Becoming Like God

[The Folk Prophet]

The church has a new article on Becoming Like God

This article should put to rest at least the core doctrine on the matter. Whereas there are extended theories that it does not put to rest, we can more confidently affirm these points as doctrinal now.

My favorite paragraph:

“What kind of a being is God?” [Joseph Smith] asked. Human beings needed to know, he argued, because “if men do not comprehend the character of God they do not comprehend themselves.” In that phrase, the Prophet collapsed the gulf that centuries of confusion had created between God and humanity. Human nature was at its core divine. God “was once as one of us” and “all the spirits that God ever sent into the world” were likewise “susceptible of enlargement.” Joseph Smith preached that long before the world was formed, God found “himself in the midst” of these beings and “saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself” and be “exalted” with Him."

[Guest]

That has always been doctrinal. What isn't doctrinal - and still isn't even with that article - is how God progressed. That God progressed is discussed in gospel principles!

People like to extrapolate that God once lived on an "Earth" and had his own Savior or his own Heavenly Father. That's what we get to argue is not doctrinal.

[Roseslipper]

That is my goal to become like Him............I do have to say itsa great goal but not easy at all....

[Latter Days Guy]

I see that the article has hit the news sites.

[bytebear]

I really don't get the controversy. Other than the mocking, the Bible is very clear that we will inherit ALL that God has, and we will SHARE HIS THRONE. How much more clear do you have to be?

[Just_A_Guy]

Anyone else catch the article's linking the Church's belief of man's relationship to God, to its teachings on the law of chastity?

I wonder whether the Church isn't constantly trying to more visibly explain the tie the LoC into the rest of its theology, the better to defend its "discriminatory" sealing practices when the time comes. Time will tell, I suppose.

[James1]

I really don't get the controversy. Other than the mocking, the Bible is very clear that we will inherit ALL that God has, and we will SHARE HIS THRONE. How much more clear do you have to be?

Hello, I think it's best to get at what the Bible says about this. No where in the Bible does it say we will have the divine nature for our own. Rather as for the Christian, everything is done in Christ not apart from Him. It is one thing to be God and another to participate in God. The Bible teaches that there is only one God and that there will never be another. God doesn't even know of any Other Gods. Through Christ we can partake in who God is and more fully when we get to heaven. We won't be gods but we will participate in who God is through Christ. Everything on Earth and in Heaven is in Christ and not apart or for our own. Colossians 1:15-16 says:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

All things were created by Him, for Him, and through Him.

[bytebear]

I would change "invisible" to unseen, since God clearly is not invisible.  And the Bible does teach that we will inherit all that He has, that we will share the throne of Christ.  And, yes, we cannot do it without Christ.  Christ opens the door.  But that door leads to infinite and eternal possibilties.

[The Folk Prophet]

That has always been doctrinal.

 

Regardless, there are many past instances, in my experience (some even in this forum) of LDS people claiming it not to be doctrinal.

[Lakumi]

Yeah there are things I have noticed LDS people can be a tad hesitant to discuss, mostly because people either take it out of context or just hear one line and their imagination goes all wild.

I mean how can you tell-especially online, if someone is genuinely interested, or someone is just there to try and stir things up (like that Quaker on the Moon question thread).

[Traveler]

Every religious person realizes the basic possibility that a G-d can exist.  This is more than theology or doctrine - it is part of the essence we call "the Gospel" or good news.  As we human in our current state of understanding deal with this possibility we can wonder - How can such a possibility be?

 

What seems obvious to me is that G-d does not create exalted heavenly beings.  The closest being that G-d creates to his own image and likeness is the integrated physical and spirit being that is mankind.  Hopefully this is not in dispute for those that believe in G-d, especially those of that trace their religious inheritance to Abraham.  But man was created as a integrated physical and spiritual being less than G-d and in some respects not worthy of heaven.  The optimum question is why was man created in G-d’s image and likeness but not created suitable for heaven?  As a side note I personally find the use of the terms image and likeness in scripture very interesting –  for me, the term image implies the physical relationship to G-d and the term likeness implies a spiritual relationship to G-d.

 

But why would G-d create us short of heavenly or in LDS terms “Celestial” beings?  From experience we humans come to understand that “good” things must be learned.  For whatever reason (known, or not known – believed or not believed), G-d did not create man perfect but created man capable of learning perfection (See Matt 5:48).  Mankind was created to know G-d by means of learning.  We human must be taught. 

 

The means that we humans are taught of G-d is through Jesus Christ.  Without Jesus we have no example of G-d from which we can be taught and learn.  There is no learning of G-d without Jesus Christ the Son of G-d.  Now consider the scripture Hebrews 5:8

 

Quote

 

Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered

 

The example we have of G-d through G-d the Son is that even G-d obtained divine understanding by learning.  And what is the most important thing for man to learn concerning G-d.  Let us turn again to scripture  the Gospel of John 17:19-22

 

Quote

 

19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

The process of becoming like G-d is divinely arranged by a learning process – a process of learning that we have been given through the example of Jesus Christ.  To deny that Jesus learned is to deny Christ and to deny that we can learn and by so learning become one G-d with G-d the Father and G-d the Son.

 

 

[The Folk Prophet]

Every religious person realizes the basic possibility that a G-d can exist.  This is more than theology or doctrine - it is part of the essence we call "the Gospel" or good news.  As we human in our current state of understanding deal with this possibility we can wonder - How can such a possibility be?

 

What seems obvious to me is that G-d does not create exalted heavenly beings.  The closest being that G-d creates to his own image and likeness is the integrated physical and spirit being that is mankind.  Hopefully this is not in dispute for those that believe in G-d, especially those of that trace their religious inheritance to Abraham.  But man was created as a integrated physical and spiritual being less than G-d and in some respects not worthy of heaven.  The optimum question is why was man created in G-d’s image and likeness but not created suitable for heaven?  As a side note I personally find the use of the terms image and likeness in scripture very interesting –  for me, the term image implies the physical relationship to G-d and the term likeness implies a spiritual relationship to G-d.

 

But why would G-d create us short of heavenly or in LDS terms “Celestial” beings?  From experience we humans come to understand that “good” things must be learned.  For whatever reason (known, or not known – believed or not believed), G-d did not create man perfect but created man capable of learning perfection (See Matt 5:48).  Mankind was created to know G-d by means of learning.  We human must be taught. 

 

The means that we humans are taught of G-d is through Jesus Christ.  Without Jesus we have no example of G-d from which we can be taught and learn.  There is no learning of G-d without Jesus Christ the Son of G-d.  Now consider the scripture Hebrews 5:8

 

Quote

 

Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered

 

The example we have of G-d through G-d the Son is that even G-d obtained divine understanding by learning.  And what is the most important thing for man to learn concerning G-d.  Let us turn again to scripture  the Gospel of John 17:19-22

 

Quote

 

19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

The process of becoming like G-d is divinely arranged by a learning process – a process of learning that we have been given through the example of Jesus Christ.  To deny that Jesus learned is to deny Christ and to deny that we can learn and by so learning become one G-d with G-d the Father and G-d the Son.

 

The reason we were not physically created in a Celestial state, imo, is because of death. Death is an integral part of the plan of God.

 

An whereas I agree with your above thinking, it is missing one important component of the life experience. To be tested. In order for us to be tested, we had to be separated, both physically and spiritually, from God. This required Death.

[Traveler]

The reason we were not physically created in a Celestial state, imo, is because of death. Death is an integral part of the plan of God.

 

An whereas I agree with your above thinking, it is missing one important component of the life experience. To be tested. In order for us to be tested, we had to be separated, both physically and spiritually, from God. This required Death.

 

I do not think we disagree.  Death is part of what must be learned to become "one" G-d.  In the Garden Adam and Eve (representing humans) chose to partake of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Death is part of learning of sin and evil - Thus you are correct that the experience in death is part of the knowledge of good and evil that man must learn to in order to be a Celestial or heavenly being that is "one" G-d in eternity.

 

The point I intended to make is that G-d intendes man to learn to be like him - as did our example of G-d in Jesus Christ learned and thus was "one" G-d with the Father.  Thus the way to heaven as established through G-d by example is a path and a way of learning. 

[Seminarysnoozer]

I do not think we disagree.  Death is part of what must be learned to become "one" G-d.  In the Garden Adam and Eve (representing humans) chose to partake of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Death is part of learning of sin and evil - Thus you are correct that the experience in death is part of the knowledge of good and evil that man must learn to in order to be a Celestial or heavenly being that is "one" G-d in eternity.

 

The point I intended to make is that G-d intendes man to learn to be like him - as did our example of G-d in Jesus Christ learned and thus was "one" G-d with the Father.  Thus the way to heaven as established through G-d by example is a path and a way of learning. 

I think it should be clarified for all reading this that we believe the "learning" that you are speaking of is by way of learning through the spirit.  D&C 50  "17 Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to ^apreach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he ^bpreach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

 18 And if it be by some other way it is not of God."

 

Those things that need to be "learned" come through the Holy Ghost and the way to receive those teachings is first by faith, then repentance, and then baptism and following that the gift of the comforter to understand the spirit of truth.

 

Else you say that everything that is true comes from God; "Elder Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught that principle in these words: “If you teach the word of truth—now note, you’re saying what is true, every thing you say is accurate and right—by some other way than the Spirit, it is not of God. Now what is the other way to teach than by the Spirit? Well, obviously, it is by the power of the intellect.

“Suppose I came here tonight and delivered a great message on teaching, and I did it by the power of the intellect without any of the Spirit of God attending. Suppose that every word that I said was true, no error whatever, but it was an intellectual presentation. This revelation says: ‘If it be by some other way it is not of God’ (D&C 50:18)."

 

As Bruce R. McConkie separates out learning via intellect vs. the spirit, so should we.

[Guest]

Hello, I think it\\\\\\\'s best to get at what the Bible says about this. No where in the Bible does it say we will have the divine nature for our own. Rather as for the Christian, everything is done in Christ not apart from Him. It is one thing to be God and another to participate in God. The Bible teaches that there is only one God and that there will never be another. God doesn\\\\\\\'t even know of any Other Gods. Through Christ we can partake in who God is and more fully when we get to heaven. We won\\\\\\\'t be gods but we will participate in who God is through Christ. Everything on Earth and in Heaven is in Christ and not apart or for our own. Colossians 1:15-16 says:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

All things were created by Him, for Him, and through Him.

This new forum does not tell me anymore what religious affiliation posters are with so I can\\\\\\\'t tell if you\\\\\\\'re LDS or not. But judging from this post, I guess you\'re Trinitarian.

Man cannot gain his Salvation unless it is through Christ, let alone inherit anything.

[Traveler]

I think it should be clarified for all reading this that we believe the "learning" that you are speaking of is by way of learning through the spirit.  D&C 50  "17 Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to ^apreach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he ^bpreach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

 18 And if it be by some other way it is not of God."

 

 

Is their a truth that does not have G-d (through the Holy Ghost) as it origin? -- my point -- If a truth exist then it is from G-d.  All you are telling us through this scripture is that if something is true it came to man through the Comforter.

 

Those things that need to be "learned" come through the Holy Ghost and the way to receive those teachings is first by faith, then repentance, and then baptism and following that the gift of the comforter to understand the spirit of truth.

 

 

It is my understanding that we must study everything we can first and ponder it in our mind and heart (heart not refering to the organ that pumps blood - but rather to the center or core of our understanding) - and what can we study that is not empirical?  If we think of something that is not empirical - that is meditation - not study.  Do you believe G-d chose his words poorly or with intent of confusion and misunderstanding?

 

Once we study then can have faith ask of G-d.  What I do not understand is why you think that the things that are spiritual have no emperical witness?

 

 

Else you say that everything that is true comes from God; "Elder Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught that principle in these words: “If you teach the word of truth—now note, you’re saying what is true, every thing you say is accurate and right—by some other way than the Spirit, it is not of God. Now what is the other way to teach than by the Spirit? Well, obviously, it is by the power of the intellect.

“Suppose I came here tonight and delivered a great message on teaching, and I did it by the power of the intellect without any of the Spirit of God attending. Suppose that every word that I said was true, no error whatever, but it was an intellectual presentation. This revelation says: ‘If it be by some other way it is not of God’ (D&C 50:18)."

 

As Bruce R. McConkie separates out learning via intellect vs. the spirit, so should we.

Are you saying the spirit is not related in any way to intellect?  I believe he is talking about selective intellect.

 

What I have been trying to put forth in another thread is that the things of the spirit - if it is true and of a true spirit - it will have witness.  Can there be a witness that is not empirical?   Empirical meaning verifiable or more than one witness?  There also exist a spirit of lies.  How do you distinguish a spirit of lies from a spirit of truth?  Especially if you eliminate any independent empirical witness.  I submit that G-d will always give multiple witness (empirical witness) of truth that he gives to man.  If you believe there is an exception - I am open to such an example.

[The Folk Prophet]

Are you saying the spirit is not related in any way to intellect?  I believe he is talking about selective intellect.

 

What I have been trying to put forth in another thread is that the things of the spirit - if it is true and of a true spirit - it will have witness.  Can there be a witness that is not empirical?   Empirical meaning verifiable or more than one witness?  There also exist a spirit of lies.  How do you distinguish a spirit of lies from a spirit of truth?  Especially if you eliminate any independent empirical witness.  I submit that G-d will always give multiple witness (empirical witness) of truth that he gives to man.  If you believe there is an exception - I am open to such an example.

 

This thinking is right in line with Marcos A. Aidukaitis's Conference talk.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Are you saying the spirit is not related in any way to intellect?  I believe he is talking about selective intellect.

 

What I have been trying to put forth in another thread is that the things of the spirit - if it is true and of a true spirit - it will have witness.  Can there be a witness that is not empirical?   Empirical meaning verifiable or more than one witness?  There also exist a spirit of lies.  How do you distinguish a spirit of lies from a spirit of truth?  Especially if you eliminate any independent empirical witness.  I submit that G-d will always give multiple witness (empirical witness) of truth that he gives to man.  If you believe there is an exception - I am open to such an example.

D&C 6; "

 22 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if you desire a further witness, cast your mind upon the night that you cried unto me in your heart, that you might ^aknow concerning the truth of these things.

 23 Did I not speak ^apeace to your mind concerning the matter? What greater ^bwitness can you have than from God?

 24 And now, behold, you have received a ^awitness; for if I have ^btold you things which no man knoweth have you not received a witness?"

 

At the moment God gave revelation to Joseph Smith, there was no other witness given to man and that was actually the sign that it came from God. 

 

And, no, I am not saying the spirit is not related to intellect.  We are dual beings, there is the intellect of the brain, the natural man - otherwise where do carnal passions come from, and there is the quiet and hard to measure influence of the spirit.

[Traveler]

D&C 6; "

 22 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if you desire a further witness, cast your mind upon the night that you cried unto me in your heart, that you might ^aknow concerning the truth of these things.

 23 Did I not speak ^apeace to your mind concerning the matter? What greater ^bwitness can you have than from God?

 24 And now, behold, you have received a ^awitness; for if I have ^btold you things which no man knoweth have you not received a witness?"

 

At the moment God gave revelation to Joseph Smith, there was no other witness given to man and that was actually the sign that it came from God. 

 

And, no, I am not saying the spirit is not related to intellect.  We are dual beings, there is the intellect of the brain, the natural man - otherwise where do carnal passions come from, and there is the quiet and hard to measure influence of the spirit.

You do realize that in D&C 6, that the L-rd gave Oliver an empirical (independently verifiable) witness concerning his thoughts, as you say, direct to Oliver’s brain or the intellect of the natural man.  Thus the witness of the truth is not of a single element of Oliver’s dual nature but of necessity required the integration of the whole sole before Oliver came to an understanding of the truth concerning his gift.

 

Also if you go back and reread D&C 6 you will realize that Oliver had already received other witnesses – that this was not in your words “no other witness given”.  Look at verse 14  -- then in verse 15 the L-rd begins to prepare Oliver for even another witness – that I have addressed above.

 

If, as you have implied in other posts, that we perfected our spirits before our mortal experience; then what need we of any more spiritual witness.  Of necessity to know truth we must integrate our physical nature by empirical witness of truth in order to progress in order to obtain anything in this mortal experience.

[Seminarysnoozer]

You do realize that in D&C 6, that the L-rd gave Oliver an empirical (independently verifiable) witness concerning his thoughts, as you say, direct to Oliver’s brain or the intellect of the natural man.  Thus the witness of the truth is not of a single element of Oliver’s dual nature but of necessity required the integration of the whole sole before Oliver came to an understanding of the truth concerning his gift.

 

Also if you go back and reread D&C 6 you will realize that Oliver had already received other witnesses – that this was not in your words “no other witness given”.  Look at verse 14  -- then in verse 15 the L-rd begins to prepare Oliver for even another witness – that I have addressed above.

 

If, as you have implied in other posts, that we perfected our spirits before our mortal experience; then what need we of any more spiritual witness.  Of necessity to know truth we must integrate our physical nature by empirical witness of truth in order to progress in order to obtain anything in this mortal experience.

Your last line, in my opinion, is very misleading.  "Integrating our physical nature" is not "through empirical witness of the truth", it is done through faith, repentance and doing the word of the Lord which then allows for spiritual enlightenment.  If that is what you mean by "integrate our physical nature", then say it as such; faith, repentence, obedience.  Verse 13 of D&C 6 explains how he got the spiritual enlightenment; " 13 If thou wilt do ^agood, yea, and ^bhold out ^cfaithful to the ^dend, thou shalt be saved in the ^ekingdom of God", by doing good! and holding out faithful! ... not through any intellectual discovery.

 

You are misinterpreting what it says in D&C 6, it says " 15 Behold, thou knowest that thou hast inquired of me and I did enlighten thy ^amind; and now I tell thee these things that thou mayest know that thou hast been ^benlightened by the ^cSpirit of truth;"  If you look at "enlighten" in the topical guide in the scriptures, the first reference is to spiritual discernment.  Verse 15 is refering to verse 14.  Note the word "did" in verse 15.  This is past tense.  As to the things in verse 14, he allowed him to progress throgh spiritual enlightenment, "thou hast received instruction of my Spirit" as it says in verse 14. 

 

Paul explains very clearly this process of receiving spiritual enlightenment.  It is through repentence, not through intellectual understanding.  1 Corinthians 2: "

 10 But God hath ^arevealed them unto us by his ^bSpirit: for the ^cSpirit ^dsearcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

 11 For what man ^aknoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God ^bknoweth no man, ^cbut the ^dSpirit of God." ..."

 14 But the ^anatural man ^breceiveth not the things of the ^cSpirit of God: for they are ^dfoolishness unto him: neither can he ^eknow them, because they are ^fspiritually ^gdiscerned.

 15 But he that is spiritual ^ajudgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man."

 

The spirit is currently under a veil so our understanding is limited.  The veil, mostly the natural man mind - the brain - "receiveth not the things of the spirit".   Do you disagree with Paul, the natural man "receiveth NOT the things of the spirit"?  ...because they are spiritually discerned.  The spirit judgeth all things.  The mind of man is limited and cannot understand all things.  When there is enlightenment as to spiritual things it is because there has been advancements in letting the spiritual mind take over the natural mind of our dual being status.   As the default, or natural state is that the brain is in charge.  We have to "do" certain things to allow the spirit to be in charge.  The things that have to be done are not better intellectual prowess but to be faithful, repentant and obey the commandments as verse 13 said.  Then we can be spiritually minded as opposed to carnally minded as Paul warns us.

[Traveler]

Your last line, in my opinion, is very misleading.  "Integrating our physical nature" is not "through empirical witness of the truth", it is done through faith, repentance and doing the word of the Lord which then allows for spiritual enlightenment.  If that is what you mean by "integrate our physical nature", then say it as such; faith, repentence, obedience.  Verse 13 of D&C 6 explains how he got the spiritual enlightenment; " 13 If thou wilt do ^agood, yea, and ^bhold out ^cfaithful to the ^dend, thou shalt be saved in the ^ekingdom of God", by doing good! and holding out faithful! ... not through any intellectual discovery.

 

You are misinterpreting what it says in D&C 6, it says " 15 Behold, thou knowest that thou hast inquired of me and I did enlighten thy ^amind; and now I tell thee these things that thou mayest know that thou hast been ^benlightened by the ^cSpirit of truth;"  If you look at "enlighten" in the topical guide in the scriptures, the first reference is to spiritual discernment.  Verse 15 is refering to verse 14.  Note the word "did" in verse 15.  This is past tense.  As to the things in verse 14, he allowed him to progress throgh spiritual enlightenment, "thou hast received instruction of my Spirit" as it says in verse 14. 

 

Paul explains very clearly this process of receiving spiritual enlightenment.  It is through repentence, not through intellectual understanding.  1 Corinthians 2: "

 10 But God hath ^arevealed them unto us by his ^bSpirit: for the ^cSpirit ^dsearcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

 11 For what man ^aknoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God ^bknoweth no man, ^cbut the ^dSpirit of God." ..."

 14 But the ^anatural man ^breceiveth not the things of the ^cSpirit of God: for they are ^dfoolishness unto him: neither can he ^eknow them, because they are ^fspiritually ^gdiscerned.

 15 But he that is spiritual ^ajudgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man."

 

The spirit is currently under a veil so our understanding is limited.  The veil, mostly the natural man mind - the brain - "receiveth not the things of the spirit".   Do you disagree with Paul, the natural man "receiveth NOT the things of the spirit"?  ...because they are spiritually discerned.  The spirit judgeth all things.  The mind of man is limited and cannot understand all things.  When there is enlightenment as to spiritual things it is because there has been advancements in letting the spiritual mind take over the natural mind of our dual being status.   As the default, or natural state is that the brain is in charge.  We have to "do" certain things to allow the spirit to be in charge.  The things that have to be done are not better intellectual prowess but to be faithful, repentant and obey the commandments as verse 13 said.  Then we can be spiritually minded as opposed to carnally minded as Paul warns us.

 

I do not think you are getting the point and the importance of integrating the physical with the spiritual.   Actually this is a very old debate concerning the letter of the law and the spirit of the law and which is more important.  I am thinking that you really miss the importance of the physical and the spiritual coming together and being successfully integrated, made whole and unified – especially concerning the ordinances of salvation.  Taking baptism for example; that two physical witnesses are necessary to empirically ensure that the ordinance was carried out physically as specifically prescribed.  If saving ordinances are not physically done correctly and empirically witnessed the entire ordinance is invalidated – Have you thought about why it is necessary for salvation to be so physically orientated and physical concerned about such important things of eternity?

[andypg]

I still tend to personally see "becoming like God" in an Eastern Orthodox/Roman Catholic perspective of absolute unity and communion with God. As I say, I don't know the specifics of what that means, but it sounds wonderful.

[The Folk Prophet]

I still tend to personally see "becoming like God" in an Eastern Orthodox/Roman Catholic perspective of absolute unity and communion with God. As I say, I don't know the specifics of what that means, but it sounds wonderful.

 

I do not think this is wrong. I just think it's incomplete. And yes, it does sound pretty wonderful. :)

[Seminarysnoozer]

I do not think you are getting the point and the importance of integrating the physical with the spiritual.   Actually this is a very old debate concerning the letter of the law and the spirit of the law and which is more important.  I am thinking that you really miss the importance of the physical and the spiritual coming together and being successfully integrated, made whole and unified – especially concerning the ordinances of salvation.  Taking baptism for example; that two physical witnesses are necessary to empirically ensure that the ordinance was carried out physically as specifically prescribed.  If saving ordinances are not physically done correctly and empirically witnessed the entire ordinance is invalidated – Have you thought about why it is necessary for salvation to be so physically orientated and physical concerned about such important things of eternity?

Yes, I have.  This is the part that relates to, "according to the flesh".  The physical nature is set up as a problem to master its passions and desires.  It is part of the test we face in the second estate.  It allows us to act and do as we are told, or not. When there is a pull in opposite directions there is choice. That is also where the problem lies, that is the aspect of our being that needs sanctification and purification so as to not be pulled in the wrong direction.  It is given to us this way so we depend on the Lord because we can't do it ourselves.  The ordinances performed represent the fact that we cannot do it but Christ can and will upon the resurrection. The opposite of that process is to think that one could purify their own body without Christ.  It is outside of our power alone. It is not possible by us alone. It is that way for a reason, to require dependence on a Savior.  With the sacrament we take on His body, and blood, not our own.  When the test is over, the body will not be in opposition to the spirit as we will then have a risen body and not a fallen one.

 

The spirit is willing but the problem is the flesh is weak in this life.  The body is no where close to being at the same level as the spirit and therefore cannot be integrated.  I pray every day that my spirit does not integrate with this body.  Why would I want my spirit to fall that low? That is the goal, to not integrate them.  Satan would love for our spirit to match the passions of the body.  And knowing the current body is not capable of Celestial glory like our spirit is, as dust will turn to dust, it is an unreasonable request to ask the body to be something it isn't.  A glorified body is needed to match the noble and high nature of our spirits. I think you sell the value of who we really are way too low by suggesting such a thing.  You and I are children of God. Yes, there are lessons learned from this body and if we are valiant in little things we will be given much greater things.  But don't set your heart on the little thing.

 

How far fallen are we in this current state?  To go from living with God for who knows how long and learning all we can from Him to being in a state of darkness and ignorance. Christ overcame all in this world for a reason.  It is so we can also one day put it behind us. I think this is what James meant by remaining unspotted from the world, James 1; " 27 Pure ^areligion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To ^bvisit the ^cfatherless and ^dwidows in their ^eaffliction, and to keep himself ^funspotted from ^gthe ^hworld."   Christ's example is as he says himself; "

 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the ^aworld, but that thou shouldest ^bkeep them from the ^cevil.

 16 They are not of the ^aworld, even as I am not of the world."

 

 

David O. Mckay explained that Christ directly remained unspotted from the world when he did not yield to the temptations of Satan and they were all targeted through his body.  He said the things that could "spot" us come the same way, through the passions of the body; "Classify them, and you will find that under one of those three nearly every given temptation that makes you and me spotted, ever so little may be, comes to us as (1) a temptation of the appetite; (2) a yielding to the pride and fashion and vanity of those alienated from the things of God; or (3) a gratifying of the passion, or a desire for the riches of the world, or power among men. …"

[Traveler]

Yes, I have.  This is the part that relates to, "according to the flesh".  The physical nature is set up as a problem to master its passions and desires.  It is part of the test we face in the second estate.  It allows us to act and do as we are told, or not. When there is a pull in opposite directions there is choice. That is also where the problem lies, that is the aspect of our being that needs sanctification and purification so as to not be pulled in the wrong direction.  It is given to us this way so we depend on the Lord because we can't do it ourselves.  The ordinances performed represent the fact that we cannot do it but Christ can and will upon the resurrection. The opposite of that process is to think that one could purify their own body without Christ.  It is outside of our power alone. It is not possible by us alone. It is that way for a reason, to require dependence on a Savior.  With the sacrament we take on His body, and blood, not our own.  When the test is over, the body will not be in opposition to the spirit as we will then have a risen body and not a fallen one.

 

The spirit is willing but the problem is the flesh is weak in this life.  The body is no where close to being at the same level as the spirit and therefore cannot be integrated.  I pray every day that my spirit does not integrate with this body.  Why would I want my spirit to fall that low? That is the goal, to not integrate them.  Satan would love for our spirit to match the passions of the body.  And knowing the current body is not capable of Celestial glory like our spirit is, as dust will turn to dust, it is an unreasonable request to ask the body to be something it isn't.  A glorified body is needed to match the noble and high nature of our spirits. I think you sell the value of who we really are way too low by suggesting such a thing.  You and I are children of God. Yes, there are lessons learned from this body and if we are valiant in little things we will be given much greater things.  But don't set your heart on the little thing.

 

How far fallen are we in this current state?  To go from living with God for who knows how long and learning all we can from Him to being in a state of darkness and ignorance. Christ overcame all in this world for a reason.  It is so we can also one day put it behind us. I think this is what James meant by remaining unspotted from the world, James 1; " 27 Pure ^areligion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To ^bvisit the ^cfatherless and ^dwidows in their ^eaffliction, and to keep himself ^funspotted from ^gthe ^hworld."   Christ's example is as he says himself; "

 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the ^aworld, but that thou shouldest ^bkeep them from the ^cevil.

 16 They are not of the ^aworld, even as I am not of the world."

 

 

David O. Mckay explained that Christ directly remained unspotted from the world when he did not yield to the temptations of Satan and they were all targeted through his body.  He said the things that could "spot" us come the same way, through the passions of the body; "Classify them, and you will find that under one of those three nearly every given temptation that makes you and me spotted, ever so little may be, comes to us as (1) a temptation of the appetite; (2) a yielding to the pride and fashion and vanity of those alienated from the things of God; or (3) a gratifying of the passion, or a desire for the riches of the world, or power among men. …"

 

I have had discussions like this before about the evils of "the Flesh" but not so much with devout LDS.  May I ask some questions about your belief to see if there is a possibility of something I have missed in my considerations?

 

Do you believe that carnal (meaning of the flesh) and sensual (meaning of the 5 senses – sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell) define the “natural man”?  And that in our current fallen state is the very definition of natural man mentioned in scripture.  In other words any pull or inclination resulting from the carnal and sensual nature of fallen man – is the enemy of G-d and all natural tendencies of the carnal and sensual will always inevitably lead anyone relying on or willingly participating in such things, to any degree, away from G-d?  Please consider carefully you thinking to answer.  Not because this is meant to be “trick” questions but to verify that you are considering all possibilities – both in personal experience and study.

 

Also can you, from your experience and background, discribe our alternate spiritual nature that has no part or experience relating to the carnal and sensual - without scientific tie to the carnal or sensual?