CWK: Becoming a god: deification in Mormonism and Orthodox theosis

[Kishkumen]

You have too many flanks going after your boat. Cheers.

Cheers! Here’s to future conversations that go somewhere!

[Rivendale]

To my recollection, no. But I could be wrong. The roots of the doctrine are in the New Testament. Of course, the clearest expression of deification is in D&C 132, so there is that.

I didn't listen to your podcast, but just reading this, section 132 is deeply rooted, and I would argue solely rooted for sex, for both the present (polygamy) and the future (continuation of seeds). 132 was the get out of jail card for the underground sex cult the church had become in Nauvoo for the selected leaders.

As far as it being rooted in the New Testament is nothing more that a reverse engineering by Smith, starting with the doctrine, then working backwards taking verses out of context that when broken down contradict the LDS doctrine. Psalms 82 being a prime example in a LDS context in that it demands that a exalted perfected being can be wicked, and throws the "be ye perfect" teaching is the waste basket.

The "hope" was for Joseph the have sex with as many women/girls as possible, and the teaching of deification was a means to that end in a teasing promise for his victims and their family. The temple, garments, tithing....etc, and the promise as taught in Gospel Principles that all exalted folks with having all power, glory, knowledge, and dominion as HF and Christ. The continuation of seeds, virgins, and concubines, is all centered for Smiths scam. Mormonism at that point, by the leaders, was nothing more than a sex cult, and todays church carry it on from a eternal prospective, even if by ignorance by the mainstream membership,

Say what you will about Ed Decker, one thing he got right was the title of his book, the LDS church is a for the elite "God Makers." And, it was rooted in and for sex by Smith.

Richard Packham would roll in his grave after that podcast.

[Dr. Shades]

The falsehoods are legion. Like the falsehood that a guy saw God and Jesus (depending on the account) in 1820 (depending on the account). Or that Nephites and Lamanites existed, archaeology be damned. Or that people should pay 10% of their income to a multi-billion dollar tax-exempt corporation at the expense of saving for the future. Or that retired couples should pay for the “privilege” of providing free labor to a multi-billion dollar tax-exempt corporation instead of bonding with their grandchildren. Or that young men should defer college for two years in order to exhaust their savings to serve as cult recruiters. Or that young women who experiment with any form of intimacy are “licked cupcakes” that no man will ever want for the rest of her life except perhaps as a sex toy. Or that homosexual individuals risk their salvation unless they remain strictly celibate for their entire lives. Or that it’s okay for a middle-aged man to grill a young person behind closed doors about the latter’s masturbatory practices.

You know, falsehoods like that.

But hey, if you want said falsehoods to thrive, then I guess you have your reasons. Hopefully I can be given a pass for failing to understand why.

Myths thrive everywhere, Shades.

Warfare thrives everywhere, too. That doesn't mean it should thrive or that I personally hope it continues to thrive.

Your mileage may vary, I guess.

I see the problem being fundamentalism that insists stories are all facts and that we should go to war with each other over them.

Of all the falsehoods I listed above, which ones qualify as mere "stories" to you?

The fact that you see an uncomplicated straight line from Joseph Smith's myths to EPA makes me worry about your judgment.

Somehow I don't think "EPA" equals "Environmental Protection Agency" in this context, but I can't think of anything else. Please enlighten.

People will invest in myths because it is part of the human condition.

People will also invest in racism because it is part of the human condition. I don't see how that means we should hope it "thrives," however.

Mitigating the problems that result will always be a part of it, too. I think it is incredibly arrogant to imagine that carping about human devotion to myth will somehow rectify the situation.

All rectification is preceded by carping.

Push for reform; don't push for shaming and humiliation.

Should defense attorneys for indicted mafiosos include that in their closing statements?

I think that The Widow's Mite has done more good than all of the ex-Mo criticism of Mormonism has done, and it did so by not criticizing Mormonism. There's something to think about. It simply reported the neutral facts to the best of its ability.

Have they helped Mormonism thrive? If not, aren't they doing a bad thing, in your view?

[I Have Questions]

Why on earth would you want such a corrupt institution to continue and thrive??

I want Mormonism to thrive, not the LDS Church per se.

I think that’s an interesting distinction that’s worth exploring. How do you separate in your mind, the LDS Church from Mormonism? On the face of it they appear one and the same. Not least because the LDS Church leadership determines what Mormonism is, and isn’t, at any given time. I note that what Mormonism is, has been fungible over time.

Mormonism at it’s core has been racist, it is sexist, and it is adamantly anti-gay. I’m surprised you want those things to thrive.

[Kishkumen]

Warfare thrives everywhere, too. That doesn't mean it should thrive or that I personally hope it continues to thrive.

Your mileage may vary, I guess.

For me the practical question is what are you going to do about the human propensity to mythologize, and my guess is that you will do absolutely nothing, because there really is nothing you can do. You can decry individual bad myths, but it is better to be strategic about it than ham handed.

Of all the falsehoods I listed above, which ones qualify as mere "stories" to you?

I didn't see many stories there. I saw a lot of bad policies that need to be changed.

Somehow I don't think "EPA" equals "Environmental Protection Agency" in this context, but I can't think of anything else. Please enlighten.

Ensign Peak Associates.

People will also invest in racism because it is part of the human condition. I don't see how that means we should hope it "thrives," however.

That's not exactly true. People invest in identities that they concoct. Racism is a specific set of beliefs that did not exist in the deep past. Xenophobia has always existed, but racism per se is a more specific constellation of bad ideas.

All rectification is preceded by carping.

Tilting at windmills.

Should defense attorneys for indicted mafiosos include that in their closing statements?

So, LDS people are crime bosses now?

Have they helped Mormonism thrive? If not, aren't they doing a bad thing, in your view?

I think so! Following their work, it looks as if the LDS Church is spending more of its money to help non-LDS people out there, and that is likely to be good all around.

[Kishkumen]

Mormonism at it’s core has been racist, it is sexist, and it is adamantly anti-gay. I’m surprised you want those things to thrive.

To me, Mormonism is based on a collection of ideas, text, and practices originating with Joseph Smith and his associates. Some of those ideas were good. Some were bad. Emphasize the good and root out the bad. That's my view. I don't think that the LDS Church owns Mormonism or is Mormonism. I think it is the largest sect that does something with that legacy. There are other smaller sects that do different things with it.

[Kishkumen]

Richard Packham would roll in his grave after that podcast.

I liked Richard Packham. Good egg. I am sorry you feel that way.

[I Have Questions]

Mormonism at it’s core has been racist, it is sexist, and it is adamantly anti-gay. I’m surprised you want those things to thrive.

To me, Mormonism is based on a collection of ideas, text, and practices originating with Joseph Smith and his associates. Some of those ideas were good. Some were bad. Emphasize the good and root out the bad. That's my view. I don't think that the LDS Church owns Mormonism or is Mormonism. I think it is the largest sect that does something with that legacy. There are other smaller sects that do different things with it.

How do you determine what is a bad idea, and how does it get rooted out?

[Kishkumen]

How do you determine what is a bad idea, and how does it get rooted out?

Look at how long it has taken the Catholic Church to change in important ways. They still struggle with big issues. The LDS Church will change slowly. Ending polygamy. Extending the priesthood to black men. Positive changes, but they took a long time. The Community of Christ has moved more quickly but at a great cost. Those are two sects grounded in the Restoration.

[Rivendale]

Richard Packham would roll in his grave after that podcast.

I liked Richard Packham. Good egg. I am sorry you feel that way.

I actually had many conversations with him and I feel fairly confident he would feel the same way.