things and are destined to be the creation for ever.Quote:
But you guys are missing an important implication of Fig's question:
Is the deity you believe in able to give lower beings the same abilities (knowledge, immortality, etc.) that the deity has?
The answer has to be either yes or no, and you guys are saying it's no, which is "interesting." CS Lewis and REAL Orthodox Christianity have taught that God IS able to do theosis--the glorification and edification of humans to the point of virtual deification. So the reader is forced to judge whether they--or you guys--are correct. I choose them. Logically, any omnipotent being should have the ability to share His abilities with other beings that He judges would be a good idea to share them with.
If you wanted to claim "Yes, God, being literally omnipotent (except in the case of irrational dilemmas like the rock one) is ABLE to do it, but He just doesn't WANT to" then that would have been another debate, that you ALSO would have lost, but you didn't choose that option. You chose "God is UNABLE to fully share His knowledge and abilities with any other being, and He never will be able to do it." So you are stuck with your statement.
Blessings,
MacG
So if God can create a biological process to beget life, why can't he create a spirit process to beget spirit life?Quote:
No. God does that through the biological process He created.
I'm just saying, it's not logical that an "uncreated" being could be created. God has no beginning or end, so He was not created...He has always existed. How could, even HE, "create" something that has always existed?
I am not saying that He didn't create spirit.. The Bible says that He did.. He just did it within us.. (Zech 12:1) Mormonism denys that saying that god created our spirits and place our preexisting spirit in it.. Like most LDS doctrine this one is upside down.. IHS jim
Interesting question in light of mainstreamism. How could Jesus' person be uncreated if His person was not around before God created? Did Jesus' person become uncreated the very moment God conjured up the idea that He needed a Jesus (man/God) to save mankind?
love,
stem
You are right he can't do what isn't possible to do.. He can't create an uncreated being... He can't create NOTHING, He can't make things that don't exist.. He isn't a God of contradictions.. Your question is foolishness.. IHS jim
Quote:
Interesting question in light of mainstreamism. How could Jesus' person be uncreated if His person was not around before God created? Did Jesus' person become uncreated the very moment God conjured up the idea that He needed a Jesus (man/God) to save mankind?
love,
stem
John 1:1-2
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
That seems to answer your question.. Jesus was with God and Jesus is God.. There was never a time when the Father "conjured up the idea that He needed a Jesus (man/God) to save mankind". God was always there and always knew what He was doing the whole time.. IHS jim
---I don't know--I have been too busy finding deficiences where they DO exist, to get used to looking for what isn't there. :DQuote:
Of course, I am hardly the first to notice deficiencies in a few of the doctrines of "traditional" Christianity--Pastors Roger Williams, John Wesley, Sebastian Franck, et al noticed them way earlier.
---Wouldn't you say that any being who is unable to reproduce is deficient? When inferior beings such as chimpanzees can have babies and teach those babies everything the parents know, and raise them to do everything the parents can do, how, logically thinking, could a DEITY be UNABLE to do similarly?Quote:
but Figs question is can God reproduce God?
---Let's take the issue a step at a time:Quote:
The point that you raise though is different in this subtle way - those that He imparts gifts of knowledge and healings and glory as in Moses shining face, and the glorified bodies of flesh and bone in the future to etc. are not God the imparter/source of such things and are destined to be the creation for ever.
1. Is God able to have a child? Yes/No
If no, then God is deficient in at least one way.
2. If yes, is God able to impart to His children the ABILITIES and PERSONALITY TRAITS that He possesses (immortality, endless learning potential, wisdom, love, kindness, patience, etc.) ? Yes/No
God clearly states (many times) that His children are "adopted" not pro-created. And I wouldn't at all presume that God is deficient in any way. But, He IS unique, as He also tells us many, many times in the Bible.Quote:
---I don't know--I have been too busy finding deficiences where they DO exist, to get used to looking for what isn't there. :D
Of course, I am hardly the first to notice deficiencies in a few of the doctrines of "traditional" Christianity--Pastors Roger Williams, John Wesley, Sebastian Franck, et al noticed them way earlier.
---Wouldn't you say that any being who is unable to reproduce is deficient? When inferior beings such as chimpanzees can have babies and teach those babies everything the parents know, and raise them to do everything the parents can do, how, logically thinking, could a DEITY be UNABLE to do similarly?
---Let's take the issue a step at a time:
1. Is God able to have a child? Yes/No
If no, then God is deficient in at least one way.
2. If yes, is God able to impart to His children the ABILITIES and PERSONALITY TRAITS that He possesses (immortality, endless learning potential, wisdom, love, kindness, patience, etc.) ? Yes/No
Not quite. You are confused. Care to try again?Quote:
I am not saying that He didn't create spirit.. The Bible says that He did.. He just did it within us.. (Zech 12:1) Mormonism denys that saying that god created our spirits and place our preexisting spirit in it.. Like most LDS doctrine this one is upside down.. IHS jim
Or you could always ask to find out what we really believe.
Actually we ARE created BY God in the beginning--as he says--in his image and likeness.Quote:
Then we may be born again through an adoption.
We are all unique, Libby.
When you bear children, you don't bear fully grown adults, or degreed lawyers or doctors. Children "become" as they progress.
---Let's see these "many" times where God CLEARLY stated that He is unable to have children except through adoption.Quote:
---If you can do something good that He CAN'T, then "He is deficient" is the ONLY presumption available.Quote:
And I wouldn't at all presume that God is deficient in any way
That would mean that God created creatures that CAN do what He CANNOT do.
Have you read and prayed about the meaning? Doesn't sound. I could get as hateful as you did here and was very tempted to be so.. Maybe you should take some time off so you can treat others with a level a civility..IHS jim
I'm just saying that your information wasn't quite right. If you would like to be corrected, all you need do is ask...politely.
No, it just means the scientist can't beget out of kind. He might be able to create a new type of corn, that is actually steril, but he is not 'begetting' it. Nor would I say that God begets corn, as corn is not his kind.Quote:
My question was about begetting in kind.
Oh. Perhaps you haven't seen this before:
IS 46:9 For I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is no one like Me,
Ripped from Answers.com:
Like:
prep.
1. Possessing the characteristics of; resembling closely; similar to.
adj.
1. Possessing the same or almost the same characteristics; similar: on this and like occasions.
2. Alike: They are as like as two siblings.
3. Having equivalent value or quality. Usually used in negative sentences: There's nothing like a good night's sleep.
n.
1. One similar to or like another. Used with the: was subject to coughs, asthma, and the like.
2. Informal. An equivalent or similar person or thing; an equal or match. Often used in the plural: I've never seen the likes of this before. We'll never see his like again.
If He can, He hasn't and apparently does not intend to:
"You are My witnesses," declares the LORD, "And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me.
MacG
What I said here applies equally to the idea of begetting. The Mormon God can neither create nor beget after his own kind. The fundamental species of being is already there. The co-eternal beings are already there. The Mormon God doesn't beget their very being. He merely gives them a spirit body. His "begetting" is not of a being after his own kind, but of a body after his own kind.Quote:
The short answer is "yes" to the original question.
But the answer is "yes" in Mormonism as well. In Mormonism, God does not really create after his own kind. In fact, his own kind are beings that are co-eternal and self-existent. Our particular God didn't given them their existence, and at spirit birth (if you affirm the traditional view of viviparous spirit-birth) he doesn't technically "make them after his own kind"; he merely clothes an existing co-eternal self-existent being already of the same fundamental species with a spirit-body.
Put more succinctly, the Mormon God doesn't have the ability to create beings of the same species. He only has the ability to clothe co-eternal beings of the same species with different kinds of bodies.
So criticism against Christianity for not having a God that can create or beget after his own kind is self-defeating.
In Mormonism, ALL persons are self-existent and co-eternal. Technically, NONE are created or begotten. Their key stages of development are really marked by the addition of bodies, not by the begetting or creation of their species or being.
Yes, that's a very good point, Aaron.Quote:
What I said here applies equally to the idea of begetting. The Mormon God can neither create nor beget after his own kind. The fundamental species of being is already there. The co-eternal beings are already there. The Mormon God doesn't beget their very being. He merely gives them a spirit body. His "begetting" is not of a being after his own kind, but of a body after his own kind.
So criticism against Christianity for not having a God that can create or beget after his own kind is self-defeating.
In Mormonism, ALL persons are self-existent and co-eternal. Technically, NONE are created or begotten. Their key stages of development are really marked by the addition of bodies, not by the begetting or creation of their species or being.
I don't think He is saying that. I'm just telling you that he makes it clear that WE are not his "biological" children.Quote:
---If you can do something good that He CAN'T, then "He is deficient" is the ONLY presumption available. [/QUOTE]
No, not at all. And we really had nothing to do with the pro-creative process, so in a real sense that was from God. He is the Creator of our spirits and He was the Creator of all biological processes.
I am saying that being corrected by someone who looks to a man like Joseph Smith as being a prophet of God has nothing to teach anyone.. My doctrine is correct being Biblical. Just by saying that it isn't shows that you are so far from God's truth that you have much more to learn than you have to teach.. IHS jim
Your ***umptions that you have read into John address my question a little but not wholly. The p***age does not come close to answering my question as it is. So are you saying that there never was a time when Jesus' person was not? Was there a point when God was but one person?Quote:
John 1:1-2
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
That seems to answer your question.. Jesus was with God and Jesus is God.. There was never a time when the Father "conjured up the idea that He needed a Jesus (man/God) to save mankind". God was always there and always knew what He was doing the whole time.. IHS jim
love,
stem
--Does that include Jesus---Jesus is only the ADOPTED Son of God? 'Cause most Bibles I have consulted are "deficient" :D as far as the word 'adopted' is concerned there. Remember, the issue is whether or not God has the ABILITY to father children of His own kind or nature or substance or species or whatever word is P.C. these days.Quote:
---If you can do something good that He CAN'T, then "He is deficient" is the ONLY presumption available. [/QUOTE]
---So you are on record as stating that you believe that God creates beings who are able to do good things that God Himself is unable to do? How does that NOT "degrade" God? How does it NOT validate Joseph Smith's famous "boast"?Quote:
No, not at all.
----My wife and I had NOTHING to do with bringing our kids into this world? I don't think my wife would agree with that. :)Quote:
And we really had nothing to do with the pro-creative process
---Yes, ultimately, indirectly, everything we do could be equivocated into being God's doing, but that forces you to include all the BAD things we and Satan do. Try to be a little more Arminian--it's good for you! :)Quote:
so in a real sense that was from God. He is the Creator of our spirits and He was the Creator of all biological processes
I've read that before. It makes a good cross reference to Exodus 8:8-10 which says:Quote:
8 ¶ Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron, and said, Intreat the Lord, that he may take away the frogs from me, and from my people; and I will let the people go, that they may do sacrifice unto the Lord.
9 And Moses said unto Pharaoh, Glory over me: when shall I intreat for thee, and for thy servants, and for thy people, to destroy the frogs from thee and thy houses, that they may remain in the river only?
10 And he said, To morrow. And he said, Be it according to thy word: that thou mayest know that there is none like unto the Lord our God.
Plus these cross references.
In each of these cases, the context is either
1) That idols and gods of the heathen are not to be compared with the living God of Israel.
OR
2) That there is only One God and One Savior with which mankind has anything to do.
Both of these, I agree with.
So your representation of LDS beliefs was not correct, and you don't want to be corrected? OK, Got it.Quote:
I am saying that being corrected by someone who looks to a man like Joseph Smith as being a prophet of God has nothing to teach anyone.. My doctrine is correct being Biblical. Just by saying that it isn't shows that you are so far from God's truth that you have much more to learn than you have to teach.. IHS jim
Ahh, now you had to bring "creation ex-nihilo" into the mix.Quote:
What I said here applies equally to the idea of begetting. The Mormon God can neither create nor beget after his own kind. The fundamental species of being is already there. The co-eternal beings are already there. The Mormon God doesn't beget their very being. He merely gives them a spirit body. His "begetting" is not of a being after his own kind, but of a body after his own kind.
So criticism against Christianity for not having a God that can create or beget after his own kind is self-defeating.
In Mormonism, ALL persons are self-existent and co-eternal. Technically, NONE are created or begotten. Their key stages of development are really marked by the addition of bodies, not by the begetting or creation of their species or being.
For LDS, neither creating nor begetting means "conjuring up from nothing".
LDS believe life begets in kind. It is God who places the intelligence into a spirit body, or who places the spirit into a physical body.
Since there are just about as many views of what mormonism is as there are mormons I an not surprised that you think I am wrong.. I guess when I was among you I had a different view of what the doctrine was.. Now if I have to beg you to share your view I am not interested.. I will just see you as one more mormon that believes they can pick and choose the commandments they want to keep.. As I read the Great Commission I see that I am called to tell the whole world about my faith..Quote:
Matthew 28:19-20
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
That is my interpretation of the p***age I don't know or understand how you could get anything else out of it.. IHS jim
Well, I suppose that sometimes maintaining one's ignorance is the best comfort he can find.Quote:
Since there are just about as many views of what mormonism is as there are mormons I an not surprised that you think I am wrong.. I guess when I was among you I had a different view of what the doctrine was.. Now if I have to beg you to share your view I am not interested...
So that's what you are doing... I challenged my belief in mormonism and that challenge lead me to truth.. You have not even looked into the the if the teachings of Joseph Smith were true or where his later teachings came from.. You haven't worked out how God being Spirit can be true when Smith said that God isn't a spirit but a person of flesh and bone (D&C 130:22).. Or why a Book translated by the power of God had to undergo over 3,000 changes to get it right.. Or how David and Solomon could be an abomination in Jacob 2 of the BofM and justified in the 132 section of the D&C.. Why is the Bible so completely adamant that salvation is by God's grace through faith (John 3:15-16, Eph 2:8-9) and yet Joseph Smith have built in works that are the requirements (water baptism, laying on of hands, priesthoods, and temple endowment) for everlasting life?Quote:
Yes It looks as though I just gave up real truth and ran into error doesn't? NOT.. I actually look deep into the error and begged Jesus to forgive me and make me His child (John 1:12).. IHS jim