Was there a First God?

[_Some Schmo]

No, I quite understand the message: There is no god.

I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree on this one.

I'm glad I was able to help you "purge". Sometimes we've just got to get it all out.

Well, actually, the message was that it's silly to stake a claim about the nature of something imagined, or think that you've got a better handle on the imagined than someone else does.

[_grampa75]

I was thinking that an infinite being can comprehend an infinite number of worlds. Mormonism posits a finite God, so grampa's question presupposes that LDS theology is correct in its definition of God.

So, yeah, it's like trying to describe a fictional character's thoughts.

You have to suspend logic and accept a whole multitude of assumptions to make any religion work. I understood where he was coming from. I just figured I'd point out the obvious. I always cringe when people talk about fiction like it's fact, whether it's speculative talk or not.

Reading grampa's posts, I realized that I just don't have any interest in these kinds of questions anymore. Maybe my conscience has become seared, or something.

I think (based on what I've read of you posts) that your underlying assumptions have completely changed to the point that to engage grampa would be to argue from a completely different plane, and you realize there's no point. It's why I just don't post in these forums much anymore myself. What's the point?

I do, however, still find myself somewhat fascinated by all the mental gymnastics. It never fails to amaze me (as does the subject of human denial in general). I have to take it in small doses though.

I have to excuse myself again, I am just not a person who ever won an award in communication skills. Most of the things I ask about or I write about is to increase my own reasoning on any scripture. I will never try to offend anyone personally. If there seems to be an offence to any of my toughts then please inform me so I may correct my approach to any one subject. I am firm in my belief and I cannot change my mind on any of the teachings that the Holy Spirit has born witness to me on. I usually only try and the answers to the question that our scripture elicite.

St. John 17: 3 And this is life enternal that they might know thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.

D & C 45: 10 Come ye unto it, and with him that cometh I will reason as with men in days of old. And I will show unto you my strong reasoning.

Is it really that simple? Is it to know our Savior that we may come to understand where he came from? Where did HE have HIS beginning? And will ever come to be like HIM as is so promised?[/quote]Ephesians 4: 13 Till we all come to the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.

In the culmination will we all become as perfect in body, mind and spirit as Jesus Christ?

grampa75

[_marg]

No, I quite understand the message: There is no god.

I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree on this one.

I'm glad I was able to help you "purge". Sometimes we've just got to get it all out.

Well, actually, the message was that it's silly to stake a claim about the nature of something imagined, or think that you've got a better handle on the imagined than someone else does.

Exactly Schmo, and I doubt ozemc understands your point given his/her responses to you in this thread, either that or doesn't want to understand your point., at least not in this thread.

[_ozemc]

No, I quite understand the message: There is no god.

I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree on this one.

I'm glad I was able to help you "purge". Sometimes we've just got to get it all out.

Well, actually, the message was that it's silly to stake a claim about the nature of something imagined, or think that you've got a better handle on the imagined than someone else does.

Exactly Schmo, and I doubt ozemc understands your point given his/her responses to you in this thread, either that or doesn't want to understand your point., at least not in this thread.

Well, maybe I didn't quite understand the complete point, but I think the reason is that it's more coming from a different perspective and a different worldview than mine.

I do believe in God, and, while I certainly believe (there's that word again!) that I cannot know his true nature, I do not consider him imaginary in any way. See, to me, the glories of the universe speak volumes of that great mind. I can't undertand how someone could not believe in some sort of higher power.

Maybe that's why it kind of got by me.

Hope I didn't offend you, Schmo, I just can't see it from your perspective.

[_Some Schmo]

Well, maybe I didn't quite understand the complete point, but I think the reason is that it's more coming from a different perspective and a different worldview than mine.

I do believe in God, and, while I certainly believe (there's that word again!) that I cannot know his true nature, I do not consider him imaginary in any way. See, to me, the glories of the universe speak volumes of that great mind. I can't undertand how someone could not believe in some sort of higher power.

Maybe that's why it kind of got by me.

Hope I didn't offend you, Schmo, I just can't see it from your perspective.

No offense ever taken.

It's totally ok to disagree about things (it should be, anyway). As I've said in so many words elsewhere on this forum, I'm not so attached to my ideas that I feel invalidated when people disagree with them. I am not my ideas.

[_marg]

Well, maybe I didn't quite understand the complete point, but I think the reason is that it's more coming from a different perspective and a different worldview than mine.

I do believe in God, and, while I certainly believe (there's that word again!) that I cannot know his true nature, I do not consider him imaginary in any way. See, to me, the glories of the universe speak volumes of that great mind. I can't undertand how someone could not believe in some sort of higher power.

Maybe that's why it kind of got by me.

Hope I didn't offend you, Schmo, I just can't see it from your perspective.

Of course one can believe whatever one wishes but one can not argue against another's beliefs as being irrational and present their own which is also irrational as the counter. By irrational I mean unwarranted with transparent evidence or evidence which potentially can be verified.

If a claim is presented the rational position is to reject it unless evidence is given to warrant it.

You had written:

I guess the main answer to your question is "no", there was no "1st" God. Whomever, or whatever, God is, God is eternal, and always "is". Eternity is timeless and unchanging, so God is timeless and unchanging.

Your argument is assertions, with no basis in fact. You do not leave open a possibilityyou could be wrong in the above. What you could say next time is ..along the lines of, I don't have the same beliefs as you. This is how I define God, it's what I believe, these are my reasons for them, these are my reasons why I find your beliefs unreasonable. You will still hold the irrational position over those who reject your claims due to insufficient evidence. But if their claims of something existing are insufficiently warranted they too will hold an irrational position.

[_Some Schmo]

I do believe in God, and, while I certainly believe (there's that word again!) that I cannot know his true nature, I do not consider him imaginary in any way. See, to me, the glories of the universe speak volumes of that great mind. I can't undertand how someone could not believe in some sort of higher power.

I felt I should comment on this as well.

Yes, the universe is quite wondrous and amazing. I completely agree. The question I have is why does it have to have a creator to be wondrous and amazing? Why must there be a "great mind?"

Things just are. We know they are because... well, there they are. That speaks nothing in support of a creator. All it says is that everything in the universe exists, and that's it. We’re the ones attaching the meaning to it (wondrous and amazing), and we are the ones who feel a need to explain that contrived meaning away by purporting an outside influence, or “creator.”

Whether you consider a god imaginary or not is irrelevant. Unless you have some sort of valid, documented experience with him, whatever you think of him is strictly from your imagination (constructed no doubt out of tidbits others have provided throughout your lifetime which fit with your imagined vision of this fantasy god).

I just can't see it from your perspective.

I dispute this comment. You, by virtue of the fact that you are a literate human being, have the imagination facilities to imagine my perspective. I mean, you've created a concept of god in your head, so you could "imagine" no god if you really wanted to. It's not a question of capability. It's a question of desire. And again, that brings me back to my assertion that you don’t want to get it because it's uncomfortable for you to think in these terms, for whatever reason(s).

[_JAK]

I would just like to ask a question before answering our dear friend who is Catholic.

In the Book of Moses we can read a dialog between Moses and God, God tells Moses, "The worlds I have created are without number to man, but they are numbered unto me because I know them for they are mine."

Let me ask you a question; If we were to ask God to measure the infinitesimally emptyness of space and give us an answer as to how far it was across the whole of space; could God give us an answer? Of course not! God cannot measure or weigh the infinite any more than we can. But how is it then that God claims to Moses that he can number the worlds, when he says, "But they are numbered unto me."

Is that just God's way of leting us know that there was indeed a first world?

grampa75

No evidence has been established for “gods” or for “God.” The invention(s) were constructed to explain that which people could not comprehend. Primitive as they were and are, there is no evidence which supports any one of the God myths currently exploited today by various groups.

Your assumption God is lacking in merit.

JAK

[_Mercury]

I would just like to ask a question before answering our dear friend who is Catholic.

In the Book of Moses we can read a dialog between Moses and God, God tells Moses, "The worlds I have created are without number to man, but they are numbered unto me because I know them for they are mine."

Let me ask you a question; If we were to ask God to measure the infinitesimally emptyness of space and give us an answer as to how far it was across the whole of space; could God give us an answer? Of course not! God cannot measure or weigh the infinite any more than we can. But how is it then that God claims to Moses that he can number the worlds, when he says, "But they are numbered unto me."

Is that just God's way of leting us know that there was indeed a first world?

grampa75

How can there be a first God when there is no Last God?

Also see:
Invention of God by irrational fears Humans hold

[_JAK]

I would just like to ask a question before answering our dear friend who is Catholic.

In the Book of Moses we can read a dialog between Moses and God, God tells Moses, "The worlds I have created are without number to man, but they are numbered unto me because I know them for they are mine."

Let me ask you a question; If we were to ask God to measure the infinitesimally emptyness of space and give us an answer as to how far it was across the whole of space; could God give us an answer? Of course not! God cannot measure or weigh the infinite any more than we can. But how is it then that God claims to Moses that he can number the worlds, when he says, "But they are numbered unto me."

Is that just God's way of leting us know that there was indeed a first world?

grampa75

How can there be a first God when there is no Last God?

Also see:
Invention of God by irrational fears Humans hold

No evidence has been established for “gods” or for “God.” The invention(s) were constructed to explain that which people could not comprehend. Primitive as they were and are, there is no evidence which supports any one of the God myths currently exploited today by various groups.

God assumptions lack merit.

“First,” “Last” -- all speculation absent evidence.

JAK