Seminarysnoozer

I don't think there is a "need" to be sexually minded. Whereas there is a "need" to eat. So, if anything, that passion is harder than a sexually driven one. Maybe that is different for a man, I don't know, but that is how I see it. I agree with taking the approach of control over eradication of it all. Nobody should be blamed or mocked for those passions any more than a person who is overweight should be blamed or mocked but should be loved and helped through it. I agree with that.

Why is it unsettling to carry a lighter burden? Christ said come unto me, take on my yoke, it is easy and His burden is light. It is harder to carry the burdens of the world. It is harder to live by the wild whims of man and to live up to their ever changing standards. There are only two yokes to take, either God's or the world's. We will either end up on the right hand of God or the left but we can't be on both sides at the same time. I think, possibly, your struggle is figuring out how to keep a foot in both camps. That, really is hard and unsettling. Matthew 11: 28-30; "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

Thanks for your response. I think that is where the world (and maybe even the church if that is the way they come across) is wrong, that the focus should be to "change". I think the goal is to control not necessarily to change. If the goal is to control and not necessarily to change than one can be successful in that endeavor, whatever the passion in this life is that we are talking about. I still every once in a while catch my husband checking out women but I know him well enough to know that it is a human instinct and tendency of normal function to do that but he doesn't act any further on it. It is a quick glance and then he might turn his chair the other way or force his eyes in a different direction. When he sees half naked women on TV, which is easy to do nowadays by flipping through the channels, he will quickly change the channel. If we go out to a movie and there is nudity or heavy sexual content, we will walk out of the movie. I think we all have to deal with passions and desires that come from the body which are normal. I am glad my husband is not repulsed by women and at the same time I realize this will be a lifelong challenge for him, cause if I do say so myself, he is an attractive man. The problem is that just because it is a passion that could even be from genetically encoded neuronal and hormonal pathways does not make it a green light to act on it or promote it in one's life. All of us face those kinds of challenges every day. This very minute I am having to act against my olfactory driven, genetically and past behavior enhanced passion to eat the cake in front of me that my daughter baked an hour ago. It definitely becomes harder to control those passions if one tells themselves that they "can't help it", "this is the way I was born". I could say the same thing about my passions for sweets, I have many generations before me to prove it is genetically driven. I would imagine that if homosexuality is the passion we are talking about, it would be much harder to control if one surrounds themselves with people of similar passions and challenges. ... thank goodness my husband doesn't like sweets as much as I do.

Like Soulsearcher has said before there are many threads on this topic and it has been said before but because, as this thread shows, these concepts are not easy to grasp and understand. I think a premise to understand this topic as well as any topic regarding passions of the body is to realize that a good part of our test in this life is to gain control of our body's passions, whatever they are. The phrase "born this way" is a push in the direction of saying "I am not responsible for it" and " I shouldn't have to work against that tendency" and "I shouldn't try to change that about myself". One thing is for sure, I was born imperfect and I will die imperfect. We are all born with corrupted and imperfect bodies. The genetic tendency to consume large amounts of food or to be engaged in intellictual argument or to seek out pain relieving medications may be equaly challenging tests in this life for some souls as much as any other. I wouldn't want to know about all the tests personally in this life. I have enough challenges as it is. I just hope that those that strugle with this particular challenge expressed in this thread don't take the idea of "born this way" as a comforting thought against having to battle against it in this life. I believe homosexuality is mostly genetically influenced as to the wiring in the brain but it is still a passion of the body that should be attempted to be controlled. Even if that specific passion gains acceptance as a "normal" part of the human make up that doesn't change the possibility that it is a corrupted feature from the perfected form of the body created in the garden of Eden. I don't have to know what it is like to say that it is a passion that should be controlled, because all passions of the body should be controlled. And, therefore, we will be held responsible for what we did with those passions even if they continue through the day we die.

I am not sure why there are some LDS, even some that have been active all their lives that still don't understand the idea that we are dual beings in this life. We are both spiritual and physical. The spiritual self is who that person really is. In this life the physical can can overpower the spiritual self in big ways. Think of someone who has Down's syndrome for example or someone who later develops Alzheimers. Would you say the individual who has Down's was born that way because it represents their spirit? ... of course not. Our physical being and traits can be polar opposites to what our spiritual traits are underneath. This is part of the test we face. In any one individual we would have a hard time saying why they have to face that test or challenge in life. That is for the person to figure out through prayer and the spirit. There are some physical traits that also drive tendencies such as genetic predispositions to alcoholism or consider what a person with Tourette's faces with tendencies to self medicate with stimulants and alcohol, etc. That in no way is an expression of their spiritual traits, just the challenge they face in this life. We are dual beings ... so a song about being "born that way" is only referring to the "test conditions" not the spiritual make up of that individual.

Ha ha, You shoot down my earlier posts about the battle between spirit and body and then at the end of this post you use that very argument and scripture to support your theories of interpreting older scripture. ?? Why are you trying to come up with theories about the symbolic meaning of older scripture when we have modern revelation to help us understand those things the way they are really supposed to be understood? You seem to accept that as a reasonable way of interpreting scripture as you did in this post above, you used more modern verses in Romans to support your ideas of symbolic meaning in earlier scripture. Why not keep going with that idea and use even more modern versus and statements from those that converse with God to help you understand the true significance of the scriptures? I can see why you disagreed with me earlier, you are trying to come up with symbolic meanings where I was trying to tell you literal meanings. I think it is more important to understand some of the basic literal meanings of the gospel before it can be applied to the more symbolic verses. The literal in this case is the literal battle between one's own spirit and one's own body, the spiritual mind and the carnal mind. Even though I think it is not correct and even sexist, I suppose if you agree to the basic literal teaching as it is in Romans 8, then you could try to apply any symbolic meaning to older and more primitive teachings in the scriptures such as possibly the symbolic meaning of man versus women. It isn't helpful or necessary to do that though, we have modern revelation, you know?

I've had that question about the third of the host of heaven as well. I would say, though, if one believes that a third of the host of heaven was cast out forever then I would have to think that God really had no ability to mold or form spiritual children into the sum of their spiritual being. Whatever that process is, if we liken it to earthly birth, I don't think God can form spiritual beings one way or another. They are either valiant or they or not. I don't think God would form a spiritual being knowing ahead that they would choose to be cast out forever. So, to me either those spirits are cast out forever and God does not have control over the sum of ones spiritual traits or God can mix together certain spiritual traits when spirits are formed and the "casting out" is not forever. I don't think it could be both that God could mix certain less valiant traits in certain spirits and have them cast out forever, that doesn't seem like the God I believe in.

To me this is like asking if there is a difference between math and math class. I think true religion would increase ones spirituality. Just like a math class that taught correct mathematics could increase one's math skills. The difference between that example though and religion is that there are many religions that mix in a lot of philosophies and ideas of man with their religion and so their ability to really increase spirituality may be limited. Thats why its a good idea to choose a religion that has a living connection and partnership with God.

I have learned to communicate via the spirit with my Heavenly Father. So, I could potentially bring all that He would see fit for me to have whatever that might be in that situation. If there was such a situation that would be the thing I would hope I would be most adept at. Then I could be inspired to follow whatever direction could be life saving or important at the time. This would have to be also a compilation of all the spiritually influenced knowledge I have gained and been inspired to that point as possibly God has prepared whoever would be in such a situation all their lives for that very event. If I was to try to prepare a mental list of those attributes that I would think would be valuable in such a situation, I am sure I would miss important ones that God would rather I spend my time on or have. I think the bottom line is that we need to constantly ask what God wants of us, individually and for ourselves. Then, no matter what is ahead we will be in a position to do whatever God has intended us to do in that situation.

I appreciate your comments, I think I agree with that. It is not really a "spirit" but either a state of mind or the body itself which polarizes toward the devil. I think this should be thought of also when reading about "seven devils" leaving Mary Magdalene, being healed of evil spirits and infirmities and other examples in the Bible. So, "spirit of infirmity" and "spirit of the devil" may be different things but similar in that they are not really "spirits", they are either states of mind or the body itself.

I am curious what most think the "spirit of infirmity" is in Luke 13:11. Is this an actual "spirit"? or Is this just a description of an illness? The scriptures seem to suggest this infirmity is controlled by Satan, verse 16 says, "And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?" There are several examples in the NT, but it seems that illnesses of all kinds (in this case, possibly arthritis or scoliosis, etc.) and being under the influence of Satan are similar to Jesus. So, what is this "spirit"? a real spirit or just a descriptive term?

I asked a similar question on 12-1-10, "Importance of location". Do a search on "location", it should pull up. I think this is a good question.

You could also say it the other way around. If his plan was to redeem everyone regardless of what they did, then by definition they would have no agency because agency requires being responsible for one's actions. He is suggesting that nobody would ultimately be responsible for anything they did because everyone is redeemed (kind of like his continued message to some on this planet now - that all we have to do is believe and we are saved). I don't think Lucifer really understood what salvation was. Just like the moms that want every child to get a "winning" trophy at the end of a soccer league even if they lost every game. That really isn't a "winning" (to use a popular phrase nowadays) trophy, it is a fake trophy, its a trophy just for participating not "winning". Likewise, his "salvation" was a fake, empty salvation.

Joseph Smith: "When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the gospel--you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil before you will have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave." (History of the Church, 6:306-307)

That gene likely just helps in ones ability to work through abstract thought processes and attach emotional significance to memories. Any subject that is abstract in nature would likely be better understood by those that have that gene. Monoamines like Norepinephrine and Serotonin are involved in prefrontal lobe to deeper nuclei communication and back. In other words, the spontaneous, "what-if" part of the brain can communicate more readily with emotional connections in the hypothalamus. That isn't just a religious or "spiritual" trait. We've known about this for a long time because of diseases like Parkinsonism and Alzheimers that can result in pseudobulbar affect, or labile affect (they start crying or have an emotional outburst for no apparent reason). The treatment for those problems are medications that increase serotonin such as antidepressants or increase monoamines in general like amphetamine based medications like ritalin or a new one called Neudexta.

I understand your point but I take a little issue with the idea that oxytocin and vasopressin are toxic or destructive in nature. (I have a degree in neuroanatomy) I agree that those might be common pathways used in the reinforcing feedback that comes from sexual activity and have direct effect on sexual function but to say that they in and of themselves are physically destructive is not true and has not been shown scientifically. In fact, if anything married couples have more sex on average than those that are not married. So, I don't see how that, in and of itself, could be destructive, or like heroin etc. Like you are suggesting towards the end of your post, it is the "activity that releases chemicals" (probably not vasopressin or oxytocin but before that step) that results in a change in primitive drives of the hypothalamus that causes the dependency like reaction. It comes from the "hard wiring" effect on those systems with those kinds of repeated exposures. The idea is right, there is a physical effect. I think though those two chemicals are part of the final common pathway for the functions associated with sexual drives and not the actual neuroanatomy of sexual drive. The premise is right though. Even with drugs like heroin etc. it is not the chemical itself that is the problem physically (unless overdosed or withdrawing from it) it is the neuroanatomy, the neuronal "hard wiring" effect over time that causes problems, changing the balance of normal function that leads to a "need" for more of the same chemical. In other words, the brain changes its "set points" of these normally existing chemicals over time with a counterbalance in inhibitory or excitatory inputs, whatever the case may be. Then there is a drive to maintain that balance, to keep sexual arousal going or to keep the heroin going etc. It doesn't "physically destroy", it changes the amount and the focus of the carnal, primitive drives. If one reacts to those drives in a wrong way, that can be destructive physically such as overdosing or engaging in deviant behaviors etc. ... just defending the married couples who are more sexually active than singles as a whole. :)

In reality, our body declines fairly quickly in this life. We reach a peak at about the age of 25 or so in most aspects of function then there is a decline and slowing down. The only thing that continues to improve for a while but then also reaches a peak is vocabulary and language skills. Our memory and our processing speed also declines. I think this body is a poor example of a body that improves with time if you separate the spiritual development from the package.

Hmm, I thought the process of repentance is the refiners fire. I don't see the difference. In your analogy then we are all in prison since we all sin. I don't see it that way, I think the buffetings of Satan are the opposition that is needed to push ourselves to new heights, it is the thing to overcome or to win out. When we go to college the test questions are more difficult and challenging. If anything, if a person is in "prison" the buffetings should be made lighter so they can have a chance to overcome them if they didn't learn that before. I think I see what you are saying but I guess we would need another word then for the increase in Satan's temptations for those that are righteous, what would you call that if not buffetings?

How would one differentiate from direct blows to the spirit versus Satan influencing body desires and function which in turn battles with our spirits? You seem so sure that Satan can battle our spirits directly even though Brigham Young and others say that is not the case. How would you know that versus the secondary effect of the body's influence on the spirit? Things that are of the Earth and that are carnal Satan has influence over, which includes our physical body, at least while we remain in this carnal probationary state.

Yes, I agree, that is why I think the buffetings of Satan come from our corrupted, carnal bodies. This is why the natural man is an enemy to God.

This is, in fact, one of the main reasons to come here and receive a body and have those very experiences. It is to develop a sense of what is from the spirit versus our carnal nature. To distinguish the two and discern the promptings comes from familiarity with the spirit and experience. It's something we all have to learn but can't be forced or taught but by experience. It is like telling someone how to ride a bike or play the piano, eventually the only way to really learn that is to experience it and try it yourself. One may even fall of the bike, so to speak, but that is the price we pay for having the opportunity to learn such things. The actual circuitry and the way the spirit communicates or influences the body, we don't know. Does it connect with the circuit of Papez, or have some direct connection to hypothalamic circuits or have more of a connection with intracellular mechanisms, we don't know that. My feeling is that it must be through the brain. It certainly isn't through the heart even though we metaphorically say it might be, as people have heart transplants all the time and remain themselves. Nobody has ever had a brain transplant though.

Ignorance is not the opposite of comprehension. Ignorance in this case means more "unaware" or "uninformed". I can be informed by my leaders without having comprehension. It seems that a lot of people on this forum have that perception, you are not unique in that regard. Of course, if one believes there is no need for inspired leaders, then, yes, you have to do it on your own, which is not the way it was intended to happen. So, in Swendenborg's ideal of no church or inspired leaders, the only way one will obtain enlightenment is on their own and in that case, I suppose, comprehension is necessary. I can drive a car for example without knowing how the car's engine operates or how to make a car. I can type on this computer without having to know the properties of transistors and electricity. But if there is no one around to make a car or a computer then I would have to fully comprehend those things to be able to first make a car before I can drive it. Luckily, that is not how God's plan works, we learn from each other and we build upon what we learn and the experiences we have. I never said learning and teaching are not necessary and I agree we can't be saved in ignorance but to say that salvation comes from comprehension is wrong. And it is a wrong pursuit if it takes away from ones pursuit of faith promoting activities. Of course, comprehension leads to further opportunities for testing one's faith but to pursue comprehension without faith in mind is the wrong place to put one's energy. And the perception that one can do it solo becomes enhanced. For example, when a person tells themselves, "I can't believe in that without fully understanding that topic" then their right eye becomes obscured. Believe first, have faith first and then understanding may or may not come in this life, ... it really doesn't matter if it comes in this life or later. The light of Christ is one's ability to listen to spiritual influences over carnal. If the experiences of this life lead to one listening to carnal influences more than spiritual then the light of Christ dissipates. Sometimes the "thorn in the flesh" allows us to turn to spiritual influences more, as it did with Peter. It is up to each person to turn their experiences into spiritual promoting events or to succumb to the world and let carnal influences win out. The spirit and the body are the two poles of the spectrum, where one is at any one point in time in terms of their ability to listen to spiritual influences over carnal is what the Light of Christ represents.

I think one of the biggest hang ups I have about the possibility of advancement from one kingdom to another is the fact that when we are resurrected we obtain a body in which we will never be separated from again. One body is that of the glory of the sun, the other the glory of the moon and the other the stars that vary as much as stars do. How is it that a "moon" will turn into a "sun" so to speak? If this is a permanent, 'never to be separated' again condition, I don't see how that is possible. Sure, during the Spirit World time there are things to be worked out but after the final judgment and specifically after we obtained our glorified bodies, I don't see how that could change from that moment on.

How much do you think morality and being valiant depends on consciousness versus comprehension? Does 'consciousness' come from the physical wiring of the neurons in your brain or from the influences of your spiritual self? Your body in this life is a gift, some people are gifted with great intelligence and others a more simple existence but luckily we are not judged on our comprehension but God takes into consideration how much each of us are given and what we have done with what we are given. Where much is given much is expected. Consider the story of the ten talents. If the servant with the 5 talents would have hidden the 5 talents he would have ended up with more than the one that was given one but in the end it would be taken away because he was not profitable. And if the servant with one talent given would have doubled it instead of hiding it he would have received all in the end. Luckily, we are not judged by a certain level of comprehension but the manner in which we deal with what we are given, in other words, what is in our hearts, whether we are faithful servants or not. If the scriptures drive us to be more faithful and valiant that is all that matters, we do not have to comprehend the exact or historical or literal meaning of them. We have leaders directed by Christ to make sure that they are interpreted correctly, whether we have faith in that system, Christ's church or not is up to you. Comprehension on an individual level is not required. To say that comprehension is a key part of salvation would be to promote ones own self attained knowledge, to trust in one's own knowledge over Christ. Swedenburg promoted just that, to be self instructed, just like Satan's plan, 'I can do it by myself' ... 'I don't need a God directed church and I don't need a savior', is how I see his teachings. "“Be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble. “Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time.” 1 Peter 5:5-6

Yes, I am hoping for that. In the case that it doesn't happen though it kind of sets up a one way relationship.