Transhumanism and Mormonism

[madhatter85]

Mormon Transhumanist Association

It's an interesting concept, I am watching the video on the main page now. While I am treading lightly and taking it with a grain of salt, what I have seen so far is rather intriguing and a lot of the ideas are things I have thought about and personally thought to be possibilities.

 

[madhatter85]

I'm surprised nobody has any input.

 

[madhatter85]

there is a really great discussion going on over at their googlegroup http://groups.google.com/group/transfigurism?hl=en.

I'm surprised that there are a lot of non-Mormons who are investigating Mormonism now because of the apparent overlap between Mormonism and Transhumanism.

 

[Arkholt]

I got to watch about half of that video a week or so ago, but haven't gotten to watch the whole thing yet. From what I saw, some parts of it seemed a little hokey to me. I'll watch it again and make some notes. It is an interesting thing. I always enjoy comparisons between Mormonism and "new age" concepts.

 

[madhatter85]

I got to watch about half of that video a week or so ago, but haven't gotten to watch the whole thing yet. From what I saw, some parts of it seemed a little hokey to me. I'll watch it again and make some notes. It is an interesting thing. I always enjoy comparisons between Mormonism and "new age" concepts.

Oh I don't disagree at all, In the discussions people are even saying some hokey things. However, there are a lot that seems plausible. I'm not preaching it as truth because, well, it's opinion and not fact garnered from Scripture and prophetic voices.

 

[Arkholt]

Finished watching the whole video from the site. I had a few issues with it, but the biggest thing, which I think is most important and which his main argument is resting on, is the part about resurrection taking work on our part to bring to pass and that it may be an ordinance of the Priesthood.

I've never heard either of these concepts before, but he presented it as a doctrine of the Church. If it is, his argument works very well, because the whole thing is about us making increasingly better technology to improve ourselves and each other. However, I wasn't aware that it was a doctrine of the Church.

I'm also a little shaky on the "doctrine" that resurrection will be progressive on an individual basis. I know not everyone will be resurrected at once, and it will be progressive in the sense of one person getting resurrected before another. However, I've also never heard of the doctrine of a person getting resurrected or transfigured over a period of time. Whatever happened to "We shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" (paraphrasing scripture)?

Basically, I agree that there are some interesting parallels, but I don't buy the complete package.

 

[madhatter85]

Finished watching the whole video from the site. I had a few issues with it, but the biggest thing, which I think is most important and which his main argument is resting on, is the part about resurrection taking work on our part to bring to pass and that it may be an ordinance of the Priesthood.

I've never heard either of these concepts before, but he presented it as a doctrine of the Church. If it is, his argument works very well, because the whole thing is about us making increasingly better technology to improve ourselves and each other. However, I wasn't aware that it was a doctrine of the Church.

I'm also a little shaky on the "doctrine" that resurrection will be progressive on an individual basis. I know not everyone will be resurrected at once, and it will be progressive in the sense of one person getting resurrected before another. However, I've also never heard of the doctrine of a person getting resurrected or transfigured over a period of time. Whatever happened to "We shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" (paraphrasing scripture)?

Basically, I agree that there are some interesting parallels, but I don't buy the complete package.

I will try to provide some outlook on how the resurrection will take place. the following I have transcribed from the book: The Plan of Salvation: Understanding our Divine Origin and Destiny, by Matthew B. Brown:

Jesus Christ took up his body again "by the power of the spirit" (2 Nephi 2:8) It appears the same mechanism will play a part in the resurrection of each son and daughter of God. It was Joseph Smith's teaching that God [will] bring [the dead] up again, clothed upon and quickened by the Spirit of the great God." This may not be the only mechanism that plays part in the resurrection process, however. Gospel scholar Robert J. Matthews notes:

Any Doctrine or ordinance as fundamental to man's eternal salvation as the resurrection of the dead is of necessity regulated and performed by the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood. It is also a part of the patriarchal order of the family. So far as the celestial kingdom is concerned, the resurrection is a family event. We would at first naturally suppose that Jesus would resurrect Himself, but perhaps he did not. Jesus did not baptize himself. The clear rendering of Acts 2:22-24, 32; 3:12-15; 5:30-32.. represents Peter saying on three separate occasions that God raised up Jesus from the dead. If we read those passages literally and combine that concept with the teaching of President [Brigham] Young and Elder [Erastus] Snow, that only a resurrected being can perform a resurrection, we may gain an insight to the resurrection process as a patriarchal family order in which a resurrected father would resurrect his son and so forth.

Brigham Yiung put forward the idea in one of his discourses that "some person holding the keys of the Resurrection, having previously passed through the same ordeal, will be delegated to resurrect our bodies." He also explained that mortals do not currently possess "the ordinance and keys of the resurrection. They will be given to those who have passed off this stage of action and have received their bodies again... They will be ordained, by those who hold they keys of the resurrection, to go forth and resurrect the saints." Elder Erastus Snow was even more specific about who would be granted this sacred privilege. He said that those who have been "crowned kings and high priests with God and the Lamb...shall...carry on the work of redemption and resurrection of the Saints of God." Such an idea is confirmed by Charles W. Penrose, who says that "in the resurrection [husbands and wives] stand side by side and hold dominion together. Every man who overcomes all things and is therefore entitled to inherit all things, receives power to bring up his wife to join him in the possession and enjoyment thereof."

President Young said that after the Prophet Joseph Smith had been resurrected he would be delegated "the keys of the resurrection" for the last dispensation and would then "seal this authority upon others" Ibid., 15:137-139

 

[Arkholt]

Hmm. Resurrection as a Priesthood ordinance certainly makes sense, thanks.

Thinking about it that way, though, it makes me like the transhuman ideas even less...

 

[madhatter85]

Hmm. Resurrection as a Priesthood ordinance certainly makes sense, thanks.

Thinking about it that way, though, it makes me like the transhuman ideas even less...

interesting, it makes me think of it as more probable.

for example, we know that God put all of the planets into motion. This would mean that physical laws like gravity that we measure scientifically are subject to the priesthood and we know that God does not break physical laws to bring about his miracles. That being said It makes sense to me that in order to perfect our physical bodies God would use scientific principles to do it and that the resurrection as an ordinance of the Priesthood would only be sealing the body and spirit together.

 

[LoTrobador]

Hi

I'm not a Mormon myself (thought I am 'academically' interested in 'all things Mormon', and was even before hearing of Transhumanism ), but I found this (Mormon Transhumanist) movement very interesting. What I'm curious about is does it raise criticism among Latter-Day Saints, and if yes - what kind of arguments? In conversations with my Christian friends some objections did appear, and they seemed to osciliate around the topics of human conceit ('correcting God'), God's will (towards His Creation) and human nature (and ingerence into it). Are there similar objections to Transhumanism among Mormons (and by 'Mormon' I mean the adherents of the LDS movement as a whole, in an inclusive sense), and particularly the LDS Church? Wouldn't some Latter Day Saints see it as coinceit or ingeretion into human nature, are there any particular objections based on the Mormon doctrine?

 

[madhatter85]

Hi

I'm not a Mormon myself (thought I am 'academically' interested in 'all things Mormon', and was even before hearing of Transhumanism ), but I found this (Mormon Transhumanist) movement very interesting. What I'm curious about is does it raise criticism among Latter-Day Saints, and if yes - what kind of arguments? In conversations with my Christian friends some objections did appear, and they seemed to osciliate around the topics of human conceit ('correcting God'), God's will (towards His Creation) and human nature (and ingerence into it). Are there similar objections to Transhumanism among Mormons (and by 'Mormon' I mean the adherents of the LDS movement as a whole, in an inclusive sense), and particularly the LDS Church? Wouldn't some Latter Day Saints see it as coinceit or ingeretion into human nature, are there any particular objections based on the Mormon doctrine?

The thing with LDS doctrine is that it does leave a lot of room for personal opinion and belief regarding certain aspects of prophecy. some (probably most) view it from a mysticism standpoint while others tend to view it from a scientific standpoint. Both achieve the same purpose essentially (perfection and eventually godhood). I don't feel you will find much opposition towards what some people think as a possibility of how prophecy may come to pass. However I'm sure you will some as people's opinions tend to be very firm on the subject.

As far as "Correcting God" I believe you are referring to the transhumanist concept of perfecting the human condition through the use of scientific means. From an LDS standpoint the current frail and imperfect human condition is entirely part of God's plan for his children. That eventually those who have lived their lives following the gospel plan will become perfected both physically and spiritually through Jesus Christ (the Redeemer). Mormon transhumanists believe the physical perfection will come through scientific means and will take work on our part to complete.

 

[FFH]

I've been holding back, but I'm gonna say what I need to say.

"The philosophies of men (transhumanism) mingled with scripture."

2 Timothy 4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

2 Timothy 3: 5
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

 

[Watchmen]

The idea that Jesus did not resurrect himself is far outside doctrine, IMO. Part of the reason a Savior was needed was to overcome physical death. Who was the Savior? Jesus. Jesus is the one who overcame death - not someone else performing an ordinance on him.

 

[LoTrobador]

some (probably most) view it from a mysticism standpoint while others tend to view it from a scientific standpoint.

Well, I wouldn't call the standpoint of my friends a mystic one, but generally speaking they seemed to express a belief that the Resurrection is to occur by means of God's supernatural grace, and by God's action only, rather than by means of science and with human participation.

As far as "Correcting God" I believe you are referring to the transhumanist concept of perfecting the human condition through the use of scientific means.

Yes.

From an LDS standpoint the current frail and imperfect human condition is entirely part of God's plan for his children.

That's more or less what I've heard, though in two 'versions':
1) human as a 'perfect machine', albeit being mortal, simply sometimes requiring medical treatment - no need for perfecting this condition,
2) human condition as a result of the Original Sin - the only Healer being God, not humans.

That eventually those who have lived their lives following the gospel plan will become perfected both physically and spiritually through Jesus Christ (the Redeemer).

I guess my friends could actually say the same thing...

Mormon transhumanists believe the physical perfection will come through scientific means and will take work on our part to complete.

...but stressing that this perfection would come through God's action only, without (impossible) human participation. And I think that's the main difference between my friends' view of Transhumanism and the Mormon Transhumanist movement's view - this relation to eschatology in the latter (human participation as possible, physical perfection as an eschatological event occuring by means of science) and lack of it in the former (human participation as impossible, therefore physical perfection as an eschatological event occuring by means of God's action alone).

 

[madhatter85]

The idea that Jesus did not resurrect himself is far outside doctrine, IMO. Part of the reason a Savior was needed was to overcome physical death. Who was the Savior? Jesus. Jesus is the one who overcame death - not someone else performing an ordinance on him.

Even if that someone else was God the Father?

we talked about fore-ordination in Sunday School today and the important distinction was made that Jesus Christ was ordained by God to be the Redeemer of mankind. this is very similar to being called set apart in a calling. Christ could not do that to himself, only God had that authority. I don't think it is a stretch by any means to think that Christ was resurrected by God through a priesthood ordinance.

 

[madhatter85]

I've been holding back, but I'm gonna say what I need to say.

"The philosophies of men (transhumanism) mingled with scripture."

2 Timothy 4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

2 Timothy 3: 5
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

You are correct that we need to maintain that it is through the grace of God that we are saved.

Do you think it is plausible that God would entrust the work of resurrection and perfection to us under his guidance and direction? also It is important to stress that even in s transhumanist model the resurrection is not possible by any means without Priesthood authority or power.

 

[madhatter85]

Well, I wouldn't call the standpoint of my friends a mystic one, but generally speaking they seemed to express a belief that the Resurrection is to occur by means of God's supernatural grace, and by God's action only, rather than by means of science and with human participation.

The Mormon transhumanist view is actually both. while it takes work on our part the actual act of resurrection is a priesthood ordinance and would not be possible without God and the Atonement.

That's more or less what I've heard, though in two 'versions':
1) human as a 'perfect machine', albeit being mortal, simply sometimes requiring medical treatment - no need for perfecting this condition,
2) human condition as a result of the Original Sin - the only Healer being God, not humans.

See, I think it is perfect for it's purpose. But far from perfect in the sense that we are unable to be in God's presence without being transfigured first. When Moses was transfigured a physical change was wrought in his body. This is the same with others who had God in their presence, like Joseph Smith, Enoch, and everyone who lived in his city.

Just as spiritual perfection takes time and is accomplished through spiritual means, I think it is plausible that the physical perfection will also be accomplished through physical means.

...but stressing that this perfection would come through God's action only, without (impossible) human participation. And I think that's the main difference between my friends' view of Transhumanism and the Mormon Transhumanist movement's view - this relation to eschatology in the latter (human participation as possible, physical perfection as an eschatological event occuring by means of science) and lack of it in the former (human participation as impossible, therefore physical perfection as an eschatological event occuring by means of God's action alone).

I'm not denying that without God's action we could ever hope to attain anything. my position is that it requires work on our part, that God is not just going to mysteriously go "*poof* you're immortal and perfected!"

 

[Watchmen]

Even if that someone else was God the Father?

we talked about fore-ordination in Sunday School today and the important distinction was made that Jesus Christ was ordained by God to be the Redeemer of mankind. this is very similar to being called set apart in a calling. Christ could not do that to himself, only God had that authority. I don't think it is a stretch by any means to think that Christ was resurrected by God through a priesthood ordinance.

Whether it was a priesthood ordinance or not is separate from whether Jesus performed the resurrection himself or not. I believe the solid doctrinal answer is that Jesus did it himself and the reason he could do it himself was because of who his Father was. He has power over life and death. The father did not need to resurrect Jesus - Jesus could do it himself.

 

[madhatter85]

Whether it was a priesthood ordinance or not is separate from whether Jesus performed the resurrection himself or not. I believe the solid doctrinal answer is that Jesus did it himself and the reason he could do it himself was because of who his Father was. He has power over life and death. The father did not need to resurrect Jesus - Jesus could do it himself.

interesting, I'm simply curious. do you also feel Jesus Christ could bless himself?

 

[Watchmen]

interesting, I'm simply curious. do you also feel Jesus Christ could bless himself?

Sure.

I understand the priesthood is a service priesthood, but there are instances where God, Jesus and others may do something because they were called, ordained, and chosen to do it. For example, supposing that everything done for our perfection is via priesthood ordinance, then the creation of the earth would have been by ordinance, yet we know Jesus was instrumental in that. It was an act for the betterment of God's children - and so is the resurrection.