- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
OK, intelligence is light, matter is infinite, can be reformed. God, angels, spirits, heaven- are all made of matter, are physical and exist within our universe’s space and time. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Einstein state that matter traveling the speed of light transforms to pure energy/light? I thought of this while going over the Book of Abraham. We die, our bodies cease to exist, the matter goes back to the earth. Our spirits are pure knowledge, light, and still material, and apparently can travel at light speeds. We can then reform matter to make our own bodies, this would make resurrection and reincarnation almost the same. Anyone else think of this when pondering the science stuff of Mormon theology? spacious maze wrote:OK, intelligence is light, matter is infinite, can be reformed. God, angels, spirits, heaven- are all made of matter, are physical and exist within our universe’s space and time.
You lost me already. I assume I don’t have to believe that to enjoy my LDS Membership again someday. I think I will stick with believing this physical universe is “a computer program” outside of which there is the real existence including the Father and all his holy angels. That, to me, is what Eternity is. And this universe is what we call Time. We are currently living in both. At least that’s my orthodox (for once!) LDS reality.
Tom
Let me start by saying I’m not a nuclear physicist (but I do work with a bunch of them). So this is just my best guess. I’ll have to think more about what you’re trying to say, but I don’t think E=mc^2 means that mass travelling at the speed of light
transformsinto energy/light. Rather, E=mc^2 is an equation that tells us how much energy is contained in a specific mass. How to extract that energy is the question of the millenium. Fission can do it, but it produces lots of nasty waste. I work at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, on the National Ignition Facility. NIF is a giant 192-beam laser generating 500 Terawatts of electricity. We blast a deuterium/tritium fuel capsule the size of a small BB with all 192 ultraviolet laser beams. Ideally, this compresses the fuel and generates enormous heat. Eventually, the BB implodes on itself, fusinghydrogen atoms and releasing energy in the form of beta, alpha, and gamma particles/rays. Basically, we have a hydrogen fusion bomb in the laboratory. But alas, this actually has yet to be done. We are preparing for experiments, and hope to be able to achieve the world’s first thermonuclear ignition in a laboratory with yield. My point? The mass must be transformed into energy via a nuclear process, either fission, or fusion. Just traveling at
cdoesn’t automatically transform something into energy/light. Also, when you say energy/light, you need to be more clear I think. Energy does not necessarily mean light. And light is simply one part of the electromagnetic spectrum. It might be that the energy is given off as electromagnetic radiation albeit at a different frequency (that is, not visible light). But, the term energy can also mean kinetic, potential, heat, sound, gravitational, etc. Also, I’m not really sure about matter being infinite. When matter and anti-matter collide you supposedly get annihilation. I don’t think this has been “proven” per se, that is what the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is supposed to tell us (if it ever gets back online). Also not sure about intelligence being light. The whole statement sounds a little mystical to me. What is intelligence, and how can we prove whether or not it is light? I’m not aware of anyone having shown this to be so. I also don’t know of any scientific experiment even demonstrating that we have a “spirit” let alone whether or not it travels at
c. Holy cow, Jmb275, what have I started? Ok, here’s what I meant: That matter is infinite, that God is physical, that He lives on a planet in our own universe, that knowledge is referred to as light(masonic idea, actually), that even our spirits are a pure form of light and matter, that Jesus made the earth out of matter from other planets……all comes from JS theology, not science. It’s in the PoGP, the King Follett discourse and other talks, and most of these concepts are supported and discussed in further detail in Bushman’s biography of Smith in “Rough Stone Rolling”. Smith took the spiritual realm and placed it in our own universe. This triggered my thoughts on Einstein and matter’s relationship with energy, and energy’s relationship with light, light with knowledge, knowledge with the spirit, and so forth. Just thought it could be a means of how a spirit could find its way back to God, speed of light.
Here’s some stuff from the King Follett discourse:
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!”
“know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves”
“God had materials to organize the world out of chaos — chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end.”
“The intelligence of spirits had not beginning, neither will it have an end.”
This is fascinating stuff.
Yes. JMB is right. MC^2 is the amount of energy you get from converting a mass to energy. As I understand it, you actually become (minutely) more massive as energy is added to you. In the case of fission, a (relatively) lot of mass change, with a correspondingly huge energy outflow, is involved. Again, I believe it’s orthodox to rather say that non-physically-constrained beings really have no time and position coordinates, and therefore no velocity vectors. All things pertaining to the universe are present to them.
Tom
spacious maze wrote:Holy cow, Jmb275, what have I started?
Sorry, I live in a technical world.
spacious maze wrote:Ok, here’s what I meant: That matter is infinite, that God is physical, that He lives on a planet in our own universe, that knowledge is referred to as light(masonic idea, actually), that even our spirits are a pure form of light and matter, that Jesus made the earth out of matter from other planets……all comes from JS theology, not science. It’s in the PoGP, the King Follett discourse and other talks, and most of these concepts are supported and discussed in further detail in Bushman’s biography of Smith in “Rough Stone Rolling”.
Yes, I understood what you meant.
spacious maze wrote:Smith took the spiritual realm and placed it in our own universe. This triggered my thoughts on Einstein and matter’s relationship with energy, and energy’s relationship with light, light with knowledge, knowledge with the spirit, and so forth.
But this is where it got tricky for me. As long as we were talking about the spiritual realm I was understanding the metaphor and thought it was interesting. But as soon as you brought science into the picture, now I don’t know what to do with it. I guess I went for the technical route as it is less prone to mere speculation.So let me put back on my spiritual hat and try again.
spacious maze wrote:Here’s some stuff from the King Follett discourse:
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!”
Yeah, I always liked this theology. It seems like the church is not interested in it anymore (re: GBH interview response).
spacious maze wrote:“know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves”
Brilliant, I love this whole concept. We’re all gods in embryo. What a great metaphor for all of life. Furthermore, notice the cyclical implications of this statement. I think this gives a nod to a different kind of reincarnation of sorts.
spacious maze wrote:“God had materials to organize the world out of chaos — chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning, and can have no end.”
Don’t know how to interpret this. It is interesting to think about though given the Big Bang theory. I wouldn’t really call the Big Bang an “organization of matter” more like a vomiting of matter. But even so, God could have been responsible for the organization of this solar system and this planet.
spacious maze wrote:“The intelligence of spirits had not beginning, neither will it have an end.”
Interestingly enough, Einstein had this view of things too. He felt that the universe had no beginning and no end (of course his own theory proved otherwise which he failed to recognize – confirmation bias maybe?). This is, I must confess a bit of a hard pill to swallow. But maybe it is due to our own limited mortal thinking, I dunno.I was reading Hawkings, and he said something about scientist dismissing their interest in discovering anything pre-big bang, since there would never be any evidence. Time, matter ect… all immeasurable before the BB. With our technology advancing exponentially in future years, I wonder how the technical and astronomical aspects of the LDS church will be perceived when measured against scientific data. I think a planetary heaven is a real weakness of Mormonism, and is only supported by the Book of Abraham (a literal reading) Kolob passage. The rest of the scriptures talk of eternity as timeless (spaceless?) I like this Wikipedia blurb on KolobQuote:A metaphorical interpretation—orthodox, but relatively uncommon in Mormonism—suggests that Kolob represents Jesus Christ rather than a physical object and location in this universe. The symbolic interpretation was explained by Hugh Nibley in The Temple and The Cosmos (see Kolob, time and temples). Advocates of the symbolic interpretation believe it harmonizes better with other Mormon beliefs, and with beliefs in the greater Christian community, as it does not require that God have a physical throne within this universe.
Antagonistically disposed people have a heyday with this, calling LDS-ism a sci fi religion. Why the literal interpretation persists, I just can’t understand.
I love the Big Bang explanation and what Hawking explains about it in “A Brief History of Time”. Very mind expanding. I still wonder why “Big Bang” is always said with a smirk in Sunday School.
Wow! I’m clueless.
Three comments: 1. I love these types of topics. They are very soul and mind expanding.
2. The King Follet sermon is one of my all-time favorites, going back to even my mission/TBM days. My perspective now has changed though. I think JS was a very inspired prophet, but I don’t read his words as literal, or even always that he knew what he was talking about (and could have been in error). So trying to make it fit into science may or may not work. The exercise is worthy though. We should not be disappointed if it doesn’t fit. That is my point.
I think and feel there are deep deep deep meanings and messages in some of those statements — ones like God being an exalted man just like us, and that we will be like Him some day. They aren’t just the literal surface meanings. To quote *the Man* “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”
3. Book of Abraham describes the throne of God being nearest to a star named Kolob. Members have inferred a lot of material from that statement that may or may not be accurate, if the statement even pertains to real astronomy sciences. It could just be a symbolic statement. It could be nothing too.
I don’t think it is entirely clear in LDS theology that God is a physical being only in our tangible universe somewhere. I think there is a lot to be gleaned from the constantly portrayed symbolism in the temple and scriptures where God the Father appears to be on a higher pedestal, or for some reason can not be interacted with directly by humans. He is always interacting with God the Son (Jesus Christ), known as God made flesh (tangible in our universe), who then passes on messages to the mortal human agents to act out in our realm.
Even in the First Vision and in other visionary examples, God the Father does not seem to speak to the mortals. Instead, he only says “Here is my beloved Son, hear ye Him.”
My current opinion is that God is outside of our existence. Or more precisely that we are contained within a sub-existence in God. To restate it in symbolic or metaphysical terms, we are living in God’s dream.
@Valoel: Love it. Tom Haws wrote:@Valoel: Love it.
Ditto!!Tom Haws wrote:Antagonistically disposed people have a heyday with this, calling LDS-ism a sci fi religion. Why the literal interpretation persists, I just can’t understand.
Valoel wrote:I don’t think it is entirely clear in LDS theology that God is a physical being only in our tangible universe somewhere.
You guys must go to REALLY liberal wards. Everywhere I’ve ever attended, the overwhelming sense is that God is tangible, is a physical being and is currently residing on an actual planet somewhere near Kolob. And, someday, that will be each of us.
The fact that you guys don’t entirely agree with this assertion doesn’t mean the rest of the world views mormonism from your perspective. The world views mormonism from the perspective of what they see, hear and that is the TBM, literal-meaning of it all.
I’m sorry for the bluntness but I would be SHOCKED if the world viewed mormonism in a different way; we make the literal interpretation persist because we still believe it! (As an institution/culture/community)
I apologize for expressing myself poorly. The first fact, we agree, is that the literal interpretation (the Father lives on a planet in this universe) persists and is dominant in the corners of the church we know very well. The experience of converts may vary. And things may be changing. My expressed amazement is that it has persisted that way for so long. Maybe LDS like being different. Maybe the dominant preference is for a Mythic-Literal faith (see Fowler). But for deeply thoughtful traditional believers, a harmonized belief has to move toward the Father being transcendent of the universe. I think deeply thoughtful traditional believers sincerely care to incorporate all truth into their view. I guess that’s what leads to cognitive dissonance and growth. swimordie wrote:You guys must go to REALLY liberal wards. Everywhere I’ve ever attended, the overwhelming sense is that God is tangible, is a physical being and is currently residing on an actual planet somewhere near Kolob. And, someday, that will be each of us.
First off, I want to make an important distinction. I think God might choose to manifest them self as a tangible man of “flesh and bone” whenever they want. They may very well be a tangible being sitting on a chair (a throne) near a planet named Kolob. What I am saying is that doesn’t seem to be the *ONLY* possible manifestation. It also doesn’t restrict them to that location and form. I think there are lots of examples, subtle ones, that indicate God exists outside of our reality. I think that may be a more advanced or deeper realization from the same stories we all read. I also admit this is my speculation. I gave up on thinking I know the absolute truth of anything.
I could show up (manifest myself) on a TV screen in my sister’s house 700 miles away if I send her a video tape of myself. That doesn’t mean I am 5 inches tall, flat and made of a body of glass and light. I’m not, but I look like that every time she plays the video tape. That is sort of how I see the Kolob thing, or experiences where God appears to a “prophet.” It is God choosing to manifest them self in a physical form for a purpose in our reality. Who knows? Maybe God is a tangible man in the super-reality above ours, has a white beard and wears a toga. *Shrug* I’m open to that. I currently think God the Father, as we like to label this being, is not a part of our tangible reality. I personally think we are within this being (metaphor, not literal).
I’m not explaining what I hear taught by other people at Church on Sunday. You are right. Most active members of the LDS Church would probably be able to repeat the opinions of prominent leaders who taught at times that God is a tangible man. I don’t disagree with you on that. I’m saying that we have a lot of OTHER evidence that can also be considered. It isn’t any secret, but most people are not motivated enough to struggle and come up with their own ideas. I may not even be right in my conclusion. These other views are out there in the standard works, and in what LDS Members would consider to be canonized theological references (like the temple ceremonies).
swimordie wrote:I’m sorry for the bluntness but I would be SHOCKED if the world viewed mormonism in a different way; we make the literal interpretation persist because we still believe it! (As an institution/culture/community)
I prefer bluntness. Everyone is free to disagree with me. I am not right. I am not sure we really disagree as much as you might have thought though.
I like this discussion. Has anyone seen a movie with Ryan Reynolds called The Nines? He plays three different characters with similar blips in their psyche, which results in the ending revelation that he is a god and has placed himself on earth as different avatars in order to live the life of his own creations and understand the human experience. Paul Toscano (of September Seven fame) views Jesus as the one and only God and Adam as playing the role of man’s father and Jesus’ father whilst Jesus was living with us down here. I suppose this is a variant of the Adam-God doctrine by Young. Toscano’s reason for this belief is that God would never sacrifice someone else, but would bare the pain Himself- therefore Jesus is God.
In response to a physical God, I’m with Valoel, I think it has to be so much more than what JS describes in the King Follett discourse. I think we are ants on an anthill, I think God paints with colors our eyes can’t see…..and so forth.
Valoel wrote:First off, I want to make an important distinction. I think God might choose to manifest them self as a tangible man of “flesh and bone” whenever they want. They may very well be a tangible being sitting on a chair (a throne) near a planet named Kolob. What I am saying is that doesn’t seem to be the *ONLY* possible manifestation. It also doesn’t restrict them to that location and form. I think there are lots of examples, subtle ones, that indicate God exists outside of our reality. I think that may be a more advanced or deeper realization from the same stories we all read. I also admit this is my speculation.
I gave up on thinking I know the absolute truth of anything.(emphasis mine)
I agree with every piece of this, especially the part in bold. Well said Valoel!!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.