Nature of God

[Anonymous]

The following quotes come from the article “Great and Marvelous are the Revelations of God” by Gerrit Dirkmaat of the Church History Department in the 12/2012 Ensign.

Quote:

“They understood that the process of revelation was not static and that the Lord sometimes commanded Joseph to revise, update, or correct the written revelations.”

“He also applied the term (Urim and Thummim) to other stones he possessed, called “seer stones” because they aided him in receiving revelations as a seer. The Prophet received some early revelations through the use of these seer stones.”

“The Prophet and Revelator inquires of God. He spiritually sees, hears, and feels, and then speaks as he is moved upon by the Holy Ghost.” (reference to spiritual visions that might be later described using more physical visitation event terminology)

“While many members today may look at the revelations as being static and unchanging, the Prophet Joseph Smith saw the revelations as living and subject to change as the Lord revealed more of His will. Members of the Church relied upon Joseph to receive continued revelations for the Church. As former Church Historian Elder Marlin K. Jensen of the Seventy has explained: “Joseph seemed to regard the manuscript revelations as his best efforts to capture the voice of the Lord condescending to communicate in what Joseph called the ‘crooked, broken, scattered, and imperfect language’ of men”8 (see also D&C 1:24).”

I think it is important to agree that the revelations that have come down in print are not perfect. Where then are the imperfections introduced? Perhaps God only gives us the tiniest morsel that we are prepared to handle. Perhaps God sends down perfection and it becomes altered in the transmission through mortal instruments.

Seen another way, perhaps such “revelations” represent our best attempts to approach the spirit of God and divinity – being assisted from time to time with inspiration to prod us in the right direction.

Is God sending down bits and pieces of the divine will and plan? Or is Mankind reaching skyward, trying their very best to draw closer to God and do what they think he would want? All of these possibilities seem to have some elements of truth. Perhaps it is a mixture of both.

“The philosophies of men, mingled with scripture” is an interesting phrase in part because we have no scriptures that do not already contain to some degree the philosophies, prejudices, and biases of men. If this phrase means something divine that is mixed with mortal understandings – transmitted, expressed, translated, and interpreted by the imperfect minds and worldviews of imperfect men – then it appears to describe ALL of scripture.

[Anonymous]

AmyJ wrote:

I have been trying to write this post in my head for about 2 weeks now.

One of the things I learned in studying the Old Testament through the Yale Great Courses class last year is that the Bible narrative is very fluid and very dynamic. Moses is not prophesying about the same things that Isaiah, or Ezekiel, or Malachi, or Samuel was prophesying.

In studying Isaiah (in the Book of Mormon), I started asking the question “what if the scriptures are all narratives put together to explain/define our relationship with God?” (I still don’t have an answer for this one, but it sounds right when it jostles around in my brain.)

Related questions:

* What narratives do I have/use to define God?

For example, I know that part of my narrative is that God is like a Father to me. But my part of the narrative pulls from my experiences with my own father – who was big on letting us face the choices of our consequences and make a lot of choices on our own. When I was a pre-teen, I borrowed a lot of medical books/encyclopedias to read up on growing babies because I was thinking of becoming a doctor and I wanted to understand what each of my siblings was doing developmentally. I gather he got a lot of flack for that because these subjects were judged as being the “wrong books” or the “wrong subjects” for a pre-teen girl child in the 1980’s.

Another example I can use is my mother. Her father deserted their family when she was 2. It has been a struggle for her not to feel deserted by God through various life circumstances.

* Are there scriptures/stories where God is defined outside a narrative?

For the longest time, I would have put the First Vision in this category. But then reading on this site got me thinking, and since we don’t know if it was a literal visitation, and have evidence it may have been a vision instead, I have no further evidence either way.

Or do we have to have a narrative to define the nature of God for us on an individual and/or cultural and/or societal level?

This what I am personally leaning towards, but trying to sort out my narrative from everyone else’s narrative is a lot like separating spaghetti noodles after they have been cooked. Very hard to do, very sticky, and have a tendency to break at random intervals.

Somehow I feel like I just put a whole semester’s worth of work into 3 questions…

Wow! Your insight is both beautiful and compelling.

Historically speaking humans have adapted their definition of God to meet their needs. In the dark ages God was harsh and cruel, probably because life was very difficult and explaining the environment was also difficult. Therefore, God was feared.

Several years ago I went to the Joseph Smith Birthplace in Vermont. I spoke with the elderly Missionary who was there. In the winter the temperature frequently does not climb above 20 degrees in the middle of the day. Life would have been very hard and discouraging. People needed an explanation to give them hope.

It’s similar to the movie made several years ago called “The Invention of Lying.”

The more I study the Bible the more I believe we are truly saved by Grace. I do not believe as the church teaches in this regard. I feel that our explanation is merely a way to control.

My favorite description of God the father is found in Matthew Chap 7:9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?

10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?

11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

This is my definition of God.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

I think it is important to agree that the revelations that have come down in print are not perfect. Where then are the imperfections introduced? Perhaps God only gives us the tiniest morsel that we are prepared to handle. Perhaps God sends down perfection and it becomes altered in the transmission through mortal instruments.

I think it is a combination of the 2 concepts. Part of my understanding of God is that He knows us as individuals, and either knows or has a pretty good idea what the combination of individuals will produce. I think that everything that comes down from God starts as perfect, but I think not only does the imperfection become altered when it arrives at the minds of people, but that mortal circumstances in general also alter it. I read a story regarding trying to teach aliens the taste of salt, and it can’t be done very well because they have no reference. Maybe part of God’s “work and glory” is to transmit information to us through our mortal, limited world.

Roy wrote:

Seen another way, perhaps such “revelations” represent our best attempts to approach the spirit of God and divinity – being assisted from time to time with inspiration to prod us in the right direction.

Is God sending down bits and pieces of the divine will and plan? Or is Mankind reaching skyward, trying their very best to draw closer to God and do what they think he would want? All of these possibilities seem to have some elements of truth. Perhaps it is a mixture of both.

In my world view, it is important that I believe it is both principles. However, what limited thought I have given it tells me the ratios are not equal among individuals, and that the ratios are not the same for the same individual throughout his/her lifespan.

Roy wrote:

“The philosophies of men, mingled with scripture” is an interesting phrase in part because we have no scriptures that do not already contain to some degree the philosophies, prejudices, and biases of men. If this phrase means something divine that is mixed with mortal understandings – transmitted, expressed, translated, and interpreted by the imperfect minds and worldviews of imperfect men – then it appears to describe ALL of scripture.

I agree.

[Author]

Posts