Rob Osborn
-
Posts
3852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rob Osborn
-
-
9 minutes ago, mordorbund said:
Interesting. The Book of Moses was revealed to Joseph Smith about the time of D&C 76 (relatively speaking) compared to when the temple endowment was revealed. Yet you consider the endowment ceremony as the clearest and most truthful depiction of the kingdoms of glory but not when it comes to Adam and Eve.
I didn't say that. I said the info in the temple is from a different angle and in that regards isn't as comparable as Genesis, Moses and Abraham. The temple adds lots of dialogue and instruction regarding their dealings with God in the garden. In this regards the temple fills in some of the details otherwise not mentioned. Those details deal with more spiritual matters.
-
30 minutes ago, person0 said:
Spirit Prison is Hell, no ifs ands or buts. This is a literal statement. We are saying nearly identical words with completely different meanings. My position agrees with modern revelation, your position stems from your personal, non authoritative, interpretation of scripture. To put it in the words of a guy I know, "You are wrong. No nice way to say it."
What type of torment do you suppose a 10 year old girl who for all intents and purposes was righteous would experience in Hell, anyway? If Jesus went and hung out in Hell, would he all of a sudden start suffering just because he was there? Would the spirits in Paradise have to suffer through a bombardment of torment at they trek through Spirit Prison to preach the gospel? To me these all have a simple answer; there is no torment for the righteous, even in Prison.
Unrelated, I have been meaning to ask you, I know you have been a member for a long time, but I wonder, did you originally convert from another faith?
Spirit prison is hell. It's where the detestable wicked spirits go. It's not where 11 year old Jewish girls who die of cancer go. They go to Paradise.
No, I have always been LDS, born into the covenant.
-
9 minutes ago, person0 said:
Christ didn't forgive her, he just did not condemn her, her option to repent of her sin remained possible, rather than receiving an immediate punishment as established by the Law of Moses. You are right that most people interpret the passage incorrectly and assume she was forgiven immediately. That said, I'm not sure it is worth arguing further as it is far off the topic of this thread, and also because it has been discussed on this forum a couple of times since I joined.
Hell meaning Spirit Prison, yes, absolutely, I would say she goes there! I have a son who is 10 years old; his adoption has not yet been finalized, and as a result, he has not yet been baptized; if he were to die today, I have no problem acknowledging that he would be in Spirit Prison until we complete his work. The problem is that, from what I can tell, you view Spirit Prison as the same for everyone who goes there, and that it is Hell in the figurative sense. The reality however is that Spirit Prison is going to be a different experience for different individuals, just like the Greek usage of the word Hades would indicate, and just like modern prophets teach and have taught.
Well, you are wrong. No nice way to say it. "Spirit prison" is hell. No ifs and or buts.
-
2 minutes ago, Rickie said:
I don't see any scenario where anyone will be without God in satisfactory. The plan of salvation set out in the council is something we all agreed on and everyone will have the opportunity to reach their eternal happiness with God and their family.
James 1:12, “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.”.
I agree with one caveat. Any and all who set foot into the way of salvation unto eternal life will achieve it. Only those who fully end up rejecting the Savior, like Satan, will not achieve it.
-
19 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
I will respond, but I wasn't saying "you don't know what you are talking about." I will open a new thread. I believe you sincerely believe what you profess; I am just not seeing the accuracy in light of revealed word through the Lord's servants.
Open a new thread. I am happy and willing to chime in.
-
29 minutes ago, Traveler said:
???? Death and Hell are two sides of the same coin in scripture. And as long as we are referencing scripture - According to the Book of Revelation - all shall be delivered from death and hell.
The Traveler
Yes, but the "second death" is a second spiritual death and only those not saved at the last great day of judgment suffer that demise.
-
23 minutes ago, person0 said:
As an aside: I wonder if @Rob Osborn reins in his extra-revelatory opinions when called to give a talk. In a similar situation, being outside the mainstream of revealed truth, I would probably keep most of those types of things in as a pearls before swine kind of thing, except with family and close friends. I do make a sincere effort to always give Rob the benefit of the doubt; in my time on this forum there are often posts of his that I am the only person that 'likes' them.
That said, we gotta call you out Rob. I mean, you essentially said that what Joseph Smith taught regarding the Saviors words to the thief on the cross are just opinion, despite the fact that it has been established and canonized as true doctrine by the prophets and apostles who followed. Joseph Smith was entitled to have opinions, but in this case that is really pushing it! I am truly baffled at how many members of the Church in general don't accept many of the inspired teachings of those whom they claim to accept as the Lord's Anointed. Anyway, Rob, I am grateful that you have a testimony of the Restored Gospel; despite your disagreement with many of the restored teachings.
Thanks. My belief concerning the thief on the cross stems from what the scripture actually says not what we want to shoehorn it to mean to fit our own paradigms. On the one hand we want to relegate the thief to hell as a wicked sinner yet on the other forgive the women caught in adultery immediately as Christ did. It's like a double standard. We don't want to believe Christ has the power to forgive a thief and so we make the thief out to be a murdering wicked sinner so that we are justified in saying he went to hell after his death on the cross. And, to top it off, we take Christ's words out of context completely to say he actually meant the opposite (paradise here actually meaning hell).
I don't buy any of it. It's all built on misunderstandings and disregarding Christ's ability to forgive. In our paradigm we have this hazy foggy line on one hand of who goes to hell at death and yet on the other we claim it's a hard and easily discerned line. And so, I prove this point- yes, a wicked murderer who loves and revels in wickedness will go to hell upon death. But, we don't have these same reservations in regards to say an 11 year old Israeli girl who is of the Jewish faith and dies of cancer at that age. We don't say she's going to hell.
-
1 hour ago, Traveler said:
As much as we talk about heaven or hell - it would appear that none of us know very much about either. The classic definition of hell is "Death". This can include being subject to death. With the Fall of Man all "righteous" spiritual children of G-d became subject to death. There are two deaths. The first is the physical death of the body where spirits are separated from a physical body. If someone were to think about this in any detail they would realize that until we were born into mortality we suffered the first death which by definition is a "kind" of Hell - even though we existed in the presents of G-d the Father. They would also realize that we all suffer Death or the Hell of physical death.
The second Death is spiritual death. We are to understand that this means separation from G-d or more specifically the spirit of G-d and the spirit of Christ. With the Fall of Man - all the righteous spirits of G-d were introduced to the second death or spiritual death. We remain in this state until be become "Born Again - Saints of G-d". The Born Again refers to a spiritual rebirth that is initiated or enabled with Baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost - but remember that to be initiated by ordinance and covenant there must be a previous act of Faith in Jesus Christ and Repentance.
I believe and it is logical to me that when we have been Born Again of the spirit and given the Gift of the Holy Ghost - we are no longer suffer from the Second Death or Hell. If this is accomplished in this life - we will remain delivered from spiritual death when we enter the spirit rheum - thus immediately enter spiritual paradise. Others may be delivered from spirit prison or spiritual hell through Faith in Jesus Christ, Repentance and the ordinance of Baptism and Gift of the Holy Ghost.
Finely when we are resurrected we are delivered eternally from the first Death and our spirits become inseparable from our bodies and we are for ever free from the first death (or Hell).
There is something else that many associate with Hell - and that is being subject to Satan or the influence of Satan. Sometimes this is called the "Darkness" of Hell and is represented symbolically in the scriptures as Darkness and Night as opposed to Light and Day. The power to distinguish and choose between light and darkness or eternal life and hell is called "Agency". We were first introduced to light and darkness in "The Beginning" while in the pre-existence where we exercised agency to become children of light or children of darkness. Those that "Kept" their first estate and exercised Agency to choose light were enabled to become mortal. At what is called "The Final Judgement" we will complete or Agency and choose even greater light or a kind or type of darkness. Those that choose the greater light - even the light of G-d become resurrected beings of light - even as G-d the Father.
The Traveler
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.
-
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:
Contradict Christ himself, or our interpretation contradicts Christ and His servants the prophets and apostles? All scriptures are interwoven that pertain to the same subject. A person may say, Christ himself said, "If I ask, I will recieve, and I asked and I did not receive." and provide scriptural evidence for this statement, but they are forgetting where Christ also said, "if we ask not amiss" (and many other statements and conditions added to "if we ask we will receive."
My interpretation follows the Lord's servants. Rob, it is not to offend, but you are not one of them. So you can provide me any and all your interpretations, but if they contradict what Christ's servants have provided in relation to Christ's words, then I know which side I choose, if I have not as yet had a spiritual witness on either matter.
God has declared there are three degrees of glory, but he doesn't need more than two hands to declare this.
So, rather than answer my question you default to the standard "you don't know what you are talking about". I really would be interested in your interpretation of those verses. It's not a hard thing. It spells it right out. I'm all ears.
-
Just now, Anddenex said:
As I have clarified before it is not the teaching of Jesus Christ which are at odds, it is your interpretation that is at odds with modern revelation and interpretation as revealed through Christ servants the prophets.
The ability to come up with a scripture, or a thought, or a question doesn't add any value if the thought in relation to scripture contradicts what the Lord has revealed through His servants the prophets.
Your response with regards to modern revelation (to @person0 given information), as revealed by Christ's prophets, "Well, certainly opinion abounds," is evidence that your interpretation contradicts His servants.
And if we contradict Christ himself? Just a quick quiz- read section 101 verses-
65 Therefore, I must gather together my people, according to the parable of the wheat and the tares, that the wheat may be secured in the garners to possess eternal life, and be crowned with celestial glory, when I shall come in the kingdom of my Father to reward every man according as his work shall be;
66 While the tares shall be bound in bundles, and their bands made strong, that they may be burned with unquenchable fire.What is your interpretation here of who the wheat are? What they receive? And, who the tares are? What they receive? And, is there anyone else that got left out?
-
29 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
Because Rob usually doesn't mean what you think he means when he says anything about the afterlife.
Do you believe he is? From his earlier posts, no.
The terms "hell", "outer darkness", and "spirit prison" all mean the same thing in reference to where the wicked go after death.
-
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:
Church's teachings regarding hell:
In this sense, Rob is correct. Upon death the sons and daughters of God will enter one of two places: spirit prison (hell) or paradise (which can be described as a type of heaven). The difference though Rob carries his thoughts toward a heaven/hell dichotomy, which isn't supported by modern teachings. He will provide his own support, which is fine, but it isn't supported by modern revelation.
EDIT: I see @person0 beat me to the clarification.
I carry my thoughts in the direction the Lord speaks. Does he not have only two hands? The righteous on the right and the wicked on the left? Is there not but just the sheep he keeps or the goats he cast aside? Is it false there be just wheat who inherit Celestial glory or tares to be burned in everlasting fire? All of these are teachings by Jesus Christ. I am not the author, He is.
Now, in relevance to the topic at hand, Joseph saw his brother Alvin in heaven. He was told that God will judge those who didn't have the opportunity to accept by the desire of their hearts. In the Book of Mormon we read of those who depart into spirit prison at death-
13 And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of the wicked, yea, who are evil—for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the devil did enter into them, and take possession of their house—and these shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and this because of their own iniquity, being led captive by the will of the devil.
14 Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this state, as well as the righteous in paradise, until the time of their resurrection. (Alma 40:13-14)So I ask- Did Alvin fit this criteria of those who go to hell after death?
1. Evil and wicked
2. Have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord
3.Chose evil works rather than good
4.Spirit of the devil entered in and took possession of their soul
5. Because of their iniquity were led down captive by the devil
6. In a state of awful fear looking for the wrath and fiery indignation of God upon them.
This is the criteria for those who are to be sent to hell at death. So, was Alvin sent here? Did he fit the criteria?
-
1 hour ago, person0 said:
There are various things in your statement that are contradictory to the teachings of the Church and its Prophets and Apostles. Please read the articles linked in my previous post under 'Additional Information'; they make it clear that the interpretation I represented is accurate to the teachings of the Church. Additionally, the screenshot below is formatted from the New Testament Seminary Teacher Manual, which provides additional clarification.
The passage below is found in the Gospel Principles manual linked in my previous post:
Whether you are unwilling to accept the interpretation given to us by the Church and its leaders is your choice, but at least those reading this thread will have ample evidence that I have taught the true doctrine espoused by the Church on this matter.
Well, certainly opinion abounds. It's an interesting story which carries rich symbolism. On the left hand is the wicked malefactor who takes upon the role of Satan tempting him and railing the Savior to save themselves. On the right hand is the sinner who recognizes Christ and submits his will to him just as Christ gave his will to the Father. Thus, Christ saves those on the right hand but not the wicked on the left.
It's interesting that paradise as used here is the place where Christ himself will be- that they will dwell together in the same place in the here after. Christ has the ability to fogive whom he will. Now, of course he still must be baptized but baptism is not a requirement to be saved into Paradise as it is not heaven but rather a go between.
The question still remains- why did Christ appear in paradise and teach them the gospel of repentance and baptism?
-
1 hour ago, person0 said:
Excellent question. In addition to the resources linked in my post above, please take note of D&C 138:29-34, which states:
Anyone who has not received baptism by the proper authority, by definition, dies in their sins; this includes those who would generally be considered good people. Additionally, the unbaptized can fall into one of two categories, those 'without a knowledge of the truth' (meaning the Restored Gospel), or those 'having rejected the prophets' (including Joseph Smith et al.). Hence, all who are not baptized by proper authority in mortality wait in Spirit Prison until their baptism is performed vicariously.
Additional Resources:
Hum...I don't know if I agree. I have a different interpretation. I read section 138 in light of a need to separate the wicked from the righteous. Much like on our earth, we separate the wicked into prisons away from the righteous who are free. I see this as the same over on the other side. There are indeed righteous people who belong to other faiths or no faith at all. There really isn't a need to separate someone who is trying to do what they believe is righteous and do good works and throw them into torment just because they aren't baptized at that point. To the thief on the cross Jesus declared he would go to Paradise. His penalty for sin is death of which he paid. His acknowledgement and acceptance of Christ at that moment was the deciding factor.
Reading section 138 I am left to wonder why Christ appears in paradise to teach them his gospel-
"19 And there he preached to them the everlasting gospel, the doctrine of the resurrection and the redemption of mankind from the fall, and from individual sins on conditions of repentance."
If they already we're all baptized there isn't a need to teach them to repent and be baptized. It is in this light I read verse-
32 Thus was the gospel preached to those who had died in their sins, without a knowledge of the truth, or in transgression, having rejected the prophets.
The two groups spoken of here, the first being those who were in paradise who died not knowing the truth but had Christ appear to them to be taught, and two, the wicked who are in prison because they rejected the truth but have missionaries commissioned to teach them there because Christ couldn't go because of their wickedness in rejecting the truth.
A person who dies without knowing the truth cannot be judged by law. In the days of Noah the wicked all perished in the flood and we're shut up in the prison to be in torment because of their rejection of the gospel.
-
23 minutes ago, person0 said:
Every person who dies without being baptized by proper authority goes to Hell (Spirit Prison) until, at minimum, their baptism is complete and they accept it in sincerity. Only those who are considered Sons of Perdition will remain in Hell (Outer Darkness) for all eternity.
I have oft wondered over this. My opinion is that the basically righteous in mortality go to Paradise whether they were baptized or not. I'm not sure the dividing line is baptism by proper authority. Can you provide a scripture?
-
45 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
Just remember that Rob doesn't really have his head screwed on straight regarding our belief in the afterlife.
It's screwed on straight. I'm wondering why we are discussing this issue. It's plainly manifest in scripture. The dead who repent will be saved. I teach nothing more nor less than this truth.
-
45 minutes ago, Grunt said:
Where do you see that? Everything I've seen says "Spirit Prison".
"Latter-day revelation speaks of hell in at least two senses. First, it is the temporary abode in the spirit world for those who were disobedient in mortality. In this sense, hell has an end. The spirits there will be taught the gospel, and sometime following their repentance they will be resurrected to a degree of glory of which they are worthy." (Guide to the Scriptures)
-
44 minutes ago, dahlia said:
I'm still not sure I have an answer on people of other Christian religions. Just because someone decides not to become LDS doesn't mean they aren't good or have rejected the Gospel. I'm not talking about people who choose to go down the wrong path, just those who express their beliefs through some other Christian belief system.
I guess I still need clarification - are you guys saying that because someone decides to remain Jewish, thereby rejecting the Gospel, that they are damned?
The wicked go into hell at death. The righteous go into Paradise. In both locations the gospel is taught and those who accept will be saved. Everyone will get the opportunity to hear and accept.
-
22 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:
I’m afraid your last opinion is not supported by our doctrine. I am glad you said it was an opinion.
It is supported very strongly by our doctrine. But because of our confusion we don't get it.
-
2 hours ago, dahlia said:
I was looking for something else (as usual) and came upon an article in 'Ask Gramps' about what happens if your kids can't join you in the eternities. In the response was, "If the children of the faithful couples, whose marriages remain in force for the eternities, stray from the gospel and live recreant lives, those children will not participate in the first resurrection, but will be remanded to the custody of Satan for a thousand years." Wha? But what if they were good people, but just decided not to stay in the church?
And what about adult children of converts, who decide not to convert themselves? I understand there is probably a problem about them joining you in the Celestial Kingdom, but 1000 yrs w/Satan?
I thought we were supposed to respect people of other faiths? It's kinda hard to say, "I respect you being a Methodist, but you're going to spend 1000 years with Satan. Sorry."
Lots of bad and phony doctrine there in that link to ask Gramps. Just a bad response, not well thought out at all.
If a person has been wicked, regardless of who their parents are, and they fail to repent in mortality they will go into spirit prison. There they will have the opportunity to repent, accept the gospel and the laws and ordinances of the temple. After they are washed clean and pay the penalty demanded by justice they can be released from spirit prison. How long that is no one knows.
Our doctrine teaches that no one pays the price for their sins and becomes cleansed through that suffering. Only repentance and accepting Christ and then baptism has power to cleanse. No other process, whether it be suffering or pain cleanses.
My own opinion is that the wicked who choose not to repent are the only ones who remain in hell for the millennium. After the millennium is over, they will be resurrected, judged, deemed filthy still and then be cast into outer darkness with the devil and his angels. Repentance and baptism is an essential saving ordinance. No man can be saved from the eternal hell that awaits the wicked without repentance from all sin and baptism.
-
-
3 hours ago, Traveler said:
@Rob Osborn @BJ64 @MormonGator and anyone else.
If someone tells me anything in confidence, I understand and respect what it means to hold something in confidence. I work with many companies and often I am asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement. My point is that if we agree to hold anything in confidence - Honest people of integrity will always keep a confidence. Even when what was asked to be kept confidence is "public" knowledge. But more than keeping a confidence - things that are sacred should be "kept" sacred; especially and most noticeably by those that believe them to be sacred.
The Traveler
In due respect, I highly regard the temple as sacred. I further believe that we can speak of the work to some degree we do in the temple and still keep it sacred.
-
2 hours ago, askandanswer said:
You may be right. Or not. I think its a bit hard to tell whether this particular example is because of preference or divine law. I think you can make a good case for either possibility. I think it's more likely to do with something like when God was a human, perhaps life was created by one male and one female together, so that's the way He's continued to do it, but having said that, it still leaves open the question of whether its' by preference or law. When considering whether its by preference or law, it might be relevant to consider that some creatures on earth are hermaphrodites. I'm not sure exactly what that adds to the discussion but it might add something in that it shows there are exceptions to the one male one female rule.
It's safe to say there are genetic problems that create people such as hermaphrodites. I tend to think male and female procreation is a divine law, even an unchanging law.
-
3 hours ago, BJ64 said:
It seems to me that the church likes to say that we don’t discuss these things not because they are secret but because they are sacred. However in my view the reason we don’t discuss the specific things that have been mentioned is in fact because they are secret.
The things mentioned about the temple in church literature are sacred but not secret.
There definitely is a sacred element to it and as such I don't discuss those sacred parts. When discussing such topics as the plan of salvation and the endowment with how it plays out the plan Is don't see an issue with discussing the general elements because, after all, it is the plan of salvation.
Adam and Eve's story
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
Short answers-
Did Adam and Eve sin by partaking the fruit? Yes
Because they fell we are. We all need saving. We all fall, when we choose to follow Satan just like our first parents fell spiritually by giving in to his temptations. Satan tries to destroy our agency (prevent free will) by tempting us so that we get chained down to his will and not our own.