Mormonism and Human History

[huckelberry]

Doc:

’m curious what board members would tell themselves when something like the above-posted information was presented to them. How did you hand wave away 200,000+ years of human cultures, religions, and identities in order to squeeze Mormonism into the equation?

I think as a believer in Christian teachings I'd assume God kinda sorta tricks us all. He set it up so it appears our disciplines in uncovering history would be helpful and good, but instead we would never really be able to uncover the true history of all that went down. We need to be tricked, I figured, so we'd be find challenge in believing in God..or some such thing. I do believe that was my go to approach.......

Stem, this goes a long way in explaining why you see god as such a garbled and negative idea. I can certainly respect your rejection of this god.I have noticed that any young earth creation belief inclines to just this implication.

[Shulem]

There was a great documentary by Werner Herzog in 2010 called "Cave of Forgotten Dreams" that caused me to have a little cognitive dissonance.

It's about a newly discovered cave in France that has the most beautiful and awe inspiring paintings I've seen. And, they are 40,000 years old. Some of the paintings are on the same scale as the Sistine Chapel and cover the entire cave ceiling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfJfRx2IAYo

I featured images from your video clip of that cave in my thread up in the Celestial Forum where I debunk the false Book of Abraham narrative of Egypt being founded in 2300 BC by Ham's progeny. It's the ultimate nail in the Book of Abraham coffin -- a wooden stake in the heart of the vampire!

30,000 to 32,000 years ago

[Res Ipsa]

There was a great documentary by Werner Herzog in 2010 called "Cave of Forgotten Dreams" that caused me to have a little cognitive dissonance.

It's about a newly discovered cave in France that has the most beautiful and awe inspiring paintings I've seen. And, they are 40,000 years old. Some of the paintings are on the same scale as the Sistine Chapel and cover the entire cave ceiling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfJfRx2IAYo

I watched it within the last couple of years and had the same reaction. Mind blowing.

[dastardly stem]

Stem, this goes a long way in explaining why you see god as such a garbled and negative idea. I can certainly respect your rejection of this god.I have noticed that any young earth creation belief inclines to just this implication.

hi huckelberry, I'd contend anybody's conception of God must also presume something similar about him, unless of course they do not think God has benevolence or a desire to have us believe in him. God is hidden is he not? That means we can't find him in any of our investigations. I thought anyway.

[MG 2.0]

As one who has chosen to move forward in faith and also being fairly knowledgeable in regards to evolution, the age of the earth, and the wide span of human history I approach it from a vantage point of using a larger scope of vision.

In latter day scriptures we have a God saying/speaking that He does one thing or another “for His own purposes”. And we don’t really have a clue as to what those purposes might be. He seems to use this kind of language when He simply isn’t or doesn’t want to reveal something.

To believe in a God who created ALL things, including the cave dwellers in southern France, one would have to be open to a God who is much Bigger and Grander than we have heretofore conceptualized. As we evolve and humanity grows from one age to another we also are able to more readily see into the mind of God. Although opaquely.

In the temple we learn about our relationship to God through ‘the man Adam’ and his progeny and the covenants that were made with this ‘chosen’ line of the House of Israel. Who’s to say that there aren’t many other ‘houses’ that have existed throughout human history? A house of _______. A house of__________. Almost ad infinitum from our perspective now that we are down the road from the original creation(s).

Religions, including the traditional view some have of Mormonism, have a narrow and limited view of God. That which He chooses to reveal. In the PofGP Moses is told that he will only learn about the things that God will give him. And nothing more.

Seeing as we do see through a glass darkly and that year by year we learn much more about the nuts and bolts of everything scientific, I think we can view this as a gradual move towards having the capacity and capability to look into the mind of God. However incompletely.

The ancients may have been of a ‘house’ that God had His own purposes for and those purpose are unknown to we moderns. The gods they worshipped, the technology they developed, the family structures they created. All at the hand of an all wise and knowing creator.

Our premortal sphere may have consisted of those connected with the man Adam and his posterity. We are here connected to that line and/or another associated or even disassociated line. Lines that may have degrees of separation from ‘the man Adam’, with their own genealogies and records and life path designed specifically for them.

Anyway, coming from the vantage point of a believers I think that we have to keep our eyes wide open to a much bigger and grander concept of God. The fact is…if one is to believe in a creator God…it is necessary to realize that each ‘house’ of humanity has been created for purposes that only God knows. We are minuscule. Moses also purported saw/realized that in his visionary experience.

What’s cool is being able to now have the tools and the know how to ‘break in’ and investigate the many and varied forms and fashions of creative processes that have resulted in the many and varied branches of creation and their ‘products’.

I agree with what some others have alluded to in that as we look through the eyes of limited understanding we might find ourselves in a position of incomprehensible wonder as to how a creator God could be behind it ALL.

So I guess you could say, I’m still dealing with the general incomprehensibility of it all and the majesty of the creation. And the hope that there is a ‘master mind’ at the root of it all.

It’s a choice. It is a choice rooted in the hope that there is something more at play behind it all other that simply what we make of it. Or what the ancients and other ‘houses’ made of it.

A grand PURPOSE. An eternal purpose. That’s a LOT to hope for, isn’t it?

Some might call it a pipe dream.

Regards,
MG

[huckelberry]

Stem, this goes a long way in explaining why you see god as such a garbled and negative idea. I can certainly respect your rejection of this god.I have noticed that any young earth creation belief inclines to just this implication.

hi huckelberry, I'd contend anybody's conception of God must also presume something similar about him, unless of course they do not think God has benevolence or a desire to have us believe in him. God is hidden is he not? That means we can't find him in any of our investigations. I thought anyway.

It is possible to consider that your observation is accepting a couple of religious ideas. One that God puts some primary value on people correctly recognizing him and second that it is easy for God to reveal him or herself to us.
I think it is possible God is not hiding but that it is difficult for God to manifest the real self to humans.
I think an alternative thought at least fits the world we live in better. That the best and perhaps only way for god to become known to humans is through the human experience with each other which contains a glimpse. That glimpse has potential to grow. Perhaps that just means we learn to build better societies. Perhaps it means there is life after death where in our communal experience grows to the point we are able to get an understanding awareness of God. If there is no life after death then our communal experience may still grow to a better expression of love with is the only way to glimpse God that is possible.

[Rivendale]

hi huckelberry, I'd contend anybody's conception of God must also presume something similar about him, unless of course they do not think God has benevolence or a desire to have us believe in him. God is hidden is he not? That means we can't find him in any of our investigations. I thought anyway.

It is possible to consider that your observation is accepting a couple of religious ideas. One that God puts some primary value on people correctly recognizing him and second that it is easy for God to reveal him or herself to us.
I think it is possible God is not hiding but that it is difficult for God to manifest the real self to humans.
I think an alternative thought at least fits the world we live in better. That the best and perhaps only way for god to become known to humans is through the human experience with each other which contains a glimpse. That glimpse has potential to grow. Perhaps that just means we learn to build better societies. Perhaps it means there is life after death where in our communal experience grows to the point we are able to get an understanding awareness of God. If there is no life after death then our communal experience may still grow to a better expression of love with is the only way to glimpse God that is possible.

I just don't get the logic of a god not being able to show himself towards his creation. Imagine raising children that way and make the parallels. It just does not comport with the reality of nurturing growth.

[malkie]

It is possible to consider that your observation is accepting a couple of religious ideas. One that God puts some primary value on people correctly recognizing him and second that it is easy for God to reveal him or herself to us.
I think it is possible God is not hiding but that it is difficult for God to manifest the real self to humans.
I think an alternative thought at least fits the world we live in better. That the best and perhaps only way for god to become known to humans is through the human experience with each other which contains a glimpse. That glimpse has potential to grow. Perhaps that just means we learn to build better societies. Perhaps it means there is life after death where in our communal experience grows to the point we are able to get an understanding awareness of God. If there is no life after death then our communal experience may still grow to a better expression of love with is the only way to glimpse God that is possible.

I just don't get the logic of a god not being able to show himself towards his creation. Imagine raising children that way and make the parallels. It just does not comport with the reality of nurturing growth.

I was thinking something similar.

It looks to me like a kind of backstop - if all else fails - and seems to disagree with Joseph Smith's teaching that it is necessary to know god's character etc.:

2 Let us here observe, that three things are necessary, in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God unto life and salvation.

3 First, The idea that he actually exists.

4 Secondly, A correct idea of his character, perfections and attributes.

5 Thirdly, An actual knowledge that the course of life which he is pursuing, is according to his will.

https://lecturesonfaith.com/3/
For me, huckleberry's conception of god seems consonant with a 'god' who doesn't exist.

[huckelberry]

It is possible to consider that your observation is accepting a couple of religious ideas. One that God puts some primary value on people correctly recognizing him and second that it is easy for God to reveal him or herself to us.
I think it is possible God is not hiding but that it is difficult for God to manifest the real self to humans.
I think an alternative thought at least fits the world we live in better. That the best and perhaps only way for god to become known to humans is through the human experience with each other which contains a glimpse. That glimpse has potential to grow. Perhaps that just means we learn to build better societies. Perhaps it means there is life after death where in our communal experience grows to the point we are able to get an understanding awareness of God. If there is no life after death then our communal experience may still grow to a better expression of love with is the only way to glimpse God that is possible.

I just don't get the logic of a god not being able to show himself towards his creation. Imagine raising children that way and make the parallels. It just does not comport with the reality of nurturing growth.

i am not a Mormon and I do not believe God is a parent. I am one of those who believe God is infinite omnipresent not a visible thing .

////
a second thought. Even from an LDS point of view one might consider that the outward visible appearance of god and manifestation of Gods power do not reveal the heart of what is most important. That knowing God can only happen with our own experience of loving each other. That experience may be clarified in a context where we are in control away from the power parent. We learn in a context of real risk.

[MG 2.0]

I just don't get the logic of a god not being able to show himself towards his creation. Imagine raising children that way and make the parallels. It just does not comport with the reality of nurturing growth.

I think we can wholeheartedly agree on that point. It’s the ‘how’ and ‘when’ we might disagree with.

And also maybe the ‘why’.

Minor quibble, ha ha.

Regards,
MG