Seminarysnoozer

We would you want fallen, corrupted DNA to be known? All of us have fallen, corrupted DNA right now.

I think this life is a probationary state that has similarities to the eternal state but not the same. I think a metaphor would be thinking of the difference between a flight simulator and a plane. I would never hope to turn the flight simulator into a plane but it certainly is a good place to start ones training in eventually flying. An unnatural change has to take place to turn the Earth into its paradisiacal glory along with every other element in the Universe. It doesn't receive its Celestial glory by itself or by its own natural progression. Likewise, passing the first estate test (the test that qualifies one for eventually receiving a resurrected body) does not mean that it will just happen on its own without any outside help. The resurrection is the reversing or the "repairing" of what was done in with the Fall to the paradisiacal type bodies that were given to Adam and Eve. If one thinks the "change" that took place from the Garden of Eden to the fallen world was just 'breaking' something here or there then I suppose one might look at the resurrection the same way, repairing the few things that were broken. This is not how I see the Fall. The Fall resulted in Adam and Eve receiving transformed bodies that could not go back to the paradisiacal state without eating of the Tree of Life. Those fallen bodies could never be "repaired" to go back to that state because they weren't that kind of body any more. A new type of body, not just a new one, is needed to become an eternal being. The fallen body is in the same image as the eternal type, just like a flight simulator's images resemble the flying of a plane but it has no inherent potential to ever become one on its own. The fallen body is only designed to be a probationary type of body, to return to dust in the end. Genesis 3; "14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: .... 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Will we be "dust" when we have a resurrected body? Could God say "for dust thou art" at that point?

Is something that is recycled really eternal? If it is recycled then we could say there is a beginning and an end. Just like the world coming to an end, "shall be consumed and pass away" and "all things shall become new". We know the material always existed and yet we call this world a temporary one, a transitory state, a "time" to prepare to meet God. So, the cycling to me indicates a beginning and an end. We are told the body will never separate from the spirit again after resurrection. It is eternal because it never has to go away and be brought back again. Even though the work that God does is one eternal round, that doesn't necesarily mean the conditions revert to start over again on the same material and same individuals. For example, a tire going round and round doesn't have to hit he same pavement over and over again every time it rotates, it is a new piece of pavement hit each time and yet it goes round and round.

Thanks for the correction. What I meant by "not caring" in that phrase had nothing to do with emotions but rather replace that phrase with "irregardless". You are confirming my statement in that your algorithm depends on reports about work needed in different areas and the number of AGVs assigned to a specific area etc. The efficiency of the AGV is dependent on being assigned properly, in other words some form of executive knowledge of the whole, some awareness of the whole. If two AGVs were assigned to do the same job because one was not aware of what the other was doing (even if it is through some higher executive function) then it would not be efficient. If one AGV were to do work without using any kind of intelligence about where the other ones were and what was needed then it wouldn't be efficient. The "return and report" confirms what I am saying. What would happen if there was no "return and report"? Just the "go and do this commandment"? Even God glorifies in the knowing that something has been completed more than just planning on doing it, He glorifies in the "bringing to pass", meaning accomplishment, knowing that it is done, the "report" of knowing what others have done. This is the source of glory. Glory is not an individual accomplishment but in the receiving of what others have done (the reporting). That is my point about the Celestial Kingdom.

I didn't say care, I said aware (at least I think I did, if not that is what I meant). By what you are saying about them, they have to be aware. You said "they offer to help". How would they know any help is needed if not aware of what the other ones are doing? How would they know if "things are being taken care of" if not aware? Of course there has to be "chit chat" along the way to let every other AGV know that things are "being taken care of". They would have to know when another was close, as you say. So, yes they are tied into each other in a way that humans could not be without some kind of electronic assistance. Whereas in the Celestial Kingdom there will be a natural tie in and awareness, called charity.

It seems to me that the scriptures use "rise from the grave" interchangeable with "rise from the dead", meaning resurrection. Obviously, we do not think the body alone could "rise", the body of the individual is not the individual nor is it an animate object by itself. So when the dead rise they are not in the grave, they are in the spirit world. Their spirits are not hanging out in the grave. If anything the metaphor would be better said that the spirits descend to the grave to gather up their body if that truly is the method by which it happens. In either case, it doesn't really affect my understanding of the doctrine that we resurrect, so how it is done is not affecting my testimony of the act. The only thing that could suggest some importance to the issue is that people give way too much affinity to earthly things in my mind, the body being one of them. The church does not suggest that a cremated body or that the body that has dissintigrated into dust over the thousands of years or the molecules from which are absorbed into other beings don't also "rise". Is the resurrected body made anew or is it simply transformed? Is the Earth made anew or is it transformed? I think the scriptures describe it fairly clearly; D&C; "23 And the end shall come, and the heaven and the earth shall be consumed and pass away, and there shall be a new heaven and a new earth. 24 For all old things shall pass away, and all things shall become new, even the heaven and the earth, and all the fulness thereof, both men and beasts, the fowls of the air, and the fishes of the sea;" Why would the heavens need to be made anew if it is simply a transformation of material? Likely because course matter cannot be turned into fine matter without changing all matter around it. There has to be a complete consumption of the material to make it into something else. i.e. - the big bang. Another related question to ponder, did Jesus body transform in the sepulcher or did it get taken somewhere else to be changed and then come back outside the sepulcher in a resurrected state? To believe that a dead body would "rise" would also mean a person would have to believe that the spirit of the person enters into a dead mass of material first and then transforms it. One would have to believe that the spirit could reside in the pile of ashes of one that has been cremated and scattered all over the ocean waters first to make it "rise" and then transform into a live resurrected body. Unless one believes that a dead mass of material can become alive and "rise" without the spirit attached to it. In other words, "rise from the grave" seems like it would have to mean that organic material could be alive to made rise before the spirit enters it. ... just some things to ponder.

I have already done it several times. I'm sure it can be looked up somehow.

I appreciate your speculation. I think work was performed as spirits also and likely not necessary for eternal glory. Didn't Micheal help work in building the world while he was a spirit? I find it interesting to ponder that when we receive the resurrected body is the time we receive our inheritance, our glory. Could those two things be tied together. It is described in the scriptures as the assignment to a Kingdom associated with certain types of body, one for the Celestial, one for the Terrestrial and many different types for the Telestial as one star differs from another. This is a crued metaphor but think of a computer that comes preloaded with software. When we are born into this world the body knows how to cry, it knows how to suckle, how to breath, how to reflexively make certain movements. These come without thinking or really even knowing what we are doing. We call these things intinctual in nature. The prophets have told us that we are dual natured. David O. McKary, Paul, Elder Bednar to name a few have spent a lot of time talking about these two natures. There is one nature and there is another. They are not the same. One has a nature the other doesn't. Again, we don't spend a lot of time talking about this in church or elsewhere as it hasn't yet been revealed. One thing to ponder. If the pre-loaded "software" or hardware of the Celestial body contained all that was done before, as in all the works of the previous Celestial beings before, then the person receiving that body would automatically become "one" with all those of similar make up and automatically become part of that existence that never had a beginning, becoming eternally always a God as that pre-loaded "software" and hardware is now self. Maybe this is the value of receiving a body, a way to pass on an inheritance of the "fullness" of particular works correlating to that Kingdom. I don't know but it seems to be of essential value to glory and not just potential as in potential works.

(Also, see above) The system you gave as an example of eficiency was dependent on the sharing of information. It could not have been efficient without that key part. If the individual AGV's did their job without knowing what any other was doing then there would be problems. What I am saying is the same, that knowing the job of everyone else but more so than just that, by loving them as self (knowing and sharing of information at the highest of levels) will make the system run even more efficiently. I would propose to you that the success of that program was not so much the specialization of the AGV's but of the sharing of the information. Even if they were all equally capable, the sharing of the information would be most important in terms of efficiency. Working together as "one" was the key to that being successful as opposed to an individual AGV doing only its job and not caring what anyone else was doing. I know not a lot of people can relate to soccer in this country but that is what I played in High School. The team was the key. We could have the best player in the state but if we didn't work as a team we would lose every time. The individual can't "win" the game if everyone else on the team looses. The success (glory of the team) is experienced by all, not just the one who scored the goal. Without the team there is no goal scoring. The team worked best when everyone knew each others job well and would assist when assisting was needed and support when that was needed. If everyone just worried about their own job alone and didn't understand the job of the other teammates then we would lose. I think we are saying the same things but the key is in the sharing of information and of being "one" mind and of "one" experience.

Thanks for your comments. I think this is why we go back and forth so much is because we share similar areas of interest. I have worked in the neurosciences in the medical field and so obviously, similar ideas exist there. I don't discount the possibility that there are specialized skills utilized by an individual as part of the whole. In fact, I would agree with you there. What I am saying though is that I doubt that we would look at ourselves that way anymore than I would say that I am a nose or an eye. When we love God with all our heart and we really do love our neighbor as self, which are critical criteria for entering into the Celestial Kingdom then God and everyone else there is looked at as self. Whatever the "eye" does the whole body knows and feels it, whatever the "nose" does is felt by the whole body as if it is self. There is no distinction if one loves another as self. There is a reason why Christ being more like God than the rest of us, could pay for our sins. It is because He could feel them as if He was there. That being a characteristic of all those who find their self in the Celestial Kingdom will make it so there is no distinction or propietary experience. Whatever the Father does the Son does, etc. Even if they do separate jobs, what is experienced is the whole, what is "self" is the one, not the individual. There is only one "one". The Kingdom of God is like the sun, one, the terrestrial is one as well but of lower power and the telestial is many like one star differing from another, remaining individual and separate.

You are so easily swayed that the Garden of Eden story is mostly metaphoric but this you can't say is also ? This is literal?

Well, the question got the answer I thought you might give which I think is right. I think it supports my statement about the lack of individuality and uniqueness that exists at that level. To love one's neighbor as self is the start of such ability to share the most intimate of experiences as if they are own even if they did not originate with self. Christ' desire that we be one is the same issue, that we share in what He has done so that we may receive a fullness. You agreeing that there are shared experiences, that that is possible, like in a marriage opens the door for the possibility that all can share each other's experiences so that there is no proprietary skill or trait or feature that would allow for distinction. If everything person A has is also received by person B and everything person B has is shared with person A then there is no unique thing between the two. It is only when there is partial sharing that there is a possibility for proprietary ownership of any trait or feature that one would call uniqueness. When Christ says that He is one with God and receives of His glory is that not entirely true? Does He only get partial glory?

My opinion is that it means they would share in each others successes in a similar way that God's glory is based in the success of others, the immortality and Eternal life of man. Why is it that we feel something different when our own child gets an A in class over any child who gets an A? This is the source of eternal joy when it is not just based in personal achievement. If joy is based in the success of others then it can be eternal and ever growing even after all is done with one self. This is also why loving neighbors as self is so important as is charity being an essential characteristic of those in the Celestial Kingdom. One cannot enjoy the success of others without it.

So you think a woman can do something Heavenly Father can't?

But thats the thing, I was trying to give an example of doing it unknowningly, there is no dealing, there is no contending, it isn't a problem. I don't think God "deals" with evil. I believe I have conversations with you or anyone on this forum to better my understanding and not to contend but maybe I am wrong about that. Sometimes what occurs is just a refinement of my understanding but there is nothing gained by contending with someone in such a way that there is a victor and a loser. I tend to believe, and obviously you think I am wrong about this, that God's focus is on doing good works and not squashing evil. His sole focus is to bring about good. Yes, one aspect of that is to not let evil get in the way of good but I don't think anything stands in God's way of His works. He says it, it's done. That, to me, suggests there is no contention, like inadvertently stepping on a bug that you didn't even know was there. God is not slowed down by evil in any way. That is what I believe but I could be wrong. Evil stands in our way until we get to that point that it doesn't but God as did Jesus has overcome all.

True worship is the desire to be like Him. D&C 93; "11 And I, John, bear record that I beheld his glory, as the glory of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, even the Spirit of truth, which came and dwelt in the flesh, and dwelt among us. 12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace; 13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness; 14 And thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first. 15 And I, John, bear record, and lo, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove, and sat upon him, and there came a voice out of heaven saying: This is my beloved Son. 16 And I, John, bear record that he received a fulness of the glory of the Father; 17 And he received all power, both in heaven and on earth, and the glory of the Father was with him, for he dwelt in him. 18 And it shall come to pass, that if you are faithful you shall receive the fulness of the record of John. 19 I give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and know what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness. 20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace." So, just like Christ did not have the fullness at first but received it grace for grace we too, if we are faithful, receive a fulness which is to receive "all power, both in heaven and on earth, and the glory of the Father" in us. A fulness is to be exactly like God.

But recall that He was the Only Begotten. His body was at least slightly different than ours to begin with. It was one that was prepared to be able to resurrect. His resurrection was separate from His assencion. He ascended 40 days after His resurrection. Will that be the same for us? That still doesn't say for sure that it was the same elements with which He ascended. They could have been taken and then transformed into the elements needed for a resurrected body to ascend. Or at least there was a change between Mary's encounter and the rest of his post-resurrection mission. Even then, He was not yet taken up until 40 days. What happned in those 40 days to the body? We don't know. Recall what He said to Mary, touch me not for I have not yet ascended. Then, after resurrection He walked with two disciples who did not recognize Him despite walking with Him for some length until He broke bread with them. Many of the Apostles had to feel the prints in His hands and side to know it was Him. Even John and Peter along with 6 apostles did not know who He was until He told them to cast their nets again and they recalled earlier miracles and then recognized that it was Jesus. If it was the same body you think they would have so easily forgotten what He looked like? In other words, "rising whole from the grave" to me sounds like the assencion part not just the resurrection. From 'Jesus the Christ' Chapter 37; "Though the resurrected Christ manifested the same friendly and intimate regard as He had shown in the mortal state toward those with whom He had been closely associated, He was no longer one of them in the literal sense. There was about Him a divine dignity that forbade close personal familiarity. To Mary Magdalene Christ had said: “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father.” If the second clause was spoken in explanation of the first, we have to infer that no human hand was to be permitted to touch the Lord’s resurrected and immortalized body until after He had presented Himself to the Father. It appears reasonable and probable that between Mary’s impulsive attempt to touch the Lord, and the action of the other women who held Him by the feet as they bowed in worshipful reverence, Christ did ascend to the Father, and that later He returned to earth to continue His ministry in the resurrected state."

We are having a language problem here. Definition of differentiate = recognize or ascertain what makes (someone or something) different. Whereas one of the synonymes of distinct is separate, this is why McConkie says it that way, "separate and distinct from each of the others..." I don't see where Jesus differentiated himself from the Father but clearly states that He is a distinct and separate individual. His speech was always about the sameness between the two. The phrase "only begotten" translates the Greek word monogenes.

Do I "contend" with a bug if I step on it, even unknowingly? ... you have to include the struggle part to make it "contend".

So when Joseph Smith saw God the Father and the Son in the sacred grove, you are of the belief that Joseph could distinguish the two without either saying this is me and this is He? You believe that there are unique characteristics that one has that the other doesn't? McConkie; "“Though each God in the Godhead is a personage, separate and distinct from each of the others, yet they are ‘one God’ … , meaning that they are united as one in the attributes of perfection. For instance, each has the fulness of truth, knowledge, charity, power, justice, judgment, mercy, and faith. Accordingly they all think, act, speak, and are alike in all things; and yet they are three separate and distinct entities. Each occupies space and is and can be in but one place at one time, but each has power and influence that is everywhere present” John 17; " 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." and " 25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me." and "7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. 9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. 10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them." If we know Christ then we know the Father as they are no different ... according to Christ.

No but I believe Satan contended with Jesus. 3 Nephi 11; "29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another. 30 Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away." The first definition of contend is to struggle to surmount. In that sense, Jesus did not "struggle", He didn't waver in His resolve, He didn't wonder, question whether Satan may be right or if that was the way to go. Peace being the opposite of contention is when a person is sure of the truth typically by way of the Holy Ghost communicating to our spirit. Contention is generated by our physical body suggesting something different than our spirit self would want. There is a reason why Christ was the Only Begotten and had to have that body to carry out His mission on Earth. He wasn't 100% immortal and so He had to increase in stature amongst men and God until He was ready to start His mission on Earth. At that point He did not waver and He did all that He was asked to do. There was no contention.

I can see where you are coming from, I have had similar questions. All of the elements of the Earth will be done away with and all that was old will be made new. Coarse matter will be turned to fine matter. Some may argue that that only entails changing a few atoms here and there but in reality we do not know if coarse matter exists in the same realm and system as fine matter. We don't know if one converts to another. We know that a mortal and corrupt body has no ability to become eternal on its own. We always speak of that change as a transformation. So, there is no need to have the actual corrupt, mortal material come back to life, it will turn to dust from which it came. Elder Bednar said; "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." The other thing to consider is that when a body decays in the ground the atoms and molecules are reused. What if a person dies under an apple tree and years latter a person comes by and eats an apple incorporating some of the atoms that used to be a part of another person's body. Now who gets the material? Is it going to be ripped from one to give to another? What about all the hamurgers, steaks, fillets etc one eats during one's lifetime. Does all that material have to pulled out from the body to form the bodies of all the animals they came from to reform them? It seems to me that the actual material forming the body that one dies with does not need to be used to resurrect. I think rising from the grave is a metaphor that simply means to bring back to life. The actual mechanics of how it is done seems less likely to involve using corrupt and recycled elements.

Unfortunately, the gospel does not contain much insight as to what the body brings to the table in the union of the body and spirit making up the soul of a person. In other words, to be like God we know we cannot just be a spirit. The body has to add something to our character, our nature, who we are and brings us closer to the character of God. So, what is it that the body has in terms of character and nature that the spirit alone cannot have by itself? To me this is one of the million dollar questions that has not been revealed. If we could isolate what that is then we could focus on those passions as something that is positive. I doubt it is sexuality and here is why. Even those people who find their self in the Terrestrial or Telestial kingdom will need a body to merit those levels of glory. Maybe sexuality is part of it but certainly not all of it as even for a Terrestrial being there is need to have a body to add to their nature to become glorious or more than the spirit alone would provide. Here is one speculation of mine; empathy. Charity, the pure love of Christ requires feeling for others and their situation. I think the body may be a source for empathy. Higher species of animals exhibit empathy and this is what makes an animal a social being or not. We know that a Kingdom is a society, the highest of which needs to have sociality. God can know our thoughts, He knows how we feel, He enjoys our successes as if He is there with us. All of this is a necessary trait to be like God. Christ exhibited an extreem empathy, to know the thoughts and purpose of anothers actions and drives, good or evil. To love one's neghbor as one self is 100% empathy. Partial empathy is the limitation of a Terrestrial body or even a Telestial body that is so distant in its understanding of another that it varies as one star varies from another. When everyone fully understand the thoughts, feelings and joys of another they are one, like the sun is one. It may take a body to do that. But again this has not yet been revealed.

And I am saying that the "power" you speak of is in terms of disposition. The disposition is to never have a desire to do evil. Purity is the lack of conflict in the mind as to what is right and to take away all doubt as to what is right. There is no conlfict in a mind that has no disposition to do evil. There is no "eternal conflict" for that individual. What is inherited is a body with a physical brain that does not allow for evil to enter as one of the options, it has no disposition to be "carnal" in any way and is one with the spirit in that same disposition. As you engineers like to say, garbage in leads to garbage out. In the Celestial Kingdom there is no garbage in. There is single mindedness, there is direct purpose and no wavering, God does not move to the right or left of His path and neither will anyone who finds theirself in the Celestial Kingdom. Maybe another engineering reference would be to appreciate that the ideal perpetual motion machine could only exist in an isolated system without resistance. There would be no energy loss to any kind of friction. It would just move forward without conflict or resistance.

I don't consider one being greater than the other as a distinction of character or being unique. These are just different points down the same path. Christ is in the express image of His Father, He does what the Father does, He thinks like the Father thinks, He loves as the Father loves. I doubt that you can come up with one distinguishing characteristic that one has that the other doesn't or will not have in their path. D&C 3; "2 For God doth not walk in crooked paths, neither doth he turn to the right hand nor to the left, neither doth he vary from that which he hath said, therefore his paths are straight, and his course is one eternal round. 3 Remember, remember that it is not the work of God that is frustrated, but the work of men; 4 For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him." The opposite of a non-varied path is the path of men after their own carnal will. D&C 132; "22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me. 23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also. 24 This is eternal lives—to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law. 25 Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law." There are too many scriptures to even list that suggest narrow is the way, having an eye single to the glory of God etc is the way to Celestial Life, broad or varied is the path that leads to destruction. That place of exaltation is where God is, not some higher realm or unreachable place or different pathway. It is narrow, it is straight, it is one, it is single. Varied, wide the way, broad, will of man etc is used to describe the other pathways.