Is the LDS version of "God" worth your worshipping?

[sock puppet]

There are lots and lots and lots of Gods. Each religion that espouses a supreme being defines it differently than the others. Given the LDS canon and the interactions with "God" of the Restoration of the 1820s, 30s and 40s, is the LDS god worthy of your worship? Keep in mind all the claimed revelations , inconsistencies on polygamy, etc., ordering that Laban be slain, the atrocities contained in the Old Testament and predicted in the Book of Revelations, etc. All in all, a 'marvelous work and a wonder.'

Don't just give a yes or no answer. Please explain your position.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

[Kishkumen]

Looks like a loaded question to me.

[Gadianton]

I think the question needs some work.

"worthy of worship" and "empirically believable" need to be decoupled, and it's not clear that they are from considerations offered.

If you're assuming that (proposed) God is worth worshiping iff God is empirically believable, then you're really asking if God is empirically believable.

If there is something interesting about considering whether God is worthy of worship, then it can't be completely dependent on whether he is empirically believable.

For instance, if we had the gold plates right here and proved the existence of reformed Egyptian and nobody can explain it, then they still contain the story of Laban.

[Dr Exiled]

No. He is a figment of the Mormon hierarchy and basically a proxy for them. I've seen them, talked to them, lived among them, played golf/tennis with them. They aren't worthy of worship. Sure, for the most part, they are nice people. However, they are all too human and don't have any inspiration beyond what anyone else has.

[drumdude]

Mormon God is too poorly defined to be able to answer the question. Every single important Mormon theological position has changed, and you can still find Mormons who believe in all of the various beliefs including polygamy, racism, Adam God, etc.

[dastardly stem]

He’s going to make everyone bow the knee and worship him someday. He prizes everyone’s free agency so much after he condemns a number of us hes gonna force everyone to worship him whether they want to or not. I think we’re not supposed to notice how he took satans plan after condemning him for proposing it. Anyway, he’s probably not worth my worship. I don’t know why any proposed god would be. But gods are gonna get what they want. That seems to be the whole point of them.

[malkie]

He’s going to make everyone bow the knee and worship him someday. He prizes everyone’s free agency so much after he condemns a number of us hes gonna force everyone to worship him whether they want to or not. I think we’re not supposed to notice how he took satans plan after condemning him for proposing it. Anyway, he’s probably not worth my worship. I don’t know why any proposed god would be. But gods are gonna get what they want. That seems to be the whole point of them.

In which stem explains why he is going back to being a faithful LDS - so he can get what he wants

[sock puppet]

I think the question needs some work.

"worthy of worship" and "empirically believable" need to be decoupled, and it's not clear that they are from considerations offered.

If you're assuming that (proposed) God is worth worshiping iff God is empirically believable, then you're really asking if God is empirically believable.

If there is something interesting about considering whether God is worthy of worship, then it can't be completely dependent on whether he is empirically believable.

For instance, if we had the gold plates right here and proved the existence of reformed Egyptian and nobody can explain it, then they still contain the story of Laban.

I think that "worthy of worship" and "empirically believable" are bit more entangled than being capable of being decoupled. For example, how would one form a belief in a morally-deficient God in the first place? Why would we need to prove ourselves more moral than this character as defined by actions described in the Old Testament and Book of Mormon in order to become gods, which is basically the implication from current LDS teachings? How did this character become a god in the first place if he doesn't behave better than the canon portrays?

[dastardly stem]

He’s going to make everyone bow the knee and worship him someday. He prizes everyone’s free agency so much after he condemns a number of us hes gonna force everyone to worship him whether they want to or not. I think we’re not supposed to notice how he took satans plan after condemning him for proposing it. Anyway, he’s probably not worth my worship. I don’t know why any proposed god would be. But gods are gonna get what they want. That seems to be the whole point of them.

In which stem explains why he is going back to being a faithful LDS - so he can get what he wants

I thought since I don't know what the hell I want I couldn't really make it as faithful LDS. They kept saying I'd get what I wanted, which was something less than exaltation. I was kind of lie, meh...I don't know if I really want that either so I left.