Does the LDS church teach that men can evolve into a God?

Bonnie

Well-known member
Right before the last boards crashed and burned, I put down on here that in Mormon theology, man can evolve into a God. The Mormons on here denied that their church teaches any such thing. I did put down proof, however, that it DOES. Then the boards crashed and burned.

I found the following on their church's official website. This article is written by their church's First Presidency, as one can see, if one scrolls down to the very bottom and sees who penned this article. The article is rather long, entitled "The Origin of Man." It is full of a lot of unbiblical assertions, but it is the very last paragraph that interests me:

Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.


This is also reiterated in other places on the LDS official website:


Now, I have sometimes been accused on here of misrepresenting Mormon beliefs, without proof. I am perfectly willing to admit when I make mistakes, but I must be shown proof. But sometimes, even when I prove that I was correct in something the LDS church teaches, some Mormons still will refuse to believe it, sometimes holding to their own beliefs, contrary to what their church officially teaches.

So, I was correct in this "evolve into a God" assertion I made on the last boards. Their First Presidency made that very claim.
 
Last edited:

organgrinder

Active member
Right before the last boards crashed and burned, I put down on here that in Mormon theology, man can evolve into a God. The Mormons on here denied that their church teaches any such thing. I did put down proof, however, that it DOES. Then the boards crashed and burned.

I found the following on their church's official website. This article is written by their church's First Presidency, as one can see, if one scrolls down to the very bottom and sees who penned this article. The article is rather long, entitled "The Origin of Man." It is full of a lot of unbiblical assertions, but it is the very last paragraph that interests me:




This is also reiterated in other places on the LDS official website:


Now, I have sometimes been accused on here of misrepresenting Mormon beliefs, without proof. I am perfectly willing to admit when I make mistakes, but I must be shown proof. But sometimes, even when I prove that I was correct in something the LDS church teaches, some Mormons still will refuse to believe it, sometimes holding to their own beliefs, contrary to what their church officially teaches.

So, I was correct in this "evolve into a God" assertion I made on the last boards. Their First Presidency made that very claim.
It would appear so, Bonnie. In black and white. Idolatry documented.
 

Bonnie

Well-known member
Thanks. It will be interesting to see if any Mormon responds, when they come back.
 

zerinus

Member
Thanks. It will be interesting to see if any Mormon responds, when they come back.
Deification is indeed an essential and integral doctrine of the Church; but it doesn't come about by "evolution". People don't "evolve" to become gods, or deified. It is a gift that God bestows on those who obtain salvation and exaltation in his eternal kingdom. It is a gift of God.
 

Bonnie

Well-known member
Sooo, Zerinus....you know better than your First Presidency? I found that paragraph in several different places on the LDS website. So, was the First Presidency wrong? They plainly wrote man can evolve into a God.

Once again, I proved I was correct about something the LDS church teaches, providing proof from the official LDS website, from the First Presidency no less. And still, I am told I am wrong.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt...
 

zerinus

Member
Sooo, Zerinus....you know better than your First Presidency? I found that paragraph in several different places on the LDS website. So, was the First Presidency wrong? They plainly wrote man can evolve into a God.
They were just being imprecise and inaccurate. That was written over a hundred years ago. They were not known for careful, accurate, theological thinking in those days. The doctrine is more accurately stated in LDS scripture.
Once again, I proved I was correct about something the LDS church teaches, providing proof from the official LDS website, from the First Presidency no less. And still, I am told I am wrong.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt...
That is silly. Deification or theosis is an integral doctrine of the Church, and always has been. But it is not acquired by evolution.; it is a gift of God.
 

organgrinder

Active member
Deification is indeed an essential and integral doctrine of the Church; but it doesn't come about by "evolution". People don't "evolve" to become gods, or deified. It is a gift that God bestows on those who obtain salvation and exaltation in his eternal kingdom. It is a gift of God.
Your church leaders and website says otherwise.

Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.

From you own church's website. I assume you accept what the words plainly mean. Perhaps you have never read it. You explanation of your leaders assumed lack of "careful, accurate, theological thinking" is just a cover what what was taught and believed. It's a dodge. Same reason why McConkie's book on Mormon Doctrine was shuffled off to the back rooms after being used for so many years by the TBMs. You doctrines are ungodly in many areas-- this being one of them-- and the embarrassment is palatable.
 

zerinus

Member
Your church leaders and website says otherwise.

Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.

From you own church's website. I assume you accept what the words plainly mean. Perhaps you have never read it. You explanation of your leaders assumed lack of "careful, accurate, theological thinking" is just a cover what what was taught and believed. It's a dodge. Same reason why McConkie's book on Mormon Doctrine was shuffled off to the back rooms after being used for so many years by the TBMs. You doctrines are ungodly in many areas-- this being one of them-- and the embarrassment is palatable.

The doctrine of the Church is determined by scripture. That is what all past leaders have acknowledged, and that is what I go by:

Doctrine and Covenants 76:

50 And again we bear record—for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ concerning them who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just
51 They are they who received the testimony of Jesus, and believed on his name and were baptized after the manner of his burial, being buried in the water in his name, and this according to the commandment which he has given
52 That by keeping the commandments they might be washed and cleansed from all their sins, and receive the Holy Spirit by the laying on of the hands of him who is ordained and sealed unto this power;
53 And who overcome by faith, and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true.
54 They are they who are the church of the Firstborn.
55 They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things
56 They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory;
57 And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son.
58 Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God
59 Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.
60 And they shall overcome all things.

Doctrine and Covenants 132:

17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.
• • •
37 Abraham . . . abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.


Like I said, Church doctrine is determined by scripture, not by what anybody else has said. Deification in the theology of Latter-day Saints is a gift of God. It doesn't come about by "evolution". It is a gift that is bestowed on those who obtain salvation and exaltation in the celestial kingdom of heaven.
 

zerinus

Member
I also forgot to include these verses in my previous post:

Doctrine and Covenants 132:

20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.
22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.
23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also.
24 This is eternal lives—to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.
 

Bonnie

Well-known member
Zerinus, I have seen all of this, many times. But it does not change what the first Presidency wrote, and is posted on your church's official website. They say man can evolve into a God. If this idea bothers you do much,then perhaps you should ask yourself WHY. Also, evolve just means to change from one form of life to another, usually from a lower to higher form. Well, isn't deity a higher form of life than mortal man? Doesn't man in Mormon theology change from a mortal man to deity, like going up the rungs of a ladder, until he achieves godhood? Isn't that evolution? Is the First Presidency wrong?
 

zerinus

Member
Zerinus, I have seen all of this, many times. But it does not change what the first Presidency wrote, and is posted on your church's official website. They say man can evolve into a God. If this idea bothers you do much,then perhaps you should ask yourself WHY.

It doesn't bother me. It seems to bother you a lot more!

Also, evolve just means to change from one form of life to another, usually from a lower to higher form. Well, isn't deity a higher form of life than mortal man? Doesn't man in Mormon theology change from a mortal man to deity, like going up the rungs of a ladder, until he achieves godhood? Isn't that evolution? Is the First Presidency wrong?

That is probably how they thought about it as well, but it is not theologically accurate. The main thing is that I agree with them, and they agree with me, that men can become gods. But how one expresses it is also important. I like to be closer to how the scripture says it, than to how you (or they) have said it. It doesn't come about "by experience through ages and aeons of evolving". It comes about by a divine decree and appointment, like it says in the scriptures I had quoted. It didn't take Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob "ages and aeons of evolving" to become gods (see D&C 132:37). They got there a lot faster than that. That means that it is not an "evolutionary" process, at least not in the usual sense of the term. They didn't get there all at once either. They had to pass certain tests. But describing it as an "evolution" is also not the most correct way of expressing it.
 

Bonnie

Well-known member
But your First Presidency says man can evolve into a God. Smith said it was like going up the rungs of a ladder, going from glory to glory, until one achieves godhood (paraphrasing). That sounds like evolution to me.

However, the idea that the First Presidency expresses does agree with what I wrote on the last boards--your church leadership DOES teach--and the official LDS site confirms it--that men can evolve into a God. EVOLVE. Now, was the First Presidency wrong to express it like that, or not? Is your church body wrong for putting their expression on their official website and endorsing it? What is wrong, in your church's theology, with saying men can EVOLVE into a God, since it teaches that mean can BECOME Gods?

I did not say that the idea that men can become Gods seems to bother you--it is the idea that they can EVOLVE into a God that seems to bother you.

So, is the First Presidency right or wrong?
 

Bonnie

Well-known member
So, zerinus--you know better than your first Presidency, and president, prophet, and revelator, do? Seems to me, saying men can evolve into Gods is MORE precise than saying they can become Gods.
 
Last edited:

zerinus

Member
So, zerinus--you know better than your first Presidency, and president, prophet, and revelatory, do?

I don't, but God does! I like the way God has said it better! :)

Seems to me, saying men can evolve into Gods is MORE precise than saying they can become Gods.

Have it your way. Seems to me you just want to argue. Not interested in that.
 

Bob Carabbio

Active member
They were just being imprecise and inaccurate. That was written over a hundred years ago. They were not known for careful, accurate, theological thinking in those days. The doctrine is more accurately stated in LDS scripture.

That is silly. Deification or theosis is an integral doctrine of the Church, and always has been. But it is not acquired by evolution.; it is a gift of God.
SO Joe Smith, in spite of his personal relationship with AN ANGEL OF GOD, "was not known for careful, accurate, theological thinking in those days". That reveals a lot about the "LDS Corporate standards".
 

zerinus

Member
SO Joe Smith, in spite of his personal relationship with AN ANGEL OF GOD, "was not known for careful, accurate, theological thinking in those days". That reveals a lot about the "LDS Corporate standards".

The revelations I quoted, and which I go by, came from Joseph Smith. That is the standard which I am going by. How did you learn to talk so much nonsense? Was it hard? I couldn't do it if I tried. It must take a lot of talent to be able do that.
 

Bonnie

Well-known member
I don't, but God does! I like the way God has said it better! :)



Have it your way. Seems to me you just want to argue. Not interested in that.
I was told by all the Mormons on here on the lasts boards, that your church does NOT teach that men can evolve into Gods. In no uncertain terms, I was told that I was wrong, when I wrote that on here. BUT--your church's very own First Presidency teaches just that! Your church's very own prophet, seer, and revelator teaches just that--that man is capable of evolving into a God! Why not own it, Zerinus? It is on your church's official website. Why does the idea of men "evolving" into Gods seem to disturb you so much?
 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Well-known member
They were just being imprecise and inaccurate. That was written over a hundred years ago. They were not known for careful, accurate, theological thinking in those days. The doctrine is more accurately stated in LDS scripture.

That is silly. Deification or theosis is an integral doctrine of the Church, and always has been. But it is not acquired by evolution.; it is a gift of God.
So, stuff written in 1909--79 years after your church was founded--was "imprecise"? I read what they wrote and it sounds pretty precise to me. Not vague or unclear. One would think that, after 79 years, your church's leadership would know how to be "precise" in describing its doctrines, would one not? After all, this was written by the FIRST PRESIDENCY in your church, your church's top theologians. Is there any higher in your church than the First Presidency? Wouldn't they know better than anyone what your church teaches and how to interpret what the LDS scriptures say?
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
So--how did the Early Church Fathers say it?

Tertullian - Adv. Hermogenes 5 Well, then, you say, we ourselves at that rate possess nothing of God. But indeed we do, and shall continue to do—only it is from Him that we receive it, and not from ourselves. For we shall be even gods, if we shall deserve to be among those of whom He declared, “I have said, Ye are gods,” and “God standeth in the congregation of the gods.” But this comes of His own grace, not from any property in us, because it is He alone who can make gods. (ANF 3.480).

Justin - Dial. 124 ...thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming "gods", and of having power to become sons of the Highest. (ANF 1.262).

Irenaeus - Adv. Her. 5.Pref ...the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself. (ANF 1.526).

Clement of Alexandria - The Instructor 3.1 It is then, as appears, the greatest of al lessons to know one's self. For if one know himself, he will know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God...But that man with whom the Word dwells does not alter himself, does not get himself up: he has the form which is of the Word; he is made like to God...and that man becomes God, since God so wills. Heraclitus, then, rightly said, "Men are gods, and gods are men." (ANF 2.271).

Athanasius - De Incarnation 54 For He was made man that we might be made God. (NPNF, second series, 4.65).
 
Top