Rob Osborn
-
Posts
3852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rob Osborn
-
-
8 minutes ago, Traveler said:
Not exactly - Those that followed Satan never will have a second estate. Only those that follow G-d will participate in a second estate. This is a critical and important notion in the Plan of Salvation. Thus the main purpose of the second estate cannot be to separate those that follow G-d from those the follow Satan - that was already accomplished. Since the main purpose of the first estate was to separate those the follow Satan from those that follow G-d - it stand to reason that the second estate has something else as its main purpose. As I have read through your post - you do not seem to understand any other purpose - let alone any possible value of any pursuit of any other purpose. It would seem from your arguments that there is no purpose or reason to suffer through a second estate.
The Traveler
Hum... there are those who lose their second estate. Is this not clearly showing a further separation or a more refined separation?
-
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:
OK, so you are not able to provide any clarification or interpretation that matches your thoughts and beliefs from a past or living apostle or prophet. I understand this is how you are interpreting these scriptures, which is a personal interpretation -- not true doctrine -- but opinion on the matter.
In light of this, as I have provided you with words of living and past prophets and apostles and the current teachings of the Church as is on their website regarding topics. I can safely assume your interpretation is your interpretation. If you are presenting this as doctrine I can safely shun it as false doctrine.
There is doctrine, false doctrines, and true doctrines. One of the problems we have as members is the belief that any and all doctrine taught by the church must be true and anything that even hints at not aligning is false and not true. But as I am showing with this parable of the wheat and the tares, there certainly is this true doctrine that in the end all of the saved recieve celestial glory it shows that we are not complete in our doctrine in it being all true. Certainly, we are indeed in the Telestial kingdom, just as the truthfulness is plainly made manifest in our holy temples and by a prophet of God. But, again, our understanding of this truth is shrouded in doctrines that are not necessarily true. I can clearly point out contradictions in our doctrine proving we teach false doctrines. So, where does this leave us? What or whom should we shun and whom or what to embrace?
-
9 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
The Church teaches what I have shared, and you specify there is a problem in interpretation?
I am struggling with how you feel you "know" what the Lord was trying to show Joseph Smith, where all current leaders provide the following:
There are multiple witnesses from those who hold keys, and those who hold keys to interpret scripture to the Church collectively regarding the concept of Telestial, Terrestrial, and Celestial glories after the resurrection. Yet, you feel, that all these brethren have a problem with interpreting what Joseph Smith was given by the Lord?
Are you able to provide one apostle or prophet that declares the same interpretation as you?
Well, we do know that we now live in the Telestial Kingdom. A modern prophet has told us that.
But, I am more interested in what the scriptures and temple actually teach as they are less prone to error and mere opinions. In section 76, if one carefully reads it, speaks rather plainly on who is saved and who isnt. The problem arises though that it was written with the speculation that the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are kingdoms of salvation after resurrection and judgment. In fact, the Lord shows Joseph in verses 50-70 the state of all the saved in the end. The explanation of the terrestrial and telestial were meant to convey the progressive stages of the plan. Somehow, that meaning was lost in transcribing and understanding. But, lucky for us, the original wording allows us to build a correct picture when we couple it with the temple endowment. For instance- in the terrestrial kingdom are found all those who died without law. Why? Is someone who merely lived and died when the gospel wasnt around destined just for a subpar glory? Section 137 tells us otherwise. The reason why they are in the terrestrial glory is because the terrestrial kingdom takes place during the millennium and during that 1000 years they will have the opportunity to accept and live according to the law of the gospel. Telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are temporary kingdoms that are made to advance man into the type of beings that are savable. Read verses 50-70 very carefully and compare them eith the previous verses of that same section of those whom Christ saves. Verses 50-70 is the very "testimony" of the only ones Christ saves and cleanses from all sin as mentioned here in these verses-
40 And this is the gospel, the glad tidings, which the voice out of the heavens bore record unto us—
41 That he came into the world, even Jesus, to be crucified for the world, and to bear the sins of the world, and to sanctify the world, and to cleanse it from all unrighteousness;
42 That through him all might be saved whom the Father had put into his power and made by him;
43 Who glorifies the Father, and saves all the works of his hands, except those sons of perdition who deny the Son after the Father has revealed him.
Now compare with how verse 50 reads out-
50 And again we bear record—for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ concerning them who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just—
Verses 50-70 then give the account of the resurrection of the just and bears testimony of those whom he saves as mentioned prior.
-
11 minutes ago, CV75 said:
it's only a parable, so doesn't mention them specifically, but like a parabola (they have the same Greek root), the parable is symmetric, meaning there are countless degrees between the left and the right divided by the vertex.
So, what you are saying is that the parable isnt really true, that there is another field of corn or beans not spoken of. Sounds iffy.
-
1 hour ago, Traveler said:
WRONG - There is no difference. There is only one spiritual death which is separation from G-d the Father whereby one is subject to Satan. There is no such thing as a "Second" spiritual death.
You say we are subject to G-d (at his right hand) or subject to Satan (at the left hand of G-d) - now you are saying there is a 3rd possibility or second spiritual death - I Do Not Believe You!!! And I am quite sure if anyone else posted this same contradiction - you would not believe it.
The Traveler
There very much is a first and a second spiritual death. They are both the same thing but they are called "first" and "second" to designate the timing and effects as they are different. All are redeemed from the first spiritual death and brought back before God in judgment. Those found filthy still at that point are cast into the second death which is an eternal spiritual death, its no longer temporary. Thus, at judgment, there is either the right hand to inherit eternal life or on the left to inherit eternal death.
-
14 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:
I am left believing that Adam & Eve flat-out sinned.
This is true, just as a fact that all of us flat out sin.
-
37 minutes ago, CV75 said:
Sheep on the right hand, goats on the left, and everyone else somewhere in front or in back of Him.
Wheat in garners, tares in bundles, and everything else sorted accordingly ("behold, there are all kinds of bad fruit" and "every sort" -- Jacob 5).
Hum...where in the parable might these others be?
-
7 minutes ago, Traveler said:
I asked a simple question - Was as choice made in the pre-existence to follow G-d or Satan? Yes or No?
This is an important question - the answer to this question is the answer to who is wheat and who is tears.
The Traveler
Of course there was a decision made. Some chose to follow Christ at that point and some chose to follow Satan. Those who followed Satan lost their first estate.
-
38 minutes ago, Traveler said:
I am not talking about the end - I am talking about the pre-existence. Was there a choice between G-d or Satan? Are you saying that was not a real choice there - just a pretend not real choice that did not matter? That there was no actual choice made as to which kingdom and King (including plan) we follow?
The Traveler
The plan, from the foundation of the world was that we would show obedience so that we could all return. The flip side is that if we fail we would become those who would be cast out with the devil and his angels.
-
53 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Was there any correction given to 76 and 88, in light of 101, as provided by modern revelation, or is modern revelation still teaching line upon line what we find in these sections?
Section 76, in my opinion, was given in answer to Joseph's inquiry that he had assumed there certainly must be more than one kingdom the saved inherit. The Lord shows forth the vision. Later it gets written and compiled into what we now have. The problem here is the interpretation. The Lord was trying to show Joseph Smith that truly, in the end, there is only the Celestial kingdom where the saved all dwell. Several clues given throughout prove this point. But, it isn't really recognized until one understands the endowment and the progression through kingdoms in order to become Celestial grade in order to be saved. Thus, section 101 is stating factually that in the end there is truly only Celestial glory or lake of fire and brimstone.
-
19 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Would you explain why you feel the section being after a section changes its meaning, as section 101 doesn't specify any correction to 76 and 88 given meaning in scripture and modern revelation?
It's line upon line. The Lord reveals his doctrine line upon line. Man understands things little by little. The problem is that man jumps to conclusions that later end up being incorrect. When seen as a whole being unfolded it makes better sense. The Lord is trying to show man the plan of salvation and that in the end it's only possible to be saved if one becomes like God, his sons and daughters, cleansed from all sin and godly in their attributes. This is what the Lord is showing. It's not possible to be a liar and saved. It's not possible to be only lukewarm in the gospel and be saved. It's not possible to accept only some of godliness and be saved.
-
Just now, The Folk Prophet said:
Excuse me, I'm having a conversation with @Anddenex.
We're all having a conversation in here, it's open to all.
-
3 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Excellent. That is more inline with modern revelation and scripture thus bears more weight toward truth.
Except that section 101 is given after sections 76,88. The endowment is given after those all.
-
9 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
My take (and I haven't read the thread through and don't really plan on it either...so if other's have said the same....) The tares are those growing among the wheat. Wolves in sheeps' clothing, lazy saints, those who won't serve and give, etc. In theory Terrestrial beings are not tares. But they aren't wheat either. The parable simply isn't talking about everyone. It's talking about the church.
So I agree that the tares don't include telestial mostly likely (maybe fringe...who knows)...but the wheat is the wheat...Celestial glory. It cannot mean Terrestrial because it means Celestial.
Okay, so, in these verses are there other groups or just these two-
27 And the righteous shall be gathered on my right hand unto eternal life; and the wicked on my left hand will I be ashamed to own before the Father;
28 Wherefore I will say unto them—Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.I can show you this same pattern hundreds of time in scripture. Are they all wrong?
-
6 minutes ago, Fether said:
Why are we treating this parable as if it were a conclusive and complete explanation of final judgement?
Because the Lord is speaking, he doesn't lie. Also, this the portion of this parable is given after Section 76 and 88 and prior to the end of end. When coupled together we see a pattern of revelation and how Christ's gospel really is a strict dichotomy.
-
19 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
To reiterate, anything outside of scripture and modern revelation, if it contradicts, I can fully shun and accept as false doctrine. This is what modern revelation has revealed through Christ's servants the prophets:
Revealed word tells us that "after" the Millennium those who remained in spirit prison but were not the sons of perdition will be freed from "hell" and be resurrected to a Telestial glory, not a Celestial glory. This gives evidence that there is more than Celestial glory and outer darkness after the Millennium.
In light of this, and my prior statement, I can fully shun this theory/opinion as false doctrine, as I can see there is more than just Celestial glory and outer darkness where the sons and daughters are resurrected to.
Scripture given:
And again, we saw the glory of the telestial, which glory is that of the lesser, even as the glory of the stars differs from that of the glory of the moon in the firmament.
82 These are they who received not the gospel of Christ, neither the testimony of Jesus.
83 These are they who deny not the Holy Spirit.
84 These are they who are thrust down to hell.
85 These are they who shall not be redeemed from the devil until the last resurrection, until the Lord, even Christ the Lamb, shall have finished his work.
Read Revelations. Why is it that in the end there are all those permitted into the Celestial kingdom (holy city) whereas without are the devil and his angels.-
7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.Why is it that this group is in the lake of fire and brimstone?
-
4 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Hum..yeah, that's opinion alright.
Yes, of course, I made this very clear it was my opinion, theory on the matter in relation to what has been revealed.
The difference though is that in the scriptures the "wheat" all get crowned with Celestial glory. Anything left is burned. This means they are cast into outer darkness.
According to the parable, true, and yet you still leave out Telestial and Terrestrial glory as already stated. Telestial glory do not receive Celestial glory, nor are they in Hell. So it appears there is more. The parable itself and what it highlights is true.
The reason they aren't mentioned is because at that point, at the end of the millennium, there is only Celestial glory or outer darkness.
-
3 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
This is a good question, although this enters into the realm of speculation and opinion as the Telestial kingdom is not mentioned in this parable, so now we are stepping into what I would call "theory."
I have two theories pertaining to this according to what has been revealed. I have not had a spiritual witness one way or the other. So, obviously this is my own opinion on the matter:
1) Wheat = Celestial and Telestial glories.
Why? We already know that the Celestial glory has been mentioned for the wheat (Here - " that the wheat may be secured in the garners to possess eternal life, and be crowned with celestial glory"). We also know the wheat are Christ's, on his right hand and I would say those who called him Lord. The Terrestrial Kingdom will be visited by Christ (but not the Father). In this sense, in theory, I can see them as "wheat" also as they will still be able to be with Christ.
2) Wheat = Anyone that is not in Outer Darkness. This means Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial glories.
In my first theory Telestial heirs are tares as they are not able to be visited by the Son, nor the Father, they are ministered to by the Father's messengers.
Hum..yeah, that's opinion alright. We are at least in the same boat in being able to offer opinions. The difference though is that in the scriptures the "wheat" all get crowned with Celestial glory. Anything left is burned. This means they are cast into outer darkness.
-
1 minute ago, Traveler said:
I would ask a simple and straight forward question:
Who are the Children of the Kingdom? And when was this determined? Were not the spirit offspring of G-d so separated in the pre-existence? Was it not there that it was decided who would follow Satan?
The Traveler
In the end, all of God's children will either claim God as their father or Satan as their father. Thus all will be either a son of God or a son of the devil. There isn't any other outcome.
-
20 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
I understand that you are carrying your thoughts according to a portion of what the Lord has said, not the whole. How many hands the Lord has is irrelevant, except in light of the parables the lord teaches. Examples would be the Savior is on his right hand and the Devil on his left, as pertaining to presidencies (Godhead) the Savior is on his right hand and the Holy Ghost is on his left hand, the sheep are on the right hand and the goats are on his left hand, and we have the wheat and tares.
In light of this we have Spirit Prison and Paradise, and we have the three degrees of Glory. Let's review where Alvin is according to revealed word regarding Spirit Prison that for some reason you aren't accepting, not sure why, but that is your choice.
From this paragraph we are able to determine the following regarding Spirit Prison:
1) It is a type of Hell, but not the Hell where Satan dwells (outer darkness),
2) It is a "temporary" state, not a permanent state where people are taught the gospel,
3) If they accept the gospel they "may" then dwell in paradise until the Resurrection,
4) After resurrection we are judged and we received our degree of glory (i.e. Terrestrial, or Celestial),
5) Those who choose not to "who are not the "sons of perdition" will remain in Spirit Prison (Tares for sure) until the end of the millenium, are freed from hell and are resurrected to a Telestial glory.In light of this, Alvin would have been received into spirit prison. My grandmother, a methodist, would also have been received into spirit prison. As this is a place where people who did not have the gospel (were not baptized) will be taught and will have the opportunity to receive the gospel. If they receive we can see from #3 they are then accepted into paradise; although this says they "may" dwell in paradise until the resurrection. This means anyone over the age of eight years old who dies without the gospel, who needs to be taught the gospel, will be in spirit prison. Here is further teaching that supports:
Spirit prison is for those who "died without a knowledge of truth" (this includes Alvin and anyone who died over the years of accountability), and those who were disobedient. The scriptures you share above as trying to confirm Alvin was not in prison (which contradicts the first definition of spirit prison) associates with the "disobedient." Alvin would be within those who died without a knowledge of the truth, especially in light of the new book "Saints" as put out by the Church. Alvin was definitely a spirit of the just who died without knowledge of the truth, entered spirit prison (a temporary state) until the gospel was preached to him.
If anyone teaches anything outside of this we can accept they are teaching their own opinion. If they begin to preach anything other than this and specify it is doctrine, we can know for sure they are teaching false doctrine and their doctrine, not Chirst's, can be shunned.
Spirit prison is the very hell where Satan dwells. That is 100% correct. This spirit prison which is the "hell" spoken of in scripture is a place where only the wicked go. Alvin was not wicked and did not go to hell at death. He was firm in his conviction of the Savior and the gospel being restored through his brother. He was recieved into Paradise.
-
2 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Except the fact, from what has already been shared, how the Telestial glory sons and daughters of God will be removed from "Hell" (Outer Darkness) after a 1000 years. The Telestial glory is separated from outer darkness and Telestial glory is separated from Terrestiral and Celestial glory.
Anything outside of this can be stated as an opinion, if someone states this as doctrine that Outer Darkness and Telestial glory are the same, then I know it can be shunned as false doctrine.
So, in the parable of the wheat and the tares, in your opinion, are the Telestial heirs wheat or tares?
-
18 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
This thread is the result of a conversation with Rob, and his request in how these verses are/can be interpreted through modern revelation. I will begin with the following verse and then others shared.
Fortunately, I will answer according to the knowledge I have at this moment, but I am not to worried about any quiz that is subjective to your interpretation of scripture.
From this verse of scripture we can gather the following:
1) The wheat are those secured to have eternal life (exaltation) as given that they will enjoy Celestial glory.
2) The tares are those that are bound and experience a burning an unquenchable fire.As to anyone being left out is irrelevant to the parable. The parable simply discusses two types of people: wheat and tares. This doesn't negate what has been revealed pertaining to Telestial and Terrestial glory. All scripture must be understood according to all the doctrine that has been revealed. We know through modern revelation there is more than simply a wheat and a tare. The parable in and of itself and what it pertains to is true. I understand you have your opinion and interpretation.
In the parable it speaks of all people who enter the earth, not just a portion at either extreme. In Matthew it says-
38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one.
We either end up being wheat or tares in the end. I have had many say it doesn't cover all God's children. But, they can't provide any supporting scripture. There is only wheat or tares. There isn't a third group. Just like when God says he will gather all people and separate them- the righteous all on his right hand and the wicked all on his left hand. There isn't a third or fourth or fifth hand. The challenge for you is to prove that in the parable God left out innumerable groups of people.
-
15 minutes ago, Traveler said:
And how does this say that the second death is not "hell"? The scripture says exactly that - that the second death is and should be considered hell. You seem to have this idea that {We shouldn't conflate the "second death" language with "hell" or "spiritual death" as the second death in scripture has a unique and separate meaning.} confused and completely wrong.
The Traveler
To clarify- we shouldn't conflate the first spiritual death and temporary hell with the second spiritual death and eternal hell that awaits the unrepentant at judgment.
-
38 minutes ago, Traveler said:
Example please
The Traveler
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev 20:14-15)
Wheat and Tares and Other Gospel Verses
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
Im not following what you are saying. Why is it that we tend to try to read things into the parable when its not warranted? There are only wheat or tares, theres nothing else, just those two.