CV75

This love, I think, is the main godly attribute that He developed, grace for grace, to a far greater extent than we ever did and are still challenged to do. I believe I have come to realize that Heavenly Father is not hiding from us, nor hiding behind His Son because He cannot tolerate the least degree of sin or telestial conditions (after, all, He has appeared or at least spoken directly to some few on earth). Instead, He has placed us in a telestial sphere where we can discover the eternal medium and language of communicating and communicating with Him. Once we catch on to that, we can progress as His Son did, premortally and in this life. He sent His Son by way of a fallen mortal body to show us, because we could not endure the Father's direct presence without quickening -- and how can that happen without faith?. His Son's eternal light shines in the darkness of this world through His personal pre-mortal and mortal mission, and now after His resurrection also. We come to recognize it, and choose to either receive it or reject it (in degrees, of course).

I think He grew from grace to grace through correct choices. I do not know anything of how this process started for Him or for any of us. But there seems to be something common in all of our intelligences that draws us together for our united theosis. If Christ was the only one around, He would not be a god any more than any of us could be, alone or in unison (apart from Him). I suppose something in our choices influenced His, and something in His choices influenced us. Given we are all children of Heavenly Father and in His presence, when I say choice, I mean those choices having to do with developing all the Father's attributes. Not everyone was influenced to choose as He did, hence the war in heaven depending on how we responded to His choices.

Good, and these exalted beings were saviors. They have a white stone "whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms will be made known." This higher order would be the kingdom of their Heavenly Father, who knows how to bring forth, gather and raise* spirit children including a Savior. A Heavenly Father who Himself was once a savior and maybe even a Savior, but still to whom our Savior in His Atonement deferred. To me this suggests that His Father, whether a savior or Savior, comprehends the heights and depths of joy and suffering that our saviors do and our Savior did to an infinitely greater extent than we, and did for our Savior that which the Savior could not do for Himself. All exalted beings end up knowing and comprehending all things, no matter how they got there; whether they were saviors or a Savior. All become Fathers. Or Mothers. *These are reflected in the three keys restored to the earth in D&C 110.

As usual, it depends -- in some ways yes, and in some ways no. In the sense of who becomes exalted, it would be a yes, we are saviors. The theory @ZealoulyStrivingproposes calls for parents of spirit children being exalted (I think).

I don't understand the "No...?" response -- are you suggesting "Maybe?" -- if so, that kind of ties up that line of discussion. Do you consider a spirit child born of exalted parents to be born in a covenant, similar to a mortal child born in the covenant through mortal parents? Focusing on your theory, what is the significance of exalted beings with a white stone (D&C 13);9 - 11) not having performed a Atonement in mortality, versus The One that has? Consecration and the united order in its various forms are/were priesthood covenants within the priesthood order, not a good-will or other secular cooperatives. What kinds of exalted activities are voluntary and cooperative versus voluntary and covenantal?

The parent-to-child sealings do not produce a child-to-child sealings. They produce family units, but the only units producing generations are man-wife and parent-child, beginning with Adam and Eve. The children are sealed to their parents, spouses and Christ, but not to each other. The sealed descendants (children, posterity) of Adam and Eve are not sealed to each other until marriage, and only as couples. Are you suggesting that every person is sealed as a couple to every other person of the opposite sex? Are you suggesting that a spirit child is not born in the covenant of their exalted parents? There are many saviors on Mount Zion and joint-heirs with Christ. By grace I am as much a Savior as He is, and as much a Father as His Father is. How is the priesthood order a cooperative, and not a covenant or sealed order?

We seal men and women; their children are born in the covenant; this chain of progress continues back to Adam. We are cousins to ancestors along the way, but not sealed to them (siblings are not sealed to each other, either), but each individual is also sealed to Christ. At what point (and why) is a spirit child of exalted parents adopted or re-sealed to a broader, or other, set of gods? Do some exalted parents not have a firstborn, a son of the morning or an only begotten? At what point is their work and glory picked up by someone else, or at what point do they pick up someone else's?

I think sex is implicit in "the restoration of the house of Israel" phrase of the second sentence in Joseph Smith's quote. When he says, "But in connection with with these..." he is referring to the fundamental principles, not the appendages. The restoration of the house of Israel requires the combined exercise of keys (by Moses, Elias, and Elijah; the gathering of Israel, the Abrahamic covenant, and Elijah's sealing power -- D&C 110), authorizing marriage and procreation in time and in eternity. There is no legitimate Israel with no legitimate sex, and there is no legitimate sex with no legitimate marriage.

I believe it refers to a lateral relationship – a sealing to each other in conjunction with, a vertical relationship with God*. 3 points: the rib is the only bone that can regenerate (so Adam’s grew back!); its stem cells can be used to create new tissues, organs, etc.; and, the word for “rib” is also the same one that is used for “chamber” (which could refer to the periosteum, a tissue surrounding the bone like a banana peel surrounds the fruit). So, there may be a literal description going on here as well. Adam’s body was made of the dust (element), and Eve’s body was made of a higher order of dust, living dust. The X chromosome has 10 times the genetic material as the Y, so an XX may represent this higher order of dust over the XY. That this was done while Adam was asleep is telling! Meaning that the particulars aren’t important to know right now 😊 * https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2024/04/34carpenter?lang=eng The “Breath of Life” seems to be more straightforward – it is the power of God to turn the key of life to connect spirit and element by exposing the light of Christ (D&C 88: 6 - 15) to the spirit and element, connecting them. The Hebrew term is nišmat ḥayyîm, which means both the “spirit” and “excitement” or “spark” of "life," which is why I lean toward the interpretation that it is the light of Christ which “quickeneth” and “governeth” all things. ETA: I know this may wax esoteric, but the reason the XX is of a higher order is because the womb is where the covenant is transmitted to children born in the covenant. The female initiatory has wording that indicates the womb is consecrated for this purpose much as a temple is consecrated for the transmission of covenants to the living and the dead.

I think we grow into the working model first established as children of God as we mature and become sanctified by the Holy Ghost. I’ve heard it said that women do not have a role model as men do; they have less structure in their path to attain godliness (e.g., priesthood office, missions, etc.). But to put it in more positive terms, they have more flexibility in attaining priesthood power along the way to receiving it more fully in the temple endowment and sealing; so many things are optional: missions, education that may or may not be applied to a profession, etc., requiring constant effort to attend to the voice of the Spirit without the “training wheel” of submitting to the requirements of priesthood office. I think this dichotomy between male and female progress befits the general nature and wiring of our minds and essential gender characteristics. As men and women cultivate the covenant relationships with the Father and the Son, they become godlike and discover they are their becoming their own male and female role models, especially once they are sealed and have a vertical covenant relationship with God, a horizontal covenant relationship with each other and with ancestors, children and descendants as family ties expand. Perhaps one way to look at the births of Adam and Eve: given that Eve came from Adam’s rib, she was coexistent with him all along. To worship the Father and the Son is to worship their “Eves” who are always with Them as well, with whom they are eternally one – they cannot be the Father and the Son without Their respective “Eves” any more than Adam was never without Eve in one form or another. Eve was both in this world as a rib and yet operating in another estate until she came forth in a new form. Another indicator of flexibility.

"The fundamental principles of our religion is the testimony of the apostles and prophets concerning Jesus Christ, “that he died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended up into heaven;” and all other things are only appendages to these, which pertain to our religion. "But in connection with these, we believe in the gift of the Holy Ghost, the power of faith, the enjoyment of the spiritual gifts according to the will of God, the restoration of the house of Israel, and the final triumph of truth." (Joseph Smith) https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/elders-journal-july-1838/12 In connection with the redemptive work of Christ (and He is The Covenant, in that He is the way, the truth, the light, the law and the life, etc. -- Moroni 10:33), it is very clear in this world with Whom and in Whose name we covenant in all these appendages. I think it is as simple as that.

He is the Eternal Optimist, and He knew it could be done. And He was right! His eternal perspective certainly has something to with it; both they and we have a veil of forgetfulness, a dark glass to see through, and eyes that can behold the future only when (if) quickened.

From Mosiah 2: 36 And now, I say unto you, my brethren, that after ye have known and have been taught all these things, if ye should transgress and go contrary to that which has been spoken, that ye do withdraw yourselves from the Spirit of the Lord, that it may have no place in you to guide you in wisdom’s paths that ye may be blessed, prospered, and preserved— 37 I say unto you, that the man that doeth this, the same cometh out in open rebellion against God; therefore he listeth to obey the evil spirit, and becometh an enemy to all righteousness; therefore, the Lord has no place in him, for he dwelleth not in unholy temples. 38 Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever. 39 And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never-ending torment.

Keeping the scope of money/records and economy/[practices, discourses and expressions associated with godly attributes] to the preexistence: Both the record and the godly attributes were constantly before us, but we could not access or comprehend them all without mortal and then resurrected bodies, and without creating a record in mortality to match the record constantly before us. I take the war to be about which records (Christ is the Word) and godly attributes (Th Father has them all) were of most value*, and which to access, and how to access them. * the same false notion we see about money in this world. All the records and godly attributes are of value.

I think currency (in this case money, which is one possible representation of one aspect of wealth) and wealth (the abundance of all good things both material and spiritual – the Book of Mormon’s description of “prosper”) are two different things. Money is one of several means to an end, not al of which are good, and which is not necessarily wealth (there are many interim steps to and versions of that), but when it is the means and used right, wealth is the ideal destination. Currency is transactional (exchange, payment, etc.) in its operation, and wealth is relational (covenants, love, creation, service and redemption, continuation, etc.). I think Jacob 2:17-19 reflects this. I don’t think money is used in heaven, but instead records, accessed by or contained in the white stone and the Earth as a Urim and Thummim, replace it. Using the definition you provided for “economy,” I would say the divine resources are the divine attributes of God (maximal intelligence, light, knowledge, etc.). He governs Himself and invites and shows the way for others to do the same, and to do the same as one -- i.e., the first and second commandments. The material resources He acts upon, including the elements of His body, are not divine, but they can certainly be filled with His glory and treated with reverence in honor of Him. I’m also thinking that money (whether paper or coin, or any other medium of exchange) has no inherent value; the value we attach to it is but a shared belief based on the false notion that rarity is inversely proportional to significance. We made it that way in this world, and we have to make friends with it (mammon) for practical purposes. But God’s eternal ways and glory is in sharing everything He has.

The second link doesn't work, but a search should provide more recent articles with even more amazing stuff! Such as when Joseph Smith translated it in relation to the rest of the Book and intertwined connections, its connection with the 116 lost manuscript pages, connections with Hebrew/Jewish practices, etc.

I can understand the negative reactions to talks like these. Like the ones that use the unneeded, decorative piano as a positive object lesson, getting extensive medical treatments that insurance doesn't fully cover while people suffering from the same malady in the rest of the second and third world have to make do. It is cultural and these folks need to be forgiven for their tunnel vision. Tons of mentions that the speakers are very well off. The above snippet comes across as an endorsement of super-womanism. A the same time, we mustn't be envious or competitive in our pursuits just because someone in authority or influence is doing it. What helps me forgive these kinds of flaws is finding hints of their recognition of "personal circumstances." If you can do it and be happy, fine. If it's not for you, don't. plenty of speakers insert their faults and humanity into their talks, too, and they are sometimes criticized for that. As far as the trends in what patriarchs say, a) there is always a prayerful choice; b) it may not be fulfilled in this life ; and c) the Lord may know something we don't. And d) sometimes getting ready for "A" brings about opportunity "B" which the Holy Spirit confirms as perfectly right. Read these blessings very carefully and prayerfully. The central message as I see it (Oaks and Johnson) is "family first," whatever else the individual may pursue in life.

Verse 13 might indicate that the brother of Jared knew that he was sealed up unto eternal life (exaltation), by revelation and the spirit of prophecy, through the power of the Holy Priesthood (D&C 131:5–6). https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/calling-and-election?lang=eng "And when he had said these words, behold, the Lord showed himself unto him, and said: Because thou knowest these things [knowledge being the fruit of faith, in this instance, of seeing His embodied finger] ye are redeemed from the fall [redemption with knowledge arising from this level of faith is eternal life]; therefore ye are brought back into my presence [eternal life and exaltation]; therefore I show myself unto you [His full physical presence with a description of His complete earthly mission]." The element of priesthood is represented by brother of Jared's reference to God's power.

We command the elements by discovering the laws of nature and applying them. Because the physical laws of nature are sustained by God through the light of Christ, we need to be very careful about using them for good or evil. The Lord gave Adam and Eve, and by extension, us (atheists, agnostics and believers alike), dominion and discretion over the stewardship of the natural world. Exercising faith in Jesus Christ is one way of discovering these laws, perhaps in the most fundamental form but also advancing in the knowledge and details thereof. Faith in Jesus Christ can facilitate our access to mortal knowledge of physical or natural law and offer direct access to spiritual gifts, the power of the Holy Ghost, the companionship of the Holy Ghost, the power of the Holy Priesthood, and the power of the keys of the kingdom which involve organization of various kinds (e.g., gathering, covenanting and sealing on earth and in heaven) as delegated to human beings by Christ. The epitome of organization in this world is found in the temple covenants, with the promises fulfilled in the Church of the Firstborn. The sealing keys and the power to seal includes command over the elements as displayed by Enoch, Moses, Nephi of Helaman 10 and others. But it also involves other manifestations of God’s power through formally appointed means. For example, spiritual gifts and the power of the Holy Ghost are broadly granted the children of God throughout the world. Formal delegation of priesthood and keys is another matter. And someone can have their calling and election made sure by the Holy Spirit of Promise and yet lack the gift of command over the elements in any of its forms in this life. Likewise, a prophet must possess and exercise the requisite faith to exercise the sealing keys. Even Nephi (Helaman 10) and Christ (3 Nephi 17) had to pray to the Father to access and use it.

Elders Fyans and Packer taught a traditional parable of the pearl and the box. My take is that parables, direct language and combinations of both, and suited for their time, serve as the box, but the pearl always remains the same. So in evaluating who correctly understands what, and given what we possess of such prophetic teachings, I think there are several intertwining principles to consider: Many are called but few are chosen; the parables use the “things of this world” and human language is of this world, and it is possible for us to get overly focused on these. The Lord teaches some truth in parables, symbolically and figuratively. The Lord teaches some truth directly, plainly and literally such as D&C 131:7-8. The Lord teaches some truth in a combination of metaphor and fact, such as John 17. Human language is often insufficient to convey spiritual truths (see 3 Nephi 17:17; Luke 18:34; John 16:17-18). Human language and parables change (imagine an early Polynesian convert understanding Elder Bednar’s parable of the pickle, or Elder Uchtdorf’s airplane analogies). Prophets are fallible and their choice of language in teaching through parables, direct language or a combination therefore may not convey the spiritual truths they wish to, to think they are (Ether 12:24). The living prophet has the keys for designing the box, and sometimes the box is simply not up to the task anymore, not because the prophet or anyone is false or too many cannot handle it, or no one has enough of the companionship of the Holy Ghost to suss the mystery, but the circumstances of human life and experience that God has allowed or encouraged to evolve have changed how we learn. Personally, if we view any prophetic teaching through the lens of John 17 as the pearl, it is easy to see that it not so strange after all. But the ways and means of teaching may be! And that is no one's fault. Holding too tightly to the things of this world is. The spiritual truths of John 17 are taught in far more successful ways than they are not. A prophet may be perfectly inspired and yet perfectly awkward in conveying it.

I think God lets a lot of unimportant things go. How long did the Brother of Jared go in life incorrectly assuming that the Lord's flesh and blood form could not be seen (or whether He had such a form at all)? Only to be told to write and seal up the answer for a long-future date. Some things, correct or not, incomplete or confounded or not, simply are not impactful upon the Lord's timetable for certain things to happen in certain certain moments in certain dispensations.

Hypotheses are unsatisfactory answers to important questions, but they could be the beginning. Posing a hypothesis, “If unsubstantiated x is true, then unsubstantiated y is true” is just another way of asking the question, but in a most biased manner. Without further examination and exploration in the “real world,” constructing and comparing hypotheses based on personal preference and preset conclusions is ill-informed and does not answer the question.

No, I am looking for you to test your various hypotheses with documented instances and occurrences, not bias, opinion and possibilities. It might help if you list your questions with the facts you have gathered that can be used to answer them. I've asked for this before ( Posted Friday at 06:29 PM ) and you insisted a hypothesis was a "textbook example" -- which are far from the same things. If you don't understand the distinction, as indicated in the subsequent exchanges, maybe we can flesh that out, though with a little work you can get up speed on your own. Thank you.

I trust your observation and conclusion. That members can't handle revelation has been repeatedly part of your hypotheses. No, they say saying other things, just as I wrote them. And you can even say they are examples that Brigham Young as president of the church did not teach false doctrine about the character of God for 25 years, or taught it correctly/completely in some ways and incompletely/incorrectly in others, for 25 years. It depends on your bias, spin, context and semantics. I choose not to employ black-and-white, dichotomous analysis to drive a predetermined conclusion. And you did use this as an example of it being "distinctly possible that the Lord would "take away light and truth from the restored Church on account of the membership no longer being able to handle many of the hard truths and deeper doctrines..." as you did here: Posted Friday at 09:45 AM

Why limit the choice to 2? How about simple fallibility, misunderstanding and miscommunication, or practice with councils and group revelation and continuing revelation in council, or expediency in the Lord changing priorities and emphasis to best convey His plan of redemption?