Rob Osborn
-
Posts
3852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rob Osborn
-
-
You can lead a horse to water...
-
22 minutes ago, Traveler said:
It has been my experience that being born again is a lot like being humble. Very often those that brag the most about knowing all the pertinent doctrinal details seem to struggle the most with being the best example.
The Traveler
It's been my experience that people claim to know much more than they think they know at the expense of making others look bad and when pressed upon close inspection they try to derail or avoid the point. Complacency seems comfortable.
-
4 hours ago, wenglund said:
It isn't a "shot," but an acknowledgement of your admitted reticence to receive the further light and knowledge that has come through the authorized channels of Christ's church, and this likely because you believe you have personally received revelations that not only conflict with what has been conveyed by chosen leaders of the church, and which are allegedly "far beyond" the understanding of the church and its leaders, but, based upon what you have said here and elsewhere, are eerily reminiscent of Protestantism.
From a general CoJCoLDS perspective, then, what you consider as far advanced further light and knowledge, is retrograde pre restoration light and knowledge
To each their own.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I don't know where people get the idea I get revelations that conflict with the prophets.
We are responsible for our own learning. We have a lot of resources before us to gather from, far more than any other church on the face of the Earth. And whether we like it or not our scriptures testify of a very typical heaven/hell dichotomy. Call it Protestantism or whatever, the fact remains.
I slowly put together all the pieces, a little from here a little from there from what's already been revealed and I slowly but steadily paint a picture of truth.
One of the principles of the gospel, an immovable pillar of truth are these verses-
26 But, behold, verily I say unto you, before the earth shall pass away, Michael, mine archangel, shall sound his trump, and then shall all the dead awake, for their graves shall be opened, and they shall come forth—yea, even all.
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 have had the witness of the Holy Ghost testify this is true, it cannot be changed! Any doctrine, for it to be true, has to fit within these scriptures. There are hundreds of scriptures nearly identical to these stating basically the exact same testimony of truth. It is a fundamental pillar of truth in Christ's doctrine. There are two outcomes- spoken of here- the righteous to be gathered on the right hand to receive eternal life or be found on the left hand of God to be cast with the devil and his angels into the everlasting fire. Call it Protestantism or whatever you will, but it is a fundamental and immovable truth of Christ's doctrine. Any and all further light and knowledge must fit within this truth. To state otherwise is to deny Christ and his very words that proceed from his lips.
Gathering information, further light and knowledge comes from a variety of sources. We can receive confirmation of truth in the temple, in our thoughts and, from scripture, from talks, from study, from visions and dreams, each other, etc. One of those bigger fragments is from the House of the Lord- His holy temple. What does the temple teach? The plan of salvation- Christ's saving gospel with all of the accompanying steps, ordinances and covenants necessary for us to return home.
As such it comes as no surprise to me that the very things I put together harmonize in the endowment. There we are taught the true meaning of the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms and how we progress through them in our journey towards perfection, where we overcome all things and are made spotless. And, as is logical, it is there we find that salvation comes in the end culminating on our entrance into the presence of God in the Celestial kingdom. Now, hearkenibg back to those verses I quoted from section 29, it supports perfectly that doctrine.
The temple endowment is the most up to date "further light and knowledge" we have concerning the plan of salvation.
We are responsible for our own learning and understanding. And while the world seems stuck in the dark ages, I work these things out diligently. The pieces are already there, we just have to connect all the dots. It's a fact that our doctrines concerning the plan of salvation don't all agree with section 29. So, either section 29, and the other 200+ scripture references are wrong or our understanding is still in it's infancy and we aren't seeing the correct picture yet. Ironically, all we have to do is go to the temple, it spells it out so very clear. But will we see it? Not very easy. Let me ask you this, will you, or can you prove those verses in section 29 are false or misleading? If they are true, as I so testify, then please stop being critical of the Lord's dichotomy of heaven or hell.
-
4 minutes ago, wenglund said:
I suppose that may be true in your personal case (particularly given your Protestant view of the gospel), though I don't see it as applicable to the general church membership, who accept the gospel of Christ as conveyed by Chris't's chosen leaders, and are receptive to further light and knowledge.. For them, they understand well enough the doctrine, and now it is time for them to apply what they correctly understand.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Is this kind of a shot at me that I'm unable to receive further light and knowledge?
I ask that in light of certain spiritual knowledge I have received showing that God's plan to save his children is far beyond our understanding as a church general body.
-
4 minutes ago, wenglund said:
For myself, and perhaps others, doctrine is a means to an end, and not the end itself. And, rationally, this means the end take precedence over the means of doctrine.
As such, this reasonably explains the shift in priorities of the Church from learning to doing, which corresponds to the shift from "knowing" to "becoming"-- as most notably explicated by Elder Oaks in his Conference talk of April, 2018.
This doesn't mean that doctrine isn't important. It just means that it isn't as important as the end objective of the gospel plan of progression--i.e. to become as the Father and Son.
I would also submit that the shift from the Church as the center for learning to the Church as a support for learning in the home, is intimately tied to the shifts mentioned above.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I agree but I see the angle like this- "Father, they don't really understsnd the doctrine". "We will thus emphasize for them to go into the vineyard and work, that through it they may not only feed my sheep but help them realize the depth of my doctrine and help them realize some of their misunderstandings concerning my work".
-
1 hour ago, wenglund said:
Okay. Not everyone is ready as yet to receive further light and knowledge, and may get hung up on terminology.
While it is true that the phrase "born again" occurs explicitly about five times in the scriptures, and this only in relation to baptism and growth in the gospel, reason strongly suggest that the other instances of rebirth, that I noted, are implicitly suggested in a number of scriptures--particularly those that refer to members of the Godhead as "Father."
And, by recognizing the layered meaning of many scriptures, one may come to understand that reference to one birth or rebirth is a type and shadow and metaphor for the other births.
But, to each their own.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
There are lots of instances in scripture speaking about being born again. In reference to the plan of salvation, it only speaks of being spiritually reborn one time once one turns to God. I'm not aware of other scripture references you may know of.
-
2 hours ago, Traveler said:
This thread was started based on responsibility for learning. At this point I am going to take a stand in support of learning by doing. There are some terms that need to be defined. One is intelligence - I propose that we define intelligence as the ability to learn. I see that there is a problem in that many think we are in the process of learning doctrine. I will try to explain a principle. There is a difference or should I say paradigm shift between doctrine and truth. I believe doctrine can be true but that truth is not just doctrine. In mathematical terms using set theory - I will put it this way. The set of truth contains all true doctrine and much much more. In short the set of doctrine is a sub-set of the set of truth.
I believe the focus of teaching is slightly changing in the church from principles of doctrine to principles of doing or becoming. Since I an a skier I will use skiing as the example of what I am getting at. We can talk a lot and teach the doctrine of skiing. We can discuss the purpose of our ski polls and how to un-weight and shift our weight when turning. We can discuss the doctrine of skiing on steep sloops and groomed and un-groomed sloops. We can discuss the doctrine of skiing on ice and deep powder. We can become experts in doctrine - all without ever putting on a pair of skis and getting on the sloops. Putting what doctrine we have learned into practice is a whole different kind of learning.
Using skiing again - we discover very quickly that we are constantly relearning the fundamentals in new applications. The experts call this muscle memory. For example we are constantly learning the principle of keeping our center of gravity directly over or above our feet. If we have a personal trainer they may suggest that in tight turns we may be leaning too far to the inside of the turn and developing a bad habit that may work on blue sloops but will cause us to fall (and perhaps hurt ourselves) on black diamond sloops.
Still using the skiing analogy - I believe that the Latter-day Saints are being upgraded and prepared (taught) for skiing beyond the bunny sloops to the black diamond sloops and that this is going to take a lot more than being expert in doctrine and discussing principles of truth is Sunday School and Priesthood and Relief Society. And I also believe we are going to need to learn to ski on cold windy days when the visibility is really poor and the conditions are so bad that no one is skiing for fun - and it will not be just ourselves but we will likely be helping others who are hurt and have no way to survive without our "expert" learned and demonstrated help.
The Traveler
In your analogy I think, from my own point of view, we arent really doctrine masters. We are like beginner skiers in the 19th century just starting to find out how e may be able to construct some kind of contraption to go over the snow. Perhaps we havent even invented the ski yet! This is how I see the doctrine in the church, where we are at, what we know and how it can be applied. I do however see a shift in "doing". But, I think this is the Lords way of getting us to truly learn what can be invented to go over the snow (doctrine).
-
48 minutes ago, wenglund said:
Since each of our spirits were first born in the pre-existence, then when our spirits are born into mortality that becomes our second birth or rebirth or being born again.
.Another way to look at this is by considering that each birth is rationally made possible by a father and mother. Our first birth (as spirit personages) is made possible by our Heavenly Father and Mother. Our second birth (into mortality) came by Christ the Creator and our mortal fathers and mothers. Our third birth (baptism of water and Spirit) ) is made possible by Christ the bridegroom and his bride the Church. Our fourth birth (the resurrection) is made possible by the first fruit and father Christ and mother Church (the patriarchal priesthood).
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Hum..I don't agree. In the sense of being "born again" as spoken in scripture it refers to our being born again unto righteousness. As sinners, people are "dead in tresspass and sin". They thus need to be born again unto righteousness. As far as I can tell, we come into mortality already alive in Christ and thus alive in the spirit and we need no rebirth at that point.
-
12 minutes ago, wenglund said:
When a spirit personage is reborn into mortality they experience a form of death that is the Fall. When a mortal is born again through baptism, their old life of sin dies. To be born again through the resurrection one must die physically.
Each rebirth I mentioned above is in the spirit.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I'm a bit confused. How is a person reborn into mortality? Perhaps you meant to say "born into mortality"? I will agree that spiritual death is tied to sin. I believe that though a person born into mortality is in a state of death so to speak, they are still alive in Spirit to righteousness. As they become accountable they slumber into spiritual death. It's at that point they need a spiritual rebirth.
-
13 minutes ago, wenglund said:
To me, the term is self-explanatory. Those who are not reborn don't become unborn, though those who are reborn must, of necessity, pass through a form of death.
What do you mean by pass through a form of death?
15 minutes ago, wenglund said:It depends upon which rebirth you are talking about.
I'm talking about being born again, in the spirit.
-
36 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:
From my perspective living in the lesser kindgoms still represents a form of separation from God and therefore still represents a death of sorts or certainly a damnation meaning a stopping of progression.
Are these people born again?
-
12 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:
Yes and no. Being born again is not a second birth in the physical sense as Jesus explained to Nicodemus it refers to a change of heart leading to repentance and baptism. Repentance is said to refer to literally turning our hearts to God. Through the process of repentance we put off the natural man and are born of God. King Benjamin does a fine job of teaching this:
He later asked his people to find out how his teachings were received and learned that they were indeed reborn as followers of Christ:
The first birth is our birth into mortality in a fallen state as the natural man, even though children are innocent until the age of accountability.
Being born again is symbolic of conversion. Conversion is progressive, but also has a tipping point that leads to the waters of baptism and a life of faith or at least acts of faith. Baptism is symbolic of being born again. A symbolic commitment and covenant of rebirth is made at baptism and renewed weekly partaking of the Sacrament. Conversion happens much like Alma's analogy to testing faith like a seed. It grows as it's nourished. It could be said that the baptism is THE rebirth event and everything after is akin to a child growing in understanding. But the analogy could also be used to describe starting fresh every day doing your best to be Christ-like and honouring covenants with a true hope that Christ has paid the price of sin and death.
It means to be converted.
If ye are not born again, ye cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, Alma 7:14.
Ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, Moses 6:59.
The kingdom of heaven!
As noted above, not being born again precludes inheritance in the kingdom of heaven. We need to be converted, hence the new curriculum is strictly pointing out that conversion is the goal and not simply obedience to daily scripture study. Studying is a means to an end. The end is for the spirit to work in us and bring about conversion.
All good insights. I like how you use the Book of Mormon. Well done. I may add one question- How is this verse related to being reborn? What is he dead to?
1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins. (Ephesians 2:1)
-
This topic I brought up in another thread and I want to further discuss it. I brought up that we as LDS do not really know what this means. As a Sunday School teacher years ago I was surprised to see such a widespread response. It's not a topic we discuss very often as we don't refer to ourselves so much as born again Christians, even though that's exactly what we are.
I'd like to discuss more of the details and see where people stand. As we discuss I will throw in my two cents but I first want to see how people respond to a few questions-
1. Is being born again a second birth, and if so when was the first?
2. Does being born again happen immediately or over a long period of time or somewhere in between?
3. What does it mean to be born again? Does this mean a person not spiritually reborn is dead? And dead in what way?
4. If we are born again what do we inherit?
5. What does it mean if we fail to be born again?
-
48 minutes ago, wenglund said:
I believe that our bodies will all be resurrected at the age at which they died, and will then grow to a perfect age. So, in that respect, my answer is yes.
And, given that the resurrection is, itself ,a rebirth (i.e. born again), then in that sense those resurrected unto exaltation may be considered as babes when first resurrected.
More generally speaking, I also believe that, with the exception of Christ, all who are exalted (i.e. resurrected to Celestial glory) will be lacking in at least some understanding of exaltation, and won't achieve omniscience until much later in eternal progression--wherein they will continue to be responsible .for their own learning.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I believe everyone is responsible for their own learning of which includes the necessary covenants for exaltation (exaltation is the highest glory being bound in eternal marriage in the CK). So no, it makes no logical sense that a baby is automatically exalted. They do not bypass their own learning and understanding. They too will be responsible for their own learning.
-
9 minutes ago, wenglund said:
The possibility is obviously entailed in a basic CoJCoLDS understanding of the transcendent atonement , particularly as it relates to a basic grasp of the Plan of Eternal Progression.
But, given your protestant view of the gospel, I can see why the obvious might escape you.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Will they enter their exaltation as children?
-
5 minutes ago, wenglund said:
These are two incorrect assumptions which you could have avoided had you read and comprehended the correct reasons I simply and clearly and reasonably spelled out TWICE for not answering you on this thread.
I shan't get into the plausible psychological factors behind your mistake assumptions because I am feeling charitable on New Years Eve , and besides it would likely be tangential to the topic of this thread.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Acknowledged. I may start a topic on the matter. Be interesting to see if you post.
-
7 minutes ago, wenglund said:
...as witnessed by the belief that children who die before the age of accountability, and thus lack understanding of complex things, will be exalted
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
And how does one propose to know how its possible that someone who lacks knowledge of exaltation will be exalted?
-
6 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
Then we are of a like mind in that regard.
Do you want to discuss or not?
-
57 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:
Can you elaborate on the techniques that the new manual and you have in common? I haven't yet found anything that is particularly new and exciting. It seems to me that the manual has scriptures to read that instruct on certain principles. It asks some questions to help us think about what is being taught, something that any inquisitive person does while studying anyway. I think for me the biggest value will be a hopefully improved sense of accountability to be studying material together as a cohort and discussing it as well as having a guide to help keep me thinking.
My first time through the scriptures I was very interested to know what I would discover, subsequent re-readings have left me feeling like sometimes I'm not going to get anything new out of it and my interest wanes. However, the purpose isn't my entertainment value or curiosity anyway, it just makes it easier for me when I'm more intrigued. For the same reason, I rarely watch a movie twice and if I do it's usually been a few years since the last watching.
I'm looking forward to seeing how much more I can learn by having a church-sponsored program of study at home instead of trying to get my family on board with my own ideas of trying to continue personal and companion/family study similar to when I was a missionary. I find that with greater repetition it is helpful to get other perspectives that elucidate points in ways I wouldn't have considered. This is where I think family and sunday school conversations will be helpful. All that being said, I don't want to be misinterpreted as thinking that intellectual understanding is more important than the conversion of desire within the heart. Sometimes it is this very thing that makes me excited to dig into the scriptures even though I have read through the New Testament several times, the Book of Mormon dozens and the other standard works completely at least once, but more often than not just when searching out particular topics.
I think your on track. I like to read slowly, ponder scriptures and ask simple logical questions. The manual seems to do this quite well. From there my mind explodes. I get all excited and start making flow charts, scripture groupings and applying the principles into the overlap of other topics and then tying it in all together. My favorite application I did was with Christs parable of the wheat and the tares. Finding out about who the wheat are, who the tares are, how it applies in latter day times with temples being the "garners", the wheat representing the harvest, of which isnt realized until a spouse is sealed to a mate in the temple. And from there how their names get written in the books in the temple where it is also written in heaven. It gets exciting for me because the overlap comes into play with realizing the Lord speaks in many different ways to say the same thing. Overlap here would be the sheep and the goats- the sherp being the wheat, the tares being the goats. Overlapped again- the sheep on the right hand representing priesthood, power and authority to save and uohold whereas the goats on the left having no master to save representing judgment, doom, desolation. Its all intertwined, it gets real fun when we arent hampered down with too much commentary and we explore on our own.
-
14 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
I believe he didn't reply because he can't stand dealing with what he sees as an arrogant, holier-than-thou, I'm-smarter-than-you, condescending world-view.
I guess you're the only "true" disciple in the world.
So sad for everyone but you.
Im willing to engage but I dont care for condescending tones.
-
20 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
I dare bet that "we", by and large, full well know the ramifications of our actions.
It can help. Yes. Requisite to salvation? I think not.
Maybe. That is irrelevant to the "how" or the "what's important" of learning though.
"May not" is a bit flimsy. Can you apply this idea to your previous two examples (Why Christ was baptized and the meaning of spiritual death)?
I challenge you to find a single person who believes that only an elite group needs to understand the core principles of the gospel. What you seem to be doing is taking complex knowledge that isn't important to have in mortality and grouping it in with the core, important things we actually need to understand.
I accept that there is value to understanding these more complex things. I accept that the more knowledge we gain here the less we'll have to learn after mortality. What I reject is that a person's ability to mentally understand complex theological and philosophical ideas has any bearing on their standing with God. What matters is humility, faith, obedience, and charity. These concepts are not complex. They are simple. You either give yourself to God -- fully -- or you do not. The simplest mind can do this and the greatest mind can do this, equal in aptitude. God respects faithful humility and strict obedience, not powerful intellectualizing and astute philosophizing.
And, incidentally, I'm still waiting on the answer to my questions.
Alma and the Son's of Mosiah before their conversion in a large part kind of represent our approach we have now days. Given that we aren't trying to destroy the church like they were, we do indeed have a lackluster desire to want to learn, teach, exhort, and live the gospel above all other worldly desires. So what changed for them? They saw the direct results of what happens to those who fail to be converted to the gospel. It was a mighty change. In that process they began to hunger for truth, with real intent, putting forth a great desire to know.
The boat we are in is we are complacent in our understanding, we don't really understand what "eternal torment" is, we don't study and pray to know these things for ourselves. We blindly accept many teachings like a test in school if we just give the right answers on Sunday.
I asked Wade a specific off the top of your head question. He didn't reply because either he was not confident in the answer or thought it was too comical to address. The whole point is that a serious knowledgeable person of the gospel- a true disciple knows the answer inside and out and is ready and willing to appease.
We spend all too much time debating what we think the gospel is without truly knowing what it really is.
I find it interesting how many times I will be told I am wrong on the basic principles of the gospel (gospel according to Rob) when most times I am directly referencing the Savior from scripture. So, like the pre born again Son's of Mosiah, I am left to believe we aren't converted- we don't really know and live the gospel of Jesus Christ.
It is upon us to understand the gospel, to know all the insurance and outs. To know the details, how they apply. Not understanding something as simple as baptism being the ordinance where in we enter into a covenant relationship with our Heavenly Father so that we are not cast aside into outer darkness can be Paramount to our conversion and others around us whom we influence.
-
8 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
Okay.
Then the answer to your question is probably Alma 31:5.
I will agree with that. I was thinking more along these lines-
3 Now they were desirous that salvation should be declared to every creature, for they could not bear that any human soul should perish; yea, even the very thoughts that any soul should endure endless torment did cause them to quake and tremble. (Mosiah 28:3).
Do we go out into the world with this same drive? No, not generally. Why? Is it that maybe we don't really understand the ramifications of our actions? I experienced in some degree the feelings they experienced in being cast off. Suffered many night terror events over the years. It motivated me to understand the gospel and to look out into the world and ask the right question- at what point does this individual become converted and born again?. Knowing the gospel, in all of it's details, helps us to have a more clear picture of the plan of salvation and it's importance. I too often feel like we as LDS have this laxadasical approach to understanding and sharing with others the gospel of Jesus Christ. Yes it's true we are converted through our actions. But without knowledge and understandings we may not be applying it for the greatest good. We need to come to the conclusion that all, not just some elite group, need to understand the gospel like Alma and the Son's of Mosiah with the same fear of failure to repent and do what's right.
-
1 minute ago, wenglund said:
Your question is tangential to the thread topic and to my comment, so I won't answer here. You are welcome to start a new thread and pose the question there, though I am not sure I will actively participate given the almost invariable counter-productivity of my discussing things with you.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
That's kind of what I thought you would say. Kind of proves my point.
-
4 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
I think you didn't answer my question.
My answer is in getting you to answer, bear with me here.
We Are Responsible For Our Own Learning
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
I agree with everything you said. Well done. But I might add a question in response-
But do we acknowledge and recognize truth, or are really "open" to another's personal revelation and interpretations, especially if it is outside of the box we have been inside our whole life, what we have built as security? Are we afraid of truth if it doesn't come from an authorities source such as a prophet? In asking this I tend to think we take too lightly each other's spiritual gifts in discerning and expounding truth to each other. We still want things to be the same, just able to share those same things more openly. Will we crack out of the shell and realize we can receive revelation and truth on par with the prophets regarding truth?