CV75

Members
  • Posts

    1759
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from SilentOne in No in-betweeners?   
    The faithfulness and the focus on Christ may be but an infinitesimally small particle off, but the eternal effects of lacking, or ever so slightly misdirecting, that tiny particle are infinite and eternal. This doesn't render celestial glory impossible to attain, it just explains the vast difference between it and terrestrial glory.
    The more graduated spectrum between kingdoms suggests, given the language in D&C 76, that there is an increase in the faithfulness of the wicked approaching celestial glory or a decrease in the faithfulness of the righteous falling short of it. But the latter doesn't make sense given President Nelson's teachings on spiritual momentum. In other words, do the wicked progress in faith and yet remain wicked so as to never obtain righteousness? (No). Do the righteous take a misstep and revert to progressing as wicked people, having proven their inability to maintain righteousness? (No). The element missing from this model, I think, is grace. Grace saves anyone who is willing, and at the same time creates a great gulf for those who are not willing, for they simply have not received God's grace unto joy. From the parable of the mustard seed, the tiny seed is faith, it grows by grace, and finally exhibits attributes infinitely greater than a mature tree. If it did not grow by grace, it would grow but just into a tree. The difference is infinite. There are no partially celestial trees that accommodate birds but no nests, nests but no birds, fungi, moss or bugs instead of birds, etc.
  2. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from laronius in No in-betweeners?   
    The faithfulness and the focus on Christ may be but an infinitesimally small particle off, but the eternal effects of lacking, or ever so slightly misdirecting, that tiny particle are infinite and eternal. This doesn't render celestial glory impossible to attain, it just explains the vast difference between it and terrestrial glory.
    The more graduated spectrum between kingdoms suggests, given the language in D&C 76, that there is an increase in the faithfulness of the wicked approaching celestial glory or a decrease in the faithfulness of the righteous falling short of it. But the latter doesn't make sense given President Nelson's teachings on spiritual momentum. In other words, do the wicked progress in faith and yet remain wicked so as to never obtain righteousness? (No). Do the righteous take a misstep and revert to progressing as wicked people, having proven their inability to maintain righteousness? (No). The element missing from this model, I think, is grace. Grace saves anyone who is willing, and at the same time creates a great gulf for those who are not willing, for they simply have not received God's grace unto joy. From the parable of the mustard seed, the tiny seed is faith, it grows by grace, and finally exhibits attributes infinitely greater than a mature tree. If it did not grow by grace, it would grow but just into a tree. The difference is infinite. There are no partially celestial trees that accommodate birds but no nests, nests but no birds, fungi, moss or bugs instead of birds, etc.
  3. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from Still_Small_Voice in Are the Gold Plates in a cave somewhere?   
    https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Question:_Is_there_a_cave_in_the_Hill_Cumorah_containing_the_Nephite_records%3F
    https://josephsmithfoundation.org/hill-cumorah-cave/
    I haven't found a first hand account, but I haven't tried very hard, either. The 2nd and 3rd hand accounts refer to reports of a vision for the basis of this.
  4. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from NeuroTypical in Are the Gold Plates in a cave somewhere?   
    https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Question:_Is_there_a_cave_in_the_Hill_Cumorah_containing_the_Nephite_records%3F
    https://josephsmithfoundation.org/hill-cumorah-cave/
    I haven't found a first hand account, but I haven't tried very hard, either. The 2nd and 3rd hand accounts refer to reports of a vision for the basis of this.
  5. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from zil2 in Light   
    I think it is used both ways simultaneously. "Metaphorically" because I do not understand the physical properties of this light, and "physically" because fundamentally everything is some kind of material (the immaterial does not exist).
  6. Like
    CV75 reacted to laronius in Light   
    D&C 88:6 He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; 7 Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made. 8 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made; 9 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made; 10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand. 11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; 12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space— 13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.
    I have generally read these verses as a metaphor, the light of the gospel/Christ/truth that comes from God being likened unto the physical light that allows us to see with our eyes. But verse 11 seems to be more literal, making them one in the same. Is that how everyone else reads it?
  7. Like
    CV75 reacted to zil2 in Light   
    I believe there is a literal interpretation to the above.  I suspect the "light" being described is not (only) the light our mortal eyes see.  My imagination comes up with all of us connected by a network of light - like a (literally) glorified fiber optic network without need for the cables.  (My imagination likes to visualize things - and make things up out of whole cloth.)
    Everywhere you see "truth", you could replace it with "knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come" and see if that sheds any (ahem) light for you.   D&C 88 and 93 have a lot of stuff that instinctively make sense, but which I have a hard time deciphering...  Go figure.
  8. Like
    CV75 reacted to askandanswer in Light   
    I've always been inclined to take a literal interpretation to these verses but I just haven't figured out how.
  9. Like
    CV75 reacted to zil2 in Regarding Ex Nihilo and the problem of evil.   
    Yep, same page.
    Here's Nibley (Approaching Zion, Chapter 3 "Zeal Without Knowledge") quoting Joseph Smith:
    (Nibley expands my brain like no other mortal I've ever read.)
    A lot of people read that as " truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come" - but the "knowledge of" part sorta changes the meaning. (Of course, given Jacob's statement, you can't blame folks for dropping the "knowledge of" - maybe it's not so important as it seems to me.  See my final sentence.)
    God has placed "truth" into spheres.  I expect one could spend hours dissecting and rearranging and diagramming above verses and come away knowing no more than they started.  Only the Spirit can teach a person what the above means.  But that and the D&C 19 verses I quoted cause me to not hold too tightly to anything I think I know.  Yes, I still hold tightly to some things - things that, as far as I can tell, came with me through the veil - but if God tells me something that adjusts my understanding, well, as the one in control of my sphere, I'm not going to argue that what he's doing is contrary to "eternal truth".
    I don't think we're back at that idea - I reject it and Joseph Smith plainly taught that it's not true.  Nevertheless (verse 12):
    You could dissect the life out of that one for years.  Reading these things makes me feel dumb as a post.  Want to know what it's saying?  Seek the Spirit, because I think our language is so ridiculously flawed and incapable that it's a wonder we can ever comprehend anything of God.
  10. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from zil2 in Regarding Ex Nihilo and the problem of evil.   
    I see God as all-powerful, which power comes from greater knowledge and love relative to our own, and in perfect balance. He is thus considerate of lesser beings and commits Himself to their obtaining a fulness of joy -- every kind of life in its sphere. Lesser beings can never rebel enough to take away what He has obtained, try as they might, and in trying find Him leveraging their efforts to His interests.
    By "sphere" I mean existence, or the extent to act (agency) and be acted upon (lack thereof). I do not understand how different forms of life came to have different spheres of existence, and why some things are purely acted upon, but it does seem to have something to do with the knowledge and love they possess (or lack thereof) and the balance therein, resulting in their level of self-comprehension (or none) and what becomes expressed in the spiritual and physical realms for us to perceive and interpret as space-time, forces, elements, microbes, plants, animals, people, etc.
    From our perspective, God has always existed, and from our perspective, we have always existed no matter when we began to perceive that we do. We may pass between many veils and estates, and not all of them are remembered, though we begin to see them as we become more like God.
  11. Love
    CV75 got a reaction from CommanderSouth in Regarding Ex Nihilo and the problem of evil.   
    I see God as all-powerful, which power comes from greater knowledge and love relative to our own, and in perfect balance. He is thus considerate of lesser beings and commits Himself to their obtaining a fulness of joy -- every kind of life in its sphere. Lesser beings can never rebel enough to take away what He has obtained, try as they might, and in trying find Him leveraging their efforts to His interests.
    By "sphere" I mean existence, or the extent to act (agency) and be acted upon (lack thereof). I do not understand how different forms of life came to have different spheres of existence, and why some things are purely acted upon, but it does seem to have something to do with the knowledge and love they possess (or lack thereof) and the balance therein, resulting in their level of self-comprehension (or none) and what becomes expressed in the spiritual and physical realms for us to perceive and interpret as space-time, forces, elements, microbes, plants, animals, people, etc.
    From our perspective, God has always existed, and from our perspective, we have always existed no matter when we began to perceive that we do. We may pass between many veils and estates, and not all of them are remembered, though we begin to see them as we become more like God.
  12. Thanks
    CV75 got a reaction from askandanswer in Ethical guidance for a not completely hypothetical situation   
    There are many hypotheticals and unknowns here (bolded). I would handle this by getting more facts to make an informed proposal to bring to the Lord.
    Exactly what are the Church's "practice" and "the church line"? What is the purpose of the practice and the line? (italicized) -- I would need a clear reference for this (CFR from you, if you have one).
    Then I would decide whether I am seeking a moral or ethical resolution (secular) or a spiritual resolution (personal revelation) and propose and pray accordingly.
  13. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from mikbone in Rending the Veil of Unbelief   
    Interesting take. I suppose that He, as a Pre-Mortal Spirit, might have touched matter during the Creation or when He wrote upon the walls (Daniel 5, a palace; Alma 10, a temple). And He did put his hand over Moses (but this comes across to me as figurative language. In Ether, He only touched the stones and not the person.
    Of course Jehovah had the ability to demonstrate a corporeal body of flesh and bone (seemingly an eternal law of grace) to those at Adam-ondi-Ahman, but as He taught the brother of Jared, no one else ever before had the faith to do so. So I’m thinking Jehovah could have appeared to them and presided over the ceremony at Adam-ondi-Ahman as a Spirit, without the laying on of hands or otherwise interacting physically while He “administered comfort” to Adam.
    Or maybe He did but no one saw it, and this would allow Him to do the same in the Creation, writing on walls, and touching stones. Maybe He can put on / take off flesh and bone at will outside of the mortal parameters of birth (on) and death (off) and resurrection (on again); I know this is an appealing concept for some. But as long as a Spirit can also organize and touch things with or without a body of flesh and bone, the faith required for a man to witness either would be the same, which has been pointed out is not the case. Probably a topic for another time/thread.
    I do think one symbolical interpretation of touching the brother of Jared’s stones to create a light source is a type of the Abrahamic covenant, the covenant with Israel and the continuation of the seeds.
  14. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from JohnsonJones in Priesthood timing   
    Of course, there is scripture and then there is the meaning and deeper meaning of the scripture. I don't believe the Lord holds His servants accountable for things they are not expected to believe, know or understand at the time of the mortal service, any more than He expected the brother of Jared to know whether He had flesh and blood. The brother of Jared was not expected to be correct in his knowledge and belief, and the scripture shows that the correct understanding is that the Lord would take upon Himself flesh and blood.
    "And he saith unto the Lord: I saw the finger of the Lord, and I feared lest he should smite me; for I knew not that the Lord had flesh and blood. And the Lord said unto him: Because of thy faith thou hast seen that I shall take upon me flesh and blood..." The Lord, because of his exceeding faith, clarified to him the difference between what he thought he saw (a living finger) and what he really saw (the future finger); the difference between the premortal Lord and the Lord in the tabernacle of His mortal ministry (verse 16).
  15. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from JohnsonJones in Priesthood timing   
    I joined the Church in 1975, and I recall a mixed bag of reaction (I lived in New York), but the vast majority welcomed it as a sign that the Restoration was advancing and a sign of the times, maybe "end times" even. I think most members at the time pretty much believed in / accepted the curse of Cain explanation and saw this as a positive sign.  At no time did I hear anything like, "The Church isn't bigoted anymore." And I never heard the removal of the ban being touted as a social justice victory within the Church.
    This confirms to me that there are fundamental principles founding our Church and religion, and policies like the ban aren't one of them. But we live with them and are patient with them.
  16. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from NeuroTypical in Priesthood timing   
    You can Google Darius Gray for more details on his experience and reaction, and his collection of reactions from other Black members. But here's an intro: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_Gray
  17. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from NeuroTypical in Priesthood timing   
    I joined the Church in 1975, and I recall a mixed bag of reaction (I lived in New York), but the vast majority welcomed it as a sign that the Restoration was advancing and a sign of the times, maybe "end times" even. I think most members at the time pretty much believed in / accepted the curse of Cain explanation and saw this as a positive sign.  At no time did I hear anything like, "The Church isn't bigoted anymore." And I never heard the removal of the ban being touted as a social justice victory within the Church.
    This confirms to me that there are fundamental principles founding our Church and religion, and policies like the ban aren't one of them. But we live with them and are patient with them.
  18. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from zil2 in Entered into their exaltation   
    Yes, I think there are instances where others have been resurrected after the Restoration of the sealing keys and yet prior to the Second Coming.
  19. Like
    CV75 reacted to zil2 in Entered into their exaltation   
    Except that it's unlikely he's been resurrected (though I suppose exceptions can be made).  In theory, he will have to wait for the Second Coming for that, like all others who died after Christ (but we're told Moroni is an exception to this, so as I said, there could be others).
  20. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from zil2 in Entered into their exaltation   
    It seems to me that children of Adam and Eve were born, lived and died before Cain and Abel arrived on the scene, since Eve speaks of the joy of our redemption upon hearing the teachings of the angel and the witness of the Holy Ghost in Moses 5. She was likely not referring only to herself and her husband, and in knowing good and evil, had already witnessed death, not only of the sacrificed animals, but of some of their children. Abel could still have been placed as a ruler over his "elder brethren" as was Nephi, Joseph, etc.
    The idea of Cain never dying is interesting to me in that never dying amounts to never knowing the joy of redemption. At least the Three Nephites will someday "die" if only for a millisecond.
    If Elijah Able's temple work has been done, he could be exalted by now (why not?). And I can see him telling Cain in no uncertain terms, "Thanks alot for the bad rap!"
  21. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from MrShorty in Priesthood timing   
    You can Google Darius Gray for more details on his experience and reaction, and his collection of reactions from other Black members. But here's an intro: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_Gray
  22. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from LDSGator in Priesthood timing   
    I joined the Church in 1975, and I recall a mixed bag of reaction (I lived in New York), but the vast majority welcomed it as a sign that the Restoration was advancing and a sign of the times, maybe "end times" even. I think most members at the time pretty much believed in / accepted the curse of Cain explanation and saw this as a positive sign.  At no time did I hear anything like, "The Church isn't bigoted anymore." And I never heard the removal of the ban being touted as a social justice victory within the Church.
    This confirms to me that there are fundamental principles founding our Church and religion, and policies like the ban aren't one of them. But we live with them and are patient with them.
  23. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from LDSGator in Priesthood timing   
    Absolutely, which doesn't mean the dead one was a bad guy, just a prophet for his times whose views did not interrupt the kingdom moving forward in the least (and may have even averted unintended disaster!).
  24. Like
    CV75 got a reaction from MrShorty in Priesthood timing   
    We are going to find many quotes on this topic. I take the living prophets’ disavowal and lack of acceptance a solid form of doctrine.
    The Lord’s servants often fall short of some people’s expectations on these and other points. That doesn’t man those expectations are correct, or correct for now. Perceived ambiguity can drive us to become as a little child as the Book of Mormon teaches in several places ("submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."). It can help us understand the Book or Mormon’s counsel to do all things in wisdom and in order, and to be charitable toward our prophets’ weakness. Some wonderful godly traits can be developed within us in the perceived, so-called “absence of official doctrine.”
     
    ETA: I was just reading in John 7 that many people in Jesus' day insisted He was not the Messiah because they assumed (incorrectly) that He was from or born in Galilee, not Bethlehem. Nicodemus tried to reason with them with a more open-minded, "let's see" attitude. I would bet that those who leaned toward Nicodemus' understanding of the way God works were closer to conversion than the ones who held to their incorrect assumptions.
  25. Like
    CV75 reacted to zil2 in 116 Pages ... Additional Context   
    Only if dude writes up an article with his sources and submits it and the editors decide to use it, or someone who works on the Liahona staff gets wind of it and decide to commission an article.  (At least, this is my assumption.)