Seminarysnoozer
-
Posts
3421 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Seminarysnoozer
-
-
I am confused by your remarks - the physical tabernacle without the spirit is a dead lifeless corpse - hardly an enemy to anything or even capable of lust or anything else that is sin???
The Traveler
Where do you get that? A body without a spirit is without life, meaning there is no potential for eternal life or what we call life which is to have both a spirit and a body. There are things that act and things acted upon but that does not mean that things that are acted upon have no action of their own. Does an oxygen molecule moving around in the air require an intelligent spirit telling it to make movements or is that just the nature of oxygen?
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. In declaring this fact the scriptures are very explicit:
“And the Gods formed man from the dust of the ground, and took his spirit (that is, the man’s spirit), and put it into him; and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” [Abraham 5:7.] " "The question, then, is: Which will give the more abundant life—pampering our physical nature or developing our spiritual selves? Is not that the real problem?3
Indulgence in appetites and desires of the physical man satisfy but for the moment and may lead to unhappiness, misery, and possible degradation; spiritual achievements give “joy not to be repented of.”"
David O. McKay states clearly that the physical man which is the contrasting nature to the spiritual nature and is within the natural body as opposed to the spiritual body has "appetites and desires". The appetites and desires of the physical body are separate from the spiritual. Man is a dual being. What is so confusing about that?
Paul outlines pretty clearly how bad that enemy is, don't deny it! "In his epistle to the Galatians, Paul specifically enumerates the “works of the flesh,” as he calls them, and the “fruits of the Spirit.” Note this classification: The works of the flesh are manifest as these:
“… Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
“Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
“Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
“Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
“And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
“If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.” (Gal. 5:19–25.)"
-
If we cannot judge how can there be free will or agency choice?
I believe the term in our LDS scripture scripture is agency. Agency implies that we work for or represent another. I believe the only agency we have is to align ourselves with either good (G-d) or evil (Satan). As I understand we are not free agents representing ourselves - because we do not even really know who we are. As I understand the default condition of our agency in mortality is to be aligned with Satan. That is problematic because Satan intends to eliminate any choice we wish to exercise concerning agency thus by default we would become agents of him.
The Traveler
I think when you say "we" you should specify what part of "we", our body or our spirit. The natural man is an enemy to God, which is the part of us that is natural or carnal. Our spirit is innocent as Joseph Smith explains. And by passing the first estate test we know it is not aligned with Satan. This is where the opposition exists to create the choice, between body and spirit. We can attempt to put our carnal tendencies under submission but they come back if we don't endure and keep the battle going throughout our life. Of course, the gospel is the method by which we more easily control the carnal aspect of our being.
-
As you asked in another thread (slightly changed for this thread) - how should we see people like Hitler and Cain?
The Traveler
Good point. thanks.
-
I have heard that there are people, who "The person choose to side with lucifer in the pre-existence but due to the atonement they still were not past forgiveness to receive his grace and mercy so they were still able to get a body"...
Not sure how true but it wouldn't surprise me.
Whether one passed the first estate test or not is not up to the individual as much as it is God's decision that the person does not merit or have it in their heart to go on any further. I doubt God makes a mistake in that decision or changes His mind as it will be with the second estate test. Why would God give something to an individual that they did not want? Choosing to side with Lucifer in the pre-mortal existence without a veil, with everything on the table is not a flip-of-a-coin decision. It is a heartfelt one that reveals one's true nature, their heart's desire. The decision God makes to cast out Lucifer and all of his followers is based in the individual's character not being compatible with one that could receive glory. They are incapable of receiving this glory, it is not just a matter of want. '
God is pretty definitive with His line in the sand. If you are not one ye are not mine, etc. And " 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."
-
I was not suggesting that someone should not seek treatment, but rather accept people for who they are. A Beautiful Mind delivers that message quite well. I believe that I did do a decent job of illustrating the stigma of revealing issues.
I do not believe that mental illness is a test of character, granted via some grand plan, rather its a product of environmental, circumstantial or self inflicted. Nature versus nurture. Society versus self, Ether 12:27, etc. There are countless variables.
I have visited enough psych wards visiting family and friends to come to the above conclusion. Considering depression is a common theme within my family, with other variables thrown into the mix, I believe I have a decent understanding of the topic.
There is no smoking gun reason or treatment, but I will say that compassion and empathy far outweigh any quest for a finite answer.
I agree! This is why we sing songs such as 'I am a child of God', to remind us all who we really are. We should accept everyone for who they really are, a child of God who has passed the first estate test, meaning one who is in line to receive glory well beyond anything found here. Understanding who we really are allows a person to realize that even a person with the best brain in the world is fallen from their previous state. Some would like to believe that we haven't fallen very far. I don't take that view. I realize that a veil has covered thousands and thousands of years (if not more) of direct learning in the presence of our Heavenly Father. To me, that is who I am and who all of us are. Not this fallen set of stewardship that we call self. This is what allows Christ to say 'forgive them for they know not what they do' and to approach the sinner with love. When I die I hope to at least regain my former status and hope to be propelled further than that. At a minimum, our former status, I believe, is an intelligence that far supersedes all the beautiful minds of this world put together. We would sell ourselves way short to fall in love with our current self, it is best to keep our eye on the glory of God which is closer to our real self than this existence.
Even the most evil person in this world did better than those who didn't pass the first estate test. I think we down play the importance of that first estate test too much, suggesting it was simply a choice between plan A or B. It was more than that, it was something that had to be earned based in the level of our faith. There were some that were more valiant than others in their expression of faith but all who passed the first estate expressed faith.
For us of faith, we should see people as they really are, as the Lord sees them and not as the world. So, I agree, we should accept people for who they really are which is not the sum total of their brain's characteristics. That is simply a temporary stewardship. When I meet Moses in the next life I doubt he will be poor of speech and I also doubt that I will see Paul with a 'thorn in the flesh' because that is not who they are even if it was part of their character here.
-
Everyone has a family. Everyone will be sealed up not just our small family and society.
What do you mean by this?
Who is Hitler sealed to? Who is Cain sealed to?
-
Trained in logical thinking. I am trying to develop a theory unifying physics and religion and answering questions like why does God need us, why do we worship, what are Satan's motives and goals.
The answer to that question goes along with why God's glory is increased when He brings about the immortality and Eternal Life of man.
If you have children the answer is inherently obvious. When my child gets an A in school I experience a certain amount of joy. Why do I feel joy about that? I am not the one who got an A. And why is it that I don't feel the same amount of joy when any other kid gets an A?
It is because of a very specific trait that I think we share with God, empathy. This is why the most important commandments are to love God and to love thy neighbor as thyself. All people that make it into the Celestial Kingdom share glory. When glory is not shared, to the extreme, is what Satan stands for. He wanted all the glory to himself and by himself without giving credit where credit is due. Worship is a form of developing empathy and the ability to receive glory from the actions of someone else. As that is one of the key traits of those found in the Celestial Kingdom, our gospel is about developing that trait. This is why we serve with an eye single to the glory of God, not to our own glory. People who cannot find joy in the success of others as much as they find it with their own personal success will not find themselves in such a system.
Logically speaking, even though you have some patents, the majority of what you know was developed by someone else and you took it on as your own. If you had to "start from scratch" so-to-speak in learning everything towards the field of electro-optics it would take you many lifetimes to get there. You would first have to develop language, how to mine minerals, smelt metals, discover theories of mathematics and physics etc. So, giving credit where credit is due, even your contributions to the field are on the back of many other people over many generations. Apply that concept to God's system. All those who have perfect empathy can receive all that God has and God receives all that we contribute. How is it that Christ could pay for all our sins if not by His ability to feel and understand the implications of such sin? God received all that His Father had and took it on as His own. Christ takes on all that His Father has and desires that we be one with Him in that same process. We partake of His flesh and blood with that idea in mind.
The system of eternal joy is one that is based in the shared success of all those who are sealed together in a covenant bond where all experience is mutually shared. 1 Corinthians 12; "25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it."
Satan was and is incapable of rejoicing when another is honored and therefore is taken off the track towards glory. Celestial life requires sacrificing self centered achievement for service with an eye single to the glory of God and in that way the person will have more abundantly than what could be produced on her own.
-
Okay, I understand what you are saying, and I apologize that I misunderstood it. I was simply going with the assumption that we were discussing literal medical diagnosed mental illness, as that's what the topic was already.
Two, yes, one would need to repent. Scripture commands that we are to not covet, and not commit adultery. Proverbs also says "For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he" Once thoughts take root, they eventually lead to actions. So it's best to nip it in the bud. If you're having those types of thoughts, then you need to do some self-examining and find out why and where they're coming from.
Oh, and this may be a religious forum, but I'm in the medical field. Therefore, it comes out.
Thanks.
So, you think a dream is a representation of what is in the heart? If you don't think the dream is something that comes from "thinketh in his heart" then where does it come from?
Lets say the person repents from the dream of infidelity and then has a similar dream that same night. Has the person sinned?
Then it sounds like you would also say that if one happens to think about eating food while fasting then they have broken their fast?
Let me remind you of the story of the man born blind; " 1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."
Jesus then explained; " 39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth."
In other words, we come to this world blinded so that we might have faith in Christ. Those that say they have no need for a Savior, that they "see" just fine (i.e - their brain works fine on it's own), remain in their sin.
Elder Wood said; "Paul then quotes the Lord, who tells him, “My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor. 12:9). All men and women are bound by mortally imposed weaknesses and limitations in strength, knowledge, and power. Contrasting these limitations with the infinite wisdom and power of God brings humility. “Weaknesses are a constant reminder of our dependence upon the Lord. It is when we take those weaknesses to Him, in humility, that we can become effectively joined with Him in a great work. It is when we have done as much as we can do that His grace … can move us beyond our natural abilities” (Carolyn J. Rasmus, “Faith Strengthened in Weakness,” Church News, 26 Feb. 1994, 10). It is in this sense that God’s strength can then be made perfect in our lives. “The Lord God showeth us our weakness that we may know that it is by his grace, and his great condescensions unto the children of men, that we have power to do these things” (Jacob 4:7)."
All men and women are mortally bound by the "limitation" in knowledge and wisdom. In other words, we are mentally limited. This is done so we approach the Lord in humility and learn to have faith in Him. 2 Corinthians 12 " 9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong."
And Jacob 4: " 7 Nevertheless, the Lord God showeth us our weakness that we may know that it is by his grace, and his great condescensions unto the children of men, that we have power to do these things."
There is nothing wrong in saying that we are mentally weak, in fact, it is an empowering thing to admit such weakness as it allows us to be made strong in Christ.
-
SS: You say that all of us have a mental illness of sorts. I beg to disagree. Merriam Webster defines a mental disorder/mental illness as:
: a mental or bodily condition marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, and emotions to seriously impair the normal psychological functioning of the individual—called also mental illness
Is this a medical forum or a religious one?
I put "mental illness" in quotes for a reason. If one looks at what we suppose our "normal" psychological functioning was prior to coming to this world, I would say that it is markedly disorganized in most ways to seriously impair function compared to our state of mind in the pre-mortal world. I would even say our personality is greatly changed and especially emotions. The world sees the outer man as the man. So, if you want to stick with that view, fine, you are right. Joseph Smith taught that we were innocent before coming here and we know that we spent a lot of time in the presence of our Father to the point of maturity and not being able to develop further unless we took a Fall from that existence. I guess it depends on how far you think we fell. Some people tend to think that we barely fell. Those same people would think that we are barely saved then too. I tend to think we fell a great distance from our "normal psychological functioning". In this way, the test is created. The first estate test was one of personality and mind to make sure we are all on the same page - we all were and are. Now we face the test of carnal versus spiritual desires. There are few in this world that master carnal drives, certainly not most. So, if you are basing what is "normal" on the majority, well the majority of people go with what is carnal.
But, if you are talking about the medical designation of "mental illness" I completely agree with you. Then, you miss the point I was trying to make, which is that we all face dealing with a mortal brain that drives thought patterns that are contrary to the desires of the spirit. The body and spirit duality of the "mind" is at odds with itself often for that reason, in everybody. Even in people who are righteous, they still have to endure, because the effect of doing nothing is to fall back into carnality. So we have to constantly fight the natural drives that create the natural man's personality, emotions, and "mind".
Let me ask you; if you had a dream one night that you had an affair on your spouse, should you repent for having such a dream? Why or why not?
-
Yes. When I think of Joseph Smith's experience I wonder by what power and means was Joseph Smith's tongue bound, and why did he fear death?
Because Satan has been given temporary power over this fallen world but that will be removed during the millennium and once again after the final battle. In the meantime, Satan has some power over physical things.
-
It dawns on me that part of the process of accepting the gospel in LDS teaching is the time after we die. Is there any instruction, or informed speculation, that those who suffer from mental illnesses or developmental delays that keep them from making informed choices will have those hindrances removed in the afterlife?
We also believe that those who die without the challenge of choice have already been judged worthy to enter into the Celestial Kingdom such as those who die before the age of 8 and those that have Down's syndrome etc. No further testing is required.
There may be some others that have such a severe mental illness that they cannot really reason in this life and may fall into a similar category.
-
As for those of us evangelicals who embrace the doctrine of free will (Calvinists do not, btw), this problem of mental illness--along with the more general 'what if they never heard?' is one that offers informed speculation, but no strong answers. Some say that it's our job to let them hear, so we must be urgent in missions (i.e. too bad, if they didn't hear). Others believe that general revelation (the witness of nature and the physical demonstrations of God) are enough--that God can judge every soul based on how they respond to what they do know. I'm somewhat in this latter camp, though I rest in my certainty that God is indeed just. We do not accept the idea of chances after death because we do not have your revelations, and we interpret the scripture in Hebrews that says it's appointed to us once to die and then the judgment to not allow conversions after dying.
"Death" is the separation of us from God. Those in spirit prison are still dead in that sense, they are still in the second estate test.
Also, all of us have a "mental illness" of sorts. We do not have a perfect body with a perfect brain. We forget, we are driven by primitive drives of hunger, thirst, sleepiness, sexual drives etc. Even the apostles couldn't overcome the drive to sleep while in the Garden. The "mental illness" is just a matter of degree. When I fast my body still says "eat" which goes contrary to what my spirit wants to do. When I give my tithing or fast offering my mentally ill brain says 'you could really use that money on your self'. We partake of the sacrament every week because our mentally ill brain easily forgets. By taking on His flesh and blood we maintain the hope to overcome this mental illness and receive a body like His. Where much is given much is expected but we all fall on that spectrum of 'mental illness', somewhere. We all have a veil that causes us to forget what we have previously learned. This is what allows God to make a judgement of quality of character as opposed to the quantity of things learned. The quantity of things learned was the first estate test.
How do you account for one who develops Alzheimer's and forgets everything learned and may even denounce what they previously testified? We are not judged by our final attestation in this life but what is in our heart (spirit self), which only God can fully see.
-
You are not fully quoting Acts 10:34 - "God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." What this is saying is that God will allow people from all nations to come to him.
God can create us all differently. We all have different Chemistry, Connections, Circumstances & Consciousness but it is what we do with our free will that God will judge us by. Some people will experience harder lives then others, its what we CHOOSE to do with what we are given that counts. So God can easily create us as different persons out of nothing. There is no logical problem.
God is worthy of "glory and honour and power" because he has "created all things" (see Revelations 4:11) But if God created all things that entails that nothing existed apart from him prior to creation. For there were no preexisting materials, he created all.
The thing that you are not taking into account is that we are dual beings both body and spirit while here. The spirit existed previously and the body is 'created' from the effects of the Fall of Adam (God having made a perfect body first). Difference is 'created' from the effects of the Fall. After the Fall there is variability with the associated different chemistry, connections, circumstances etc. Joseph Smith clearly taught that the spirit is inherently innocent. We believe that God does allow all people of all nations come to Him. If they did not have an opportunity to hear of the gospel it will be delivered to them in the next life, in spirit prison.
-
All things in the universe exist either in a state of thought, energy, or matter (which is merely condensed energy). As our spirits are more than mere thoughts, but the very core of our being, it is reasonable to assume it is made of some kind of matter that science has yet to understand. This is nothing new, in fact, as there are many types of matter and energy that we still have yet to begin to understand (dark matter/dark energy are good examples). As far as how a soul "fits" within a body, it could be a cohesive interaction, such as how two different liquids with the same density can be mixed together. One interesting idea is that the amount of empty space between atoms and even sub-atomic particles is so vast that we are, in fact, more empty space than not. It is entirely possible that the soul is made of a type of matter that is able to exist within this empty space without interfering with what we perceive to be our solid bodies, or "normal" matter.
Just a thought.
You are assuming that the two types of matter exist together naturally. I don't think we know if that is true. God placed Adam's spirit in him. It wasn't there before He placed it in him. At what point does the spirit enter the body in gestation? Most do not thing it is at the moment of conception. So, there is a body without a spirit for a period of time. And of course we know of spirits without a physical body.
In our pre-mortal life, for millions of years (or whatever length of time) did we have access to course matter or need it? Was it even around us at that time? If not, there is a place that exists that is not attached or mixed with "our universe".
What we call "our universe" may not be all there is in God's universe. Fine matter may not be anything that science could ever understand so to say it is something that science has yet to understand is to believe in potential for the tower of Babel. We are told that there are some things of God that are unreachable by man. Is the resurrected body made from the dust of this fallen world or from Celestial material?
-
I don't know if this is what you've been trying to say all along. I agree that spirit being material matter would mean that it is "physical" under a limited definition (you'll see in LSD parlance that we usually reserve the term physical for the tangible, or temporal aspects of our mortal experience). Undoubtedly, there are some "physical" properties of spirit matter that could presumably be measured - even if only by the "light of Christ" or some equally meaningless means for a physicist who only deals with the empirical.
Yes, I think this is where even LDS get hung up on the idea that because spirit is made up of some "matter" that it must be measurable by scientific means.
I think we have to, at least, suggest that the properties of 'fine matter' are different from 'course matter' so much so that one cannot detect 'fine matter' through 'course matter' means. Just because I can hear doesn't mean that I can hear the voice of someone who lived 100 years ago without a recording of some kind. There has to be some intermediary to allow me to hear that voice. We don't know how spirit matter interacts with the physical body. But we know that it is a limited or controlled connection, at least in this life because in order for the physical (the brain) to influence the spirit, it has to be allowed.
If a person has Tourette's and yells out a cuss word (a physical brain function) I don't think it mars the spirit necessarily. Or if the brain creates a dream about an affair, has the spirit been marred by that action? If a person takes it to heart (meaning driven by the spirit) then it becomes a sin. If I get hungry during fast Sunday, is that the spirit or the physical body? I think it is important to realize that there has to be a separation of the two entities in this life, otherwise we would be responsible for every passing thought as if that was what was in our heart. There is a difference. And the connection in this life is a loose one unless we actively make the spirit more in control which is what the gospel does.
-
I do not believe that any truth can come to man except through G-d (Holy Ghost) -- if it come by any other means there is in it a lie.
All truth comes through the Holy Ghost (G-d). Again what ever someone learns except through the Holy Ghost is a lie.
See Moroni 10:5 and Moses 6:52
I am trying very hard to get the just of your thought but I believe that the principle for the discovery of truth, as I understand, is seeking and searching and then it comes through the Holy Ghost - What I do not see is the great difference you speak of between that which is physical and that which is spiritual. The principles of obtaining truth look the same to me???
The Traveler
I know you believe that way.
If Osama Bin Laden taught his son truths about physics, then he taught by the power of the Holy Ghost?
If Cain teaches his son about fire, it is a lie? Or teaches his son how to raise crops, it is a lie? Or did he teach through the power of the Holy Ghost?
When a baby learns how to suckle, that was the Holy Ghost?
Moroni 10:5 and Moses 6:52 tell us how to have all the truth, which of course includes spiritual truths. Moses 6 says "asking all things" which does not mean "everything". " 5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things."
That doesn't exclude the possibility of knowing some things because what those scriptures are saying is that if you want to know the truth of all things it can only be done by the Holy Ghost because there are things that are only known by the spirit. The part that is known by the physical can be done by the physical body. But having knowledge of the physical alone is not "all" the truth.
If I am wrong, fine, tell me the exact statement that says if someone learns something with their mind and not through the spirit that it is a lie. Where does it say that.
-
Just because we have not discovered something does not mean that we cannot ever discover it. In fact all things discovered were unknown prior to being discovered. I cannot think of even a single exception?
As to the separation you speak between that what is physical to that which is spiritual - why do you think that the principles and laws pertaining to spirits are different for spirits in heaven as to spirits on earth? Based on what understanding to which you have assess have you drawn the conclusion that man or spirit be able to lift himself up again based on their being in heaven or on earth?
I never said anything about the separation of spirits in heaven verses on earth. Let me try to bring it back to what the original topic was - spirit matter verses other matter - physical or course matter.
I don't think there is a difference in the laws pertaining to spirits wherever they may be. But there clearly is a difference between body and spirit.
I think you have a hard time with the concept that there are two kinds of learning - spiritual and the learning of man. To you it is the same, and that is unfortunate. If I can't break beyond that then it is hard to speak of the separation. Until you can grasp the concept that it is possible for a man to learn something without involving the spirit then we are left with only one set.
2 Nephi 33 " 1 And now I, Nephi, cannot write all the things which were taught among my people; neither am I mighty in writing, like unto speaking; for when a man speaketh by the power of the Holy Ghost the power of the Holy Ghost carrieth it unto the hearts of the children of men.
2 But behold, there are many that harden their hearts against the Holy Spirit, that it hath no place in them; wherefore, they cast many things away which are written and esteem them as things of naught."
As in verse 2, there are men who cannot be influenced by the spirit. This does not mean that they cannot learn earthly truths. Could the men in verse 2 learn mathematics or the theory of gravity? Sure! But to learn of the spirit requires a spirit to spirit communication. Clearly, there are two systems at play here. By saying no, there is only one, then you reject those that are learned of men only as if they learned by the spirit.
Elder Bednar taught this principle and asked what it means to learn by the spirit; "How is faith as the principle of action in all intelligent beings related to gospel learning? And what does it mean to seek learning by faith?
In the grand division of all of God’s creations, there are things to act and things to be acted upon (see 2 Nephi 2:13–14). As sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father, we have been blessed with the gift of agency—the capacity and power of independent action. Endowed with agency, we are agents, and we primarily are to act and not only to be acted upon—especially as we seek to obtain and apply spiritual knowledge.
Learning by faith and from experience are two of the central features of the Father’s plan of happiness. The Savior preserved moral agency through the Atonement and made it possible for us to act and to learn by faith. Lucifer’s rebellion against the plan sought to destroy the agency of man, and his intent was that we as learners would only be acted upon."
Let me ask you to ponder the difference between "spiritual knowledge" versus any other kind of knowledge. Why would Elder Bednar separate it as "spiritual" knowledge? Why not say all knowledge then? ... because there is a difference. So, let me just start with the idea that there is a difference.
And here it is, Elder Bednar's description of the difference; "The learning I am describing reaches far beyond mere cognitive comprehension and the retaining and recalling of information. The type of learning to which I am referring causes us to put off the natural man (see Mosiah 3:19), to change our hearts (see Mosiah 5:2), to be converted unto the Lord, and to never fall away (see Alma 23:6). Learning by faith requires both “the heart and a willing mind” (D&C 64:34). Learning by faith is the result of the Holy Ghost carrying the power of the word of God both unto and into the heart. Learning by faith cannot be transferred from an instructor to a student through a lecture, a demonstration, or an experiential exercise; rather, a student must exercise faith and act in order to obtain the knowledge for himself or herself."
Why are we asked to forsake the world? D&C 53:2 " 2 Behold, I, the Lord, who was crucified for the sins of the world, give unto you a commandment that you shall forsake the world." Why forsake the world if all the truth lie in the world, as you suggest? Because the truth is supernatural, it is obtained by putting off the natural man or by forsaking the world. That is the test we face, do we turn to worldly knowledge or spiritual knowledge. But if one cannot separate the two then one takes a natural course, which is what Elder Bednar says "a mere cognitive comprehension and the retaining and recalling of information".
-
When we talk about sets that are are not transitive there are principles and laws that define such sets - likewise with sets where transitivity occurs. If I were to guess - I would say spiritual things are transitive - based on Abraham chapter 3. There we learn that whenever there are two spirits one will be "greater" than the other. Thus the problem is not understanding what you and I may call spiritual transitivity but in being able to quantify which spirit is greater than another. All we know concerning such things is that G-d is greater than them all or the greatest of all.
With non-transitive sets of infinite things there are no relationships like what we are given in Abraham Chapter 3. There infinity + 1 is not greater than infinity - 1. That is why transitivity does not exist with infinite sets. We also know there is a direct correlation to things spiritual very similar to things empirical (note that I have expanded the idea from physical to that which is empirical). This is because of how I interpret D&C 130:21. This implies what is defined in mathematics as a "direct" relationship. Sets that vary with direct relationships of necessity must be transitive.
Now I do concede that perhaps it is possible that things spiritual are not related to such understanding. But that leaves us to wonder why G-d would use symbols deceptively - which is my understanding of a the essence of a lie. However, as always, I am willing to consider other possibilities - but not as serious without some compelling (logical - meaning rhetorical) or demonstrable (empirical) based on the principles and laws I have access to.
Because I believe G-d operates on principles and laws I try to understand the principles and laws in use concerning whatever is being addressed. In this manner when I have disagreement with someone concerning some point; I first attempt to determine if their opinion differs because of principle and law or because of a undisciplined opinion or prejudice. I realize this sounds cold and hard but I have yet to experience any truth (exception) that is secured by any other method than through rigorous disciplined application of principles and laws - if you have a better example - I would love to consider it.
The Traveler
I didn't think we were talking about law verses no law or principle verses no principle. Again, we were talking about the separation of laws and principles that exist here verses there. Even in the scripture you quoted it is referring to a law decreed in heaven upon which all blessings are predicated. It isn't a law decreed on earth. It gives no specifics as to how this is done. There is no empirical evidence, for example, that through the grace of Our Savior we will be resurrected. Where is your empirical evidence for that, based in the science of the world. You can't find it because it is based in a law decreed in heaven. It is a heavenly, spiritual law. Not one found here. There is a separation of the laws. Man cannot resurrect him self. Based in worldly laws and science man would never be able to lift himself up again. If you have a better example - I would love to consider it.
What law of science allowed Jesus to know of our sins, all those people before and after him? What law or principle of the world allowed him to do that? Spirit bodies work different than physical bodies. They may be similar and there are differences because if similarity or symbolic teaching is all we needed then we would not have to come here. We could have had all the similarities and symbolic teaching expressed in our spirit bodies without being here. Symbolic teaching is the first estate test. We all passed that already. Now we are facing the test of action. I am not sure why you would want to regress to a test of knowledge when we have all graduated from that kind of test already. The application of all the principles and laws, we have already been exposed to, at least in a symbolic way (book learning). A test of character is what we face now. And, likewise, we would not need a physical body after this life if similarity or symbolism is sufficient.
Are there laws and principles that are brought about by having a body that were not at play while in the spirit alone? This is a very important question as to the purpose of this life and our gospel that is overlooked or taken for granted. What about the principle of fasting? Did Christ not say that the spirit is willing but the body is weak? How is that if they follow the same laws?
-
All very good points but we have very well defined conditions for all uses of infinity. Thus we can experiment and see if or when transitivity applies. But we do not have well defined definitions or access to the eternal model. So if we say a particular principle applies or does not apply - we cannot demonstrate how that application takes place.
My assumption is that what we learn concerning our empirical (fallen) experience has application beyond the grave - unless we are specifically instructed otherwise by revelation. If not then all bets (including so called spiritual) are off - so I hold to the statement by Paul in scripture - Prove all things and hold fast to that which is true.
The Traveler
Somehow you switched from physical laws being applicable to the eternal realm to lessons learned. I wasn't talking about lessons learned.
The lack of "access to the eternal model" is a reflection of the lack of transitivity. If all I have is a hammer then all I can do is work with nails, if I come across a screw, well then I am just .....
The idea that spiritual things are obtained spiritually and physical things are obtained physically and one doesn't understand the other very well is a reflection of its lack of transitivity. It isn't possible to "access the eternal model" through physical means, not only because there is no access but because it is not possible. That is a law, that is a truth. To suppose that it could be possible is a lie. Even if I had a super powerful telescope or scientific equipment from this world, I couldn't see God's throne or His realm anymore than the best hammer in the world could screw in a screw. That is not to say that they are in opposition, they are simply different systems that have different properties.
If that were not true then there would be no reason for God to have a physical body and a spirit body. If it was one system and one set we could have skipped this portion of our development because we wouldn't need a duplicate body that follows the same "laws of nature" our spirit body does. Do we really know why we need a body to be like God? Not really, but that is one of our core beliefs. If God has spirit matter and physical matter to be God then spirit is not the same as physical as there would be no added value to have a physical body. We are told the body is in the image of the spirit. If it is not in the form or shape that they differ than how is one different than the other? Their properties are different. What we don't have access to is to understand why the spirit alone cannot be like God. In other words, what does the body have that the spirit doesn't. Spirit - Body = the non-transitivity qualities of the spiritual realm. And Body - Spirit = the non-transitivity qualities of the physical realm. And body does not equal spirit in all of its qualities.
-
I see your problem - you are using principles that apply to one set from another set. Infinity is not a number as you are trying to use it. Your application to a infinite hotel with infinite guests is a misuse of logic. Your infinite hotel even when full will still have infinite vacancies. Moving guest around does not change anything. If you need - we can go into number theory and even discuss the various kinds or values of infinity (since all infinities are not equal). Part of the answer to your implied logic dilemma comes from your own logic - adding or subtracting any amount of finite number to infinity does not change that value of infinity - thus add another guest to a full hotel does not change the infinite vacancies or infinite guests nor the room available or full.
This is a very common error that occurs with both advanced and novice mathematicians. Not all mathematical logical operations are transitive. The logic of the binary operation of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division of infinity is not transitive. Do not feel bad any university mathematical texts is riddled with such errors.
As to your assumption that G-d did not have any experience or knowledge concerning time prior to what Genesis defines as the "Beginning" I see as a gross misunderstanding of G-d and time. I do not know why a Christian would even go there?
The Traveler
Ahah!
Why can't you take this same reasoning and apply it to principles pertaining to this realm, earthly, mortal state versus the eternal realms - "not all .... logical operations are transitive."
The laws of nature may be "one set" and the laws of celestial realms another set. Like you said, "I see your problem - you are using principles that apply to one set from another set." There is nothing that says we can take laws pertaining to coarse matter and apply it to fine matter even if they can be together in one whole set of truths, like the word "mathematics" containing all the sets. Looking to the sky to find Kolob may not be any more successful than the tower of Babel. We are told pretty clearly that we are separated from God while in this existence.
-
Empathy. That is what is required to love your neighbor as your self. That is the virtue that allowed our Savior to know our sins and pay for them. And, I believe, that is the method by which glory can be given vicariously. Just like when your own child does well in school, there is a joy that is had more than if another child did well, that feeling of joy is through the level of empathy one has for their own children. Eternal joy is obtained in a similar way.
-
As always I find your point of view interesting and worth investigating.
50 years ago the physics associated with dark energy and dark matter were mysteries and are somewhat mysterious still as to the physical science - but such things would seem much more so the those seeking spiritual understanding of such things. But my comments are more centered on the things that we do know and understand. Those "things" that we do not know - you are correct in asserting that it would be pointless to discuss what we do not know as truth that we ought to know.
For all things that we do know of the laws and principles of our universe that we do and can study that are and were utilized to create and maintain our universe - I can find none (any exceptions) that are inconsistent or that G-d would need to change in order for him to continue his creations and governing such things. I assumed that since you purport the likely hood that G-d does not rely consistently (or religiously) on those "universal" and "natural" laws and principles that we do know about - that you may have prepared an example of something you know rather than a speculation of sorts.
I had hoped that if you do not believe in the consistency of scientific study that you might be able to provide and demonstrate reason for your belief beyond pure speculation with a plausible example. I have attempted to speculate such matter but have found such speculation without sufficient merit to use in any discussions of what is known and not speculated.
For examples I have speculated relationships with higher orders of dimensions and how such orders could effect our physical laws and principles and how it may be possible that divine beings (such as G-d) can apply such principles of higher dimensions to cause miracles - including resurrection as you have questioned. Though I find such ides perhaps plausible but I have no way to demonstrate them from our current 3 dimensional space time state. So I see not point in discussing such things beyond speculation - certainly I cannot say with authority that I am right and you wrong about such thing - but I can say that I am able to speculate such things without violating the physical laws that currently govern us. But then that is what I intended to logically do - so I must concede that my logic is prejudiced with a predetermined conclusion - Which has a very high probability of being incorrect.
The Traveler
Great answer! Thanks.
When the world changed at the time Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, did the world just change in status or were there physical changes that took place and to what degree? Is there anything physical that remained in a paradisical state?
If everything changed or even if most things changed, why? Why did the world (all things created, which probably includes the universe) have to change?
2 Nephi " 22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end."
Moses 4 "23 And unto Adam, I, the Lord God, said: Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the fruit of the tree of which I commanded thee, saying—Thou shalt not eat of it, cursed shall be the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life."
1 Corinthians " 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all asleep, but we shall all be changed,"
The characteristics of first being of the earth then taking on the heavenly require a change, and the change is called a mystery, because we do not have those laws and characteristics now. "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" but a change could allow it, to me, speaks of the physical differences that exist, not just the state of mind or state of righteousness.
Also, keep in mind that upon resurrection there is a difference in the body of those that receive a Celestial body versus those that receive a Terrestrial body and those of the Telestial. Why would there have to be different bodies for each group if it were only based on spiritual characteristics? Possibly because the physical characteristics of those places differ.
Why does one have to be transfigured physically to see God?
Revelation 21 " 1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea." Heaven, of course, in this case refers to the heavens or the universe around us. Why would all that have to change if it is just the same ol' nature, the same laws?
1 Corinthians 15 "40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another."
It is not one glory with different levels - that is what we talk about different levels within a Kingdom but the Celestial glory is one type and the terrestrial is another type. Why does the terrestrial have to be of another type and not just another level within the same type? Of course, in reference to the physical location and characteristics.
-
It may be helpful if you provided a principle and law "of nature" that you believe to be different. It may be semantics but I think you may be confusing natural law of physics with social covenants that define a "kingdom".
Just like no social law of covenant of a dictatorship, kingdom or democracy is going to change the value of pi regardless of if one abides in heaven or outer darkness.
The Traveler
How about the idea that a spirit being never dies. I know of no such example in "nature", in this world. Show me an example of a spirit being living forever in this life, demonstrated only by laws of physics etc. Show me in nature, through scientific examples how Christ could bring Lazarus back from death, brain destroyed type death and rewire his brain to be who he was as before without going through birth and development or being kept alive on life support.
It is a bit hard to give you examples of things we cannot know. Have you been talking to any pharisees lately? Just Kidding!!
Alma 40:3 "Behold, he bringeth to pass the aresurrection of the dead. But behold, my son, the resurrection is not yet. Now, I unfold unto you a mystery; nevertheless, there are many mysteries which are kept, that no one knoweth them save God himself. But I show unto you one thing which I have inquired diligently of God that I might know—that is concerning the resurrection."
...there are "many" not just a few minor details.
-
I think your word usage of "supernatural" is problematic, and I think it reflects our basic disagreement here. The issue isn't so much "are the laws of heaven incompatible with our nature", but "are they the same or not".
Using a definition pulled off the internet, "supernatural" is defined as "[a]ttributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature." The first part of that definition (beyond scientific understanding) is well and good, but IMO sloppy. The second part (being "beyond... the laws of nature") is where things get problematic.
Defining the things and ways of God and the spirit as "supernatural" implies that they are outside the laws of nature (which are really the laws of God or the laws of heaven, and dictate the actions of both spirit and element). There is, in fact, *nothing* that exists which is truly supernatural, because everything- to be real- must be comprised of the basic building blocks of everything. Those building blocks are called "spirit" and "element".
It is only in the vain imaginations of men and women, disconnected from the truth and the spirit of Truth (D&C 93:26), that "supernatural" things exist.
I reread your statement here. I think the use of the word "supernatural" is problematic for you because you chose to describe "laws of nature" as "really the laws of God or the laws of heaven". That is where you and I probably differ in our beliefs.
I do not see heaven and earth as operating under the same laws. That is not to say that they are incompatible. I am simply saying that they are not the same. For purposes of discussion, if you are not willing to separate those laws pertaining to a fallen world with those of heaven then you tell me what word you would use for "things measurable by earthly science" or "things measured by man". To me, the word "nature" or the natural man or carnal or worldly would be fine.
My eight year old daughter plays soccer. Even at my age, I play soccer on a women's league. The game is the same game but different rules apply. My daughter plays with 6 girls per side, there is no off-sides and they cannot slide tackle, for example. Whereas, when I play there is off-sides, there are 11 per side and one can slide tackle. My daughter cannot play by my rules. They are inaccessible to her at this time. They are different but not incompatible. If my league were to tone down our rules then it would not operate the same, the level of play would be way different.
Likewise, God cannot perform Celestial acts (not all of them - just some limited ones) in a fallen world. If you don't want to call those differences supernatural then fine, give me the word.
The world is wrong
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
I agree, agency requires responsibility and accountability. There has to be a consequence to the choice to exercise agency.