Seminarysnoozer

How did Jared know ahead of time that their language could be confounded (i.e - future tense) with enough time to ask his brother to pray to the Lord that it wouldn't (future tense)? Ether 1:34 I guess I always assumed that this was in one swoop that all their languages were changed and not a process that occurred over time enough to give time to pray that it didn't happen as they were observing it occur to people around them. This makes me think of a disease process, possibly, such as TB that could cause them to go deaf and maybe even want to "scatter" to get away from it. And a side question, why does Jared always ask his brother to pray for things and not take on that himself? Seems like he had plenty of faith to do it himself. It comes across as Jared being the one in charge as he says things like "Go and inquire of the Lord ...". Even if the brother of Jared is the leader, it seems like Jared is giving orders in Ether 1. I am having a hard time picturing the nature of that relationship.

When a soul comes unto God's rest what is she resting from? When a person leaves this world and enters into the peace of Paradise, what is the peace from? There is nothing in the gospel that says once a person enters into the Celestial Kingdom that there will be ongoing internal strife, even if it is always overcome by righteous desires. Our battle is here. Those that did not pass the first estate test did not pass for a reason, they were not worthy enough to even take on such a battle. They would have surely lost. There was no chance for them to overcome the battle against carnality. We (as in "we" from the sentence you created and I commented on, I was assuming did not include all those souls that followed Lucifer and Lucifer him self - I guess I would not call that "we"), on the other hand have a fighting chance and in the end will win out with the saving grace of Christ to earn a body in which there is peace from such a battle. We believe in a Savior that overcomes this world and everything in it. Because of that salvation we no longer have to face those challenges once passing through it. We know, for example, that children that die before the age of accountability and those that die with diseases that affect their ability to be accountable, such as Down's, will never know sin. If they never know sin, what is it that they are "controlling" as you suggest in the next life? What are they keeping in "bounds"? The fight is won by Christ. We win the fight too if we accept His victory. We cannot overcome or keep in bounds the carnality of this world by ourselves. That is the reason and job of the Savior. I cannot understand why you would want to reject the gift of the Savior and suggest that we will have to learn how to be our own Savior. The way to keep the carnality in "bounds" is by following Christ. Then at the end of this probationary (temporary) state Christ overcomes it all. He does not leave some of it behind for us to battle latter. If there is any battle then it is our own spiritual nature that we have adopted but predicated on the limits in which we accept Christ' saving grace. And that measure will be the measure of which Kingdom we end up in. Those that fully accept Christ will not end up in the Celestial Kingdom will not have any carnality left to "keep in bounds". There is no unclean thing that will be in His presence. If one is so attached to the idea of carnality, then I am sure it will remain as it was probably becomes a part of their spirit self after leaving this world. We hope that doesn't happen. We hope we can leave carnality behind, never to have to deal with it again. Upon resurrection, our dual being status changes from what it was here. We are no longer "dual beings" with two different natures, a carnal one and a spiritual one. We become a dual being of both body and spirit no longer at odds with each other, of one nature. The body provided, of course, matching our spirit self at that time.

When my son gets an A in school I feel great for him, it is a success that I feel even though I didn't get the A. But the success is shared. I don't have that same connection with one of his classmates who also might get an A. Why not? Sharing everything does not preclude them having different roles or being different personages. It is the sharing all that is misunderstood. Just like the prodigal son who came back has all the father had like the son who stayed. They both have all. Is there anything that the father of the prodigal son has that was not available or shared with the son? We don't understand what it is like to share everything. We get glimpses of it when we have families and we share in their success. But to have eternal joy is a process of sharing "all", including all that came before and all into the future. The greatest commandment of loving our God and loving our neighbor is a requisite to sharing all, like the love I have for my children and my parents. In a small way their successes are mine and it will be to a full extent in the life to come if we are fortunate enough to merit that status. It is not required to be the same being or to do the same things to share everything. What is required, though, is to want it. If you don't want it then fine you wont get it. But that is up to you.

How can 100% look different from 100%?

I was never arguing the point that they are separate beings or that they do certain things. I was asking you ponder the idea that God knows all and nothing is hidden from him, including Christ' experience. How is that possible? We don't know. But we do know it is possible. If this is possible, to feel the experience of another as surely Christ even did while paying for our sins in the Garden, then what is it that God could keep separate from Christ after His ascension? I am also not arguing that they gather the experience separately but that all that God has Christ has now. This is important to understand, I think, because in answering the question of this thread, who is God? we have to take into consideration this ability, the ability to see the full experience of others. I am not saying that I know how this works but with that ability, Christ would also be able to take on all that was done before Him as if it was His own experience. Just like when I pull out a text book (but of course at a very primitive level) I take on the experience of all those whose works are put into the book. I didn't have to do all the things that went into the collecting of the knowledge of the text book. I can read it and gather that information vicariously. I can also look at your writings without having done it myself. If "all" is not known, such as what it felt like or the feeling of enlightenment etc, then there are things hidden from God. Either there are things hidden from God or there are not. I am assuming that Jesus also gains that ability after his mission which required being like man for a time (being made lower than the angels - Hebrews) but only for a short time, until He overcame the bonds of death. As it is explained in Hebrews; "16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make a reconciliation for the sins of the people."

Do you have an understanding of faith and the value of faith? Even when you study any field of science, you are putting faith in someone else work. Even us using the language we are using at this moment was based on the work of someone else. The computer was invented by someone else. I don't have to know much about computer science and electronics and how to mold plastic etc. to use a computer. It is all based in faith and trust of the work of someone else. If all of us had to start from scratch in terms of our "technology" from the moment we are born in this life then we would all still be living in the stone age or worse. "Technology" even is based in having a trusting faith for all the previous work that was done. If we are able to deliver that knowledge to the next generation (i.e. - education) then they can build upon that and advance. So, in a round about way, even technology itself is a faith based process. To obtain all that God has and to live in an ever increasing environment requires people who are 100% faithful to His teaching. Doubters, murmurers, distrust, complaining, faithless etc. slows down the learning process and puts a limit on what can be learned. The ceiling of technological growth will always be limited by doubt and disbelief. Faith is not just an item from which there is a test. It is a very useful process in which knowledge and intelligence can be passed without requiring each individual to go through the same exact steps to get there on their own. God, the all-knowing has mastered that kind of faith and all that was before and all into the future is His because of it. This life is a test of faith, not knowledge. We all passed the test of knowledge before this life, that is called the first estate test.

And you believe that Jesus cannot possess the experience of the Father? Can God possess the experience of Jesus in the Garden, or does He not have a complete idea, as if He was there, knowledge of what Jesus felt in the Garden? If God can know what we feel as if He is there (I don't know, maybe you don't believe that is possible) then why would it not be in Jesus' power as well, at this point, to know what God experiences and has experienced as if He was there? We don't understand how that power works, but I think both you and I believe that God and Jesus can vicariously know the feelings of our heart, to completely understand our thought process and experience. We cannot hide anything from God. If we cannot hide anything from God, then what of the Father's is hidden from Christ? You really think that the experience He had of what it is like to see His son suffer is hidden from Christ?

It is not a new idea it is just that I am being more specific. For example, your last sentence I would add an element of specificity; We can understand desires as an element of the carnal self versus the spirit self and when we indulge in the carnal self and it's associated selfish desires we take the first step to bondage - but when we can sacrifice carnal self and it's selfish desires by discipline we take the first step to spiritual freedom. The misconception comes from the under appreciation of the role of the dual being and the temporary nature of carnal self. Can we change our temporary self (the combined carnal body and spirit)? Absolutely! That is the test we face, the given circumstances and then a measure of how much we change in this setting. Like the worker given 5 talents, what is he going to do with it, change it or hide it and lose it?

The LDS use of "desire of the heart" as opposed to simply "desire" is defined by what the person truthfully wants beyond the carnal distractions of the body. Truth and discipline are a part of the hearts desire but leaves the judgement of things like "discipline" to God as only God can see the real desire of the heart. Again, desire of the heart is not synonymous with consciousness. I was not talking about "desire" alone because that would include the passing carnal desires of the body such as sexual desires, hunger, thirst, anger, fear, the desire to drink alcohol, smoke etc. (potentially). LDS believe we are dual beings both body and spirit. God can see the inner man, the spiritual self, where we have a hard time looking beyond the outer man, the carnal man, the body's influences. If you think that God and Jesus are not exactly the same, then what specific thing does God posses that Jesus does not? (Outside of a name)

Thanks, of course keep in mind that the "desires of the heart" is something that only God can truly see. It is not synonymous with consciousness. Sometimes people say they like things or simply go with the crowd or fold under peer pressure etc and that is not really the desire of their heart. It takes into account the corrupted influences from the brain that disrupt the underlying spirit self influences. For example, a person might have a genetic predisposition to alcoholism and so they desire it physically but that may not really be the "desire of their heart". By definition, all of us here desire to be like God. Some lose that desire during the course of their life and the carnal influences pulling them away from that original desire. Righteousness is defined by maintaining that desire, to wish to have the image of his countenance in ours.

What God has for you is what you want. That may be where LDS view is a little different. We believe part of this life is to express the desires of our heart. If we show affinity towards worldly things, as opposed to godly or heavenly things then that becomes the desire of our heart. What God wants for us is to maintain our desire to be like Him that we had before coming here. We even believe that you had that desire before coming here as that is what it takes to pass the first estate test, it is just a matter of recalling that desire and letting it supersede any other desire, including passivity. I believe your expression of your potential in God's kingdom is correct and I am sure that you attain what you want. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

The curse comes from what is in the heart. If it is one's heart to not be like our Father and to not be one with Him then that will be that person's destiny. God does not give gifts (eternal ones) that will be trampled. But, if we so desire, like the prodigal son returning home, we can have all that the Father has. Or was there something that the Father of the prodigal son did not give his son when he returned?

But his physical body is not made from corrupted material. It is made of a finer material than what we have within our scope now.

Yes, parables, symbolism and metaphors have always been a stumbling block for people who cannot see with their "right eye". The key is understanding the significance of the symbol before developing an opinion about it. The right eye is symbolic of spiritual perception, as in Zechariah 11:17 "17 Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened." Ecclesiastes " 2 A wise man’s heart is at his right hand; but a fool’s heart at his left." ... there are many examples of the right and left hand symbolism in the Bible, as has been stated. This may also have to do with the symbolism of the direction in which the Lord will return at the second coming from the East. And the waters of life from the house of the Lord flow to the right while facing eastward. And the glory of the Lord flows into the house by the East gate. I think the issue is to understand the intent of the symbolism without letting the tradition be more valuable than it's intended message.

I think the comparison you might be after is more in terms of "cultural traditions" and principles, not doctrine. Principles are the way the underlying doctrine is packaged for our current use and application. The way a group is taught a certain doctrine via the application of principles can vary according to God's word but it wouldn't change the underlying doctrine. A good example would be that of the law of sacrifice as was already given. How the law of sacrifice is carried out might vary in different eras. But the truths about the doctrine do not change. Just like as they are doing this next year, changing the curriculum for the young women and men, that doesn't change the underlying doctrine. If you are asking how to distinguish principle from doctrine; that I think is done by understanding the differences between the two.

Do you really believe that God is this universe? To God our universe and His may co-exist and that is likely how He views it, I don't know. But when you say our universe, as in the one that we can see, touch and interact with right now through physical means and experience, I don't think He is in that universe, at least not all the time. Do you not believe that there are heavenly realms that are unreachable by man on his own? My understanding of LDS belief as far as that goes is that the spirit matter in which God exists is different from our own. As Brigham Young stated; "Spirits are just as familiar with spirits as bodies are with bodies, though spirits are composed of matter so refined as not to be tangible to this coarser organization." “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5)

Thanks for your kind reply, I don't think I disagree with you if you take a close look at what the word "attain" means. I am simply pointing out the fact that we must have learned something over the bazillion of years we spent with our Heavenly Father learning all we could and becoming mature spirits before we came here. Yes it is my opinion to believe that we were not dumb as spirits. If I as a lowly and humble human being would consider if I even had a thousand years in the presence of God could learn a lot, probably more than any person on Earth could ever learn on their own even over 100,000 years then why could I not believe that as a spirit for an even longer period of time we have learned all science, all math, all biology, all astronomy, all physics, all social sciences etc. I don't think we just sat around. This is a belief that comes from an understanding of the plan of salvation which is to have an understanding of what happened before this world began. Of course I don't know the details but I would have a hard time being convinced that we learned less than what we could learn here in 80 to 90 years of human being life. So when you say "attain" that is in comparison to what we had before, not in relation to what we start out in this life with. The attainment of intelligence that is spoken of there is in relation to the things we couldn't learn without a body. I doubt that includes things like physics, mathematics, astronomy, biology facts, etc. Did we learn how to choose properly between carnal temptations and influences of the spirit? No. So, any attainment of those types of things will be counted as above what we learned before and that will stay with us. I think it is a narrowed view to thing that we did not learn many secular things (more than man could ever learn) before coming here and that that knowledge will flood back to us after the second estate is over. .... please explain the "same me" idea in regard to someone that has Down's syndrome. I think you will conclude that the body of that person is not the "same me". This is a temporary existence, if you have insight of how you were before in comparison to how you are now then you have been given a gift that very few have as most of us have a veil over that kind of understanding.

No, our church does not teach this. We do not teach that becoming like God is something that is entirely achieved by individual achievement, we are taught that we are carried and advanced by the grace of God if we are worthy. There is a gifting process, the advancement is given or sometimes we use the word "inherited". The inheritance we receive by definition is something that is offered us if we are worthy. Worthiness is the requirement, not advancement in intelligence. The advancement in intelligence is what already took place. How many more years of advancement in intelligence do we need beyond the bazillions of years we spent in God's presence before coming here? Further advancements are in terms of spiritual worthiness and experience. It is not in terms of technology or scientific understanding. All of that, we will inherit. Just like when you use a textbook from the library, you have inherited years of knowledge in that book. You didn't personally advance that understanding on your own and yet it is used to push yourself further than your ancient ancestors had. Are you more intelligent than your ancient ancestors? If they had access to the textbooks and teachers and societal teaching etc, would they be less intelligent than you? Satan tried to teach that we could do it on our own without God. He still tries to put that in our minds now. To suggest that we could do that is an idea that went out with the first estate test. You didn't believe that back when you passed the first estate test. It is just a matter of remembering what you previously believed. To access that requires spiritual influence, which is a very hard thing to do for all of us, that is what creates the test we face. If it was natural or easy to access that previous spiritual learning, there would be no test. It is natural to not remember. Also, remember that our current state is temporary. How you are right now is not your true self. This is just a set of characteristics, personality, intelligence level all of which is described as your "stewardship". But this stewardship is temporary, a probationary state. The current level of intelligence was only meant as a temporary state. To appreciate this consider the Celestial spirits found in the bodies of those that have Down's syndrome, etc.

Scriptures use metaphor and anecdotal teaching, it is not a science book.

"he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty (Heb; it is not for his appearance) that we should desire him." Thanks, and Joseph Fielding Smith interpreted these words to mean that Jesus would look like an ordinary man and thus the Jews would not recognize him as the Son of God. (Doctrines of Salvation, 1:23) And in verse 3; "He is despised and rejected of men ... we esteemed him not."

I think it would fit better with his mission if He simply blended in with everyone around Him and didn't stand out in any sort of way, Hymn “Oh God the Eternal Father” #175, 3rd verse; When Jesus the anointed, descended from above, and gave himself a ransom to win our souls with love – With no apparent beauty that man should him desire, He was the promised Savior to purify with fire." As several have stated though, I don't see how that really matters unless one is of the type that somehow have adopted this belief that how we look in this life is how we look in the next. That belief creates a lot of problems, this is one of them.

Thank you, as always, for stimulating conversation.

What about the example of the United States of America, hope you are not questioning the intelligence of the signers of the Declaration of Independence; "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

Evolution does not equate with better. I think that is one mistake of science. Maybe it is because our "intelligence" also includes the ability and capacity for selfishness and for spontaneous imaginative and creative thought. With those two things a group that was working together can spontaneously change motives and decide that they don't like the nature of the relationship anymore or they want to get paid more or they think the other person isn't doing their job etc.. This is why I think in the hive mentality, as it applies to humans and maybe because of the "evolved" intelligence, there has to be some expenditure towards maintaining motive. The natural man is an enemy to God. Likewise, "natural" evolution may not be something that takes us closer to God. Becoming more specialized in carnal activities may be more distant from spiritual ones or may be more distant from the original creation. I doubt the natural course of carnal things is one that reaches ever closer to God. Things that make us more efficient and "better" require effort and usually constant effort, otherwise natural man takes over and we slip down the hill in the opposite direction. Hanging our hat on some idea that we are more "evolved" at carnal activities may not be a good thing to be so proud of or at least try to improve further. I think getting away from our carnal nature is better.

I am confused about you talking about this life or the next. You seem to be bouncing back and forth between the two. I think you have to keep in mind that the "most effective and efficient solutions for the hive" don't have to "evolve" in the next life. They have already been worked out. They just have to be followed. (Thus, my example of the football player who simply follows the plan without any autonomous thought) You seem to be implying that there has to be some form of change in the way things are done in the next life over time, which is what the words evolve implies. I don't think that is a feature of the next life. The process has been done over and over again, and all the bugs (excuse the pun - hives/bugs) have been worked out. The only place in which the lack of efficiency would need to be worked out is in a place where all the players are not on the same page, i.e. - in mortality. This is why I am saying (which you are taking as a given that does not really exist in this life) that the most important feature of this mentality is everyone being on the same page, the same motives and without variability or lack of integrity. The lack of integrity is the reason the football player would run a different route than planned, a mortal feature.