Philosophical Problems with the Mormon Concept of God

Christian Research Institute ^ | Francis J. Beckwith

[Elsie]

Later saints were able to bear more things, and so they were released from that "level" of law to go to a higher.

But, unfortunately, we could NOT continue in the 'everlasting' covenent of plural marriage, because the Gov't opposed us.

[Elsie]

...the "plain and precious truths" such as we learn in our temples ...

Oh.... I see.......

[Elsie]

Even Einstein admitted that much of what the mathematics told him were contrary to what he "felt" to be true

Dang!

Even ol' Albert had that "feelin'"!

---

Was he one of the first JEWISH Mormons? (Ooops; I meant LDS)

[Elsie]

CAMPOUT!!??

Cool!!

[Elsie]

The point is that the concept of creation ex nihilo is not a Christian doctrine. The 2nd century Christians got suckered by the Gnostics, and in an attempt to prove that their version of God was better than the Gnostics, came up with the idea that God can create something out of nothing (top that, you Gnostics!), and you've bought into the tradition.

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then......

[P-Marlowe]

I suggest that we all wait until we're granted a personal interview with the Creator, and then our questions will be answered.

You mean the Organizer.

Admit it, you don't even believe in a "creator." You believe in a being who, with a little help from his heavenly ancestors, was given an opportunity to "organize" the existing ethereral material to piece together the earth and... not much more.

Let me say, that if you go before the "Creator" for an exit interview and you go in with an assumption that He is nothing more than a cosmic "organizer" you are not going to enjoy your little discussion.

[Frumanchu]

Because ex nihilo is a false concept.

You have yet to prove that, sir. You remind me of a math trick my algebra teacher taught us in high school. He showed us how one equals zero by running through a series of equations. Indeed, when he got to the end, the board read "2 = 1" Only problem was, at one point he had to divide by 0 to do it. Same logic and tricks apply to our little conversation...

Illbay - "Two equals one."

Frumanchu - "Your proof is wrong. You can't divide by zero. And why exactly can't two equal two?"

Illbay - "Because two equals one"

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

CAMPOUT!!??

Cool!!

No, not cool

Bloody COLD!!!

Oh to be young enough to enjoy such foolishness again!

[P-Marlowe]

BTW you never answered this question:

Are you willling to admit that the God that I believe in, a God that Created the Heavens and the Earth and the Universe by the breath of his mouth and all creatures and prniciplites and thones and dominions in all time from eternity to eternity, the First God and the last God and that there are no other Gods in existence anywhere in the universe or beyond the universe, is NOT the God that you believe in?

Its a yes or not question, so it shouldn't be too hard to answer.

[Illbay]

...the LDS is claiming of late to be another Christian denomination.

That is wrong. We don't "claim" to be "another Christian denomination."

We are THE Church of Christ. There is no other. Period.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

That is wrong. We don't "claim" to be "another Christian denomination."

We are THE Church of Christ. There is no other. Period.

Six of one, half dozen of the other, we don't worship the same Jesus either!, so why don't you just tell that to the world, put your beliefs out there and, stop trying to tell the world that you're just "one of us"?

Let's see how the LDS stand up under that microscope.

[The_Reader_David]

The passage of the Psalmist when read in light of the already accepted doctrine of creation ex nihilo supports the doctrine, but it cannot be said to be a scriptural basis for the doctrine: making by word could simply be evidence of sovereignty over pre-existing matter--it obeys His word.

In fact the only explicit Scriptural support for "from nothing" comes from Maccabees. (The passage you cite could more easily be read as support for the participation of the Son = Word, and Spirit = breath in the creation, than as a basis for creation ex nihilo.)

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

In fact the only explicit Scriptural support for "from nothing" comes from Maccabees. (The passage you cite could more easily be read as support for the participation of the Son = Word, and Spirit = breath in the creation, than as a basis for creation ex nihilo.)

If i am not mistaken, II Maccabees was dated from the Second Century B.C. Wouldn't this tend to give doubt to the idea that idea of creation ex nihilo is a gnostic invention from the Second Century A.D.?

Btw, i have serious doubts that the NT does not support ex nihilo creation.

[P-Marlowe]

The passage of the Psalmist when read in light of the already accepted doctrine of creation ex nihilo supports the doctrine, but it cannot be said to be a scriptural basis for the doctrine: making by word could simply be evidence of sovereignty over pre-existing matter--it obeys His word.

You seem to have missed the point. I was not arguing for an ex-nihilo creation. Clearly the universe was not created out of nothing, but out of substance. But what is that substance and where did it come from?

I was showing that the universe is composed of the substance of the breath of God's mouth. It was not out of nothing that the universe was created, it was out of the substance of God's Word.

This is confirmed in one of the most profound verses in the New Testament:

Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

The entire substance of the universe would fit into a teaspoon if you removed the space between the unseen particles that make up all of the matter of the universe. That substance was created by the breath of God's mouth, by his Word and that which we see is composed of that which cannot be seen.

[The_Reader_David]

In that case, what you are arguing for is contary to the Holy Orthodox Faith. The breath of God, which is His Spirit is Uncreated, and there is no likeness whatever between the created and the Uncreated. God called the created substance, "all things visible and invisible" as the Creed says, of the world into being out of nothingness,
as the Holy Scriptures (in Maccabees) tell us.

[P-Marlowe]

You missed my point again. Please read what I wrote carefully and see if it is in contradiction to your understanding of Ex-nihlo. I believe that it is not in contadiction. Here it is:

That substance [the substance of which the universe is composed] was created by the breath of God's mouth, by his Word and that which we see is composed of that which cannot be seen.

Now unless you are willing to argue that the Word of God itself consists of "nothingness", then we don't have a disagreement, do we?

Frankly there is nothing more substantial in the universe than the Word of God. It is by his Word that the entire universe was created and it is by His Word that it is presently being held together.

[Illbay]

I can't help it if you guys got off-track and don't recognize the Savior any longer.

You have a chance for a mid-course correction, though.

CTR.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

I can't help it if you guys got off-track and don't recognize the Savior any longer.

You must be thinking of the LDS, Orthodox Christianity didn't loose anything, certainly not any revelation!

[RnMomof7]

Eph 3:9 And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

[Frumanchu]

You follow a false prophet who claimed revelation from the Lord which he did not receive. By his failed prophecies he is proven a liar and a heretic.