Do you agree with Moroni 8:18?

[Cow Poke]

For those who might not know, the Mormons USED TO believe in an eternal unchangeable God.

Moroni 8:18 For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is (a)unchangeable from (b)all eternity to all eternity.

I'm interested in the explanation that "changes" this unchangeable God.

(I added the parenthesis for readability)

[ke7ejx]

I certainly do! Not to mention 99% of the Latter-day Saints I know.

[Sparko]

How can he be unchangeable from ETERNITY, if he used to be an intelligence, who became a spirit being who became a mortal man who became a God? sounds like lots of change to me.

[OtherCheek]

How can he be unchangeable from ETERNITY, if he used to be an intelligence, who became a spirit being who became a mortal man who became a God? sounds like lots of change to me.

As I understand it, the orthodox God also changes in that decides to create more today than he decided to create yesterday.

Perhaps what is unchangeable is the fact that God has always been and will always be righteous. And we can trust that He will never deviate from that course.

Perhaps, also, you might read the surrounding verses of Moroni 8:18 to pick up on a context too. (just a thought)

[onefour1]

For those who might not know, the Mormons USED TO believe in an eternal unchangeable God.

Moroni 8:18 For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is (a)unchangeable from (b)all eternity to all eternity.

I'm interested in the explanation that "changes" this unchangeable God.

(I added the parenthesis for readability)

I believe that God at one time was not God, but was an intelligence, then a spirit being born of another God,and then he iived a mortal life, was resurrected and received a fullness of glory and became a God.

From the time that he became a God he was unchangable in that from the time he became a God he never sins, is always righteous, honest, faithful in all that he says he will do, always just in what he does, knows all things, is everywhere present, and has all power that any being can attain. He received all this as a God. He received this after his resurrection in the eternities.

As a God sitting on his throne in eternity, he has created this earth through his son Jesus Christ. When Adam fell, this earth was no longer in an eternal state, but changed into a temporal state. In the end, this earth will again be in an eternal state. So when I hear the phrase, "from all eternity to all eternity", that means from before the time Adam fell to the time when this earth again will be in an eternal state. Thus God, as a God, is unchangable from the state of eternity before the fall of Adam to the state of eternity after the temporal existence of this earth.

When God was an intelligence, he was not a God. he may have been a God like Jesus from his days as a spirit, we do not know. But some time in eternity past he went through what many of us go through. Upon being resurrected, he received a fullness of glory and became a God.This all occurred in eternity past. He became a God then, He is a God now, and will be a God in the eternity to follow. Thus he is God unchangable from all eternity to all eternity.

You cannot count the time when he was not a God. It doesn't fall within the limits of the scripture because it is only speaking of himself during the time he is a God. He became and was a God in the eternity before this earth and will still be a God after this earth when we return to eternity.

[Sparko]

As I understand it, the orthodox God also changes in that decides to create more today than he decided to create yesterday.

Unchangeable doesn't mean unable to act

It means his nature and attributes have not changed. Yet the LDS God's nature and attributes have changed and so how can it be claimed that he is unchangeable from ETERNITY to ETERNITY?

Perhaps what is unchangeable is the fact that God has always been and will always be righteous. And we can trust that He will never deviate from that course.

That is ONE attribute that is unchanging. But can you really claim that for your God? Did he sin as a man? If so he was not always righteous, was he? And what about all the other attributes and the nature of God?

Perhaps, also, you might read the surrounding verses of Moroni 8:18 to pick up on a context too. (just a thought)

educate me.

[Sparko]

I believe that God at one time was not God, but was an intelligence, then a spirit being born of another God,and then he iived a mortal life, was resurrected and received a fullness of glory and became a God.

From the time that he became a God he was unchangable in that from the time he became a God he never sins, is always righteous, honest, faithful in all that he says he will do, always just in what he does, knows all things, is everywhere present, and has all power that any being can attain. He received all this as a God. He received this after his resurrection in the eternities.

As a God sitting on his throne in eternity, he has created this earth through his son Jesus Christ. When Adam fell, this earth was no longer in an eternal state, but changed into a temporal state. In the end, this earth will again be in an eternal state. So when I hear the phrase, "from all eternity to all eternity", that means from before the time Adam fell to the time when this earth again will be in an eternal state. Thus God, as a God, is unchangable from the state of eternity before the fall of Adam to the state of eternity after the temporal existence of this earth.

When God was an intelligence, he was not a God. he may have been a God like Jesus from his days as a spirit, we do not know. But some time in eternity past he went through what many of us go through. Upon being resurrected, he received a fullness of glory and became a God.This all occurred in eternity past. He became a God then, He is a God now, and will be a God in the eternity to follow. Thus he is God unchangable from all eternity to all eternity.

You cannot count the time when he was not a God. It doesn't fall within the limits of the scripture because it is only speaking of himself during the time he is a God. He became and was a God in the eternity before this earth and will still be a God after this earth when we return to eternity.

You are talking about "eternity" as a place. Yet the phrase "from all eternity to all eternity" clearly means "forever" in context. It is not speaking of a place but a duration. and as you just admitted above, there was a time when God was not God according to the teachings of the LDS church. So he could not be unchangeable forever.

PS an aside to Ke7: See? I told you the LDS God was different from the Christian God.

[Cow Poke]

As I understand it, the orthodox God also changes in that decides to create more today than he decided to create yesterday.

That's like saying I have changed my character because I ate TWO bowls of cereal this morning instead of one like I did last week. Besides, this isn't about the "orthodox God", except to the extent that Moroni 8:18 APPEARS to be talking more about HIM than the God you worship.

Perhaps what is unchangeable is the fact that God has always been and will always be righteous. And we can trust that He will never deviate from that course.

That's not what Moroni 8:18 is about, OC --- even reading it in context.

Perhaps, also, you might read the surrounding verses of Moroni 8:18 to pick up on a context too. (just a thought)

Gee, OC, you're finally learning about CONTEXT? And I DID read the context, OC --- and my question still stands.
Do you agree with Moroni 8:18?

[Cow Poke]

I believe that God at one time was not God, but was an intelligence, then a spirit being born of another God,and then he iived a mortal life, was resurrected and received a fullness of glory and became a God.

From the time that he became a God he was unchangable in that from the time he became a God he never sins, is always righteous, honest, faithful in all that he says he will do, always just in what he does, knows all things, is everywhere present, and has all power that any being can attain. He received all this as a God. He received this after his resurrection in the eternities.

As a God sitting on his throne in eternity, he has created this earth through his son Jesus Christ. When Adam fell, this earth was no longer in an eternal state, but changed into a temporal state. In the end, this earth will again be in an eternal state. So when I hear the phrase, "from all eternity to all eternity", that means from before the time Adam fell to the time when this earth again will be in an eternal state. Thus God, as a God, is unchangable from the state of eternity before the fall of Adam to the state of eternity after the temporal existence of this earth.

When God was an intelligence, he was not a God. he may have been a God like Jesus from his days as a spirit, we do not know. But some time in eternity past he went through what many of us go through. Upon being resurrected, he received a fullness of glory and became a God.This all occurred in eternity past. He became a God then, He is a God now, and will be a God in the eternity to follow. Thus he is God unchangable from all eternity to all eternity.

You cannot count the time when he was not a God. It doesn't fall within the limits of the scripture because it is only speaking of himself during the time he is a God. He became and was a God in the eternity before this earth and will still be a God after this earth when we return to eternity.

"from all eternity to all eternity" is pretty inclusive --- as in ETERNALLY --- no beginning and no end. Do you have a different definition of "eternity"?
Do you agree with Moroni 8:18?

[OtherCheek]

And I DID read the context, OC --- and my question still stands.

Can you tell me the context then, so that we all know that you understand the context?

Do you agree with Moroni 8:18?

Yes.

[Cow Poke]

Can you tell me the context then, so that we all know that you understand the context?

Sure. It's a very KJV-ish passage sounding very much like Paul writing to his "son", Timothy, with about a dozen "behold"s thrown in for good measure.

Vs 1 of Chap 8 tells us that Mormon is instructing his son, Moroni
vs 2&3 is a "Paul & Timothy" type encouragement
vs 4-7 - a Pauline-like passage where Mormon is advising Moroni to correct some errors in teaching
vs 8-17 children are born innocent, and need no repentance or baptism, and will not go to hell if they die before being saved
vs 18 God hasn't changed from all eternity to all eternity
vs 19-26 continues the theme setting aside "infant baptism", calling it (again) a mockery to God

Now, are you going to tell me that vs. 18 ONLY applies to God not "changing His mind" about "infant baptism"?

Yes.

I'm sure your "yes" will be dependent upon your explanation of vs. 18. And you'll be able to support that with examples of teaching from the time that was written, yes?

Just out of curiosity, OC, why is "context" all of a sudden important when you seem to feel totally comfortable ripping verses out of the Bible completely out of context to support your positions?

[JAYMZ]

Just out of curiosity, OC, why is "context" all of a sudden important when you seem to feel totally comfortable ripping verses out of the Bible completely out of context to support your positions?

.....because it allows him to put off dealing with the issue directly.

Scripture Verse:

Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

[Cow Poke]

Prior to 1835, Mormon "doctrine" appeared much closer to contemporary protestant denominations.
It was only AFTER 1835 that the "man becomes God" theology begins to develop.

It would seem that, claiming to be the RESTORATION of the Church, that Smith would have gotten it "right" from the getgo, rather than look like everybody else until later.

Early Mormons believed, apparently, that there was ONE God, and He was from everlasting to everlasting -- no spin, no kabuki dancing -- God was eternal.

a paper given on May 3 at the 1980 Mormon History Association meetings in Canandaigua, New York.

Church publications from this period are important sources of doctrine and doctrinal commentary, given the lack of diaries. After the publication of the Book of Mormon in 1830, the Church supported The Evening and the Morning Star in Independence (June 1832 - July 1833) and Kirtland (December 1833 - September 1834). In October 1834, the Latter Day Saints Messenger and Advocate (Kirtland, October 1834 - September 1837) replaced the Star.

Both monthlies published expositions on doctrine, letters from Church members, revelations, minutes of conferences, and other items of interest. William W. Phelps published a collection of Joseph Smith’s revelations in the 1833 Book of Commandments, but destruction of the press and most copies left the Star and Messenger virtually the only sources of these revelations until 1835. In that year, the Doctrine and Covenants, which included the Lectures on Faith and presented both revelation and doctrinal exposition, was published.

The doctrines of God and man revealed in these sources were not greatly different from those of some of the religious denominations of the time. Marvin Hill has argued that the Mormon doctrine of man in New York contained elements of both Calvinism and Arminianism, though tending toward the latter. The following evidence shows that it was much closer to the moderate Arminian position, particularly in rejecting the Calvinist emphasis on absolute and unconditional predestination, limited atonement, total depravity, and absolute perseverence of the elect. It will further demonstrate that the doctrine of God preached and believed before 1835 was essentially trinitarian, with God the Father seen as an absolute personage of Spirit, Jesus Christ as a personage of tabernacle, and the Holy Ghost as an impersonal spiritual member of the Godhead.

© source where applicable

(bolding mine)

same as above

The Book of Mormon tended to define God as an absolute personage of spirit who, clothed in flesh, revealed himself in Jesus Christ (Abinidi’s sermon to King Noah in Mosiah chapters 13-14 is a good example). The first issue of the Evening and Morning Star published a similar description of God, the "Articles and Covenants of the Church of Christ," which was the Church’s first statement of faith and practice. With some additions, the "Articles" became section 20 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

The "Articles," which according to correspondence in the Star was used with the Book of Mormon in proselytizing, indicated that "there is a God in heaven who is infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting, the same unchangeable God, the framer of heaven and earth and all things which are in them." The Messenger and Advocate published numbers 5 and 6 of the Lectures on Faith, which defined the "Father" as "the only supreme governor, and independent being, in whom all fulness and perfection dwells; who is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient; without beginning of days or end of life."

In a letter published in the Messenger and Advocate, Warren A. Cowdery argued that "we have proven to the satisfaction of every intelligent being, that there is a great first cause, prime mover, self-existent, independent and all wise being whom we call God... immutable in his purposes and unchangable in his nature."6

© source where applicable

[OtherCheek]

Prior to 1835, Mormon "doctrine" appeared much closer to contemporary protestant denominations.
It was only AFTER 1835 that the "man becomes God" theology begins to develop.

It would seem that, claiming to be the RESTORATION of the Church, that Smith would have gotten it "right" from the getgo, rather than look like everybody else until later.

Hogwash.

That's like me saying:

"Prior to the Apostle Paul, Christian doctrine appeared much closer to LDS doctrines. It was only after the Apostle Paul came on the scene that a basis for the doctrine of "sola gratia" took hold.

It would seem that, claiming to be true Christianity, that the early church would have gotten it "right" from the getgo, rather than Paul inventing some new doctrine that Jesus himself never taught."

Psst. CP actually thinks that all of these sources he quotes are officially run by the Church.

[Cow Poke]

Hogwash.

That's like me saying:

"Prior to the Apostle Paul, Christian doctrine appeared much closer to LDS doctrines. It was only after the Apostle Paul came on the scene that a basis for the doctrine of "sola gratia" took hold.

It would seem that, claiming to be true Christianity, that the early church would have gotten it "right" from the getgo, rather than Paul inventing some new doctrine that Jesus himself never taught."

Psst. CP actually thinks that all of these sources he quotes are officially run by the Church.

So "hogwash" and a little kabuki dance is all you got? And I notice you don't DISPUTE the source, just make a snide comment about what I do or do not believe. And WHY is OC left to resort to this nonsense?

.....because it allows him to put off dealing with the issue directly.