Posted on 03/16/2009 6:19:18 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
"God exists, and he's American" is the judgment of Dr. Milton Glass, fictional nuclear physicist from the acclaimed Alan Moore-Dave Gibbons comic Watchmen, when he learns that Jon Osterman, has come back from the dead. Osterman disputes Glass's judgment, but the new deity's protest rings as hollow as his promise of fealty to his first girlfriend.
In the story, Osterman dies in a freak lab accident that is the stuff of countless superhero origin stories. It utterly obliterates his body but leaves his mind intact and powerful. Osterman then re-creates himself from scratch. He is not just reborn but transfigured and renamed, as the world's oddest crime fighter: Dr. Manhattan. By the end of the tale, Manhattan even talks of Osterman as a different person.
Obviously, Dr. Manhattan looks different. He has the skin of a Smurf, the body of a Greek god. He crackles with energy and can manipulate other matter with the same ease that he reconstructed himself. Less obviously: His changed perceptions bracket him off from the rest of mankind. He can see things at the molecular level but is puzzled by basic human emotions and conventions. His women complain that they can't connect with him and he often walks around in his rebirthday suit. He perceives time differently as well -- the future and the past run together.
Dr. Manhattan is clearly a sort of god. After the mystery at the heart of Watchmen is resolved, he professes a newfound fondness for human life and muses, "perhaps I'll create some" -- elsewhere in the universe. But what sort of a god is he?
Enter: irony. One group that is not likely to come out in great numbers to see the new film Watchmen is members in good standing of the
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Mormon lawyer and theologian Richard Hopkins offered a useful summary of these differences [re the view of the great high God and the other heavenly co-rulers] in a dispute with then-evangelical theologian and philosopher Francis Beckwith. ("Then" because Beckwith has since converted to Catholicism.) We'll look at those differences that apply to Dr. Manhattan:
Creation: According to Hopkins, the Mormon God is a creator in the same sense that I am the creator of this article or that Van Gogh is the creator of Starry Night. God may be an organizer, a planner, an architect, a genius, but he does not create things from nothing ("ex nihilo"). Likewise, Dr. Manhattan can manipulate matter on a grand scale, but he is only reorganizing what is already there.
Omniscience: Hopkins argues that there is "a vast difference between classical theism and Mormonism on the subject of how God knows the future" because "classical theism views God...as being outside of time and space. From this vantage, he can supposedly see any point in time he chooses." Dr. Manhattan shares this in common with the God of Mormonism: Even though he can perceive time more fully than most humans, he is part of time. Manhattan calls himself a puppet who can see the strings, but he is much more than that.
Omnipresence: The Mormon God is not subject to the same limits that humans are but he is not everywhere at once. That's also a pretty good description of Dr. Manhattan.
Change: Hopkins calls the idea held by "classical theists" that God is unchanging "demonstrably unbiblical" and definitely un-Mormon. Mormonism posits an ever-evolving God, not at all unlike Dr. Manhattan.
Corporeality: With the exception of the Incarnation, traditional Christianity insists that God is "spirit" only. Mormonism disagrees. Hopkins insists that if man is made in the image of God, then God must have a corporeal form. So far as I can tell, there's nothing in the book of Mormon about God having blue skin and a symbol of hydrogen burned onto his forehead, but you never know.
Well, I always figured that the book of moron, false doctrines and bizarre covenents, and pearl not worth the price read like comic books... so it makes sense that a comic book read like Joey & his seven witlesses justification to live off of others tithes while gathering as many young ladies to his bed.
I guess Smithmas came early this year.
Ha!
The Lord once told us how what we should do if we love Him:
"15 ¶ So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
John 21: 15-17
Should a servant of the Lord therefore feed His sheep or mock them for wandering away?
Pearl of Great Price was actually a Egyptian embalming manual.
Sounds more like he's Blueish
Unless you realize that God needs us, even your hatred of LDS won’t save you!
You did mean to say, “We need God”, didn’t you?
No. It is crazy to say, but God and I talk. God needs us. It explains everything.
Pearl of Great Price was actually a Egyptian embalming manual.
As I understand it, the scrolls included with a mummy were more instructions for the soul of the deceased regarding the challenges he would face on his journey into the next world rather than an "embalming manual". In other words, helpful advice on how to prevent your heart from being tossed to the crocodile god instead of instructions about how to drain blood and put guts in jars.
Wouldn’t you know it?....ping!
Your comment says much more about you than it does about my religion. Why do we have to abide comments like this on Free Republic?
Your forgot John 10:14
14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—
We're trying to introduce you to the Shepherd. For some reason you keep declining to know him and cling to the idea of a god who was once a man. In order for the Shepherd to feed the sheep, they must be part of His sheep hold. In him is everlasting sustenance...it is to be found in Him alone, not through His sheep.
I notice you chose to leave out the part ware your author says that your religion is a man made tradition.
(”differs meaningfully from the concept of God that was developed through Church councils and inherited by most Protestants.”)
Since posters know that only a few folks will follow the links, I think I see another example of people using only parts of articles that back their conclusions and try to hid the rest of the article from of folks.
Why do you feel you should be protected from the free exchange of ideas, whether it is on FreeRepublic, or in the town's square. Won't your group be able to stand up under scrutiny?
“God needs us”
No, we need Him.
Yes, we need him or her, but he or she needs us too. Think about it. Read scripture with an open mind.
For no reason I can imagine, God talks to me. I know from direct revelation tht God needs us. It’s crazy I know.
I just checked SciFi Channel listings, I didn’t see this.
Hum...
Doubt this tread will draw much attention...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.