- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have been thinking about the concept of god amidst the tragedies of recent days. As well, I have responded on another board to a thread where others have wondered how god answers prayers and regulates rewards and punishments. This is what I wrote in response to my musings:
The God WithinPlease let me know what you think.
Very interesting. I wonder if you have listenend to the podcast over at mormon matters: the-kingdom-of-god-is-within-you-believing-it-trusting-it-accessing-it/eman wrote:Very interesting. I wonder if you have listenend to the podcast over at mormon matters:
the-kingdom-of-god-is-within-you-believing-it-trusting-it-accessing-it/
I just saw a notice on that podcast…I hadn’t seen it before I posted.In the mouth of 2 or more witnesses. .. 
Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2
A very interesting post. I would agree that an all-seeing/knowing/powerful God offers some complications that tie my head in knots. Does he intervene for some but not for others? A recent gen conf talk cited God’s goodness when two children were miraculously found in the rubble of the Haiti earthquake. But if He gets credit for the good news stories he should also bear responsibility for the bad ones. And if he is… I’ve still not found a good answer to this. As to the rest of the post. Very interesting thoughts on internal conscience and sub-conscience.
A couple of thoughts about onward implications… If it’s all ‘in our head’ and we have nothing to do with the God in heaven, what of revelation, what of guidance beyond the unseen and unknowable?
If the god in our heads is the only one we have to do with, the Mormonism really only offers us tribe. For those of us who have other tribal options the implications scare me.
Having said that, I like this:
Quote:
(1) our divine nature coming from Heavenly Father, (2) the light of Christ, given to us at birth equating to our conscience, and (3) the Holy Ghost, which dwells within as our constant companion. Whatever we may believe about the gods out there, I think we can and should agree that there is a god ‘in here’, and least, and set aside rejecting what I write here for a bit.
This approach suggests we as eternal souls with our small slice of deity, combined with God’s bestowed influencers (2 and 3 in your list) have been given the ability to measure and manage a lot of our life and “not be commanded in all things.” It also explains why, according to Joseph Smith, those who lived without law, will be judged without law.
If most of our decisions and morals are based on the god within then we really is a life of accountability. I sometimes wonder whether atheists are actually among the most elect of God’s children. While I have the majority of my questions and decisions guided by mormonism and our understanding of the god ‘out there,’ atheists are like PHD students who write their own exam question. There are many morally motivated atheists – based solely on the guidance of what you call the god within.
On the other hand… When I read the blog it also reminds me of the argument I have with myself that it probably is
just‘all in my head.’ I’m fine with the idea of a god ‘in here’ as long as there is also God ‘out there’ who is the source of life in this life and the next. Otherwise it’s all just neurons that eventually switch off and go dark…
I am willing to accept that “God is in me” but he surly has very little to say. Men for centuries have witnessed of the message he wants them to bear. Yet God is still absent when speaking to more than one person at a time. Then at best they get conflicting information. So what is Gods message? What does he want me to do as an individual? I know what others say God wants me to do, but what really is he expecting of me? My only conclusion is to do the best I can. Beyond that I will be waiting on God to give clearer instruction. My favorite part of the concept that we are gods and children of the Most High God, and that the kingdom of God is among/within us, is that it takes away our natural tendency to blame someone outside the collective “us” for the bad things that happen and puts the responsibility to deal with those things squarely on us as individuals and as a collective people. It makes Hitler responsible for what he did, but it also makes Mother Teresa responsible for what she did – and it makes me responsible for what I do on both sides of the scale. Mormonism’s addition of degrees of accountability and the idea that our judgment will be nothing more than an acknowledgment of who we are / become (what we make of our “divine nature”) is precious to me – and both of those concepts point toward the “god within”.
I think it’s interesting that the temple endowment paints a picture of competing Gods in this world. It hints at the primary contest being who we will follow in this world – that the ultimate goal is to establish the kingdom of God on earth – that the struggle is to see who will be able to say, in the end, that it is the day of their power. I also think it’s interesting that much of the early Mormon vision was focused less on theology and more on kingdom building – and that one of our Articles of Faith says we believe part of the plan is to make the earth a paradise.
I believe in seeing where we have legitimate, important similarities with other religionists, and I have no problem admitting and celebrating those similarities, but I think one area where we have become too much like the rest of Christianity is in our current focus on the Celestial Kingdom as somewhere out there and after. I think we have lost sight to a degree of the idea of creating the City of Enoch here on earth, and that idea is centered, imo, on this concept of “the god within” each one of us.
Thanks for your thoughts Wayfarer! Immanuel (or Emmanuel or Imanu’el, Hebrew עִמָּנוּאֵל meaning “God is with us”)
Roy wrote:Thanks for your thoughts Wayfarer!
Immanuel (or Emmanuel or Imanu’el, Hebrew עִמָּנוּאֵל meaning “God is with us”)
Exactly. As well, the “Kingdom of God” lies within us as well.I am really drawn to this concept of “god within.” The only thing I struggle with is what happens when two people have conflicting views because that is what each of their “god within” tells them. For example, let’s say I feel a strong desire to completely leave the LDS church, but my wife has an equally strong feeling that I should stay in the church. Now what? almostgone wrote:I am really drawn to this concept of “god within.” The only thing I struggle with is what happens when two people have conflicting views because that is what each of their “god within” tells them. For example, let’s say I feel a strong desire to completely leave the LDS church, but my wife has an equally strong feeling that I should stay in the church. Now what?
that is always a tough one. but i think of a lot of friends with mixed faith marriages, and one of the key things i find in common is support for the spouse’s faith.I think there is a greater concern than “what we want”. family unity, community, service… these things have value. when one spouse insists on staying, then there is really nothing I can do to change that. on the other hand, in time, she may see the light, or you both may find a suitable middle ground…it all takes time…and patience…and a lot of love.
your mind may be determined to leave, but the god within is much more than you. the god within does not always deal in logic, but in feelings, and in needs…the needs for community and the love of family are often more important than what we think.
I think I lead the conversation into the wrong direction… My only question is what do you when two people have their “god within” tell them conflicting things… I only used the leaving the church vs. staying as an example. Another example could be one person feels prompted to move to another state, while the other person feels no such inspiration. Or one persons “god within” tells them that smoking is wrong, while another persons “god within” tells them there is nothing wrong with it at all.
Another example would be with Joseph Smith. His “god within” told him to give commandments to other individuals. Why would this be? If it is true that we all have a “god within” why would we need anyone else to tell us what to do?
almostgone wrote:I think I lead the conversation into the wrong direction… My only question is what do you when two people have their “god within” tell them conflicting things… I only used the leaving the church vs. staying as an example.
Another example could be one person feels prompted to move to another state, while the other person feels no such inspiration. Or one persons “god within” tells them that smoking is wrong, while another persons “god within” tells them there is nothing wrong with it at all.
Another example would be with Joseph Smith. His “god within” told him to give commandments to other individuals. Why would this be? If it is true that we all have a “god within” why would we need anyone else to tell us what to do?
is there a wrong direction to a conversation like this? There are three possibilities.1. There is a hierarchal god out there, who controls all things and coordinates/correlates the messages given to individuals by their god within. This would be the ‘theist’ position.
2. There is nothing out there at all. Our ‘god within’ is merely our subconscious and there is no connection to the outside at all. The term ‘god within’ is meaningless. This would be the ‘atheist’ position.
3. There is a ‘divine network’, where the god(s) within can communicate with each other, but that these gods are not directly synchronized. This is a ‘Middle Way’ between theism and atheism. Probably not very satisfying to most people.
To say that we have a ‘god within’, also means that we have some pretty primitive base desires…a devil within as well. In general, however, the devil within, who chooses self-destructive behavior, would not ultimately survive evolution. Evolution would favor that natural tendencies toward survival and thriving of life.
When I started this message, I asked if there is a wrong direction to a conversation like this. The fact is I don’t know which of the three cases above is true. I have seen a LOT of evidence that we communicate subliminally with people around us, and our non-conscious mind is a lot more aware of the environment than our conscious mind is. We can detect subtle frequency shifts in background noise, and we tend to be able to identify patterns naturally. We are capable of recognizing faces easily, and from the face we can communicate a lot of imformation between people without words and conscious thought.
There is a connection — but there is no proof, nor even the potential viability that there is an orchestrating hierarchal god out there controlling all that is. As well, I have identified patterns that are meaningful to me…when my mother died, going to a sealing of her favorite granddaughter shortly after her death, and distinctly feeling her presence — these things sound hokey, but they are real to me.
If the case is either that there is nothing out there, or a divine network, then it is distinctly possible that the god within one person radically departs from the god within another. I would say, though, that whatever we believe god conveys to us, is simultaneously combined with our own conscious desires and biases, such that there is limited uniformity between messages conveyed through one person versus another. This can explain why there are differences in your example.
But I want to emphasize that we don’t know. I don’t know. It’s a model that helps me understand the world.
Excellent response Wayfarer. :thumbup: almostgone wrote:I am really drawn to this concept of “god within.” The only thing I struggle with is what happens when two people have conflicting views because that is what each of their “god within” tells them. For example, let’s say I feel a strong desire to completely leave the LDS church, but my wife has an equally strong feeling that I should stay in the church. Now what?
I believe this is how it should work if there is a deity in charge….at least how I would want it to go:
1. Both parties recognize the other is having inspiration based on where they are in the journey
2. Both are excited because their differences are what created opportunity to learn more…to have a heightened understand of the big picture…of they both are on the same page they should realize that very little growth will occur…
3. Put aside their fears and talk. Share perspectives and understand each is explaining truth as they know it…love and cherish the other and respect where they come from…you never know when the light will turn on in your head and you will have an “aha!” Moment where you will come in to new light and understanding
I think of the Indian tale of the 7 blind men and the elephant…each is correct in their limited understanding yet incorrect in their knowledge of the big picture and only through listening and talking together with open minds will they ever know the truth
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.