Gazelam wrote:That we are made in the image of God is to be taken literally. The body is part of our soul, and we are imperfect without it. .
I know what party lone is. I just wanty people to consider that it may be wrong (just an opinion) or just not to be taken literally. I know what most Mormons think but then I know what most think about the hemispherical model of the Book of Mormon too (and now the apologist think that is wrong)
I do find some evidences against God looking like a man in my favorite scripture, D&C 93 where it says that man is the tabernacle of God. I do find some comfort in the non-LDS idea that God is the summation of all the things in the universe, and that he has to act among us through our bodies and efforts.
Of course there are some scriptures that say God is a spirit, and the ones that Gazelam quoted to indicate he's got a body.
"D&C 130 is the only place in canon I know of the the declaration that God has a body exists. On the other hand the fifth lecture on faith that used to be in the D&C and can be argued was canon, says the Father is a personage of spirit."
For me this shows that Joseph was wrong. Section 130, if we take Joseph at his word, was a revelation from God, thus the information wasn't from Joseph. Lectures on faith, which CAN be argue was canon, cannot be argued as revelation since this was the reason given for them being removed from canon. So I would say that Joseph (or Sidney, most likely), from an LDS perspective, was wrong about the Father being a personage of spirit, as the revelation, section 130, declares him as having a physical body.
If one is christian/Mormon, it would seem to me odd to accept God as having anything other than a body, considering that the one example of a divine being that christianity/Mormonism revolves around is the whole idea of God having a human ape like body: in the form of Jesus.
CE_Digger wrote:I do find some comfort in the non-LDS idea that God is the summation of all the things in the universe, and that he has to act among us through our bodies and efforts.
When I try to imagine a god, I imagine one who created me as the center of the universe and all of you to entertain me while I'm here.
That's kind of fun and makes me less likely to hate my playthings. Some of my playthings don't do what I want and then I want to build an ark and make it rain.
But I don't. I'm afraid I'll get grounded and won't be able to play with you guys anymore.
"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder" --Homer Simpson's version of Pascal's Wager
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
"But I don't. I'm afraid I'll get grounded and won't be able to play with you guys anymore."
Actually, your reason for not being able to play with us anymore won't have anything to do with being grounded.....(unless we're the lucky ones in the ark)
To keep the playing field level, please do not reference the ramblings of Joseph Smith, Sidney, or Briggie. There is nothing to prove what they said, wrote down, revised, and published as divine scripture. known to Mormons as the D&C.
Kiss off PP. He can reference whatever he wishes. For believing LDS the LDS canon has the same credibility that the Bible does for an orthodox Christian. You have no rigth to tell him not to quote whatever he wishes in his posts.
Gazelam wrote:That we are made in the image of God is to be taken literally. The body is part of our soul, and we are imperfect without it. .
I know what party lone is. I just wanty people to consider that it may be wrong (just an opinion) or just not to be taken literally. I know what most Mormons think but then I know what most think about the hemispherical model of the Book of Mormon too (and now the apologist think that is wrong)
It seems to me the idea of God the Father having a physical body was not part of LDS doctrine until after 1835 though there is some ligh evidence that this may have been doctrine sooner. The Fifth Lecture on Faith that was part of the D&C until 1921 stated the Father is a personage of spirit.
Gazelam wrote:That we are made in the image of God is to be taken literally. The body is part of our soul, and we are imperfect without it. .
I know what party lone is. I just wanty people to consider that it may be wrong (just an opinion) or just not to be taken literally. I know what most Mormons think but then I know what most think about the hemispherical model of the Book of Mormon too (and now the apologist think that is wrong)
It seems to me the idea of God the Father having a physical body was not part of LDS doctrine until after 1835 though there is some ligh evidence that this may have been doctrine sooner. The Fifth Lecture on Faith that was part of the D&C until 1921 stated the Father is a personage of spirit.
Jason
I believe you're right, if I'm remembering correctly. I think that's one thing that non-Mormons have a hard time with: they see it both as a limiting/reduction of God's infinite nature and a rather presumptuous aggrandizing of humans. I always liked this aspect of Mormon theology. Almost makes me wish the church was true.
Gazelam wrote:That we are made in the image of God is to be taken literally. The body is part of our soul, and we are imperfect without it. .
I know what party lone is. I just wanty people to consider that it may be wrong (just an opinion) or just not to be taken literally. I know what most Mormons think but then I know what most think about the hemispherical model of the Book of Mormon too (and now the apologist think that is wrong)
It seems to me the idea of God the Father having a physical body was not part of LDS doctrine until after 1835 though there is some ligh evidence that this may have been doctrine sooner. The Fifth Lecture on Faith that was part of the D&C until 1921 stated the Father is a personage of spirit.
Jason
I believe you're right, if I'm remembering correctly. I think that's one thing that non-Mormons have a hard time with: they see it both as a limiting/reduction of God's infinite nature and a rather presumptuous aggrandizing of humans. I always liked this aspect of Mormon theology. Almost makes me wish the church was true.
As I have studied the theology of the Christian faith as well as started with Islam, it seems to me the humans, in their philosphy, get nervouse when we make God to close to what we are. It is interesting the this seems to be the major issue orthodox Christianity has with Mormonism. Early Christianity certianly struggled with the idea of God being man in the form of Jesus. The creeds as they evolved seemed to each time take a step in making God more removed and bigger and father away from man in order to be "worthy" of worship.