Leaderboard

Mr. Shorty, Back when my wife and I were in our early thirties (and about 10 years before the missionaries found us), my wife was diagnosed with a brain tumor. It was found to be non-cancerous (sorry I don't recall the proper medical terminology, I'm a truck driver and can't remember most medical terms a day later... so it's especially unlikely I'll remember them 27 years later). Anyhow. the tumor was on her pituitary gland, and she (with my asked for advice) had to decide whether to have it surgically removed, with a roughly 50/50 chance the optic nerve would accidentally be touched, rendering her permanently blind in both eyes... or choose a medical alternative, a medication that she would stay on for the rest of her life, and which would supposedly keep the tumor from growing further, but which also carried the risk that at anytime in the future, the tumor could still become cancerous. With our limited understanding of miracles (although not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we did consider ourselves Christian), we asked for guidance and for a miracle from God, and with a great deal of faith (which we sorely lacked), we received both. We opted for surgery and today my wife is healthy (and has her vision). I know we are not to be commanded in all things, but we can certainly ask for advice and direction, and it will be lovingly shared. As a convert from in my 40s, I often feel I'm walking a few steps behind everyone else, in knowledge, understanding, and even sometimes my ability to have faith. The Lord has proven to me time and again, that even with just a kernel of faith, He can perform mighty miracles.

Yes, it really is about the word. If we can put that label on anything that we agree to, it cheapens the nature of the term "Covenant". Do we make covenants with Amazon when we agree to pay money and Amazon agrees to give us something? That would be absurd to couch it in such terms. I do make the concession that I was perhaps conflating "ordinances" with "covenants" (an understandable mistake). So, yes, ordinances require bodies. Perhaps covenants do not. That brings us to asking if "the Grand Council" was a covenant making process. While the descriptions of a council may be very similar to, say, a sustaining vote for Church leadership, there is one thing that it lacks. That can be summed up with the word "keeping". I had thought that our participation in the Council was a single point decision (yes, with eternal consequences) rather than a commitment to "keep" certain promises. (For brevity, I'm asking your indulgence on the vagueness of my wording. Just think: single point action vs. a continuation to act/behave a certain way for a duration). And I see nothing in scriptures that says otherwise. However... @Just_A_Guy's link confirmed that we are indeed "keeping" a commitment. The Church News website search engine sucks. I can't look it up to see the full context. Anyone have a link? Assuming this is all correct, I still wonder how such a commitment could have a possibility of being enforceable. We'd have no memory of such a commitment. Isn't part of a commitment remembering what we committed to? How can we be held to a commitment we, by the nature of the process, can't even remember? Because of the veil, I see it as a decision to "jump". After that, all bets are off as far as we know. After this life, we may have a "full recollection". But how is our promise to obey in any way binding on us in this life?

I don't know this person, but he provides some quotes on the topic: https://askgramps.org/covenants-made-premortal-life/

FWIW, my patriarchal blessing alludes to covenants made prior to birth (not trying to say that my patriarchal blessing should dictate your understanding of the subject; but just responding to your question about whether any of us had heard such a thing). I’m not sure I’m prepared to accept the idea that all covenants require a physical ordinance performed through a mortal body; I’d be interested to hear you flesh that out (HA!) a little more. Edit: the Joseph F. Smith manual quotes a fragment of Kimball as saying something very similar, and attributes it to the Church News issue of January 18, 1975. See https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-138-vision-of-the-redemption-of-the-dead?lang=eng.

It seems pretty clear that we mortals do not have the same understanding of Time and Causality that God does. We see this with people claiming the benefits of the atonement before Christ did the physical part... (given how we understand time). Clearly God can accept it before it happens. We know with work for the dead, the physical part of the ordinances, can be done by proxy. While we do acknowledge some limit aka spirit prison vs paradise we don't fully understand how that breaks down. So the idea that we might have made convents in the preexistence and gained the blessing of them, with the ordinances to be done later, does not strike me as out of line with limited stuff we already know and accept.