Seminarysnoozer

This is an interesting thought too when looking at Eve's role in the Garden of Eden, eating the fruit first.

Thank you. I think this is really good insight. This is probably also why Jesus went away from where they were praying. I appreciate your comments. There is more to this than just the "support" idea. But, in this sense, sleeping is supporting, because if they would have been awake they may have tried to interrupt the visibly painful process if they would have fully witnessed it. Luke 22 is a little more clear about them 'sleeping for sorrow' and after Christ rose from praying (it was over) He still asked them why they were sleeping and to rise and tarry to not enter into temptation even though He was done praying. That would make sense if He was saying this so they wouldn't try to fight off the betrayer, like you mentioned. Thanks.

The dilemma in my mind is knowing that Jesus was the only one who could make that atonement and He knew that going into it. It seems more likely that Jesus was wanting them to stay awake for their benefit, not His as if He 'needed' something from them. To go back several times after they fell "asleep" (they may not have been asleep but exhausted from trying to believe and pray and 'tarry' with the idea of Christ being the messiah - so no snoring involved) and to say at the end, okay its done now you can sleep makes it seem like He was looking out for their interests, their benefit. I like how Elder Whitney describes it in his dream, that Jesus did not rebuke the apostles but gently tried to wake them up, as if He was concerned that they were going to miss something.

I found an interesting suggestion by McConkie: "Perhaps the very reason Peter, James and John slept was to enable a divine providence to withhold from their ears, and seal up from their eyes, those things which only Gods can comprehend." Mortal Messiah vol 4. From what everyone is saying, I think I will settle with the idea that it was only for support, not some other purpose ... as a witness, or to pray with him, or to watch for Judas etc. I think I read somewhere too that "sleep" was really just exhaustion from trying to comprehend what was going on but they couldn't, so they "slept", or they were shut off from what was going on.

Thanks, I was going to offer that as an example as well but didn't want to compare what Jesus went through to labor. I see the comparison though. During my second, the labor went on so long my husband fell asleep and I didn't want to wake him until it was really needed. I just appreciated the fact that he was there.

Thank you for your response. I think having forks in the road is different than having traveled the road completely. This is the time where there are forks in the road, not after. I think "work" after this life for individuals is in terms of satisfying the demands of proof in the law. I don't think the "work" is in terms of development or change (forks in the road). But, I realize this is just my opinion, likely based in the sense of urgency I have to do the right thing here while we "have a chance". The gospel seems to suggest that this is the one-time probationary period. The probationary period has to include the choice between good and evil and not just a choice between being more or less valiant. When we die we enter into a restful state of not being buffeted by any external source of evil temptations. Therefore, after this life there is no more opportunity for change, but there could still be time for stating our choices that may have gone undeclared to that point for lack of opportunity. I don't think, though, after this life we can make one choice and then reverse the choice after we "think about it". Now is the time to reason, to ponder and to work out one's salvation in that sense. After this life, without external evil influences, if we are posed a question that we fully understand, I think we would answer the question the same way every time. There won't be another chance to change our opinion about something. I think the degree to which one leans in one direction or the other, in terms of kingdom progression depends on how much one looks at this life as an opportunity to reveal our true natures (a test) versus an opportunity to grow. I guess I look at this life as more of a test than it is a class. Like taking a final exam in a college class, one would hope they go into it having learned all they could before undergoing the test but I suppose one could learn a little from the test itself. If one leans in the direction of this life being a class as opposed to a test then I could see how that person would feel like there should still be time to "figure out" the right answer later. I am also of the opinion that the "refiner's fire" does not change one's true nature, it makes a person more pure or consistent with their true nature. Without the misdirection that occurs in this life, everyone will be living their 'true nature' in the next life, it doesn't have to be discovered or worked out. When our true natures are revealed the glory assignment can take place. That doesn't mean the path for learning and growing is complete, it just means the person won't change direction because there is no fork in the road after that.

Thanks. I understand that as the intent of the request, what I am trying to understand is what kind of support could they have offered by being awake? I am not following what they are doing while being awake. Obviously, whatever 'tarrying' He was asking for wasn't necessary because He got the job done without them. Was He asking them to do something that He knew they couldn't do and wasn't adding to the purpose of the event? What I think you are saying is that He just wanted "moral support" knowing what He was going into. I guess I am not following how in that setting, where Jesus is doing all the work, what the difference would be between awake apostles versus asleep apostles, who in either way give their support to what is going on.

In Mark 14:38-42 it says; "38Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak. 39And again he went away, and prayed, and spake the same words. 40And when he returned, he found them asleep again, (for their eyes were heavy,) neither wist they what to answer him. 41And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 42Rise up, let us go; lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand." Why did Jesus ask them to "watch" and "tarry" there so they wouldn't enter into temptation? I guess I am not following why that request was made. Is He simply asking them to stay awake to watch for Judas? Or is He asking them to stay awake to help Him in some way with what He was going through? When all is done, Jesus know Judas is coming before he actually was there and so it wasn't really necessary to have a watchman so to speak, He knew when they were coming. Was it that He wanted witnesses to the event? I guess I am not gathering what the value of having them not be "heavy" is at that moment. What could have Peter, James and John specifically added to the moment if they were awake and not "sore amazed"?

What would be the purpose for waiting much longer after that point to make a Final judgement? What piece of information is missing to make that Final Judgment after the second resurrection? I thought we were resurrected unto our Kingdom, which to me is the judgement. This is how I read D&C 88, specifically verses 15-22, " 20 That bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent are they sanctified." In other words, at the point of resurrection, bodies that are sanctified and redeemed will be made for the purposes of the Celestial Kingdom activities and those that are assigned to other kingdoms will have other bodies. - verses 28-31. We will be quickened by the type of body that matches our assigned Kingdom. It seems to me that at the point of resurrection it will at least be obvious what kingdom we are going to. Realize, of course, that the Final Judgment is not a time to dish out punishments but a time to assign and inherit a level of glory. Bodies are how we "inherit" things after it has been decided that we have earned that inheritance. The bestowing of that glory comes in the form of the resurrected body which is the soul of man and described in D&C 88 as quickened by a specific fullness of glory, either Celestial, Terrestrial or Telestial type quickening. To me that sounds like it happens all at once. If you think the "quickening" won't happen till later .... I don't see that in the scriptures either. Sounds like it is one in the same time frame.

If we believe that we made informed decisions about the trials of this life even though we may have been naive about how tough it would be, that shows you how far we have fallen in terms of our comprehension and rote or fact based knowledge. Most can barely understand what is expected of them (this includes me). We struggle to understand why we have to go through certain trials, where before it seemed clear. This is why the most important knowledge we obtain here is not comprehension but faith based experience. Our spirits already have comprehension and we will get it back when we leave this existence whether or not we live up to our promises though will determine how valuable the faith based experiences will be to us in the future. In other words, learning algebra or how to play the tuba, etc. isn't that important unless it gives more opportunity for faith based experiences (i.e following God's will).

How about being valiant or not, is that given? How about whether a person is self centered or not, is that given? Is Satan's level of selfishness given? Some of the choosing you are talking about happened before this life. I don't know if it is a totally clean slate before coming here, as if all the valiant choices we made before are made even with everyone else. There is something that is carried through, distinguishing that from things that are given in this life may be difficult.

Thanks .... exactly! This is why I have a hard time understanding why sometimes when people find a talent in themselves they say they must have had it before, as if it is not given but owned. If one has a talent and love for music, as an example, that doesn't necessarily mean that it came from the previous life. That, I agree, is a form of "selfish and wicked pride" as you put it.

If one thinks that buying a product that costs 50 cents to make and retails for $2.50 but buying it for 10 cents, 100 times over is honest then more power to that person, I suppose. I, personally, would have a hard time paying 10 cents for a product that costs 50 cents to make (materials, shipping, storing costs etc.) without ever having the intention to try it out and see if it is something that I may want to pay full price for one day. I think "being honest in all our dealings" includes paying a reasonable price for products and services .... maybe I am way off in left field with that idea. I think there are some in my neck of the woods (southern California) for example that find workers who they can pay 2 dollars an hour to get the job done as opposed to minimum wage, would that be honest? ...just because it can be done easily, just have to go the shopping mall corner and I can pick up several of those workers right now, doesn't make it "honest". (Not talking about hiring an undocumented worker as an employee in a business, by the way, that would be illegal on top of the dishonesty described above.)

I agree. I think the further we progress in the gospel, we realize that this gospel is one of "sharing" even though "sharing" is not the right word. Maybe, as Jesus put it, 'being one' are the right words. My feeling is that we will be more 'one' than we will be individuals in the next life and as we work towards that end we will look back at this existence of separate assignments and stewardships and think that was kind of odd, to have them separated that way. But, the separation is necessary for testing purposes, for this probationary existence. I think we will find that God is not God without His female counterpart and the power of God is not the power of God without His female counterpart. If the priesthood represents the power of God, then, by that thought process it also represents the power of His female counterpart.

All memories are symbolic and related to something else. This is simply the anatomy of memory. We relate one thing to another and we associate emotional significance to the subject to help with where and how important that piece of information is. In other words, all memories of all kinds are symbolic. Memories are not a video tape recording, they are remembering the general significance and relevance of the subject. The association to any subject starts very young for any given person. This is why anyone who would "expertly" interpret dreams would have to have an understanding of that persons past memories and experiences and how their brain assigned significance to those events. This is why the interpretation of dreams done truthfully can only be done by divine means. There is no other method of understanding another persons subconscious wiring. Even our own understanding of our own subconscious is very limited, like me looking at this computer and "seeing" all the computations this computer is doing right now. Therefore, interpreting one owns dreams is also difficult without divine intervention. We can easily be satisfied with a comprehension of possible significance of certain symbols for any topic our own brain made but that is simply being satisfied with an interpretation that "sounds right" and may not be at all what the brain was going through at the time of the dream. Any more that when I step outside and a rain drop hits my head then I should interpret that as God forgiving me of my sins. We can make up symbols for just about anything.

I am not offended. Thanks. I commonly think of the phrase "remember who you are". I think that phrase exists because at the moment we are not who we really are, we are behind a thick veil and subject to the carnal natures of our bodies. I guess some think that those two factors don't make much of a difference on their characters and there is very little remembering needed. My feeling is that we learned a lot before this life, at least up to the point of actually having a body. Obviously, it is enough for many, those that die before the age of 8 and those that die with severe diseases that make them unaccountable in this life. The scope of the subject in D&C 82 is mentioned in my OP but this is why I also included the broader interpretation and description by others such as President Spencer W. Kimball said: “God has endowed us with talents and time, with latent abilities and with opportunities to use and develop them in his service. He therefore expects much of us, his privileged children" I think this is how most view "where much is given, much is required" speaking of the more inclusive talents etc and not just church assignments.

I appreciate your response. I am totally on the same page with you, thank you for saying it clearly. Of what we currently have we need to give our all. One thing to point out though is that the uneven distribution of what we have here in this life is not in correlation to what we had before. I am trying to point out that there can be and at least will be a specific outlining of what we had before and what we were "given" here in this life at judgment day. Those two lists are not the same, before and during probationary life. The after probationary life list of traits and skills etc. will more closely resemble the before probationary life list with added things we may have learned here. Maybe we can't distinguish the differences here between what is "given" versus the make up of our spiritual self now, but we will at some point be able to see those differences, in my opinion. The truth of this is when we look at those that are born with disabling diseases such as trisomy 21 etc. Their 'before probationary life' list of traits greatly differs from their 'during probationary life' list of traits. Obviously, those souls were advanced enough to not have to endure the probation time in the same way the rest of us do, or even children who die before the age of accountability. Their lot in life, in fact seems inversely related to where they were before. I guess the point I am trying to make is that the set of talents and potential talents and abilities, skills etc. is given for testing purposes in this life and not a reflection of anything "owned" from the previous life. Of course, the more valiant souls may be put in situations where they can be challenged with greater responsibility for their specific calling and even given traits to accomplish that thing. Moses' spiritual self, for example, possibly doesn't have a problem speaking in front of groups but here it was necessary to carry out God's purpose. Even though we might relate that to his character, that may not really be how his spiritual character would act. I think the differences in the before and during list of traits is mostly true for everyone save possibly a few such as Jesus and others that we don't know about. The rest of us have fallen to a state that is described by Moses as 'man is nothing' (in comparison to the skills and traits and knowledge and abilities we had before).

I think if something in the Forum sounds trivial, then don't participate in the discussion. Obviously, what is seemingly important to some may not be to others, there are many threads that I don't participate in because I don't have anything to add to the discussion. In my early posts I think I explained that I would imagine most would say "everything" is given and so that would include all that we have. I anticipated what you just wrote and explained that to most that would be the end of the discussion. What I am proposing here, to look deeper into that statement is the fact that if one says they are "given" that means that they were not there before (at least at some point), in other words, they are not inherited traits of the spirit being, or our eternal intelligence. And if they are given here, in this life, then they are temporary which would fit with the description of being "stewards" and not owners. The discussion wasn't really about what we do with "given" talents because that is obvious and not really up for discussion as you are trying to say, "sounding trivial" but rather this was an attempt to discuss if there can be any separation of the things that were "given" in this life as temporary stewardships and not a 'carried over' trait. If it is unknown and one just approaches it as if everything is a gift, that is a valid response that I also already proposed, which I agree is probably the best way to approach it and leave it as an unknown, trivial thing. But here is the thing about that, if one says everything is a gift then in no way should one claim that their current personality is somehow a reflection of how they were in the previous life. Those aspects of a person's being, if they say it is just how they are and not a "gift", in other words, not a "stewardship" then that attitude would take away from their gratitude towards all things given and it would also be viewed as a part of their being in which there is no "pay back". If it is truly trivial, then the statement should be "all is required of everyone" not "where much is given much is required". If you think there is no difference between those two statements then I think "where much is given" is misleading.

That is what this whole thread is about, "extreme couponing" is a program on cable TV that highlights people who turn this into a common practice of getting their groceries for essentially free. There were many, more than 5, that I saw and more and more are trying to do this. I was never talking about the person who uses coupons as they were intended, single use to see if one would like to buy or use the product. Of course, that is not dishonest.

You can see where my question comes from then. It isn't very clear. If it was exactly as we were before then we would face the same challenges we do here, there. To create this temporary, probationary state there had to be temporary, probationary factors put into the equation. It is kind of like when you take a test and it says "If Jane and Elaine traveled in a train going 60 mph for two hours and Jane traveled an additional 20 minutes, what is there combined travel distance?" ... when you take the test you realize there is no actual people named Jane and Elaine and there is no actual train, it is just set up for the test. That "set up" is what is "given", they are temporary conditions so that we can be put into a testing situation. They are specific to each of us, I believe, to be tested in certain areas. Whereas there may be other areas of our lives that are just who we are and God can make the veil thin enough that they come out from time to time such as remembering knowledge learned before. Some people, I think, start to believe that the "set up" is who they really are, as if they had those traits before this life. How would one know, which are which? As far as Christ goes, that is a different situation than what we find ourselves in, He was the Only Begotten. That must make the veil pretty thin and give Him the physical power to complete His mission. As He pointed out to His disciples, the spirit is willing but the body is weak (for all of us except Him).

Thanks. I have 4 children, I know what you are saying. But, how do you know that those differences are not because of the brain's wiring. The wiring of the brain occurs mostly by the 8th week of gestation. They come out different because of their physical characteristics. Maybe the closest representation we have of this is how different identical twins are. But even then there is some genetic differences that occur after zygote formation that could account for small differences. There is nothing in our religion that says that we had various talents before we came here, only varied levels of being valiant. That, of course, translates to further development but it doesn't say that it is in a different direction of development. And, we are in such a fallen state, our talents, if they do shine through would be like comparing professional basketball players skills when they have their legs tied together, arms tied behind their back and blindfolded with anyone else who is tied up in the same way. Can you really see the differences shine through?

This is what makes any good and true religion faith based. There is not much that can be explained until one is there doing it just like a doctor couldn't really explain what it is like to be a doctor until one is actually living that life, etc. We get glimpses of it by living the gospel and having a family of our own here. These, in part, are things we are commanded to do in this life so we develop a love for Godliness. The power of the priesthood, Jesus' teachings and example, Joseph Smith's vision, temple work, the gospel itself, etc. are things that give us glimpses and metaphors for that existence, but that is as much as we get without taking faith out of the equation. Only those that know the true nature of God and can "see" God could know this but they are those whose probationary test is over. To "see" God is what the tree of life represents, most of us are still holding onto the rod and not quite there yet.

Thanks Pam. I think those quotes tell us that we should be willing to give everything. Even then, I think how one views this subject is a potential attitude changer in terms of the pride that is associated with something thinking that if they have a lot here, somehow they were the ones with a lot before this life began (which may be true for some but not all). As opposed to realizing that pretty much everything we have here, whether it is athletic prowess, intellectual prowess, artistic prowess, social prowess etc. is given and 'on loan' temporally, and not a reflection of our spiritual self any more than one would consider someone with trisomy 18 to be a physical representation of their spiritual self. My personal view in this matter is that the traits that we carry with us from the previous life are things like, whether a person is valiant or not, how in tune to the spirit one is, whether a person is self sacrificing or not, whether a person can delay gratification or not ... all the things that we are sent here to reveal, our true natures. What we did not carry through, at least seems less likely, is whether we love chocolate or not, whether we love a good joke or not, whether we like sports or science, whether we can speak in front of large groups or not, whether we have an ease with algebra or not, whether we can create a beautiful painting or not, whether we are good at team sports or not, etc. With those "given" temporary traits that are on loan for a short period of time, God is looking at whether we keep them for ourselves or whether we share them and expand them. If one claims them as their own, then by definition they are not sharing them ... which is part of the test. If one says "I am a great artist" then they would be claiming it for themselves, as opposed to saying "I have been blessed temporarily with this talent". ... it is all in the attitude. ... like the unjust steward wanting to take it for himself when it was never his in the first place.

I think that many "temporal amenities" (I like that description, by the way) are considered by many to be who they really are. In other words, people think to themselves, 'I am intelligent' therefore my spirit was intelligent before this life. Or, 'I have a love for sports' therefore my spirit must have loved those type of challenges before this life. Or, 'I have a mind for science' therefore I must have had that propensity before this life. ... and not that is was given or part of our "temporal amenities" on loan from God. For me, I find nothing in my blessing and others that I have read that outlines what is inherent versus given in the Patriarchal blessing unless wherever it reads "you have been blessed with..." should be interpreted as "you have been given ....". This raises another way of looking at this, should everything we consider to be a blessing in this life be looked at as something given, something 'on loan'?

I think most realize that a talent refers to money (I think they do) but one thing they may not realize is that one talent is about $380,000 our money ... just to put some perspective on that. Of course this is a parable and words represent other things, just like "seeds" might refer to people or the gospel etc. In that parable, talent does not just refer to money. This is an interesting response because this view is seeming to say that there are some things, at least, that are carried through from the previous life. If that is the case, then those things are not counted towards 'where much is given, much is required'. This statement is seemingly stating that only things that we are partially good at to begin with are the things for which 'much is required', not the things that we are 'naturally' good at. So, if I am 'naturally' a good athlete and make millions playing a particular sport, not much is required of me from that 'natural ability' or if I am 'naturally' an intelligent person and make millions because of this 'natural ability' not much is required from that ability? If I carry the love and ability for music, not much is required of me, in terms of that ability? So how can we tell which ones where 'much is required' versus others that we don't need to 'pay back' in that way? Or, is everything in this life "given"?