Seminarysnoozer
-
Posts
3421 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Seminarysnoozer
-
-
This is an interesting question and brings up some interesting thoughts. From a certain perspective...not. They can become like our Heavenly Mother. From another perspective, yes, we can all become like Heavenly Father. But this is one specific way in which there has to be a literal difference and women will not become just the same as our Father. Gender is eternal. The Father is male. Women will never be male. So women will never be exactly like Heavenly Father.
Yes. And no. I will never have dominion over Jesus, for example. God the Father does. We will never have the same dominion as the Father, but we will share in His full Glory. So "all" is an interesting idea in this regard.
Thanks, I agree with your responses.
What really does dominion mean in that sense? Is it like the word, presiding? If the stake president attends sacrament meeting and presides over the meeting for that day, what does that mean for him or us in the congregation? Did something happen that wouldn't have happened if he wasn't there? If two Stake Presidents happen to be in the same sacrament meeting, only one presides, the one that is over that particular stake. So the one has "dominion" over the other but when comparing the amount of keys and authority the two have, side by side, the quantity is no different. Dominion, in this sense and when compared to others of the same glory, is just the order of things not a description of quantity of anything. Right?
I kind of think of the word dominion the same way. I am not sure if that translates into any real glory, power or anything really. It is also kind of like using the word honorable. It is a title of respect but isnt really attached to any specific authority that is greater necessarily than anyone else.
Gospel Principles Chapter 47, on what is received with exaltation; "They will have everything that our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have—all power, glory, dominion, and knowledge (see D&C 132:19–20). President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: “The Father has promised through the Son that all that he has shall be given to those who are obedient to His commandments. They shall increase in knowledge, wisdom, and power, going from grace to grace, until the fulness of the perfect day shall burst upon them” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 2:36; italics in original)."
I don't know; all is all. 100% looks exactly like 100%.
-
I wanted to both allow you to answer and see how you would answer before I responded. I believe your line of thinking is critical to understanding men and women are different and fulfill different roles - not just in mortality but in eternity. I believe your observation of a particular phrase enlightens in part that difference. It is obvious that in creation, especially in the creation of human life - men and women fulfill different and necessary roles.
By the nature of creation a woman gives herself (both physically and spiritually) to the creation of human life as she becomes pregnant with child. Without giving herself in such a manner children could not be created. But at the same time she should not be alone - thus there is also a role of husband and father that the man needs to take upon himself to take or received the woman unto himself to oversee and provide for her being a mother.
The problem is that many see the woman giving herself as being subservient to the man that in taking her and her pregnancy unto himself she becomes less than him. It seems most obvious to me that a woman cannot give herself in selfishness. The problem is in understanding the man receiving or taking the woman and child unto himself. This act of receiving is often seen as selfishness in the role of men but the truth could not be farther from this understanding. Taking a woman in pregnancy is and ought to be understood as complementary to the unselfishness of the woman and makes the whole of unselfishness greater than the sum of it parts.
But the role of men and women do not suddenly just start when the woman is pregnant but rather is part of the eternal nature of creation which is in the greatness of G-d. Thus it seems to me that priesthood and the man being ordained to priesthood is an element of the eternal order of G-d. The priesthood being the means by which manhood and woman hood is fulfilled. It seems clear to me, concerning righteous and unrighteous dominion that the priesthood is useless to the man that uses priesthood to have unrighteous dominion of women. Likewise the woman cannot fulfill her giving of herself outside of giving herself to a man that does not honor her and the priesthood through which he receives her.
As I understand the priesthood - it is the divine order of G-d. What I am not sure is if in this life the priesthood is given unto man only as training and preparation for roles that will be such the same or different in eternity. I am inclined to believe that when we understand the eternal nature of marriage and the eternal roles of giving and receiving as a divine order or G-d - we will understand the priesthood and why men and women have different eternal roles.
As a sister in the Church, I think the other misconception created by this issue is that there is some limitation to one's progress by that separation of roles. In other words, can women really become like our Heavenly Father or not? Can women have all that the Father has like it is promised to anyone entering the Celestial Kingdom? (key word being all)
I think the answer to that is that a role doesn't necessarily change the quantity of glory available. And, I think the way around that is to understand that in the Celestial Kingdom everyone is part of the "one" body.
1 Corinthians 12; "18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?
20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another."
I don't think there is more honour in one role than another when in the Celestial Kingdom as it is shared as one body without schism. I think one would see herself as the whole while in the Celestial Kingdom and not as an individual, in other words. In this life, we tend to separate the two, which I believe is what you are saying as well.
-
Snoozer-
Can you clarify something? Are you saying that once we die, we don't take any of our fleshy desires, i.e., our appetites and passions with us? I'm not quite following you.
That is the goal, to not serve mammon, to not become "of" the flesh, to not be carnally minded, to not remain as the natural man, to be born again but not of the flesh. There are at least three phrases that describe not taking our fleshy desires into the next life; 1. putting off the natural man, 2. bridle the passions of the flesh and 3. to be spiritually minded (as opposed to carnally minded)
If one does those things then one does not have to take the fleshy (carnal) desires into the next life even though we live in the flesh in this world. It is the difference between living in the flesh vs being of the flesh.
I think the only carnal appetites and passions that remain are the ones that are internalized, the ones that become the treasures of the heart. That happens when one is carnally minded. It is important to distinguish the "carnal mind" from "carnally minded". The carnal mind is the description of the passions that come from the flesh (neuroanatomy, hormones etc.). To be carnally minded is when one's spirit takes that in and makes it part of their spiritual make up. If one is carnally minded when they die then that appetite will carry through. If one "puts off" the natural man (the carnal mind) then those appetites will not be carried through with the spirit.
As Paul explains so beautifully in Romans 8; "10 And if aChrist be in you, bthe body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of crighteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also aquicken your bmortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye ashall die: but if ye through the Spirit do bmortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live."
He explains that we have to now live in the flesh but we can make those passions dead by being spiritually minded and not internalizing the mortal body passions. But if one takes in the mortal body passions then one is living "after the flesh". We can "mortify the deeds of the body" by listening to the Spirit that communicates with our spirit. If Christ is in us, the body is dead - i.e. - we don't pay attention to the appetites of the body. How does one "mortify the deeds of the body"? By not making them a part of our spiritual make up and then they also die when the body dies - they are gone, they are not carried with us. We are debtors, not to the flesh! (A great description of addiction - to be a debtor to the flesh)
Again, I think Elder Bednar says it very clearly in modern day terms, April 2013 Conference; "The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).
The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh."
-
Good - we both believe in evolution. Do you believe that evolution is open ended - or is evolution closed meaning that there is some point at which evolution stops and no longer can happen?
As to the second question. It is quite simple. If something has happened - can it be made to happen by duplicating the parameters that cause the event. For example if a diamond is created from carbon under great pressure - will a diamond always result when carbon of the same purity and amount is submitted to the same pressure - will a diamond always result - it is it possible that if repeated enough - one would end up with something else that is quite different, like perhaps gold?
In science we call this principle of repeated parameters giving the same result - isotropic. One assumption of scientific thinking is that the universe is isotropic - that laws of physics (nature) that are true here; are true everywhere throughout the universe - do you believe such principle?
But could you apply something that is true for this universe with this type of matter, course matter to a universe of a different type of matter, fine matter? We are told that spirit matter is different from our current state.
-
It is my understanding that the essence of who and what we really are was spirit in the beginning. I therefore believe that it is our spirit that is eternal. There is thought that in the resurrection our physical body also becomes eternal but I personally have not been able to wrap that up very neatly with sound logic. As best as I can understand our physical body becomes an integrated appendage or addition to our eternal spirit. Let me give an example:
If we learn to play a musical instrument we will actually change the physical "wiring" of our very physical brain. But I believe there is more to playing a musical instrument than just physical learning and physical changes. I believe that our very eternal spirit also learns and changes as well - this is because our physical bodies are integrated with our spirit. Likewise the spirit also learning will be reflected in changes in our physical abilities.
Because the things we learn in this physical life have a corresponding effect on our integrated spirit what we learn is not forever lost and forgotten when we die but is retained by our spirit that is and always has been eternal. Thus what we learn will continue in the resurrection. Meaning that everything we learn in this life will have some lasting effect on our eternal spirit. We are told that in keeping the commandments that the effect on our spirit will be a freeing and liberating affect. Likewise we are told that indulging in sin will create a bondage or loss of freedom of our eternal spirit.
As far as addictions are concerned - I would submit that any cognitive addiction that we learn in this life will indeed have an effect on our eternal spirit. I also believe that there is an advantage for a spirit to be integrated to a physical body - otherwise I see no reason for anyone to look forward to the resurrection. But like all things - where there is an advantage there can also be a disadvantage. It is both my understanding as well as my experience that discipline is the key to properly integrate the spirit with the joys that uniquely come with a physical body. For this reason - to teach in part what we must do to discipline the integration of our physical being with our spirit all of the ordinances given concerning eternal salvation require a physical as well as spiritual commitment within the ordinance. It is why the laying on of physical hands are integrated with spiritual priesthood blessings and ordinations.
The soul of man is both body and spirit. So, logically speaking, the body of itself has to add to the soul something the spirit could not bring to the table by itself related to soul type things - in other words, not just some physical ability but a characteristic of the soul.
As a crude example, I like to swim in the ocean. Growing up and living in San Diego all my life I have developed a physical sense of peace to go out and swim in the ocean, especially on a warm sunny summer day. My cousin, who rarely visits anymore, from another part of the country, hates to go swimming in the ocean, it makes her scared. Are these spiritual based likes or physical body likes.
When a person has damage to both anterior temporal lobes of the brain they can develop a condition in which they become hyper-oral and hypersexual. Did the damage to the brain also cause damage to the spirit to change the character of the person? Or could it be that certain characteristics are only found in the physical brain?
There are thousands upon thousands of studies and information regarding the localization of personality in the brain. The most famous case that started a lot of that discussion was that of Pheneus Gage, in which a tamping iron used in blasting rocks went through his frontal lobe in the early 1800s and caused a dramatic change in his personality from a well manered gentleman to one who would "induldge in profanities". So, was the spirit affected or damaged by the physical injury or could it be that there are areas of the brain that drive things like social behaviors etc.?
We believe that the body adds to the soul, the core nature of the individual and not that it is just an appendage or an outer covering, at least, the resurrected body to be such. If that is what we believe then we have to believe that the body has character and soul of itself that it adds to that combination. The spirit alone is not the soul of man. And I don't think it is 99.9%, the soul of man.
One other thing to consider is to ask whether Christ was capable of the things He experienced during the atonement without a body? Could have taken on the same feelings and empathy without a body, spirit alone?
-
Of note: There is a particular key phrase in the temple related to queens and priestesses that is all but ignored in what otherwise might be the strongest and most logical of arguments from those arguing that women have or will have the priesthood. I claim no insight as to it's meaning, but I do feel that it's quite glaring to ignore it. That phrase is "..to her husband."
Even though you say you don't know the meaning of the phrase, I am not seeing how you are linking that up to whether women have or will have the Priesthood. Could you explain why you think that phrase is significant? Thanks
-
Sorry! It took me a while to understand what you were saying Seminarysnoozer. Did you mean he would be unrecognisable to neither of the women because he would of changed so much in the resurrection / exaltated state?
I think that is what you must of meant?
Yes, that is what I meant. Again, this is my personal belief, not something from the church but based in my understanding of the gospel and scriptures. If one really believes that our corruption can take on incorruption then one would have to go back to a time that there was no corruption, in the Garden of Eden. The ressurection is a restoration to reverse the effects of the Fall. How has the Fall affected your current body? However it has affected your current body, that will be reversed by the resurrection.
The changes that occur from the original would have to include all the differences in DNA from the original. There is a reason that both Seth and Abel were in the "express image" of their father. Consider what it means to be in the "express image" of their father, then consider that we are to have the image of Christ in our countenance. Consider what it means to be like our Heavenly Father in every way, to have ALL that He has.
I have a strong belief in this because I think it is important to understand as best we can the purpose of the body. Why do we need a body to be like our Heavenly Father? Because He has one is a simple answer. If just having any body is all that is needed then the scriptures would not explain that there are different kinds of bodies, one for the Celestial as the sun is one, one for the moon and many different types for the Telestial as one star differs from another. Why do the scriptures say "as one differs from another". Is that a phrase that has no significance?
Consider that Christ's prayer is that we be "one" like He is "one" with His father. We should pray for the same thing.
-
How sad for the deformed, ugly, scared and infirm.
I question this as doctrinal in terms of "common" and "repeated often", etc... Moreover, there's some logical problems in it. If the purpose of being raised as we were was so that we knew each other, then what of the wife who dies, and then the husband gets marred, scarred, or just puts on a ton of weight, then dies? And what if that man married a second time after the marring, and that wife died before him as well. Which one should he be raised as to be recognizable?
Read that last sentence of that quote in light of the fact that God created one man and one woman in the Garden of Eden. The variability from that original creation is as a result of the Fall, so when you ask which one should he be raised to, it doesn't matter because eventually it would be neither. At least, at some point, according to Joseph F. Smith, the body will have all of its deformities and defects eliminated back to the way God originally designed it.
The body of the glory of the Sun is one, the body of the glory of the moon is one and the bodies of the glory of the stars are numerous as one star differ from another. I am not trying to suggest that all in the Celestial Kingdom will be clones but at least it will be to the point of not having to say that one differs from another. The body will look more like the original creation more than anything we look like post Fall once all the defects and deformities are removed. So, that is why the answer to that scenario is neither.
It all depends on how far one believes Adam and Eve fell from their paradisical bodies that would live forever to the ones from which we get our current genes. I realize some would like to think we didn't fall that far but the bodies of resurrected beings are described to some detail on certain occasions of having an appearance that is hard to describe. Unless, of course, he looked something like this when he was alive; "His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters"
That quote from Joseph F. Smith is part of a number of quotes supporting the idea that we were around before this life and we will be around, as our spirits are eternal, after this life. The same spirit that was around before this life will be there after too.
-
Snoozer-
"All the quotes you gave say "spirit" and you, in your last paragraph say "you."
No offense intended, but you're nit picking now, looking for things to bolster your beliefs. I assumed you'd realize that when I said "you," I was referring to your spirit for they are one and the same. First off, Tourette's isn't an addiction, it is caused through possession by an unclean spirit. Secondly, sleep and eating are a necessary function to maintain life, although you can be addicted to food. The body is the mortal house of our spirit, but our spirit is what makes us "us." It is our "mind," our intelligence with a veil across it to allow us to make choices in this life free of our memory of the pre-existence. All you have to do is research the teachings of the apostles and prophets to learn this.
Okay, lets research the teachings of David O. McKay, a prophet of God; "Teachings of David O. McKay; Each of us has two contrasting natures: the physical and the spiritual. Man is a dual being, and his life a plan of God. That is the first fundamental fact to keep in mind. Man has a natural body and a spiritual body."
President David O. McKay (1873–1970) taught that because of the Fall we have a dual nature: “One, related to the earthly or animal life; the other, akin to the Divine. Whether a man remains satisfied within what we designate the animal world, satisfied with what the animal world will give him, yielding without effort to the whims of his appetites and passions and slipping farther and farther into the realm of indulgence, or whether, through self-mastery, he rises toward intellectual, moral, and spiritual enjoyments depends upon the kind of choice he makes every day, nay, every hour of his life.”
How about Elder Ballard; "Elder Melvin J. Ballard (1873–1939) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught that “all the assaults that the enemy of our souls will make to capture us will be through the flesh, because it is made up of the unredeemed earth, and he has power over the elements of the earth. The approach he makes to us will be through the lusts, the appetites, the ambitions of the flesh. All the help that comes to us from the Lord to aid us in this struggle will come to us through the spirit that dwells within this mortal body. So these two mighty forces are operating upon us through these two channels.
“… If you would have a strong spirit which has dominance over the body, you must see to it that your spirit receives spiritual food and spiritual exercise. …
“The man or woman who is taking neither spiritual food nor spiritual exercise will presently become a spiritual weakling, and the flesh will be master. Whoever therefore is obtaining both spiritual food and exercise will be in control over this body and will keep it subject unto the will of God.”
All the assaults will come through the flesh!!!! Elder Ballard explains that it is through the flesh that come the lusts, appetites and ambitions!!! He says "two mighty forces" are operating through "two channels", not one!! It is not one in the same. You would know that if you really studied the teachings of the Apostles and Prophets.
Gospel of the Doctrines teachers manual, chapter 8, from the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints, supporting Paul's discussion on this topic; "Discuss with the students what is meant by the term dual nature. The term dual nature refers to our opposing qualities. On the one hand, we are spirit children of God, innocent when we come into the world and endowed with the potential to become divine (see Supporting Statements E on p. 21 of the student manual). On the other hand, we also have bodies of flesh and bones and are driven by physical urges and demands (see Supporting Statements E on p. 21 of the student manual). The Apostle Paul recognized the conflicting spiritual and physical aspects of man (see Romans 7:15–25; Galatians 5:16–17). Failure to master physical urges results in the emergence of what King Benjamin called the “natural man” (Mosiah 3:19)."
Elder Bednar, General Conference 2013; "As sons and daughters of God, we have inherited divine capacities from Him. But we presently live in a fallen world. The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).
The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh."
What??? the flesh has inclinations, impulses and passions??? Yes it does! The spirit has its will and the body has its will. Which one we follow is the test we face. That is the "precise nature of the test of mortality" as the Apostle David Bednar said just last year. The imprecise way to discuss that battle is to use the terms "evil spirits". Now that we have enlightened clear revelation about the battle we can talk in precise terms, like Elder Bednar, President David O. Mckay, Mosiah and even Paul have talked about it. So, if you want to call me "nit picky" I will take that as your pejorative for being precise as opposed to the vague descriptions you would like to place on the topic. When one uses the term "you" in relation to these things at the same time one talks specifically about the spirit, then one has to also diferentiate which "you" she is talking about. The outer "you" or the inner "you". If you don't appreciate the difference then you will not understand what is meant by God seeing the inner man. There can only be an inner man if there is an outer man as well. We have a hard time telling the difference between those two even in ourselves.
-
Last week during fast testimony meeting many of the testimonies ended with the statement " I know the church is true" I found what that means can be different things to different people depending on factors such as age, maturity, wether one is a life long member or convet ect.......
My question is what does this phrase mean to you? To start off I will share what this statement means to me.
I believe that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints holds within it the oridinances neccisary for salvation and the authority from God to perform said ordiances. I know that the Book of Mormon is scripture and was translated by the spirit of revelation. I know Joseph Smith was called to restore the church that Jesus Christ established during his mortal ministry. I struggle with many of the cultural components of this church. I sometimes don't fit in becasue of my political leanings but my word I love this church and the members.
So, If you would please share what this means to you. This has really been on my mind a lot and want to get peoples thoughts and feelings.
Gospel Principles chapter 41; "The Church is organized in the spirit world, and priesthood holders continue their responsibilities there (see D&C 138:30). President Wilford Woodruff taught: “The same Priesthood exists on the other side of the veil. … Every Apostle, every Seventy, every Elder, etc., who has died in the faith as soon as he passes to the other side of the veil, enters into the work of the ministry” (Deseret News, Jan. 25, 1882, 818)."
Article of Faith 6; "6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth."
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "cultural components". If by cultural components you mean the organization of the church then one should gain a testimony of that. If you mean by "cultural components" the imperfections of it's members, then one doesn't have to have any testimony of that but should have compassionate concern about their well being, growth and development, realizing that none of us are perfect but are striving together to become perfected in Christ.
We could have the same discussion about "family". My family isn't perfect but I could have a testimony that the family organization is instituted of God and will continue in the next life. Therefore I could get up and give a testimony that I believe in family even when my family is not perfect. Belief in the church should be the same. I realize people mean to say "gospel" when they say "church" but I think for some, like you are suggesting - depending on maturity and understanding of the gospel, I am not bothered by people who state they have a testimony of the Church when in their heart they are talking about the organization that Christ established and that will continue into the next life, because I know they are not trying to say that the people in the church are perfect by that statement. If anything it is a statement about Christ, as Jesus Christ appeared with His Father and personally restored His Church in the later days - that is what is included in the testimony of the truthfulness of the church.
-
Yes, all addictions are taken with you when you die. You are the exact same person in the spirit world as you were in life; no different. Hardly any church member knows anything about the different types of evil spirits loose in this world. The scriptures talk about three different types: devils or demons, unclean or foul, and divination spirits. I've heard many LDS ( used to be one of them) say that all of these types were among those cast out of heaven along with Satan for rebellion. They couldn't be more wrong.
From a number of the early church leaders:
"Although those men and women are dead, they have a good deal of power; their spirits have power over us when we render ourselves subject to them; their spirits are busy at work. They are diligent in performing the work of destruction and confusion; they go at that work the very moment their spirits leave their bodies. I have said, a great many times, that that spirit which possesses us here will possess us when our spirits leave our bodies, and we shall there be very much the same as we are here. If you are subject to rebellious spirits, or to a spirit of apostasy here, will you not have the same spirit beyond the veil that you had on this side? You will, and it will have power over you to lead you to do wrong, and it will control your spirits." (Heber C. Kimball, JD 4:237)
"When those who are guided by these evil spirits die they go where the evils spirits are, and they will continue to have power over them. Those who resist such spirits in the flesh will be free from their power hereafter." (Wilford Woodruff: History of His Life and Labors, Pg. 619)
"We receive revelation from Heaven, you receive your revelations from every foul spirit that has departed this life, and gone out of the bodies of mobbers, murderers, highwaymen, drunkards, thieves, liars, and every kind of debauched character, whose spirits are floating around here, and searching and seeking whom they can destroy; for they are the servants of the devil...." (Brigham Young, JD 13:281)
There are a few more, but that is the gist of their teachings.
So, getting back to the unclean, foul and spirits of divination; these are not part of the 1/3 that were cast out of heaven. These are people who die in their sins and become those spirits.
"Many spirits of the departed, who are unhappy, linger in lonely wretchedness about the earth, and in the air, and especially about their ancient homesteads, and the places rendered dear to them by the memory of former scenes. The more wicked of these are the kind spoken of in Scripture, as "foul spirits,' "unclean spirits," spirits who afflict persons in the flesh, and engender various diseases in the human system. They will sometimes enter human bodies, and will distract them, throw them into fits, cast them into the water, in the fire, etc. They will trouble them with dreams, nightmare, hysterics, fever, etc. They will also deform them in body and in features, by convulsions, cramps, contortions, etc., curses, and even words of other languages. If permitted, they will often cause death. Some of these spirits are adulterous, and suggest to the mind all manner of lasciviousness, all kinds of evil thoughts and temptations." (Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology, Pg. 111)
"Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this, for that same spirit which doth possess you bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world." (Alma 34:34)
So, yes, quite literally, the exact same disposition you have at the time you die will be the same disposition you will have in the spirit world. If you are an apathetic member at the time of your death, you'll continue to be apathetic. If you are addicted to porn, you'll become an unclean spirit tempting the weak minded to look at porn. If you are prideful and rebellious and try to lead members here astray, you'll become an unclean spirit and continue to lead the gullible members astray. If you are valiant in this life, you'll influence the living to be valiant.
All the quotes you gave say "spirit" and you, in your last paragraph say "you". There is a difference. How one is during this life is not always reflective of their spirit lest you want to say that a person with Down's syndrome reflects their spirit's nature. Or the person who has Tourette's yelling out explitives at church reflects their spirit's nature.
Heber C. Kimbal's quote you gave is key, as it says "if we render ouselves subject to them". There is a difference between enduring vs. becoming subject to it. Paul did not become subject to his thorn in the flesh but endured it while here. We all live in the flesh while here and therefore have fleshy addictions of some kind or another. We all (pretty much) get hungry on fast sunday. Even the Apostles slept in the garden when asked to wait and watch. Do they have an addiction to sleep? The body does, but the body is weak even when the spirit is willing. The body and the spirit have different natures. They re not one in the same. I think you ere if you suggest such a thing. Your last paragraph should have used the word "spirit" as opposed to "you", like all the examples you gave from people who know what they are talking about. Will the spirit of the person with Tourette's still have Tourette-like behaviors in the next life just because they couldn't control it here? ... I don't think so.
-
I agree that there is divine glory in service. But service for glory is not divine service - true service can only be for the glory of others. Serving for self glory is the temptation that turned Lucifer to Satan. For this reason I personally will not serve if tempted with my glory - I am really strong and a good Mormon and I can resist anything but temptation - but you can pursue what ever is most important for you - I just do not do well with that kind of thinking.
Thanks - but not thanks
You are making it sound like it is impossible to say, "I want glory to glorify my Father by receiving glory". What other way could we glorify our Father in heaven? Service is the means to an end, to help others glorify their self and to help us become glorified. In doing that the Father is glorified. Anything we can do to bring about the Eternal Life and immortality of man is glorifying the Father, meaning by me receiving a Kingdom of glory, I glorify the Father.
I am not sure why you want to take the purpose out of this life, it is for glory. Did we not want to be like our Heavenly Father from the beginning? Do we not want eternal life, which is a state of glory?
What came first the chicken or the egg? The desire to become like our Heavenly Father came first. To become like Him, we serve others as that is what He does. The glory of others is our glory. Those things cannot be separated. If one brings but one soul to God, how great shall be their joy (glory). If I am Christlike then when my fellow brothers and sisters are served well and gain glory then so do I, through their success. They cannot be separated as much as you would like it to be.
Purpose = attitude = desires of the heart, which is everything. We will be judged based in the desires of our heart. Desires become purpose when the desire is put into action. The gospel is a means to an end, the end is to become like God, full of glory. If one follows the commandments without purpose then there is no desire of the heart and therefore one cannot have an eye single to the glory of God.
The bottom line is that if you desire to be like God, then without question or dancing around semantics, you desire glory. You can't have one without the other. Now, if you do not want to be like God, then you can serve without purpose. If one serves without purpose then, by definition, they are not doing it with an eye single to the glory of God. Once one understands the nature of Celestial beings, even to the small degree possible while in this life, one realizes that Gods glory cannot exist in a vacuum. God is glorious because He helps others become like Him. It is a glorious event to become like God, glorious for God (as we are told that is His work and glory) and the one becoming like Him.
Listen to the words of Jesus Christ; "5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.
8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.
9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them."
He is praying, 'I did the work you sent me to do, now glorify thou me by the glory I have given you'. Christ understood His purpose and the result of the service He gave.
And He wants the same for us (believers); " 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:"
How silly it would be if I asked my daughters to remain worthy of temple marriage so you can have an eternal family and they said, "okay, I will do it because you asked me to but I really don't want it for myself". Then I would say, "you can't have an eternal marriage unless you want it." ... same thing applies to Eternal Life (receiving the highest glory), it has to be desired. When we serve with an "eye single to the glory of God" we express desire to have it for ourselves, as Christ said "that they may be one, even as we are one."
If one does not want to be glorified in the Celestial Kingdom (does not want to receive glory) then can they really serve with "an eye single to the glory of God"?
Should we want glory? Lets see what Christ says about that; "45 ¶Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:
46 Who, when he had found one apearl of great price, went and sold ball that he had, and bought it."
We should want it so bad that we give up everything for it. (The Kingdom of heaven is a kingdom of glory)
-
Quite to the contrary. I believe the saying is that you go to heaven for the climate and you go to hell for the company.
I don't think we fundamentally disagree at all: there's certainly a component of addiction that is chemical/physiological, and is just something that the spirit inhabiting the body has to deal with; and to which death does offer release. But does addiction often run concurrently with a spiritual ailment that will persist beyond the veil? I think the answer can be (not always, but sometimes) "yes". Obviously, that doesn't change our obligation to be universally compassionate in the here-and-now. It just means that we can't medicate, operate, or electrically stimulate our way out of every form of addiction.
On a semi-topical tangent: Just_A_Girl swears that there's a quote out there from JFS implying that our bodies are not immediately perfect on resurrection morning, but that they gradually become so over time. I can't find it anywhere. Does it ring a bell to you?
Thanks for the clarification.
The quote may be the one in which he says the resurrected body with grow to the stature of the spirit in reference to mothers being allowed to raise their children. Joseph F. Smith; "But we know our children will not be compelled to remain as a child in stature always, for it was revealed from God, the fountain of truth, through Joseph Smith the prophet, in this dispensation, that in the resurrection of the dead the child that was buried in its infancy will come up in the form of the child that it was when it was laid down; then it will begin to develop. From the day of the resurrection, the body will develop until it reaches the full measure of the stature of its spirit, whether it be male or female."
-
I think there's a chemical and a psychological/spiritual side to most addictions. My pet theory in this scenario is that a dead meth addict wouldn't have to detox, but he would still want the stuff because he just hasn't learned healthy stress coping mechanisms and may still fondly recall the physical fix he got through using. Ditto for a sex/porn addict--the endorphin/hormonal cravings wouldn't be present after death, but the spiritual aspects still have to be dealt with.
Generally speaking, I think that those who have to be redeemed from "hell" will ultimately discover that the hell was almost completely of their own making.
I think it is more complicated than that. "Coping mechanisms" can be described as physical traits as well. We know, for example, that self-mutilation is a form of an abnormal coping mechanism that can be triggered by brain injury such as traumatic brain injury to bilateral temporal poles. There was a recent study that showed that posterior hypothalamic deep brain stimulation removed that abnormal coping mechanism.
Bialteral lesions to the anterior temporal lobe which can occur in traumatic brain injury (being in a car accident) can result in hypersexuality (see Kluver Bucy syndrome). In my career I have seen cases like that. They were previously wholesome, church going chaste people who turn into a different personality and one in particular I remember suddenly became hypersexual and had an addiction to pornography and would go to Tijuana for prostitutes after this injury. He truly had a sex addiction after the injury. The reason to point this out is that we don't know how much influence the wiring of the brain plays a role in these things in any given person versus some agency allowed choice, we can't judge that.
The bottom line is whether something becomes written in our heart or not. Is it taken to heart, meaning do our spirits incorporate that trait or not. How do we know that Pauls "thorn in the flesh" was not some addiction, that he now does not have?
What is of "their own making" is hard for us to distinguish in any given person. That is for only God to know. We have to assume, as we show love to those around us that may be suffering from addiction, that all of it is not of their own making, that the whole thing is a "thorn in the flesh". We are not allowed to judge that way because we don't have the ability to know which components are driven by brain anatomy vs. the part that is spiritual characteristics.
- Just_A_Guy and talisyn
-
2
-
I had hoped that for an example one might see something closer to their own home. We are stewards that have dominion, gifts, callings or talents or what ever one may refer to our life journey. As stewards; are we eating healthy and pursuing healthy life styles both in regards to spiritual and physical health. Are we wise stewards of the wealth we have been given or do we adorn ourselves with fine clothing, comfortable dwellings and tech stuff beyond our "needs". Do we seek understanding and wisdom in the "best books" of science, politics, economics, entertainment and religion or do we entertain and enlighten ourselves on a diet of the talents of others contributing little or nothing ourselves.
It seems to me that the nature of the "natural man" is to see and catalog well the sin of others, not just as individuals but as social, political or some other category, however so small the effects of such sins and then to diminish to near nothing the effects (however so prominent) our own, regardless of what impact such has on ourselves and those around us.
In essence we all think we will be saved in heaven from our own sins and that others, whoever they may be - just not us; will be damned forever in some hell or kingdom less than Celestial.
I do not know about everybody else but I am very concerned and my best plan is to beg as much as possible for any mercy or leniency possible - for me an everybody I know.
This is the reason we are told to pray daily. Understanding what one's stewardship is does not come easy. It changes. Even Joseph Smith received constant and sometimes changing direction revelation as to what to do next. Even though, for example, he was shown and explained the purpose of for the golden plates he wasn't allowed to take them until 4 years later. He had to remain constantly in tune to know what to do at each moment and at the right time and be prepared for any change. If Joseph said, "don't tell me, I know what to do here", he would have done the wrong thing. It is in remaining humble and realizing he didn't have the whole picture or all the knowledge to make such decisions that he was directed. He couldn't be directed if he would have said, "don't tell me, I'll figure it out on my own."
We have to live our lives that way too and that is the only way to be assured that in the end we hear the phrase, "job, well done." As the story of the ten talents suggests, the problem is that most people don't know what to do with the talents they have, do I store it away or work it? The only way to really know is to stay worthy of the direction from the Holy Ghost in all matters. Do I go to school or do I start a family? Do I get a job in this place or continue my education? etc. There is no blanket answer that can be given for everyone in many of those types of questions. It has to be obtained via personal revelation to be assured that the correct decision is made. It is only a "sin" if the Holy Ghost is ignored or not sought and one chooses based in some other form of reasoning, instinct, human intellect, tradition etc. in place of following the promptings from the Lord in any given matter.
-
It has to become part of our spiritual character to continue on through the next life. To mar the spirit like that one has to develop a love for whatever addiction. One may ask, 'isn't that what addiction means?' There is a difference between the passions of the body and what is in our "heart" or our heart's desire".
If a person who has Tourette's syndrome yells out a particular explitive every time they walk into the chapel, I don't think any of us would say that that particular practice, done a thousand times over would stay with the individual in the next life. Unless, they learn to love that thing, if it becomes 'written in the heart' then it will stay.
In this life we are given specific challenges, "thorns in the flesh" and stewardships (talents) that may or may not be part of our spiritual character. These are temporary stewardships that pertain to this life. Pauls "thorn in the flesh" went away upon his death. The lessons learned from enduring it have not gone away. It may be hard to distinguish what is temporary and what is part of the spiritual make up but I would suggest that our fully matured adult spiritual self that has spent eons in the presence of God, learning all we could before coming here, hardly shines through in most of us. Our outward traits and abilities are mostly of the temporary probationary self, the body.
-
What do you think - is it a sin to reject any truth; regardless of source? or is it only a sin if certain specific truths of particular religious stripe are rejected?
And what does it mean to reject a truth - could rejection include the intent to put it off until later?
If a 16 year old catholic young woman (for example) encountered the missionaries and was invited to hear the discussions but remembers her parents instructions to 'not listen to anything those missionaries tell you' and therefore turns away the missionaries invitation, is that a sin or not?
Boy, that is a tough one. I think it is way too complicated for us to say one way or the other. She is honoring her parents by following their instructions and yet turning away greater truths. I think it depends on a lot of factors that we are not privy to. For example, if she was one to burn away her light of Christ by engaging in certain behaviors before that encounter then maybe she missed the promptings of the Holy Ghost at that moment that would have told her what to do. There are way to many factors to make a blanket statement about such things because we really do not see all the circumstances, history and spiritual ability of any given individual, but God can see those things and make a judgement.
-
Faith4, Thank you for your post. I wanted to respond specifically to your post for many reasons. My particular journey seems to have been quite different than yours. It appears to me that your love, knowledge and respect of G-d is based on and in Biblical scripture. Mine is quite different – my love, knowledge, understanding and respect of G-d is despite Biblical scripture. For me love and respect for G-d is a matter and result from my own experience, study and analysis.
I have found scripture unreliable in that, rather than foster consensus of logic and reason, I find scripture to be overly ambiguous; so much so that the more scripture is studied the more disagreement there seems to be in what exactly scripture is communicating and the greater there seems to be anger between those that disagree. And this is not a recent or new phenomenon but a longtime historical result that has existed with the beginning of early Christian effort to canonize scripture and make heretics of those that disagree with the popular notions of scripture at a particular time and place.
Jesus did not say that his disciples could be identified by any particular interpretation of scripture but rather by the love such disciples have for others – a love and compassion particularly shown to extend to their enemies. As a general rule (meaning that there are some few exceptions) I have personally found through a wide opportunity of experience that those dedicated to scripture and particular interpretations of scripture to be prominently among the least loving and compassionate towards others.
What I have found is that those that love and respect others (kind of along the lines to which Jesus spoke) – and I do not know or recall even a single exception – honor and respect themselves and their abilities to function honestly and rationally with others much more than with scripture.
Yes, the personal witness one gets from the Holy Ghost should be the strongest influence we have in accepting and understanding truth.
-
Is it actually condescending if in the end (meaning that actual purpose) was to increase one's glory? How can G-d say it is his work and glory to bring immorality and eternal life to others - if in the end there is no cost but rather a great return on such an investment.
But lets look at this from a different angle. Is it possible that Lucifer is not so stupid realizing that there was a greater increase in personal glory to not center on bringing immorality and eternal life to others? That something is eternally lost or given up in such a sacrifice? Or is G-d's sacrifice like the missionary that served because his father promised him lots of $$$$$ and a brand new car when he returned? And who is to say what is the reason a missionary serves if they get lots of $$$$$ and a brand new care (as previously promised) upon return from their mission.
I think it is as simple as saying there is glory in serving others, in being charitable and benevolent. If that is the center of glory then it makes sense that the greatest commandments are; "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy aheart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself."
I think the other thing to keep in mind is that glory is happiness. "Men are, that they might have joy", whereas, Satan is miserable and "he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself." 2 Nephi 2
The plan of happiness, which includes Christ' sacrifice was for the purpose of bringing about happiness, the greatest of which occurs with Eternal life, the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. This is why it is called the plan of Happiness. Eternal life is a state of being where one can be glorified by the accomplishments of another. That can only happen when one loves that person as their self. It is the same reason for which I get more excited about my own son getting an A in class over another boy getting an A in that class. The level of joy from that act comes from the attachment I have to my son, the love I have for my son. Happiness comes from serving others such that the love for that person increases to the point of treating that person as self and they the same for you, then their successes becomes yours and yours theirs. This makes joy endless. If success is proprietary then it has an end. To make it shared one has to serve, be charitable and benevolent to the highest degree. That is the glory of God.
-
I wonder where the millennium part of the question asked comes into play. Probably from the idea that there are quotes along the lines of people who have young children die will be able to raise them in the millennium (though, personally, I think this idea is more akin to folk-doctrine). As the article suggests, no one will be denied promised blessings if faithful. But in the millennium?
It is an interesting thought though, and it really comes down to, and pertains to, the idea of raising physical, mortal children. In theory, the sands-of-the-sea posterity promise refers to the having of spirit children. But -- there is a certain feeling of missing out that comes from not being able to raise physical, mortal children. I guess the question is, when all is said and done, will having missed out on that opportunity really matter in the eternities or not? Or will it be more like a child complaining that they never got to...I dunno...color with crayons as a child. That doesn't mean that when they're an adult that they're going to want to spend their days coloring or that they'll want to revert back to their childish state so they can enjoy childish things once more. (Maybe there's a better "childish" example than coloring...but hopefully my point comes across.)
Yes, like these types of quotes; "President Joseph F. Smith said: “Joseph Smith taught the doctrine that the infant child that was laid away in death would come up in the resurrection as a child; and, pointing to the mother of a lifeless child, he said to her: ‘You will have the joy, the pleasure, and satisfaction of nurturing this child, after its resurrection, until it reaches the full stature of its spirit.’ There is restitution, there is growth, there is development, after the resurrection from death. I love this truth. It speaks volumes of happiness, of joy and gratitude to my soul. Thank the Lord he has revealed these principles to us.” (Gospel Doctrine, pp. 455–56.)"
But, at the same time the spirit of the child is an adult spirit and will have the privilege of marrying and obtaining all the blessings anyone would in the Celestial Kingdom. So, it almost seems like the Millenium would be a reversion for that spirit, which to me seems odd. Bruce R. McConkie; "Children are the sons and daughters of God. They lived and dwelt with him for ages and eons before their mortal birth. They are adults before birth; they are adults at death."
I don't understand the need for what Joseph F. Smith is talking about. If God can give us a resurrected body that changes from its mortal state to its perfected form automatically (for those that die at an older age, the body would change to something more like it looked maybe 50 to 60 years before its death) then it does not seem unreasonable that an adult spirit that died with their mortal body in a child state could receive an immortal adult body automatically (years different than its death). Or, is it that the process of resurrection can only go in one direction, reverse? That seems odd to me. Unless, we believe that the resurrected body of a person that dies at an older age would also have to develop over time to meet the stature of its spirit - like Mork from Ork. Why would it have to be in the one direction and not the reverse?
-
I'm familiar with Joseph Fielding Smith quotes about angels coming to assist in the work for the dead, but I can't think of anything about "immortal beings will come down to assist in [missionary work]" during the Millennium. Do you have any references?
I had one, sorry, lost it. The best I remember is simply the chapter on the millenium in Gospel Principles, chapter 45 where a quote from Joseph Smith says that these beings will be involved in the government and "other work". So, not just with geneology.
... ah there it is, Gospel Fundamentals chapter 34; "The Prophet Joseph Smith said that people from heaven will visit the earth often during the Millennium. They will help with the work done in the temples and with missionary work."
-
You sparked a thought about faith in people rather than "something". As I thought on this I became convinced that we must first have faith in ourselves before we can have faith in others. This is because if we do not have faith that we can identify others in which we can have faith - then we will never be able to have faith in them. Therefore, we must have faith enough in our own ability to identify someone worthy of our having faith in them.
The more I thought on this the more I am convinced that all faith we exercise is in reality an extension of the faith we have in ourselves.
Thank you Seminary, this a whole new landscape of understanding for me. I deal with many atheists in my profession and I realized that at least in part the inability to have true faith in G-d is hampered a great deal in an individual's tentative faith in themselves. This also means that we cannot have faith in attributes of G-d that we do not understand as worthy for ourselves.
Your insight bring much more to the table but at this point I think I will back off some and see what others are harvesting or discarding concerning the idea that we cannot appreciate in others (including G-d) what we cannot rationally see through faith we exercise in ourselves.
Great points!
I guess I don't think about having faith in myself much because growing up with the LDS gospel we are taught at a young age that we are literally children of God. Remembering that fact is the trick. It is hard not to see ourselves as anything more than our current self as opposed to the eternal being underneath. It certainly changes perspective once there is a little understanding that we really do have a Father in Heaven.
I have 3 close girlfriends that joined the church over the years and when I look at their conversion process it was never about the details or the customs of the church but their basic belief in God and the relationship we have with God. That was the toughest hurdle to get over, then the rest of the discussions and learning came easy. Thanks.
-
SeminarySnoozer, what do you think the level of ministry will be for resurrected beings in the Millennium? My understanding is that they will introduce the living to records of the dead, but I'm unaware of them serving in the role of preachers - especially when the Church will still exist.
Do you think the Millennium will serve as a period where these women will receive converts? Will they also have the converts sealed to them? Or will some of that work and effort happen while these women are still in mortality?
Great questions that I don't know if I have complete answers for. I do know that the two great works during the millenium are temple work and missionary work. And that immortal beings will come down to assist in both works. Only the righteous (meaning people who will end up in either the Terrestrial or Celestial Kingdoms) will be around during the Millenium but they will still have agency and continue in their beliefs. Eventually, though, they will all confess Christ as their Savior as stated in Jeremiah 31; " 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all aknow me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their biniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."
I think the answer to your last question is 'both' now and then.
The other thing to consider is that we believe in the power of vicarious experience. The work of the Lord testifies to that ability, to have such charity and love to be able to experience the pain and sorry of another's sin. It wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest that when a person makes it to the Celestial Kingdom such power of vicarious experience will be theirs as well. A woman who did not have the experience of raising children could still have such a powerful empathy that the experience is theirs as well from another's. In fact, I think this is what makes the Celestial Kingdom and endless source of joy, when a person can take joy from another's act. When joy is only obtained from personal acts - that starts to sound like Satan's idea of happiness, it is limited.
I believe the possibility of having joy multiplied is expressed to us many times over but we sometimes miss that message; D&C 18:" 16 And now, if your joy will be great with one soul that you have brought unto me into the akingdom of my Father, how great will be your bjoy if you should bring many csouls unto me!" ... (the exclamation point is in the scriptures!) Also couch this with the idea that we receive the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant when we are obedient to the laws and ordinances of the gospel even if we are not the literal sons or daughters of Abraham. The blessings include that through our seed ALL the families of the world will be blessed. Abraham 2: " 10 And I will abless them through thy name; for as many as receive this bGospel shall be called after thy cname, and shall be accounted thy dseed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their efather;" (I am assuming that means as their "mother" as well)
-
Now I am more confused with your understanding - Are you saying that it is a lie - the Book of Mormon is wrong is teaching the doctrine of the condescension of G-d?
Sorry, I am not following how you are arriving at this statement, you are going to have to give me more to respond. What specifically are you refering to? There is the condescension of God and the condescension of Christ. Which one are you talking about?
Addictions
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
An Addiction is a continued repetition of a behavior despite it having negative consequences or a neurologic impairment leading to such consequences.
If that is the definition of addiction then I am afraid all of us are addicted because none of us are perfect. The flesh rules our lives, we are in the flesh. You cannot use a strict definition of it being a fleshy desire that rules our lives because then everyone would fall into that category. The Apostles wanted to stay awake and watch and pray while in the Garden with Jesus but they couldn't. The "flesh ruled their lives" during that event because even though the spirit is willing the flesh is weak. But there is a difference between desires of the flesh and desires of the spirit. We are dual beings with two natures. If the spirit adopts the tendencies of the flesh as its own then that is something that will continue. We cannot get rid of the "thorn in the flesh" any more than Paul could during this life.
Lets just say for sake of arguement that Paul's thorn in the flesh was anorexia nervosa (we don't know what his thorn in the flesh was). And with that thorn in the flesh he had an addiction to exercise. Despite him trying to make it stop, the flesh kept driving a desire to loose weight, his body was addicted to loosing weight and yet he realized this was a behavior that had negative consequences. So long as Paul's spirit doesn't learn to love that addiction it will not continue with him in the next life, it dies with the body that is driving that addiction.
Let me give you another example. There are described cases of people devloping an addiction to gambling after taking a class of medications called dopamine agonists. These are medications used for Parkinsons disease. So, if a person that gets such a reaction were to become "addicted" to gambling as a result of such medication and the person dies with such an addiction that they obviously did not overcome, you want to say that it will continue with them in the next life? What if it is just the body that desired such things and not the spirit? I don't think the medication had an effect on the spirit directly in that example. Only the body was affected and then an addiction developed. We have two natures, one of the body and one of the spirit. We are being judged based on the nature of our spirit and God takes into account the circumstances of the body and all the variables that we cannot see.
If someone has depression ( and there have been recent talks about mental illness) and as a result they are "addicted" to sleep, the brain gives that person a drive to sleep all the time even though their spirit strugles with such an issue, the thorn in the flesh. If they died with such a problem it may or may not continue with them. It all depends on whether the spirit falls in love with that trait, if it becomes a "desire of the heart". If it is only a feature of the body and not of the spirit then it will not continue with them. Some people fall in love with their illness, they say "this is who I am" and that is when they have reached the point of despair where their spirit starts to take on those characteristics. By remaining with hope, the problem may continue one's whole life but it doesn't have to become part of one's spiritual nature, this is what is meant by hope and to hope for all things. Whether any given behavior is just from the body or part of one's spiritual nature, we cannot judge, we do not have that ability to tell the difference, but God does.