[An audio version of this article can be played below.]
Many members of the Church believe that God is subject to physical laws or that He perfectly understands and obeys the physical laws of the universe. In other words, that God is some sort of super-scientist who has managed to understand all of the laws of the universe. This is a common belief but it lacks scriptural basis.
Instead, God is the author of law. Law does not exist independently of God.
Consider the following:
And again, verily I say unto you, he hath given a law unto all things, by which they move in their times and their seasons; (D&C 88:42, emphasis added)
You see, God is the great lawgiver, and in a sense that means more than simply the giver of moral laws or commandments. He is also the giver of the laws of physics, chemistry, and so forth.
Gospel Scholar Susan Easton Black, held this understanding. She wrote, for instance:
Joseph Smith did not give self-existing law—which does not think, plan, or have purpose and also does not have body, parts, or passions—credit for the uniformity and order in the universe. Rather, he taught that the universe is governed and upheld by a powerful God who has body, parts, and passions and who is in the form of man. “If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible . . . you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves.”
God takes credit not only for the movement of the heavenly bodies but also for the physical changes that take place above the earth in the atmosphere, on the earth, and in the earth itself. For example, since he is responsible for creating natural law, he is ultimately responsible for the rain and snow and for the budding and blossoming of plants. He told William Marks and Newel K. Whitney to “settle up their business speedily and journey from the land of Kirtland, before I, the Lord, send again the snows upon the earth.” He also told them, “will I not make solitary places to bud and blossom, and to bring forth in abundance? saith the Lord.” (D&C 117:1, 7)
Joseph Smith explained that physical matter must obey the decrees or commandments of God (natural laws) until these laws are changed or revoked by a different commandment from God: “God has made certain decrees which are fixed and immovable; for instance, God set the sun, the moon, and the stars in the heavens, and gave them their laws, conditions and bounds, which they cannot pass, except by His commandments; they all move in perfect harmony in their sphere and order, and are as lights, wonders, and signs unto us. The sea also has its bounds which it cannot pass.” (Susan Easton Black, Doctrines for Exaltation: The 1989 Sperry Symposium on the Doctrine and Covenants, 55-71)
That God is the author of law was also the understanding of Elder Anthon H. Lund, member of the First Presidency, who held that:
We believe that everything is ruled by law. We are thankful that it is so, for otherwise we would live in a world of chance, in a fearful uncertainty of what would happen next. I believe that the material laws that can be traced in the creation had an intelligent will behind them, that the laws themselves were never superior to the will of God. He made those laws, and by His power they became effective to accomplish His purposes. (Conference Report, April 1916, p. 12. italics mine)
Also Elder Parley P. Pratt who stated that God,
has the power to govern and control the universe. (JD 17:324, emphasis added)
Here I believe Pratt was referring to God as the author of all natural laws. How else could he “govern and control the universe?”
But wait, Joseph Smith believed likewise. He stated:
God set the sun, the moon, and the stars in the heavens, and gave them their laws, conditions and bounds, which they cannot pass, except by His commandments; they all move in perfect harmony in their sphere and order. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 197-98.)
And:
If . . . we admit that God is the source of all wisdom and understanding, we must admit that by His direct inspiration He has taught man that law is necessary in order to govern and regulate His own immediate interest and welfare: for this reason, that law is beneficial to promote peace and happiness among men. And as before remarked, God is the source from whence proceeds all good; and if man is benefited by law, then certainly, law is good; and if law is good, then law, or the principle of it emanated from God; for God is the source of all good; consequently, then, he was the first Author of law, or the principle of it, to mankind. (Joseph Smith, HC 2:12-13.)
Joseph Fielding McConkie goes even further. Writing that it is heresy to believe that God is not the author of law:
A common Latter-day Saint heresy is that we become as God is through education or the mastery of laws. The notion being that God became God by identifying the laws of nature and learning how to live in harmony with them and how to harness them for his purposes. Our present text refutes such a notion. God is the author of law, not the co-partner with it. We do not worship law. Law, like the sectarian god, is without body, parts, and passions; it knows nothing of justice or mercy, or of good or evil. It has no power to determine or change its own course.
But, says one, is it not by obedience to law that Christ became as his Father and that we become as God is? To which the answer is, Yes, of course, but Christ followed only laws that had been ordained by the Father. His salvation rested in doing the will of the Father, not in discovering laws that govern in the universe and attempting to comply with them. So it is with us. We seek salvation in the teachings of the prophets, not that of scholars.
It is righteousness of which the scriptures speak, not scholarship. Exaltation is obtained by faith in Christ, repentance from sin, compliance with the ordinances of salvation, and enjoying the companionship of the Holy Ghost, not by the mastery of math and science. By obedience to gospel principles, Christ obtained the fulness of his Father. Having obtained that fulness, he became the personification of the Father and thus became a perfect expression of the mind and will of the Father. The power and authority of the Father thus became his and so we say of him (as we say of the Father) that he is in and through all things, that nothing is greater than he is, for he and the Father are one. The idea that God became such by the mastery of the laws of nature is a modern tower of Babel built on a college campus. It gets men no closer to heaven than its ancient counterpart. By contrast, revelation tells us, “The powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness” (D&C 121:36). (Revelations of the Restoration, D&C 88)
That God is the author of natural law also makes sense in light of: Moses 6:63; Psalms 19; and Alma 30:44. The fact that: “all things bear record of Christ,” that “the Heavens declare the Glory of God,” and that planets which “move in [a] regular form,” testifies “of a Supreme Creator” suggests that there was deliberate design in the making of such law.
That God is the author of law holds all sorts of theological and philosophical implications. None of which is within the scope of this thesis, except the idea – common to the founders – that, for man’s law to be just, it had to be founded upon God’s law. For instance, many Founding Father’s quoted William Blackstone who wrote:
Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws. . . (William Blackstone, as quoted by Verna M. Hall, ed. Christian History of the Constitution of the United States, p. 253)
Regarding the “law of nature” and even in the absence of direct revelation, man was not left alone to determine how man’s law should be formed. God provided man the ability to reason intellectually, and feel intuitively, the proper course to guide one’s actions and in the enacting of laws. John Locke could write, therefore:
“As men we have God for our King, and are under the law of Reason: As Christians, we have Jesus the Messiah for our King, and are under the law revealed by him in the gospel.” (John Locke, The Reasonableness of Christianity).
The “law of reason,” is manifest to individuals through the Light of Christ, and therefore through the operation of the Light of Christ just human laws can be formed.
That God is the author of law should also give new meaning to Thomas Paine:
But where some say is the king of America? I´ll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the royal brute of Great Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the Word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other. (Thomas Paine, Common Sense)
So which God are we talking about? As all LDS should understand, our God was once a mortal man just like us, and had to go through his probation just as we do now. So, before our God was God, who was the author of all law and the ruler of the universe? So you say, well, it was his father and God. Okay, so he too had to go through is probation before he became a God. And this continues on and on forever. In fact, all Gods, …, are you hearing me? All Gods had to go through a probation just as we do now. Yep, every single one of them, and there is no end to them. So who is the author of all law and who governs the universe?
The answer is none of them. The Gods are subject to natural laws just as we are. All matter is intelligent and operates within the sphere of the laws that govern them. The Gods did not create the laws of nature and they did not create matter. The Universe exists and operates independently of the Gods. I use the term “Gods” because that is what you believe. But to be more acurate, the Gods are simply men and women who have earned the right to greater knowledge. And with that knowledge, they can and do support man’s quest to progress. Hence, they seek to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. That’s why we’re here. To progress until we attain the highest level we can achieve or possibly reach the station of a God (Exalted man/woman). Read the King Follet discourse to gain a better understanding of some of these concepts. But I warn you that if you read it with an open mind, it will take you far beyond the comfort of your little box. I should know, it did for me.
Paul
Paul wrote:
To which I respond: Paul, go back and reread D&C 88:42. Here’s an excerpt:
Yes, it’s true that all matter is intelligent and alive and operates within the sphere of laws that govern them. But it is He who gave the law. I’ve backed this up with scripture and the words of modern day Prophets, Seers and Revelators. You haven’t.
Paul also states:
To which I also reply: What makes you think I haven’t read the King Follett Discourse? I must have read it dozens of times. But I agree with you that God is an exalted man. But it is God that gave the laws that exalt man. Or in other words, “when was there ever a Son without a Father?” As Rodney Turner wrote:
I forgot to give proper citation to the Rodney Turner quote. Here it is:
PAJ, Steven has backed up his claim with both scripture and the words of prophets and apostles. Can you do the same? If you can’t, then you aren’t expounding LDS doctrine, but PAJ doctrine.
Our views of what constitutes “law” are limited by mortal myopia. We don’t know what other laws exist and how they function. The Lord has told us a little about them. D&C 93 tells us:
“All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.” (D&C 93:30)
So truth is independent. To me, that means there is an objective truth, but we experience it subjectively–what Paul called “seeing through a glass darkly.” Exalted beings have perfect consonance between objective and subjective truth. The truth we accept determines the laws under which we live. From D&C 88:
“20 That bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent are they sanctified.
21 And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit canother kingdom, even that of a terrestrial kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom.
22 For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.
23 And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
24 And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet for a kingdom of glory. Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.
25 And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—”
Being a musician and music teacher, I tend to imagine this as a musical metaphor. When I show my students fingerings for guitar scales, I have them learn certain ones in certain orders because they build progressively upon one another. It eliminates the need to work out a fingering in advance because you learn the “law” and obey it through repetition. When they have mastered the fingerings, they discover that there are other ways to do them. They are still proper scales according to the rules of music theory, but there are other ways to achieve it.
The end result, if the student applies himself diligently is the ability to freely create, compose, and even improvise. The body does not limit the brain because the mechanics of how to “obey” are natural. The fingers respond and play what is in the heart and mind. There is no easy way or shortcut to get to that level. It’s all practice and repetition.
Then, a musician who has mastered the western 12-tone system to this degree might awaken to discover systems that exist that use 17, 19, or 21 tones per octave. A whole new level of law and discipline emerge from that discovery. A new panorama of creative expression can open.
I think God understands law and truth in such a way that he can create at will whatever he envisions in his mind’s eye. He is not limited by law because he is the master of law, a creator of law.
The next question should be, “What is the purpose of the law?” The Jews had a law as a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ. We have a terrestrial law called tithing. We have a celestial law called consecration. Charity is the most important law of them all, it appears.
To me, the law is whatever God ordains to move an individual or group of individuals towards exaltation. He intentionally sets up “paradoxes” to force us past our self-imposed limitations. For example, he that loses his life will find it. The prophets preach the importance of the family, yet the Lord challenges us to leave our family to go preach the gospel as missionaries. The law teaches the importance of chastity, and then the Lord turns around and challenges 19th century New Englanders from Puritan stock to practice plural marriage. He challenges the rich to forsake wealth. He challenges the poor to forsake envy and resentment.
All along the way, the test seems to be, will we follow a law, or will we follow the Lord. We would assume that these are one-in-the-same, but the tests often go against our assumptions, like Nephi’s being required to kill Laban. Abraham and Sarah had to lie to Pharaoh, when they presumed that honesty would be the standard. Can you imagine how Abraham and Sarah must have felt as they prayed for the Lord’s deliverance? Imagine the test that Sarah must have gone through, trusting Abraham’s inspiration? Imagine Abraham and Isaac? Again, it was a test that challenged Abraham’s assumptions about law and obedience.
It is a very human tendency, as evidenced in almost all man-made religions that, in the absence of revelation, men want a set of rules and boundaries to observe. In doing so, they place limits on what they expect God do demand of them. They arbitrarily divide secular from spiritual, etc. They say that God would never ask them to do such and such. They want lists of rules and the assurance that, so long as they “color inside the lines,” they’ll be saved.
Each of us, if we are fortunate enough, will be tested at some point to see if we will do all that the Lord commands us to do. The Lord wants to shake us loose from every “idol” and ever obstacle that separates us from him. Any misguided-loyalty we have that would keep us from following him will be challenged. I guarantee that a moment will come when we will have to take a step into unfamiliar territory because the Lord bids us to do so. At that moment, all we know about law gets tested to see if we will obey the direct revelations of the Spirit.
Last of all, we assume that the Father, when he went through his mortal probation, was like us–flawed and sinful. That is not the case. Joseph Smith plainly taught that Jesus did the things that he saw the Father do, that is: lay down his life and take it up again. Like Jesus, who did not require an atonement for his own sins, neither did God the Father. Joseph infers that Elohim himself had once been a Christ.
As we examine the life of Jesus Christ, he was obedient to law as a mortal in order to set the example. He grew grace for grace and truth for truth. Yet at no time was he subject to law, being the embodiment of all truth and law himself.
Perhaps therein lies the distinction between him and us vis-a-vis the law.
Very good Greg! Looking at either view being debated here along-side your music analogy, is it contrary to what’s been revealed to believe that God did not create each “note”, maybe each note precedes God, but the he did create the “tune” that governs this universe?
Or how about this, a software developer does not create the programming language he uses, but he does create the rules of his software via his programming language. Eh?
Skyler,
I think you get what I was trying to say in oh-so-many-words. I wouldn’t say that the note “precedes” God, but that it is co-existent with him. The Lord’s way is an eternal round. (1 Nephi 10:19, Alma 7:20) He lives in an environment where all things are “present” before him. (D&C 38:2, D&C 130:7) To me, that describes an existence where things are not linear. Cause and effect are co-existent, not sequential.
Debates like these are interesting, but we have to admit humbly that we cannot even scratch the surface of understanding eternal things. Even if the Lord reveals them to us in a way that we can understand, we may well lack the ability to describe them. The Nephites to whom the Savior appeared learned things when they heard him pray that they didn’t have the power to utter.
“Chicken and the egg” discussions like this probably cause some major “eye rolls” among the legions of angels who watch over us.
“Yes, it’s true that all matter is intelligent and alive and operates within the sphere of laws that govern them. But it is He who gave the law. I’ve backed this up with scripture and the words of modern day Prophets, Seers and Revelators. You haven’t.” — Steven
I don’t know that I would use the term “alive” in your statement since there is a difference between intelligence and being self-aware. In any case, you are totally fixated on “He who gave the law,” meaning that God gave it. Yet you totally ignore or are completely oblivious to the fact that our God has NOT always been God. So, if our God has not always been God, then who is the “He” who gave the law? Perhaps another God? Which God would that be? The Gods cannot create matter nor can they create the natural laws that govern them. Because of their vast knowledge, the Gods use the natural laws of the universe to achieve their goals and a lifestyle that we can hardly imagine. In the end, it all comes down to knowledge. It is knowledge that lifts a man or woman to the status of a God or to some lessor degree. Joseph Smith had the following to say about knowledge:
“It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance.” – Joseph Smith (HC 5:392)
“Knowledge saves a man; and in the world of spirits no man can be exalted but by knowledge.” – Joseph Smith (HC 6:314)
“Knowledge is the power of salvation.” – Joseph Smith (HC 5:403)
The reason that I asked you to read the King Follet discourse is because, based on your writing, you don’t appear to understand it. In this discourse, Joseph Smith infers that there was no creation. In other words, we were not created. We’ve always existed for all eternity. Hence, we are co-existent with the Gods. The only difference between our God and us is that He has already passed through his various stages of progression and has achieved the status of a God or an exalted man. Once you understand who you “really” are and who God “really” is, then you will be in a better position to understand your true relationship with Him. What you believe now about this is not entirely accurate. In fact, I would venture to say that you would happily reject the truth if you heard it. About this type of issue, Joseph Smith said the following:
“Brethren, if I were to tell you all I know of the Kingdom of God, I do know that you would rise up and kill me.” – Joseph Smith (by Parley P Pratt, Millennial Star 55:585)
There is so much more that I would like to say, but I have already cast enough pearls before you and the readers. I would like to encourage you, perhaps even warn you, NOT to put your trust in the arm of flesh. You and you alone are responsible for you own salvation. If you put your trust in anyone but the Lord, you will be damned.
Paul
PAJ, will you read G. West and my responses and let us know your thoughts? I believe this debate is bridge-able.
Skyler,
I did read the post by G. West and, with all due respect, I was not impressed. He is all over the map in his response and totally wrong on a number of points. I also read your post, with your analogies that need some improvement.
A better example is to consider mankind on this world. We did not create this planet, but here we are. We can till the ground and grow food; build nice homes with a variety of materials; build vehicals that can trasport us on the ground, water, and fly through the air; build great cities with fantastic skyscrapers; setup manufacturing that can make virtually anything; we can harness electricity to perform great work and miracles that vastly improve our lives; and we can build ships that can take us into space; etc.
Now, imagine this on a scale exponentially greater than this, perhaps even off the page. Imagine a world (kingdom) populated by exalted beings that possessed unbelieveable knowledge. Well, you can’t and neither can I. And the reason is because our understanding and imagination is quite limited to what we know and have experience with in this world. Our existance here is pathetic and grossly primative. We may think that we are happy and that we are surrounded by beauty, but compared to what awaits us in the eternities, our lifetime here would be more accurately compared to a waking nightmare. After seeing the vision of the lowest kingdom of heaven, the witnesses said that if mankind saw what awaited them in the afterlife, that they would commit suicide to get there. Well, I think that about sums it up.
Anyway, I don’t know what or how you think this debate can be bridged. If I’ve missed something, please do enlighten me. :-)
Paul
Paul, as I said previously, Steven’s argument has been backed up by prophets and scripture, yours has not. Why is that? My hope in bridging this debate was more for your benefit than his. Do you have any scriptures or prophetic counsel to back up your claim? If not, then, as I said, you are espousing PAJ doctrine.
Skyler,
PAJ doctrine. Hummm. I has a nice ring to it. LOL! Gack!
Since you like quotes so much, let me give you a few from Joseph Smith:
“I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the Saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them, after suffering all that they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything come that is contrary to their traditions: they cannot stand the fire at all. How many will be able to abide a celestial law, and go through and receive their exaltation, I am unable to say, as many are called, but few are chosen.” – Joseph Smith (HC 6:185)
You may think you are well read, but the early saints knew as much or more than you do. And yet, they could not handle the revelations that contradicted their beliefs.
“The Prophet said to me [Brigham Young] about sixteen years ago [at Kirtland], ‘if I was to show the Latter-day Saints all the revelations that the Lord has shown unto me, there is scarce a man that would stay with me, they could not bear it.’” – Brigham Young (Millennial Star 13:257)
Again, the early saints new what we know, and yet they would have left the church if Joseph told them all he knew. You should really think about that and the conclusion it leads to.
“If the Church knew all the commandments, one-half they would condemn through prejudice and ignorance.” – Joseph Smith (HC 2:477)
Yep. In essence, Joseph Smith was trying to point out that the true Gospel of Jesus Christ was so different than modern Christianity that it was practically alien in comparison. That’s why it was so hard for them to accept. And keep in mind that Joseph Smith did not reveal most of what he knew because the entire church (except for a few) would have apostatized.
Anyway, I say these things not so much for you, Skyler, but for those who are honestly looking for answers, those who will not fly to pieces like glass when they learn something that is outside of their paradigm.
Paul
PAJ, you’ve yet to back up your argument that God is not the author of law with anything, and you continue to dodge my requesting you to. Why?
“PAJ, you’ve yet to back up your argument that God is not the author of law with anything, and you continue to dodge my requesting you to. Why?” — Skyler
Again, what God are you referring to and what law are you referring to? With regards to the probationary state we are in now on this world, this exact process has been going on for all eternity, worlds without end. Like using a template. When our God became God and put us here on this sphere, he did not create new laws or rules for us to follow. These same laws or rules we abide here have been in place for all eternity. I know very well what the scriptures say, but I also know that much of the scriptures are written in symbolic language that most people are quite unfamiliar with. For example, when you read Genesis 2:7,
“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
If anyone actually believes that God breathed into Adam’s nostrils the breathe of life, then you are living in La La land. I bring this up only to make my point that what you read is not necessarily how it actually happened. And the same goes for removing a rib of Adam to make Eve. It is all symbolic language. Anyway, I digress…
Joseph Smith stated in the King Follet discourse that matter cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be changed and manipulated. This means that matter is co-existent with the Gods. This means that the Gods did NOT create matter, and as such, did not set forth the laws or rules that govern all matter. And this leads to the logical conclusion that the Gods did not author the laws or rules of nature, which are dependent on the laws of matter. As I stated in an earlier post, the Univese exists and operates independently of the Gods. Mankind and all intelligent self-aware life forms in the Universe are eternal components of the Universe and were not created by anyone. As Joseph Smith said in the King Follet discourse, “God cannot create God.”
When our God says that this is his law or he is the author of that law, we must understand that, as a man who has earned the right to his exaltation and has become a member of an elite group of people called Gods, he has the privilege of making this claim.
Paul
PAJ – “When our God says that this is his law or he is the author of that law, we must understand that, as a man who has earned the right to his exaltation and has become a member of an elite group of people called Gods, he has the privilege of making this claim.”
So then he’s lying? Or is it closer to Greg’s analogy?
Skyler,
Neither, but I really don’t know what Greg’s analogy is. The Lord usually speaks in Prophetic language in the scriptures just as the ancient prophets did. Aside from Joseph Smith, none of the modern Prophets use it or appear to understand it.
Paul
Greg’s analogy was simple. Surely you can understand it from his post (and my then his follow ups). Are you claiming that modern prophets don’t use our understand the Lord’s language in the scriptures, besides Joseph Smith? Feel free to re-state your position if I’ve misconstrued it.
This entire argument and its metaphysical and epistemological foundation presupposes creation ex nihilo, and this stands in opposition to LDS theology. Any absolute adherence to natural law philosophers pre-restoration of the gospel will likewise suppose creation ex nihilo — this is why most continental philosophers almost completely reject the notion of natural law, because every philosophical foundation of natural law is founded on a metaphysical and epistemological concept of creation ex nihilo.
As for the interpretation of the quotes from scripture and actual General Authorities of the Church, there are a few inconsistencies here.
First, this article does not clearly define the distinction between the positive laws that our Father in Heaven gives to his children that are a type of the actual principle (i.e. natural law), and then, without defining the two types of laws, it calls the positive laws the natural law. For instance, consider the quote from “Elder Anthon H. Lund, member of the First Presidency, who held that:
‘We believe that everything is ruled by law. We are thankful that it is so, for otherwise we would live in a world of chance, in a fearful uncertainty of what would happen next. I believe that the material laws that can be traced in the creation had an intelligent will behind them, that the laws themselves were never superior to the will of God. He made those laws, and by His power they became effective to accomplish His purposes. (Conference Report, April 1916, p. 12. italics mine)’”
It is not necessary to take a legally positivist approach to natural law and declare that God positively created natural law ex nihilo, for it is easy enough to solve this quandary by acknowledging that God is the originator of all positive [material] laws and commands as he directs his children — and that all material positive laws can be traced in the creation to an intelligence and principle. After all, by way of example, no man could be saved through perfect adherence to the Law of Moses, for this law was an arbitrary positive law/code that originated with God as a type, token, and symbol of the actual principle of Christ’s sacrifice and atonement.
Secondly, if our Father did not create matter ex nihilo, then there are certain natural principles that he did not ‘create’ as well. For Joseph Smith said that “Element had an existence from the time [God] 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.” What are these “principles of element” that have no origin? Joseph Smith taught that God ‘organized’ everything that already existed. “Law,” in a very general sense, is the definition of how and what things ‘are,’ and, by virtue of the priesthood keys of Lawgiver, it is easy to see how God would have a “pure knowledge” (D&C 121:42) of what things already were inherently in and of themselves and then ‘give’ or ‘impart’ this knowledge to the elements (i.e. the lawgiver would give the elements the “law”) so that the elements could use the agency that had existed in forming together. This is plainly obvious in the creation story found in Abraham 4, as we are told “the Gods organized the earth… and the Gods saw that they were obeyed” (Abr 4:12). Now the question is, does the elements ‘obeying’ “even as they were ordered” (Abr 4:11) presuppose that all natural law is merely a positive dictation from the Lawgiver? The answer is quite simply, no, it does not.
Third, Joseph Smith’s statement that God set and ordained things in their sphere, movement, and place does not prove the author’s point. If we suppose that God is the greatest scientist and works with materials that have always existed (i.e. materials that were not created ex nihilo), we can easily say that God abode by pre-existing natural principles in imparting to the elements a pure knowledge of what they were in and of themselves. As such, when the elements obey God and come together, we can plainly see that all things still bear witness of a Creator, and that God is still the source of everything coming together — in other words, God is still the source of the law, in that God is the source of revealed truth and “pure knowledge”. After all, although all matter existed in chaos (i.e. that the elements were unorganized) before the Creator revealed to this matter what it was inherently, we can say, in every way, that God is still the origin of the law in putting all things in their proper sphere, and that all things have happened because of him. Again, Joseph Smith’s quote here, and the various scriptures, do not disprove the “God as the greatest scientist” point that the author is trying to make.
Fourth, the author’s opening statement — “Many members of the Church believe that God is subject to physical laws or that He perfectly understands and obeys the physical laws of the universe” — points out a major flaw in many philosophies. It is a false dichotomy that God is either (1) above the law as the absolute originator of everything ex nihilo, or (2) that God is subject to the law. However, if law is the definition of what things are inherently, and the lawgiver — who has a ‘pure knowledge’ of all things as they are — gives the law to matter unorganized (i.e. he reveals to matter unorganized what it is, and matter uses its eternal agency to obey and form together) — then we say that God is the originator of the law to these elements, for God is the source of their law. This does not mean that God is an arbitrary positive director, or that natural law is a creation from an arbitrary positive dictate.
Lastly, if we suppose that God is absolutely the positive and natural originator of all law, period, then how do we resolve the idea that “as man now is God once was, and as God now is man may become”? If our God is the absolute originator of all law, then how did “the law” work in this eternal spectrum and context?
Shiloh, you’ve made some very important points that I think the author should consider. I’m curious what you thought of what Greg and I explored? See above.
I am very, very late in answering Shiloh’s reply dated August 8, 2010. It seems that life has a way of intervening.
Shiloh’s main argument seems to be that one must believe in a creation ex nihilo if one also believes that God is the author of all law. But such a belief in creation ex nihilo is not necessary, in fact I deny it also.
It is true that matter has always existed. But so has God. As Joseph Smith put it, “Where was there ever a son without a father? And where was there ever a father without first being a son? Whenever did a tree or anything spring into existence without a progenitor? And everything comes in this way.” I know this is which came first, the chicken or the egg quandry, but that where things stand at the moment.
God is neither subject to nor master over the law. God did not create law and law did not create God. Law defines things as they are and God is co-eternal with intelligences and the elements. Thus, law defines God as He is. God has perfect knowledge of things as they are by virtue of His priesthood. To assert that God created law is to say that one was before the other. It is not so. All of your quotes and scriptures point to one conclusion: God is co-eternal with the law.
I wrote my entire Honors Thesis on this subject. I agree 100% with the author’s original claims, and have 50 pages of research to support it.
Let me know if you are interested in it.
Shiloh,
I believe that God is the absolute originator of all law [that pertains to us and the matter around us]. This does not conflict with the statement that “as man now is God once was, and as God now is man may become,” because God ‘grew up’ in a universe governed by another. ‘God’ isn’t just a solitary person, but a title or position of authority. God is the originator of all laws within His jurisdiction (His children and the matter in His children’s universe).
“Secondly, if our Father did not create matter ex nihilo, then there are certain natural principles that he did not ‘create’ as well.”
This doesn’t logically follow. It is easy to imagine (especially if you are versed in quantum mechanics) completely ungoverned matter.
Steven’s views are a misunderstanding of scripture, and are out of harmony with the teachings of our early prophets, like Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.
God didn’t create the universe. He didn’t create matter. He didn’t create the laws of nature. He is a material being, who is subject to the same eternal, independent, and unchangeable laws that all matter is subject to. If you believe otherwise, then you apparently know very little about Mormonism.
John, see my reply to Shiloh. I don’t believe that God created matter ex nihilo. If God is subject to “eternal, independent, and unchangeable laws that all matter is subject to” then God is not master of the law. I deny that thesis. As to how much I know about Mormonism, you have the right to your opinion.
Who says God is master of all laws? And if you have scriptures that say such, how do you define law? You can’t just over-simplify things and expect it to be true. Then you end up sounding like a dogmatic McConkie, and end up rejecting the teachings of Mormonism’s Prophets in the process.
If God didn’t create matter, but was organized from matter himself by someone else, how can he be above those laws? That’s an illogical absurdity.
Your view of God is shared by mainstream Christianity, but it isn’t shared by Joseph Smith or Brigham Young and their contemporaries. Do you at least admit that?
Steven quotes Joseph Fielding McConkie as saying:
“A common Latter-day Saint heresy is that we become as God is through education or the mastery of laws. The notion being that God became God by identifying the laws of nature and learning how to live in harmony with them and how to harness them for his purposes. Our present text refutes such a notion. God is the author of law, not the co-partner with it.”
That’s funny, the Official Priesthood manual for 1915, Rational Theology, by John A. Widtsoe, and published by the General Priesthood Committee of the Church, completely refutes Joseph Fielding McConkie.
The Priesthood manual says that in the universe, “the law of cause and effect reigns supreme,” not God, and that cause and effect is the “universal law to which all lesser laws contribute.” The manual continues: “This is the great law of nature, to which every living thing must conform, if it is to be in harmony with all other things. . . . Since man is constantly being acted upon and acting upon matter and energy, he must himself be brought under the subjection of the great law. . . . Man, as he gathers experience, becomes more powerful in using the forces of nature in the accomplishment of his purposes. With this thought in mind the great law becomes a law of increasing power, of progressive mastery over the universe. For that reason, the law expressing the resultant of the activities of universal forces is often called the law of progression. . . . Nature is inexhaustible in the possible number of inter-relations among matter, energy and intelligence. It follows, therefore, that man will forever be able to add knowledge unto knowledge, power unto power, or progress unto progress. This law of progression is the great law of the universe, without beginning and without end, to which all other laws contribute. By adherence to this law the willing, intelligent beings have risen to their present splendid state of manhood, and by further compliance with this law they will advance to a future Godlike state of perfection. The supreme intelligence and perfected will of the universe, God, has attairied His position by an obedient recognition of the conditions of the law of progression.”
We also have Brigham Young, 1 February 1857:—“My religion is natural philosophy. You never heard me preach a doctrine but what has a natural system to it, and, when understood, is as easy to comprehend as that two and two equal four. All the revelations of the Lord Almighty to the children of men, and all revealed doctrines of salvation are upon natural principles, upon natural philosophy. When I use this term, I use it as synonomous with the plan of salvation; natural philosophy is the plan of salvation, and the plan of salvation is natural philosophy.” (In Journal of Discourses, vol. 4 [Liverpool: S. W. Richards, 1857], pp. 202–3.)
Another example: “When we speak of the law of Christ, we speak of it as the power to keep matter in its organization.” –Brigham Young (see JD 6:330-333)
Not all laws are the same. There are those laws that God gives us and we are obliged to obey in order to progress. All mankind, the animals, plants, and elements are all required to obey these laws. They fall into the realm of “the lesser law”. As we progress, we learn to obey the greater law as it is given. Thus the separation of Kingdoms. We are bound to obey these laws.
However, God is bound by an even greater law; the law of the God’s if you will. This is not a law we are bound by yet, as we are not God’s. God CANNOT break the law or he will cease to be God. We all know that he is a God of order, not chaos.
So when we speak about God being the author of the law, this simply means that he decides which laws are given to his children to obey. They still fall within the boundaries of the greater law, the law that God is bound by.
For example, God has commanded that a man be married to one wife. We know that polygamy is the greater law. But we have not been commanded to live it at this time. Does that mean if a man only marries one wife he is breaking the greater law of plural marriage? Of course not. It still falls within the bounds of the law.
As to the music analogy listed above. The most important thing left out of that was God. The entire analogy leaves the impression that the student will progress base on their personal understanding and learning as they acquire the knowledge of the notes. We all had the knowledge and understanding of the laws before we came to earth, we are here simply trying to remember them.
We all fully understood what progress would require. We only needed to come here for 2 reasons. 1- To gain our bodies. 2- To be tested to see if we would use our free agency to choose the path of God. Everything else was already decided. We simply had to choose it. God is now doing everything he possibly can to help us achieve it (remember the scripture about his work and his glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man) by giving us greater and greater laws until we can become like him.
So is God the author of the law? It depends on the law you are talking about. The laws as we know them, yes. He is the author of the law. The law that He lives by, no. It has always existed and God is God because he lives by that law.
Chuck, see also my reply to Shiloh. I know my answer seems simple, but that’s how I see things. Cheers.
Wow! Isn’t it great that God our Father has seen fit to give us free agency? Isn’t it wonderful that we can…and do voice our opinion about stuff? I’ve really enjoyed reading the different thoughts! I know someone on this posting board…and agree with him. Yet…I see some other posts that have grabbed my thought process! This comment board has given me pause. Thanks! Wouldn’t it really really be a shame…if we lost this ability? To have our own thoughts…and…to speak them? If folks don’t start waking up to our awful situation…and stop putting so much FAITH in the ARM OF FLESH…we WILL be slaves. Lucifer wants to force. So…he starts a war in heaven. Was the war won by either side? No. Just changed battlefields! WILL…it be won? Count on it! But…what will be lost? Just earlier I said ” we will be slaves”…but truthfully that is already occurring…right? Why else would it be necessary to “redeem?” I’m not going to weight in with my opinion about the subject at hand…as I’m not quite as smart as you guys. I’ll just continue to “listen for the spirit.” The spirit doesn’t bring opinion and that’s a sweet thing!
@Marc: That is the great thing. You do not have to be smart to understand the Gospel. I think that is frankly why there are so many arguments. The gospel is simple enough to understand that an 8 yo can understand and accept it. And yes you are right, free agency and what we do with it is all that will matter in the long run. God doesn’t care about these discussions. He just wants us to follow Him. Obedience is the key! It’s like President Faust once said, the only thing we truly have to offer God that is ours is our Agency. Everything else is His.
@ Chuck: Agreed!