Rob Osborn
-
Posts
3852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rob Osborn
-
-
2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Only if you ignore the pre-existence in my opinion. In the Pre-existence we made choices that directly affected the conditions we were born into here. It showed our wished in that arena already in where we would wish to go...at least in my opinion. Thus, whether we have a shorter life or longer life, what choices we make here also affect where we go in the next life. If we choose wickedness and die young, or wickedness and die old, it is still the same. If we choose the good while young and die, or choose evil and die old it is still the same.
If either accepts in the Spirit World (and theoretically, even those who completely rejected the Lord in this life will eventually have their spirit lightened and will at least acknowledge him and his atonement, as every knee will bow) then they will be judged as per their hearts, minds, actions and other necessary items in accordance with the judgment of the Lord. It is all part of the plan, and if only a shorter time period was needed to know what their fate would be, then that is how the plan works out.
Humm...well enough, I respect your opinion. I disagree but who's to know, right?
-
15 minutes ago, Jersey Boy said:
It’s very obvious which of the eight verses is the one I’m referring to. You may be missing it because you don’t believe there are three major degrees of glory in heaven.
Just throw it out there, you may be surprised by my answer
-
1 hour ago, Jersey Boy said:
IThere’s one verse in D&C 76:72-79 that clears up all the confusion and makes the other 7 verses very easy to understand. I’m wondering if you can find that one clarifying verse, and then, if you can find it, go on to explain why that verse makes all the other verses clear and easy to understand?
Humm...kind of difficult as it speaks of different groups.
-
2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
There's another way to look at it as well.
Among those who are in the heathen nations are those who have no knowledge of the Law. IN this case they could also be seen as those without the Law. The difference in the idea would be those who did not have knowledge of the Law but who would have accepted it with all their heart. In this instance, they will receive the same reward.
On the otherhand are those who would not have accepted the Law even if given the chance. Thus, they did not have the Law either, but without the law and not accepting it, they receive the award according to what they accept.
In that same light, we could view those who did not have knowledge of the Law but knew of the law (in society) vs. those who knew the law but rejected the law.
It can be viewed multiple ways depending on your opinions, ideas, and thoughts on the matter.
What about those who reject the law, die young and then accept in the spirit world vs. those who reject it their whole lives then, nearing death in old age, accept?
The logic of accepting in this life falls apart under closer examination. Thus, those who die without law are no different than those who reject it ehere both then accept it in the spirit world- it being about who we become, not where we been.
-
2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
The great thing we have as LDS is that most of us (I believe Rob does believe sort of in a binary, which is why I would say most of us) do not believe in a binary eternal reward. It is not heaven or bust. In fact, we believe most will get to the Kingdom of Heaven, even if it is not with exaltation. Even the Telestial Kingdom is to be more glorious than what we can imagine here on Earth. It is a paradise that many would die to get to if they knew what it was like (at least according to some). This shows the Lord's great love and mercy, even for those who absolutely rejected him here, but do not become Sons of Perdition.
Binary heaven and hell with differing glories within heaven.
-
9 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
This topic is always quite personal to me. My father's soul literally depends on the outcome of this argument. Dude spent 20 years among the Mormons, poking lighthearted fun at organized religion and figuring he had everything he needed to go to whatever heaven awaited him. He proudly took the title of Heathen, and often referred to himself as one. I did his temple work. But it's not like he didn't reject umpteen opportunities to hear the law, and they tell me we keep our personalities and beliefs and stuff as we pass through the veil.
Fortunately for him, none of the players on this board will be deciding the outcome. No offense, but my dad's got a better judge to issue the final ruling. I get to have hope no matter who seems to win this earthly argument.
I hear you. Under my own personal beliefs he will most likely accept the gospel and when he does he will be put on the same path as all the rest of the saved to inherit all that the Father hath.
-
24 minutes ago, Traveler said:
Lev. 26:33 Deut 28:25, 37, 64 Jer 29:18-19 Amos 9:9 Zech 10:9 1Nephi 22:3-8 3Nephi 21:26
I would also point you to the Symbolic reference of Zenos's allegory of the tame and wild olive trees in Jacob 5-6
Okay, so do you think they (the lost tribes) lived and died for the most part without law?
-
16 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Heathen nations are able to be viewed in two ways according to scripture:
1) Those who are ignorant, knew no law
2) Those who are aware, know of, but are without law
What I have discovered situations like this, from our perspective, are rarely black and white as you might have people in #2 (fit the parameters) but have people in their nation who fit #1. This highlights the concept that eternal life is a personal endeavor.
So, do you think that those spoken of in D&C 45:54- "they that knew no law" are the same as those spoken of in section 76:72 "they who died without law"?
-
43 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
The verses spoke of are speaking toward "heathen nations" and anyone who would be considered a "heathen" by scriptural definition. We have "heathens" even among the United States who would be ignorant of, or without law but are aware of.
Having a partial law, doesn't place someone who is among a Christian nation as someone who knew the law. There are still people in the United States who have only heard the word "Mormon" but have no clue who or what they are, and yet their lives would be -- from scripture -- considered hedonistic. They are people who think Mormon and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are two different churches. To be fully ignorant of any law though, obviously this is referring to people who are gentiles, heathen nations, that have never even heard of the Bible or Christ. Examples would be island dwellers or forest dwellers where missionaries have never reached.
So the easy question is once again, "Who determines if someone "knew the law" and is subject to this statement?" There are multiple scriptures, not just D&C that have to be taken into consideration that correlate with these verses. They have been mentioned.
But I am not interested in having a circular debate that goes through the same passages of scripture. I have shared, you can move forward how you would like.
I think we are basically in agreement here. It took a bit but I think we have arrived. So, do you believe that the heathen nations who have died, died without law?
-
14 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Who determines if someone "knew the law" and is subject to this statement?
By what means/measure is determined then if someone "knew the law"?
This is what I hear from you, which was supported by a seventy, "If you preach the missionary discussions, and they don't accept -- they are condemned." This includes them in the "knew the law."
Another seventy from our mission was asked same question and his response, "We don't know what spiritual witness these individuals received. We do not know. God knows. Simply hearing the word does not mean they "know" the law." That is one type, and they do not fully enter the group of being ignorant of law.
In order to "know" one must have had spiritual witness and rejected it. That witness is then from God, not man.
But the verse quoted is speaking of "heathen Nations". I think we can ascertain what and who this is and pertains to. In the rest of Christianity the "heathen Nations" were those Nations, entire populations of society who were or are strangers to revealed Christianity/religion and thus- knew not the law.
-
6 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
I have already shared, and @JohnsonJones already highlighted thoughts also. No need to further debate something if clear examples are provided. Here is another aspect to those who know law, but are without the law -- spiritual witness.
Okay, just so we are on the same page then- you believe that someone who "knew no law" is someone who knows of the prophets and was aware of the prophet teachings but chose not to be a part of them because they received no spiritual witness?
-
18 minutes ago, Anddenex said:
Not the same group either.
Let's cut to the chase scene- who specifically do you think are those who knew no law?
-
1 minute ago, Anddenex said:
Samuel the Lamanite was preaching to a Nephite civilization that already had the law, they were already within the law as Nephi was preaching among the saints, warning and calling them to repentance.
We are talking about people who know of, but are without the law, not within the law.
Okay, so, another example- the son's of Mosiah going to preach the gospel to those who were unaware or ignorant of the law.
-
6 minutes ago, Traveler said:
I believe you are mixing and confusing symbolic references. In particular the symbolic reference in scripture to the scattering of Israel among the gentile and heathen nations (apostasy) from where they will be gathered in the harvest or time of restoration.
The Traveler
Expound please.
-
4 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:
As I said, it's one way to look at it, not the only way.
I suppose a parallel could be utilized. There are those who have no idea what the US Laws are. They are ignorant of them. If they had the chance to know them and to also experience the freedoms of the US, they may choose to live here.
There are others who are very aware of the Laws and freedoms of the United States. They choose to live outside the United States, without the law of the US being applied to them.
They do not heed our laws (and don't need to as they live elsewhere), but at the same time, they also are not guaranteed the same rights and privileges that a US citizen may possess both within our nation and without.
Humm...I can see what you are saying but not sure it can apply. In order to be within the law or know the law all one has to do is have it preached and explained to them. It's not possible that one can remain outside the law or die without law once it is preached to them and understood by them. If it is preached to them and they choose to reject it they do so in transgression. Transgression can only come by being within the bounds of the law.
-
3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Another way to look a it.
We do Temple work. All those who did not have the chance to receive it in this life, but receive it in the next and would have received it with all their hearts will receive the same reward as those who receive it in this life and are faithful.
These are those who died and did not know the Law. They were probably located in Heathen nations where they never learned the Law of the Lord.
On the otherhand are those who do not believe in the Lord. They have learned about the Church and it's ordinances. They have chosen to remain with their own religions. They do not practice the Law of the Lord, but practice their own law. Their lives are without the Law of the Lord and thus they have made their choices in this life.
That's not necessarily how it is, but it is way to look at it.
I'm curious- how is it possible that someone can know the law of the Lord and yet live "without the law"? To me, personally, it's not possible to be outside of the law and it's jurisdiction- the justice aspect, if one has it given to them. They would fall within the justice of the law. This is what ancient Book of Mormon prophets meant when they preached unto the wicked so that their sins would be answered on their heads and not the prophets.
-
6 hours ago, wenglund said:
I will repay your alleged courtesy by politely and graciously answering, "bye." No more time wasted.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
That's fine, but realize this-, you wanted to change the topic, delve off on a tangent, but then when it came to the simple nuts and bolts decide you don't really want a discussion. Not sure if you what your angle is but please don't change the topic again and expect to have dialogue if it's only going to be one sided.
Regardless, the reason I asked you that question is because no one can satisfactorily answer it. You see, it's not logical that a terrestrial and telestial heir would be resurrected in the resurrection unto damnation to be delivered to the devil and yet on the other hand only Celestial heirs come forth in the resurrection unto eternal life. Many thus will intentionally change the meaning of the scriptures to account for this. There is no bait here, just the truth. People just aren't willing to accept the truth as it stands.
-
6 hours ago, wenglund said:
Your inability to understand why, is part of the reason that the only intelligent thing to do at this point is to say, "bye,! and avoid the bait to inevitably wasting more time.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I am of the strong belief that you can't provide what I ask for. That's fine, good day.
-
6 minutes ago, wenglund said:
I deeply respect and value what you learned about the law of sacrifice.
This having been said, like some kids, you know so much about things that you are unaware of just how little you do know--even when it is pointed out to you this way and that that you don't. Mary Poppins said it best: "...there’s no one so hard to teach as the child who knows everything.”
If you did read the articles, you did so with your eyes wide shut, or you are seriously lacking in comprehension. Either way, we are back to the same old invariable conclusion. It is a waste of time trying to give you a hand up in light and understanding.
Bye.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I'm not sure why you choose to speak the way you do with me, whatever. Could you perhaps quote certain sentences from the articles that prove your position?
-
4 minutes ago, wenglund said:
See? You are either pitifully dishonest with yourself, or you are incapable of correctly comprehend that you in no way directly answered my question, which makes it abundantly clear to those who are capable of comprehending, that it is not only pointless to try and assist you with a hand up in light and knowledge, but it is counterproductive, a waste of time.
Bye wall.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Please just answer the question I put forth. I gave you the courtesy of answering the questions you asked for. So please be respectful and answer mine. I don't mean any hard will, I'm just curious what your personal belief is in regards to who you think is part of the resurrection of life/just and who is part of the resurrection of damnation/unjust.
-
2 hours ago, wenglund said:
Actually, I have directed you to three articles, two of which are from Church publications, each of which quote extensively from the scriptures and modern prophets/apostles, and you weren't capable of seeing it--or, as Joseph Smith less charitably phrased it, "beyond the narrow-minds of man."
To use the words of Christ, "Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?" (Jn 3:10-12)
You are free to consider it a "bluff" on my part, and that would be understandable given your current incapacity to understand higher things. And, you will continue to see it that way until you become capable. Until then...
I have even been constructive enough to explain how you could exceed the self-imposed limitation of your current understanding, but to no avail. Oh well...
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I read the articles. They aren't suggesting what you are putting forth. I'm not sure how you are coming to the conclusions you make because the law of sacrifice is not a mystery nor does it require a "higher understanding". I understand the law of sacrifice quite well, in fact, I think most primary children understand it quite well. It's not a mystery kept only for some elite intellect. Christ doesn't keep his paths, his ways complex and mysterious, but, men sure do have a way of making it seem complex and mysterious.
I learned something very interesting about the law of sacrifice that I'd like to share with you. A few years ago, in the process of helping some neighbors with their vehicle who were poor and destitute there came a time when the mother needed a blessing. We, as a family and business had sacrificed time, effort and money into their car. The Lord taught me a valuable yet simple principle of the law of sacrifice. Instead of asking for a blessing upon ourselves, our business and families I prayed that the blessing that may have been afforded to us be passed back to them to receive that promise in the blessing we gave that mother. The law of sacrifice is to put forth love, even if it requires some loss, or perceived loss, on our part but in doing so we gain the love and compassion required of the process. As such, asking the Father to pour out a blessing upon that head of which was sacrificed for brings the blessings upon that individual because it cannot be denied.
The lesson was profound because in essence it is the same with Christ, he suffered and died for each one of us individually. Thus, when he asks the Father to pardon us, or give us the blessing, the Father cannot deny the Son because he cannot deny the sacrifice. And so it is with us also according to eternal principle and law- when we sacrifice for another and suffer some loss on our part and ask the blessing to fall instead upon those we sacrificed for the Father cannot deny it because to do so would be to deny the sacrifice of the broken heart and contriteness of the one asking.
-
31 minutes ago, wenglund said:
There is a reason you didn't directly answer, but verbosely and strenuously evaded my questions, and this is because were you to directly and simply answer yes or no, would be to evince that you are currently at odds, and the several ways you are at odds, with what Joseph Smith wrote. Either way, we both know where you are at odds- And, that will suffice.
Now, back to the topic.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I did directly answer each of your three questions. A follow up set of questions-
Which resurrection do you believe the Celestial, terrestrial, and telestial receive? The resurrection of life or the resurrection of damnation?
-
16 minutes ago, wenglund said:
Since you repeatedly asked about this after noting it is a tangent, let me respond Socraticaly by asking:
Do you believe, as Joseph intimated, that the three degrees of glory mentioned in D&C 76 are "after the judgement" (i.e. post resurrection)?
Do you believe, as Joseph intimated, that people are "saved" and are "heirs of salvation", and will bow their knees post-judgement (post resurrection) in the telestial, and terrestrial, and celestial kingdoms? In other words, do you understand that there are multiple conotations of the word "saved" and "salvation"?
Do you believe, as Joseph intimated, that the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are the "future life" (not to be confused with the symolism of this current life), and "destiny," and "completion" for some people, and that they will never see the celestial kingdom of God?
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
There's really a lot going on in section 76. It was given in response to the verse-
John 5:29
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
Of which was given to them, meaning the same thing, using synonyms-
17 And shall come forth; they who have done good, in the resurrection of the just; and they who have done evil, in the resurrection of the unjust
Because John 5:29 is the same as that seen in the Book of Mormon, for instance-
11 If they be good, to the resurrection of endless life and happiness; and if they be evil, to the resurrection of endless damnation, being delivered up to the devil, who hath subjected them, which is damnation- (Mosiah 16:11)
5 If they be good, to the resurrection of everlasting life; and if they be evil, to the resurrection of damnation; being on a parallel, the one on the one hand and the other on the other hand, according to the mercy, and the justice, and the holiness which is in Christ, who was before the world began. (3rd Nephi 26:5)
Thus we know that John 5:29 and D&C 76:17 are synonymous, they mean the same exact thing, just worded differently. Thus the term "resurrection of life" is synonymous with "resurrection of the just" just as the phrase "resurrection of damnation" is synonymous with the phrase "resurrection of the unjust". And, because the Book of Mormon extrapolates what damnation means- "being delivered up to the devil" we thus can know that only the just, or those resurrected unto eternal life are saved from the devil which is damnation-.
That much must be understood, otherwise it's not possible to understand section 76. So then to answer your questions-
1."Do you believe, as Joseph intimated, that the three degrees of glory mentioned in D&C 76 are "after the judgement"?
I believe Joseph received a vision showing the continued duration of man's progress so that he could come forth in the resurrection of eternal life. It's the subtle way the angel or Spirit is showing Joseph how it's not possible to be saved from hell if one doesn't come forth in the resurrection unto eternal life, or in other words- the resurrection of the just. "Just" because they are "justified" in and through Christ of the complete forgiveness of sin and justified unto receiving eternal life.
2. "Do you believe, as Joseph intimated, that people are "saved" and are "heirs of salvation", and will bow their knees post-judgement (post resurrection) in the telestial, and terrestrial, and celestial kingdoms? In other words, do you understand that there are multiple conotations of the word "saved" and "salvation"?
"Saved" and "salvation" only mean one thing in discussions on the plan of salvation. Being "saved" means to be saved from the consequences of sin which would otherwise confine him or her to the eternal hell. Salvation means to be saved physically and spiritually unto eternal life. The two terms have no other meaning in scripture when the plan of salvation is discussed.
3. "Do you believe, as Joseph intimated, that the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are the "future life" (not to be confused with the symolism of this current life), and "destiny," and "completion" for some people, and that they will never see the celestial kingdom of God?"
I can't see where this life or place we currently are in is a "symbol" for the telestial kingdom when in fact we are told we are in the very kingdom itself. If we know that we are not yet completed now we can extrapolate that the telestial kingdom is not a final destination but rather the means to the destination.
-
13 minutes ago, wenglund said:
Yes, that is a relatively elementary understanding of the law of sacrifice. I am speaking to a higher understanding of the law, which you continue to admit you can't see.
And, that is okay. If, or whenever you are ready, you will see it. Until then,....
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
You always seem to shroud this knowledge you have to some "higher understanding". I'm not necessarily calling your bluff but rather asking for some real principle founded doctrine. Perhaps you could link a talk by a modern prophet that speaks on this matter, or perhaps a manual?
The Heathen Nations and They That Knew No Law
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
I've written papers on each of those separate verses. I could go on for days...literally. I was more inclined to see what you thought and go from there.