Seminarysnoozer
-
Posts
3421 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Seminarysnoozer
-
-
Something I've thought about now and then for awhile is the idea of how we and others react to passing on. It's always sad when someone dies. Even if we know we'll see them again, we mourn. It's usually scary for the one dying. Sometimes tragic, if it seems to be before one's time.
Do you think it was the same when we came here? Surely we had friendships and bonds with other spirits. Was it painful to leave and be left? Was it scary to pass into an unknown world that we knew would be lone and dreary (after all, passing into heaven sounds much nicer, and we still fear that). Or was all of that overshadowed by the joy of opportunity and growth?
I usually don't like fringe-y kinds of topics like this, so mark your calendars.
I think it probably was scary because we all knew that some wouldn't make it back to the same kinds of relationships. Like the fear one might have when they leave for a mission, there is mostly excitement mixed with a little fear of the unknown that comes with taking on something that hasn't been done before. I am sure the underlying feeling was mostly joy.
-
Thanks for your response - if you do not mind some questions?
Why is anyone's heart not true? Is it because they do not understand something - if that is the reason why doesn't G-d let them see what they have not taken into consideration? Is it possible that is exactly what is going on in our life experience?
Why do you think Lucifer is scared out of his wits concerning the risk of mortality? What do you think he knows that those that are not scared were not told? If he was wrong about being scared - why did not anyone (ie - G-d) tell him the truth? Is Lucifer deceived? or does he not know the truth? If he really does not know what is going on - is it just he is condemned forever for what he does not understand? He must know exactly what he is doing - and if that is the case - why is he doing it? It just does not make sense.
The Traveler
I thought that was the answer I gave ... our true nature.
Anyways, he is condemned forever based in his limited ability to have the characteristics it takes to receive glory. Faith in God, love of God and our fellow man are basic prerequisite characteristics that are revealed when given agency and stewardship. God knows where the line is drawn. We do not have the full list of what all those characteristics are but when they are revealed and made known based in specific choices and the reasons behind making the choices then God can determine that the person has no potential to progress further than that certain point irregardless of their level of understanding.
If I don't want to become a doctor it wouldn't matter whether I understood the pre-med material well enough to do well on the MCAT or not. If I wanted to be a doctor but not live the lifestyle of a doctor then, in essence, I am saying that I don't want to be a doctor. Even if I ace'd the MCAT, if I expressed some characteristic that suggested I would be a horrible doctor, like if I said something like 'I love to watch people suffer', there is no Medical School that would take me.
Likewise, the intelligence and aptitude is only one part of deciding the cut off between moving forward or not. The bigger part of the cut off seems to be whether a person loves God with all their heart, might, mind and strength and loves their fellow being as their self. It is based in traits.
To me the bigger question related to this is whether God really has any control or input to our basic traits. I think He doesn't, we were intelligences before and our make up was established. There may be some molding and development across a certain range but there may be certain spirits that can't get past a certain point no matter how much instruction because that is who they are. The devil was the devil from the beginning. God still needs to go through the motions to reveal those traits due to laws of justice etc.
-
From time to time there are things in doctrine that just do not make sense to me. Perhaps the doctrine of most difficulty to me is intelligent beings (aka – Lucifer and his followers) choosing the dark side. Before anyone gets sidetracked – my issue is not if there is a dark side or that agency would allow someone to choose the dark side. I got that – I understand that the possibility must exist. My problem lies in that I just cannot come to grips with a reasonable intelligent person choosing the dark side.
It seems obvious to me that someone choosing the dark side is doing so because to them something is missing. They are acting opposite of intelligence. Thus the only reason they make a dark choice is because something is left out of consideration. The only reason to live a lie with something left out is either ignorance of it or the false idea that it was not important. And since whatever was left out is critical to the eternal outcome; the time must come to realize that the dark side is not beneficial. Thus once the eternal outcome is realized there would have to be regret and desire to change the eternal outcome. Desire to change eternal outcome by definition is a change of mind and the very essence or repentance.
Changing the inevitable outcome is the whole purpose of the atonement of Christ.
So my paradox is – why should any intelligent being be trapped (damned) by the dark side for all eternity?
The Traveler
Because it is their nature that is damming.
Agency reveals traits. It reveals one's true nature. This is why the desire of the heart is so important.
What is the difference between "ignorance" versus living by faith? We are told that in the pre-mortal world the noble and great ones showed exceptional faith. Our passing the first estate test was based in faith.
I think the gnashing and wailing is a sense of realization of what was done. There are some aspects of our nature that we cannot change. For example, can a female spirit change their nature to a male spirit?
-
Methinks George Q Cannon and Seminarysnoozer lacks a sense of humor. :)
Seriously... there's a difference between making fun of something/somebody, being flippant, and having a sense of humor.
If "sense of humor" is a trait, how come "sense of seriousness" isn't?
Maybe I am being serious or funny, not sure.
-
George Q Cannon from Juvenile Instructor; “What is it to be humane to the beasts of the fields and birds of the air? It is more than to be considerate of the animal life entrusted to our care. It is a grateful appreciation of God’s creations. It is the lesson of divine love. To Him all life is a sacred creation for the use of His children. Do we stand beside Him in our tender regard for life?"
“Reverence is the noblest state in which a man can live in the world. Reverence is one of the signs of strength; irreverence, one of the surest indications of weakness. No man will rise high who jeers at sacred things. The fine loyalties of life must be reverenced or they will be foresworn in the day of trial.” (John Ruskin in David O. McKay, Man May Know for Himself [Deseret Book Co., 1967], p. 18.)
As George Q Cannon states all animals are sacred, making fun of them is, by definition, making fun of something that is sacred, which is irreverence. Closely akin to flippancy is irreverence. Making light of sacred things indicates a lack of affection for and faith in God.
-
I kinda get lost in some of these discussions, but a thought came and I wonder if the experience of being "touched" by a spirit is a "spirit to spirit thing" or experienced through the connection of our spirit and body.
Just thinking out loud.
I assume you are referring to being "touched" by the spirit like Alma's example of a seed planted in the heart, a faith promoting experience. If that is the case then it is Spirit to spirit.
Elder Christofferson; "The word of God, as Alma said, is like a seed planted in our hearts that produces faith as it begins to grow within us (see Alma 32:27–43; see also Romans 10:13–17). Faith will not come from the study of ancient texts as a purely academic pursuit. It will not come from archaeological digs and discoveries. It will not come from scientific experiments. It will not even come from witnessing miracles. These things may serve to confirm faith, or at times to challenge it, but they do not create faith. Faith comes by the witness of the Holy Spirit to our souls, Spirit to spirit, as we hear or read the word of God. And faith matures as we continue to feast upon the word."
(Note the use of the capitalized S in Spirit)
-
I believe that when Christ spoke of being whole that he was speaking of being an integrated entity of both the body and spirit. In addition I believe that Matthew 5:48 indicates that resurrection is not necessary.
As I understand we become whole or integrated through sacrifice and discipline. Since these seem to require a dominate spirit we may think of sacrifice and discipline as spiritual but in truth the process is integrated and requires that the body be disciplined as well as the spirit.
If we observe the ordinances of salvation we will discover that both the body and the spirit must be integrated or the ordinance is invalid. This is why both physical and spiritual baptism is required - if only by proxy.
We know that a mortal body can be integrated with our spirit through discipline and achieve even what we can call perfection - Jesus is the example. If not then the scriptures lie in telling us Jesus was tempted but resisted, thereby showing that resurrection is not necessary to integrate the spirit and body in common cause in order that there was an atonement.
The Traveler
I agree with all of that. I don't think anything I've said is contrary to that.
In fact, I will take it a step further .... the more our body becomes like Christ's body the more our spirit becomes integrated with it. This is why we take on His flesh and blood in the Sacrament. And when we sanctify ourselves we can have His image in our countenance. And there are higher ordinances in the Temple that relate to the transformation of our bodies.
I like how Elder Bednar put it in his April conference talk "We Believe in Being Chaste"; "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. "
-
One of the outstanding achievements of the 20th Century is what in engineering circles is called the "integrated circuit". This is where a single engineered electronic entity is able to perform multiple functions. Though integrated circuits has in its design multiple nature it is still by design a single integrated entity - unable to function its designed functions without the whole or all the parts.
I submit that man as an integrated entity of the physical and the spiritual is much more than the mere sum of the two parts or two natures. This is because of what we may think of in scientific terms as the integration of parts. In other words - by seeing or understanding man by the separate parts we may understand some of the degraded functions but in so doing it is impossible to comprehend (or utilize) the capability of the integrated entity.
I believe that the nature of man is in reality a single entity - that may have some "dual" (meaning spirit and physical) parts in the make up of human nature but that man is by design a fully integrated entity of those parts. I believe this is part of what D&C 93 verses 28-36 is trying to help us understand. That by focusing just on the individual natures of spirit and element you will miss the greater view of man as a fully integrated being of much greater nature than just the sum of those two parts.
The Traveler
It is possible for a man to be completely blind to the spirit, to have no spiritual influence at all and there are spirits that exist that have no physical body. As soon as you say "man", yes man is a dual being by definition. But the amount of integration between the two parts vary from individual to individual. We currently live according to the flesh with minor glimpses of spiritual input from time to time. The spirit is quiet and hard to hear. It is only when we put off the natural man (the body part) can we really hear the spirit. The perfect union will be upon resurrection, not in this current state. We are not fully integrated. On fast Sunday, my body is not fully integrated with my spirits desire to fast, it wants to eat. The apostle's bodies were not fully integrated with their spirits that didn't want to sleep.
-
^^^^^
This.
I have a very playful relationship with my Heavenly Father. There is often snickering heard quite clearly from above. Others I've known have had very serious relationships. Perfection. All things, to everyone. To each, as needed.
Q
There are also people that mock God or blame God for everything that goes wrong .... To each, as needed.
-
Yes he does! At least I believe so - otherwise why would have plants in the middle of the jungle - far, far away any ocean that have a "perfume" that smells like rotting fish? Also if we are created in His image and likeness then the fact that most people have a sense of humor would be another indicator that he has one!
We are not really sure how God created things originally. Everything around us is as a result of the Fall and all things changed at that point, even us.
-
I donno, if God really wanted me to be faithful, not sure why he'd make my life go as it is, which makes me often doubt his existence
something to ponder I guess (for me)
This life isn't a test of whether a person is faithful or not, we already proved that in the first estate test. We were all faithful to the plan of God. We all believed in it and agreed to it. And we will all be rewarded for that with the exception of the sons of perdition. This life is a test of how faithful we are, to what degree. Are we faithful even according to the flesh, the carnal passions and drives that distract us from our previous faithfulness, to the degree that we will forsake the will of the carnal mind and obey God's will?
This test would not be a "second" test if it didn't stratify those that already passed a "first" test. Maybe we could say, this life is like going onto Grad school. Everyone here has already gotten their degree, now we are allowed further instruction to qualify for bigger rewards and even the chance to be like God.
-
I've been thinking about what it may be like in the hereafter if there is someone who has wronged you in this life in a way that though you can forgive them, you would rather not be around them or associate with them. Especially if it is something serious like sexual abuse, etc. I would think it would be uncomfortable in heaven if someone who had wronged me deeply was there too and we were supposed to associate with them. Let me know what you think.
I think we will also more fully understand how far we have fallen by being mortal and realize how we currently are is not who we truly are. This is a temporary carnal state where we live according to the flesh. Our carnal-mortal drives is not reflective in a one-to-one relationship of who we really are. Each of us face specific challenges but the "thorn in the flesh" isn't intended to be a thorn in the flesh for eternity. I think once we see everyone for who they really are and not just their mortal stewardship then we can more easily forgive. I believe this is why Jesus could love the sinner more easily, He had a thinner veil as far as that goes and can see all of us as spirit brothers and sisters, realizing this is just a temporary stewardship.
I think this is more readily obvious in, for example, one who has Down's syndrome. None of us would say, they are that way because that is how their spirit is. In fact, that person's spiritual prowess is likely greater than a person who has a physical body that is less challenged. So, the physical challenges we face in this life, including the brain circuitry that drive anger, sexual drives, etc. are not in a one to one relationship with the spiritual self.
If the servant who only was given one talent doubled what they were given, he would have been on the same standing, in the end, as the one who received 5 to begin with.
This is why we cannot judge, because we cannot see the inner man very well. We cannot recall the glory of being a son or daughter of God. I think we constantly have to remind ourselves that everyone on this planet is a son or daughter of God and has passed their first estate, which means they believed and had faith in Christ and God's plan. We don't have authority to deny anyone the glory that comes with passing the first estate which should include more respect than we have for any man, with the exception of Christ. In other words, man is lower than the glory received by passing the first estate and your view of that person will at least be at the Telestial level, a glorified being for having passed the first estate, no matter what they did in this life. Of course, if they happen to be a son of perdition then you wont have to associate with them anyways.
-
VORT!!!
PAY ATTENTION!
You're right. YOU ARE 100% CORRECT.
So... I had a really interesting experience a few days ago. Jehovah's Witnesses came knocking on my door. So, I spent some time chatting with them. We got into some heavy topics and I told them that we agree on a lot of what they were saying but I told them that unless they believe in Pre-mortal existence, I can't be a "Witness" (that's what they called themselves).
And to my surprise... they asked me... What's pre-mortal existence? MAN! What an opening! So, I asked them to wait while I rush to grab my Primary Singing Time Visual Aids that has those circles on the Plan of Salvation and I explained to them everything about the Plan... and they asked, where in the scriptures does it say that?
AND AT THAT VERY MOMENT, I PAUSED, AND SAID TO MYSELF... DAGGONE IT. I SHOULD'VE LISTENED TO VORT!!!
True story.
Great example of those focused on verse and missing the spirit.
-
This scripture has provided valuable insight to me about how and why we study the scriptures. I think Traveler helped me to see it quite a number of months ago. Jesus here is talking to the Jewish rulers who are well versed in scripture.
The question is, do we come unto him? Is the Father's word in us? If so, our study has not been in vain. But some can study and search the scriptures and not be drawn to the Son. For all their studying they are actually further from him.
Yes, that is a great scripture. They thought eternal life was obtained by knowing the scriptures well. But it isn't, it is in coming to the Lord, wherever and however the testimony is given. Some, it might be through reading scriptures, others it might be by listening to the testimony of others, for others it may be by praying. But for all it has to be done by first humbling one self and seeking through faith. The scripture you gave, to me, says the reason for them not coming to the Lord is that they did not first believe. If one searches the scriptures and studies without first humbling their self, and believing then it is in vain. If one goes to the scriptures for a sign or to prove a belief then it is in vain.
That is why the word "ignorance" (as in 'cannot be saved in ignorance') has to be defined as it is in D&C 136. It is ignorance to the influences of the spirit not "ignorance" in a general sense or as to the ability to quote scripture or understand historical facts.
-
D&C 131:6, for starters.
My use of the word "scriptorian" is in reference to the original post. I thought my original usage was quite clear in this respect. If it's still unclear to you, let me know and I'll point it out.
Talk about cross referencing scriptures, the "ignorance" spoken of in the verse you gave references to D&C 136:"32 Let him that is ignorant learn wisdom by humbling himself and calling upon the Lord his God, that his eyes may be opened that he may see, and his ears opened that he may hear; 33 For my Spirit is sent forth into the world to enlighten the humble and contrite, and to the condemnation of the ungodly."
That ignorance is in reference to being ignorant of the spiritual influences we can have in this life if we are humble and contrite and asking in prayer. That kind of ignorance is when a person is blinded to the spirit and only depends on secular learning. One can be brilliant to the ways of men but be ignorant to the spirit. The scriptures and the doctrine are there to help us depend more on the Lord and recognize the spirit.
The doctrinal facts and data we all knew before coming here, the veil blocks that knowledge. If we remain worthy, that knowledge will all come flooding back into our memory once the veil is lifted. We have no chance of learning the facts better than what we learned before coming here. The value of this kind of learning wisdom is in the improvement in our faith and dependency on the Lord and ability to stay in tune with the spirit.
-
Fine thoughts Seminarysnoozer, let me comment on just a few points.
No, the body is not the source of suffering. The body is simply the means through which we are exposed to suffering. Satan and his hosts are the source. I could also take this statement and reverse it. The body is not the source of happiness it is simply the means through which we are exposed to greater joy. Here are Lehi's words, "Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh" (2 Ne 2:27). Note that qualifier, "according to the flesh". If we will choose liberty and eternal life "according to the flesh" we will indeed be free. But if we choose captivity and death "according to the flesh" we will certainly be miserable.
Challenge produces growth. While in this life, those who die two hours after being born may face very little growth. That says nothing of who they were before coming to earth and nothing of who they may become after it. The scriptures say they are saved in the Celestial kingdom, and so it is. But growth does not come without effort.
The body is more than just the "means", it is described as being part of the foundation of our character. If it was just the means for suffering and happiness then we could also say the same thing about the sun, the earth, the air, food, herbs, dirt, viruses, antibiotics, automobiles, etc. The difference is that none of those other physical things are part of the foundation of our character. The body is not just a vehicle, it adds to the soul, it adds to our character and combined with the spirit brings a fullness of joy because it is part of the foundation of our character. It is part of the nature of God. Right now we are of a dual nature. The spirit is only one part of that dual nature. The synergistic effect of the body plus the spirit could never be reached by the spirit alone because the body is not just an interface or a vehicle, it is part of the soul, thus adding to our character. It is part of the foundation of the character for the person who doesn't live in this life long enough to even remember it as well as those that find their self later in the Telestial Kingdom.
-
Seminary, Of course we as spirits could love and be loved, could understand and be understood. But we clearly did not have a fullness, we were limited in our experience. D&C 93:33-34 says, "For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fullness of joy; and when separated, man cannot receive a fullness of joy." Before this earth life, we progressed for perhaps eons of time but we reached a state where further progress was limited. In order to continue our growth we needed new challenges, new experiences and new opportunities. That is exactly what the plan of salvation offered us. That is why we came here, to gain the experience we needed through a body.
Now I do not know all the limitations of a spirit, nor all the opportunities of having a body. But I know that every moment of this life is precious. Every minute here we shape our destiny. To believe otherwise is to minimize our purpose here. But not only that, to believe otherwise, is to minimize the purpose for Christ's very atonement. We read in Mark, "And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy. ...And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him" (Mark 14:33, 35). Note that here, at the end of his mortal life, Christ was amazed and fell to the ground. Neil A. Maxwell said, "He had been intellectually and otherwise prepared from ages past for this task. He is the creator of this and other worlds. He knew the plan of salvation. He knew this is what it would come to. But when it happened, it was so much worse than even He had imagined! ("A Choice Seer" Aug 1986) Even Christ learned by the things which he suffered. Just as we must. Eternal consequences face us at all times.
Yes, I completely agree and understand the first paragraph but that is exactly what prompts the question, what does the body add beyond this life. Why is it necessary for the person in the Telestial Kingdom to have one in order to be of that level of glory beyond what the spirit alone could provide.
In the second paragraph you are implying that the body is the source of challenge and suffering and that is how it makes us more like God. I disagree with that premise as it pertains to the eternities. Christ overcomes all. His burden is light. Perfected, sanctified bodies should have no challenge attached to them at all.
What about the child that lives 2 hours, dies and goes straight to paradise and onto the Celestial Kingdom. What "challenge" did this body have if the child had no opportunity to express free agency while under the influences of the body as she died before the age of accountability? Obviously, that aspect of the body is not the thing that makes it necessary to be combined with our spirit to make us more like God. Those souls skip over the mortal "challenge" aspect of our bodies and yet still need a perfected body in the next life.
There must be some amount of eternal joy that the body contributes that the spirit alone is not capable of. If God continues to have a body "inseparably connected" in order to be God, that implies that if He was spirit alone He could not be God. Even if He has experienced all and knows all, He still has to have His body to remain God. Even if the person in the Telestial Kingdom has gone through the first estate and the second estate experiences, she needs to keep the body to remain in that level of glory. A spirit alone cannot have the glory of the Telestial Kingdom.
One thought may be that the spirit alone is not capable (at least to a certain degree) of sharing experience - 'to put yourself in someone else' shoes' so to speak. One of the maturing things that happens by the age of 8 is one's ability to empathize. That empathy is what allows us to have charity, the pure love of Christ. A child starts out only seeing things only from their perspective. As we mature, there are parts of the brain that allow for 'putting yourself in someone else' shoes'. We, in part, know this because there are conditions like Autism in which there is an impairment of those types of social skills. Without that ability it would be hard to live a Celestial life where we are asked to love this way; "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." Notice how Jesus separates out the sources of love - heart (common reference to spirit), soul (the combined spirit and body) and mind (the brain's physical anatomy - referencing input from body). Heart alone is not good enough (spirit alone is not enough). And the second commandment is to love thy neighbor as thyself. Without empathy the second commandment is not possible. Social interactions by definition require empathy ability.
Maybe the body is the means by which we can truly share our experience one with another and not just have experience for self. After all, we believe that Christ's power rests in His ability to feel the full impact of all our experience and pay for them. We believe that He couldn't pay for them without experiencing it on some level (the method by which that was done is not understood). Possibly, He couldn't really do that without a body, a mind that has grown in stature among men.
My husband tried to comfort me as much as possible during my pregnancies (they were rough). But as much as he tried, bless his heart, he won't know really what that feels like at least while in this life. To love someone as your self, one must put their self in their shoes as much as possible, at least at a mental level. That ability will likely be magnified the more our bodies are sanctified and perfected. It may be the thing that allows us to be more connected than we could be before this life.
-
Just a thought - I believe that the purpose of this in scripture is to give Adam importance concerning creation. Prior to the fall the creation speaks of G-d in the plural with pronouns like us and we. Thus it seems to me that prior to the fall Adam had divine status and was a participant in the creation. Also in scripture G-d is given as the father of Adam - which is interesting when we consider that Jesus is the only begotten of the father.
The Traveler
Yes, this is what I think I was getting at. Thank you.
I think we consider Adam as a gardener but he also was likely a zoologist or together would be considered a biologist. Not to say that was the only thing he studied but to put it on equal footing with taking care of plant life.
-
No idea about God... But i STILL use the names my son came up with as a small child. Sure, their official names are fine, but HIS names are wrapped up in joy. All different kinds of joy. Of a parent, of the excitement of getting to introduce him to the world, of the pure love, of the memories that those names give me of those things.
Then, of course, there are our down under cousins. Not only do we have common names In English (dog I stead of canis familiaris, grass instead of... Oh. Bad example there. Too many subspecies)... But then the Aussies go a step further and rename everything all over again. Or add an O to the end, either or.Renaming, though, In a style that's half cockney half substitution code. I refer you to some such phrases such as Bickie, Buckleys, & cop it sweet. Then there's naval slang. Anyone with the surname Brown is renamed Bomber. Engineering boys are all called Charge.
Then we have proper names. Crazy changes there across geography and time. Both in spelling and usage. Spelling is simple... Maryam to Miriam or Maryanne, Mary.. Usage gets all culturally tied up (masculine or feminine like Ashley? Whitney?... Respect via first or last name? Is your first name your family name and your last name your individual name, or in reverse?... Is your name a variation of your fathers? Or mothers? Or neither? How many durn names DO you have? Do you change it at puberty, marriage, parenthood, old age, or other milestones? Can you change your name? Do other people give you nicknames? Are you known by an arbitrary designation? John or Archibald, or by physical trait or characteristic? Red, Swift? Or a combo? Fat Mark, Mohammed the sculptor, Tina the barbarian, Yankee Mike. Bomber?
Our poets, scientists (taxology!), cartographers, comedians, singers, lawyers, et cetera all question names. A rose by any other.... Orange four inch door hinge... India Caribbean tomato tomahto.
... I wonder less that God had him name the animals... And more that Adam could stop long enough to get on with the rest of life's business.
Course... We've never really stopped.
We're still,trying to Grok things.
Name it, understand it.
Or at the very least,be able to argue about it with others.
Blood. RBCs, WBCs, plasma, oxygen, carbon, hydrogen... Cascading reactions of the sun. Name units of time. Measure that time for the suns rays and particles to hit the earth.
Names. Knowledge. Power. Wonder.
At that point he was still in the presence of God, he had not yet eaten the fruit of death so his body (and brain) had not yet been corrupted by the Fall. He spoke the language of God. And he could have simply asked God, 'what is this?' There would be no need to rename things or alter their names if they already had one. Recall, God has done this over and over again, one eternal round. He has a name for everything, I am sure.
We are talking about naming species, not a pet. Do you understand dogs more or less if your were the one to give it the name "dog" as opposed to just using the name that was already given? I am not following the idea that simply naming something gives one more knowledge about it. Especially, if it already has a name. God told him to do it. So, this isn't him just wondering would it could be and giving it a name because there wasn't one already.
Maybe, he chose the animals that would eventually continue in the fallen world? Out of those found in paradise, possibly he chose (named) those that would go on. Maybe those that didn't get a name became extinct at the Fall. ... it seems that there must be some other reason. Maybe it is just a ritual regarding ownership or dominion.
-
As we choose to face more powerful contradictions we grow. Our body here on Earth allows both the opportunity, and through it, the challenge. We have been placed here with Satan and his hosts to be tempted and tried. It is through the body that the adversary tempts us. However, for the righteous, the body is also a shield and protection. If we yield to the lusts of the flesh we are overcome and the spirit becomes subject to Satan and his hosts. But if we listen to our spirit we gain control over the body.
Let me give one way I believe we grow beyond this life. As we expand our capacity to love, to understand others, we grow in the Spirit and are able to bless them. Our love grows beyond our wife and children and encompasses many, many, more. The body allows us this additional growth.
I agree with what you are saying here but there is no real understanding of how the body "allows us this additional growth" beyond what our spirit is capable of. All you are saying is that we are capable of more with a body. Yes, I believe that, that is a part of our beliefs. What is it about the body that makes it a necessary step to become like God that the spirit is not able to do without it? So, what I am really asking is, what are the deficiencies of the spirit? Is the spirit really capable of a limited amount of love and understand?
Are you trying to say that the body can love where the spirit can't do on it's own?
Having a car allows me to bless my family more than if I had to run all my errands on my own but my car isn't me, it isn't part of my soul or character. Just because something allows us to do something more isn't an explanation of how it is part of our character or nature. This is such a unique belief but we understand very little about it. What part of God's nature is made possible by being flesh and bones with spirit as opposed to just spirit body alone? What part of the Telestial being's nature is made possible by their flesh and bones which would not be possible without it?
-
The body does not generate feelings, it magnifies and enhances them. Elder Bednar put it this way, "Our physical bodies make possible a breadth, a depth, and an intensity of experience that simply could not be obtained in our premortal estate." (Things as They Really Are - Ensign June 2010 - ensign)Elder Packer said, "...our spirit and our body are combined in such a way that our body becomes an instrument of our mind and the foundation of our character" (Speeches) Our body is a gift to shape our character but we must learn how to control it.
Yes, it says that the body becomes a "foundation of our character."
Where does the "breadth, depth and intensity of experience" come from?
When one talks on the phone, the phone makes sound. The voice of the person talking could not reach the ear of the person listening naturally but with the use of the phone and the phone generating sounds one can hear the voice of someone far away. Is the sound heard from the person talking or from the phone? Yes it was initiated by the person talking but what one is hearing is not the person talking, it is the phone generating sound waves. So it is possible for the phone to generate noise.
Likewise, if the body adds anything to emotions or experiences such as despair, anger, thirst, visual information, sensory information, perceptions, hallucinations, dreams etc. then it is capable of generating them, by definition.
If we argue so strongly that it does not come from the body then I go back to the question, what is the body adding to the spirit that the spirit cannot do on its own that would give the soul glory on an eternal basis (not just through mortality)?
No unclean thing can enter the presence of God. The spirit of the Lord does not dwell in unholy temples. The body won't pose any challenge when it is perfected, sanctified and purified by the process of resurrection. It only adds something ... what does it add?
-
This is a good question. There is hope for you yet SeminarySnoozer
. In a way this misunderstanding about how the spirits interact in the spirit world can cause us to not question why we are here and misinterpret why we need a body in the first place. While here in this physical wold we do not understand what we have. When we have passed on we will long for our bodies - but not because we need to touch other things.
These words are not perfect but let me see if I can explain. A body increases our capacity to feel emotion, to experience more deeply. It increase our love, our devotion, our happiness, but also magnifies our anger, our worry, our sadness, or our fear. This is the great challenge of our lives, to control this bombardment of our senses, to harness the new depth of feeling, and to cope with this new rush of emotion. Look into your heart. If you are calm you will begin to see the difference. Our spirit is not loud, not troubled like our bodies. The problem is in the rush of physical stimulus our spirit can get lost. Here is what Elder Bednar said last conference, To control our bodies is our glory and our challenge.
It is one thing to talk about the challenge of this life and another to talk about why we need a body in the eternities to be like God. If the body only relates to the probationary period where there is a challenge and a test then there is no need to have one later. The only reason to have one later is to realize that the body adds (in a positive way) to the glory more than what the spirit is capable of on it's own.
So, there are aspects of love, devotion and happiness that the spirit alone cannot produce, that the body is generating?
I think it is a big step in understanding to say that the body contributes to emotion that is not emanating from the spirit or at least cannot be produced by the spirit alone.
Opposition allows us to choose and obey and thus receive the glory associated with that obedience while in mortality but the corruption is overcome by the resurrection. Christ overcomes all things. A perfected body is not troubled. A perfected body wont present any challenge. We seize to be a dual being upon resurrection and become one with our body. We cannot serve two masters for eternity.
-
I am not so sure if this is true (spirits can't contact physical bodies). Joseph Smith when describing his experience before the first vision states, "the power of this enemy which had seized upon me."
An experience from my mission would tell me clearly that contact between a physical body and a spirit does occur.
However, I freely admit I do not understand the contact and how such is possible, or possibly happens in a different way.
Satan has been given power to bruise our heel. He has certain influence over mortal carnal things as a result of the Fall.
-
I'm pretty certain the sensory capacity of our spirits unfettered with mortal bodies would be a thousand times better than what we know of as touch.
When my dad died, he visited my brother. The "touch" my brother felt from my dad was an all-encompassing feeling that he described as akin to the feeling he feels when he feel touched by the Holy Spirit with the added sensory of actually seeing my dad in the form of light holding his hand. He "heard" my dad in the same way he hears the Spirit. Direct communication from thought to thought that he heard with his whole being, not with his ears.
If spirit to spirit interaction is better without the body then the question raised is what does the body add to becoming like God. There has to be something added via the body that the spirit cannot do on it's own otherwise it wouldn't be a necessary step to be like God. We know the fullness of joy can only be had when body and spirit are together. So, what is it that the perfected body adds to make the union greater than the part? (Of course, I am talking about a perfected body, not the corrupted one we have here in mortality)
The answer is not just reproduction because we know that even in the Telestial Kingdom, the glory is higher than what would have been possible without a body. There is something a perfected body adds to increase glory in a way the spirit could not do it on it's own even for those who will not be participating in eternal families.
The Dark Side
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
What you are asking is unknown.
Why would some spirits be more noble than others? It is the same question but just to a smaller degree. Why were we not all exactly like the Firstborn and mirror every move, thought process and expression of faith?
To know the answer to that would be to understand how intelligences are formed.
I think too, I would not look at it "as turning away light" but not having an ability to hold onto light. It is not a feature of, 'he could and yet he doesn't' but more of a 'he wants it but not capable of it'. If Lucifer was not of the contrite, humble type, he is not capable of receiving the truth and light even if he wants it.
The Lord, through Joseph Smith gives us the pattern of turning away from the light in all things and throughout all the heavens which includes Satan; D&C 52; " 14 And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—
15 Wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.
16 He that speaketh, whose spirit is contrite, whose language is meek and edifieth, the same is of God if he obey mine ordinances.
17 And again, he that trembleth under my power shall be made strong, and shall bring forth fruits of praise and wisdom, according to the revelations and truths which I have given you.
18 And again, he that is overcome and bringeth not forth fruits, even according to this pattern, is not of me.
19 Wherefore, by this pattern ye shall know the spirits in all cases under the whole heavens."