I have recently obtained a copy of the "Gospel Principles" manual being studied this year in Priesthood and Relief Society in an apparent effort to get the membership back to a more basic understanding of the gospel according to the church. I already have a question from my reading of the first (or second (I should really check))chapter based on previous conversation with members of the LDS church, and will raise other questions I will have as I read the manual... but my first question...

Is it or is it not an LDS teaching that you will become Gods (yes, big "G") and be, for the males, Heavenly Father to your "spirit children"?

Hill Cumorah CC wrote:Is it or is it not an LDS teaching that you will become Gods (yes, big "G") and be, for the males, Heavenly Father to your "spirit children"?

Yes, it is.

A more biblically conducive phrase that I like to refer to when speaking with non-members would be that we will inherit all that the Father hath, which I think most Christians outside of the mormon church can relate to. This is logically interpreted to mean that we can obtain the same glory as our Father in Heaven through eternal progression and the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Non-mormons tend to make such a huge deal out of this issue.

Cobraman wrote:A more biblically conducive phrase that I like to refer to when speaking with non-members would be that we will inherit all that the Father hath, which I think most Christians outside of the mormon church can relate to. This is logically interpreted to mean that we can obtain the same glory as our Father in Heaven through eternal progression and the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Non-mormons tend to make such a huge deal out of this issue.

Agreed. I wrote a blog post a while back where I listed the key biblical passages that point towards this doctrine.

The "King Follett" discourse, given by Joseph Smith would help you to understand the nature of God, and the idea of us becoming Gods a little better. It discusses how God himself, once had a mortal body just like you and I, and that he will receive and even greater glory after the 2nd resurrection, and when we move up in our glory.

girlieadb wrote:The "King Follett" discourse, given by Joseph Smith would help you to understand the nature of God, and the idea of us becoming Gods a little better. It discusses how God himself, once had a mortal body just like you and I, and that he will receive and even greater glory after the 2nd resurrection, and when we move up in our glory.

God, who is the Alpha and Omega, who is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient does not have a fulness of glory? Do you understand why people react so negatively to that teaching?

Christopher wrote:God, who is the Alpha and Omega, who is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient does not have a fulness of glory? Do you understand why people react so negatively to that teaching?

Possibly the same reason that people have always reacted negatively to a prophet's teachings.

"Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?" (Acts 7:52)

Joseph wrote:

Christopher wrote:God, who is the Alpha and Omega, who is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient does not have a fulness of glory? Do you understand why people react so negatively to that teaching?

Possibly the same reason that people have always reacted negatively to a prophet's teachings.

"Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?" (Acts 7:52)

Do you expect people to act positively to the teaching that God is a liar and He is not, in fact, "from all eternity to all eternity" or perfect (if He was perfect He would not have need of "greater glory") as He states over and over again in His scriptures?

I do understand how it could be a hard concept for those who are not of the LDS faith to grasp, and this is where study (of related concepts) and prayer should come into place. What I stated was a summary, and a very much depleted form of what is actually included in the actual discourse. If you want to have a fuller understanding of the concept, I recommend reading the "King Follett" discourse in "The Teachings of Joseph Smith".

Nowhere have we said that God is a liar, nor do we contradict ourselves with what has been said. I would like to portray a parable to help you understand how God would receive a great glory than that of which he has now.

When your child has had a successful life, and has worked their very hardest to be the best person they could be, according to the knowledge that they know, would you not glory in that your child did their best? This is how "I" took this statement.

Also God does not "need" a greater glory, however it will come as a byproduct of the succession of his children.

Christopher wrote:Do you expect people to act positively to the teaching that God is a liar and He is not, in fact, "from all eternity to all eternity" or perfect (if He was perfect He would not have need of "greater glory") as He states over and over again in His scriptures?

Since Latter-day Saints do not claim that God is a liar, I see no reason to answer that. God is "from all eternity to all eternity" and he is "perfect." More perfect and eternal than either of us can now conceptualize.

It seems that you don't understand what we mean by "glory" in this context.

girlieadb wrote:I do understand how it could be a hard concept for those who are not of the LDS faith to grasp, and this is where study (of related concepts) and prayer should come into place. What I stated was a summary, and a very much depleted form of what is actually included in the actual discourse. If you want to have a fuller understanding of the concept, I recommend reading the "King Follett" discourse in "The Teachings of Joseph Smith".

Nowhere have we said that God is a liar, nor do we contradict ourselves with what has been said. I would like to portray a parable to help you understand how God would receive a great glory than that of which he has now.

When your child has had a successful life, and has worked their very hardest to be the best person they could be, according to the knowledge that they know, would you not glory in that your child did their best? This is how "I" took this statement.

Also God does not "need" a greater glory, however it will come as a byproduct of the succession of his children.

Ugh, we GRASP it perfectly fine, we just believe it is not scriptural. The LDS idea that those who disagree with their teachings are dullards who just don't understand the teaching, and just need to have it explained better, is infuriating

God claims over and over to be "from all eternity to all eternity" "without beginning of days or end of years", that He has always been God, and that there is NO OTHER God besides Him. You contradict that so yes, in effect, you are calling God a liar or at least a teller of half-truths (which isn't too awfully lot different).

Christopher wrote:God claims over and over to be "from all eternity to all eternity" "without beginning of days or end of years", that He has always been God, and that there is NO OTHER God besides Him. You contradict that so yes, in effect, you are calling God a liar or at least a teller of half-truths (which isn't too awfully lot different).

We're not calling God a liar. No Latter-day Saint believes that God isn't "without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity."

Joseph wrote:

Christopher wrote:God claims over and over to be "from all eternity to all eternity" "without beginning of days or end of years", that He has always been God, and that there is NO OTHER God besides Him. You contradict that so yes, in effect, you are calling God a liar or at least a teller of half-truths (which isn't too awfully lot different).

We're not calling God a liar. No Latter-day Saint believes that God isn't "without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity."

Do you believe God has always been God or was He once a man living on an earth sinning and repenting?

Christopher wrote:Do you believe God has always been God or was He once a man living on an earth sinning and repenting?

Are those the only options?

(Hint: Neither.)