Eydis

Maybe the better way to say it is that a the future cannot be described as events that have already come to pass. Like I said before, I may know that I will leave this body some day but I wouldn't say that I am a resurrected being right now. I cannot know that I am a resurrected being until I am resurrected. I could know that I will someday be resurrected but that does not carry the same significance as saying I am resurrected. I can see the value in saying that there is something gained by bringing the act 'to pass'. What I don't understand is why there is such a strong push in these arguments to say that God does not gain anything by bringing things 'to pass', that it would carry the same value as it had before He brought it 'to pass'. How is that idea supportive to the LDS doctrine?

The present could be defined as the moment something could be acted upon. One cannot act on (or change) the past or the future event other than what is done in the present.

D&C 132 does not explain it that specifically, it does not say "Eternal Plural Marriage". When recent prophets are asked these questions, this is what they say; " Sealings. Former Utah senator Jake Garn was reluctant to remarry following the death of his first wife, Hazel, in 1976, but he soon realized that he could not be both a father and a mother to his children. When he began dating Kathleen Brewerton, who would become his second wife, questions soon arose about how his first wife would feel should he become sealed to a second wife. The couple took their questions to President Spencer W. Kimball. He said he did not know exactly how these relationships will be worked out, but he did know that through faithfulness all will be well and we will have much joy. Brother Garn later recalled. Kathleen told him that she was afraid of offending Hazel. President Kimball's demeanor seemed to change. From being somewhat hesitant in his earlier answers, he now became sure and spoke with firmness. He looked right at Kathleen and with a tear forming in his eye, he said, "I do know this: you have nothing to worry about. Not only will she accept you, she will put her arms around you and thank you for raising her children" (Jake Garn, Why I Believe [1992], 13)." ...and ... "Family members need not worry about the sealing situation of blended families as it might be in the next life. Our concern is to live the gospel now and to love others, especially those in our family. If we live the gospel to the best of our ability, the Lord in His love and mercy will bless us in the next life and all things will be right. I have seen some new blended families become torn apart by worrying about who will belong to whom and who will be with whom in the next life. My mother, who is sealed to my deceased father, is married to a widower who is sealed to his first wife, who died childless. My mother and her second husband have a son, who is my brother. We are not concerned about who will be sealed to whom. We simply trust in the Lord's wisdom and love and try to live righteously. . . . ("Uniting Blended Families," by Robert E. Wells, Ensign, Aug. 1997, p. 24)" Even in D&C 132 it says; "66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present." That is at the end of the chapter right after the section on plural marriage so there is no claim to this being an "Eternal" plural marriage. Let me ask you something, if a man in this life lives plural marriage, lets say with 10 wives but then breaks his covenant, becomes unworthy of it, what will happen to the 10 wives. Will they be given to one man or will they be divided and given to 10 different worthy men? Of course we don't know but would you say that it is possible that the 10 wives be given to 10 different worthy men? If yes, than it is certainly possible that every earthly plural marriage would be so divided. But keeping in mind that within the Celestial Kingdom all are sealed to each other, there is no break with the sealing of eternal families within the Celesital Kingdom, so all is good.

I don't think I am explaining myself well, my apologies. I am trying to say there is something qualitatively different between knowing something will happen vs. knowing that it has happened. For example, I know that my son will graduate from High School in a year but I wouldn't yet call him a High School Graduate. Similarly, I think there is something qualitatively different when God brings something "to pass" as opposed to knowing that it will happen. What I mean by timeless, is the claim that there is no equation in God's realm that would require the factor of time. It is the belief that time simply doesn't exist for God. So, this takes away any relative time discussion, it wouldn't include any idea that for God time is faster or slower, it is the belief that there is simply no passage of time at any rate for God. I don't know what else to call it but timeless. In the First Vision, Joseph heard God speak. He heard the beginning of the sentence through to the end of the sentence, by his description. Joseph didn't say the sentence was instantly in his mind as if is happened in a twinkling of an eye, or something like that. He claimed that he saw and heard and watched God point even. To claim that God pointed means that at one moment He wasn't pointing and then He was. This implies the passage of time witnessed by Joseph Smith. If God was without time, then He couldn't do those things, it would be all one moment.

So you don't think that Vort and you will be bound together in the same family bond? That you will be of different families if you both make it to the Celestial Kingdom?

Not only is it "not unreasonable" (wow, three negatives in the same sentence) but Ezra Taft Benson discussed it; "I also recognize that not all women in the Church will have an opportunity for marriage and motherhood in mortality. But if those of you in this situation are worthy and endure faithfully, you can be assured of all blessings from a kind and loving Heavenly Father—and I emphasize all blessings. I assure you that if you have to wait even until the next life to be blessed with a choice companion, God will surely compensate you. Time is numbered only to man. God has your eternal perspective in mind." It is hard for me to understand how someone who would otherwise be worthy of a Celestial life, who is faithful and endures to the end, would turn down celestial marriage when it is offered so that they may be an angel in the Celestial Kingdom. That does not make sense to me. How could they turn down marriage and still be faithful? That would be a contradictory statement regarding the the description of the type of people that will be in the Celestial Kingdom, people that want the fullness of that glory. The opportunity for marriage will come before resurrection as we are told there is no marriage after resurrection. Resurrection comes before being placed into a Kingdom of glory (or right with it) so then if it is possible to be in the Celestial Kingdom and not be married then we would have to say that those individuals turned down the opportunity to take on celestial marriage. I don't see how that is possible.

Is it a requirement to be like God? Will there be anyone in the Celestial Kingdom who does not have all that God has? Just like you quoted D&C 76; " 59 Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s. " If they are not married then how can they have "all" as in 'all things are theirs'?

In the Celestial Kingdom all is shared. One should ask their self, is there anything I could hide from God? Is there any experience, any thought, any passion, any joy that I could hide from God? No. If an individual makes it to the Celestial Kingdom and inherits all that God has, then what could one hide from that individual? Nothing. The sealing power allows anyone who makes it into the Celestial Kingdom to share the glory of all those who are also in the Celestial Kingdom. In other words, then news is that if one cannot love their neighbor as their self then they will not be in the Celestial Kingdom. If one loves their neighbor as their self then they have the capacity to experience what that person experiences which is the lesson taught by our Savior as He did in the garden of Gethsemane. If one man has one wife in the Celestial Kingdom and another man has 15 wives in the Celestial Kingdom (if that is really possible) then would they have different degrees of glory? No. Because all is shared. In other words, there is no reason for a man to have more than one wife in the Celestial Kingdom. At least we have no plausible reason for a man to have more than one wife. I can't see any revelations that say it is in the LDS gospel that a man will have more than one wife in the Celestial Kingdom. Please give us quotes as to where you see that as official doctrine of the church.

Maybe they thought they would lose what they supposed they had, they weren't willing to take a chance. Despair, hopelessness, feeling like its not worth the effort are pretty powerful tools of the devil. Definition of lose by Webster; " to miss from one's possession or from a customary or supposed place " If one cannot live by the admonition of Paul, to hope for all things and endure all things, then by definition they take their self off the path of happiness.

But we do believe that God can experience your experience and therefore obtain the same power which was exerted. We believe that Christ experienced all our sins and suffered for them and we can experience them too. That ability makes it so that there is no loss when one being experiences something that the other didn't do. So, one of our core beliefs as Christians is that it is possible to experience something someone else experienced in the same way they did. Christ gives all his glory to God and in the end we all can have all that God has. The omnipotent ability comes from sharing experiences, the only way to share experiences it to have the love of Christ, pure charity. The result of all the things you said God is all about (love, kindness, compassion ...) is that it gives Him the power to "live" vicariously and obtain glory vicariously. This is our goal as well. Whether it is His hand or the hand of His servants it is the same.

I think one of the things that has helped me focus on the effects of pride is to realize that in the Celestial Kingdom we share each other's glory. If the people that end up in the Celestial Kingdom are ones who love their neighbor as their self then that means they value their glory as much as their own. That is a primary characteristic of those people. In other words, in order to qualify ourselves for that Kingdom we have to show that we have that character about us which is the opposite of Pride or seeing others as taking something away from us when they are successful. In our current political environment something that seems to always come up in my household is how a big part of the population seem to believe that if one person is rich it makes another poor when really it is the opposite. There is a belief, at least it seems that way, that the rich made the poor. So, they want to tax the rich more heavily, they want to redistribute wealth etc. In other words, there can be a lot of pride in those that have little when they desire more of what their neighbor has as opposed to being happy for their neighbor's success. It is a sin of pride when one cannot love their neighbor as their self and be happy for their neighbor's successes.

I agree that there is purpose in these things but I disagree with Traveler saying that it just seems like it is random when it is not (maybe I am misinterpreting what he is saying). I guess the question is whether God could use random events for His purposes. For example, within genetics there are certain traits that can follow a dominant or recessive pattern. Do you think God then decides, 'I gave that trait to 3 of the children so I better give the recessive trait to the 4th child to maintain the pattern.' Or, does God just let the random pattern of who gets what trait based in the natural occurrence of genetic randomness. I think sometimes the child born blind is not based in any cause and effect but an occurrence related to the random events related to corruption and then used for God's purposes.

You shouldn't be jealous but realize that a covenant is a two way street. We covenant with God but also God covenants with us to help us fulfill our promise. That additional help is not there without the covenant. A covenant is a contract of teamwork between the person making the covenant and God. That is the blessing of having priesthood authority in our lives that is binding and real. Those covenants will be made available to all those who desire them and remain worthy of them onto the next realm where they will be made available if they couldn't happen here. So, don't be jealous but at the same time remain desirous.

So, when a terrorist bomb goes off in a crowd and the nuts and bolts fly in seemingly "random" directions killing one child in the crowd and not the other and taking out the legs of another but not the person standing next to them, that was determined rather than "random"?

But what if the purpose of the test is to see what a person does in the setting of not being aware of the conditions? Like Adam not knowing why he performed sacrifices but doing it anyways. The way to set up a test of faith is to create a setting where the conditions are unknown to the person. If the test is who would a person turn to when the conditions are unknown, do the turn to their spiritual understanding, rely on Christ and the Holy Spirit for guidance or do they turn to their own understanding which is flawed and limited. Isn't that the test we face? In my understanding, the first estate test was the one where we had all knowledge placed before us, all the conditions were understood. We all here already passed that test. We don't need to take that test again. Now we face a different test, a test of the flesh, a test based in faith which is, by definition, a test in the setting of unknowns.

The limitation in our understanding is not accepting that God can see everything as if it is now. The limitation in our understanding is how God can see everything as now and at the same time have value added when something is brought to pass. In other words, we are told that there is a value or something added to God's glory at the moment something actually happens, when something is brought to pass. So, one way to reconcile that is to try to comprehend that there is a difference between seeing all time and actually passing through the time. It may be possible to see all time (as if all is as one day with God) but still have a past, present and future of which cannot go back to the past to alter any event or go into the future to alter any future event. Seeing something really well of the past or the future is a basic concept of all Christianity as we believe that Christ experienced all of our sins but that doesn't necessarily mean that He could warp time or time travel or live outside of the passage of time. The conflict that should be addressed by anyone who believes that God doesn't experience the passage of time or that God is "timeless" is to explain how God has an increase over time related to things being brought to pass or else, by definition, one would have to say then that God has experienced all that He would ever experience and therefore would have no increase at the moment something happened. It is important to my testimony that when I do something righteous I am actually giving glory to God. It would be hard to swallow the idea that if someone performs a righteous act that God is emotionless about it. Emotion requires a change from one moment to the next, something gained that was not there before. As far as gospel doctrine goes, I would like to hear the reasons why someone who believes that God is timeless stengthens their testimony, not that God can see all time as if it is one day but how does it help one's testimony to believe that God does not experience the passage of time. What is gained specifically by that concept alone, the lack of passage of time but still being able to see all time?

If that is the theory, then I think they likely exist independently but can interact. For example, Adam's body was created and then the breath of life was added. Also, we existed as spirits before the construction of this world. Lucifer was given power to influence the elements of this world, he didn't have the power automatically. Ultimately, we don't know enough about it to say.

Well, there is the phrase creatio ex materia. Consider what it means to be "transfigured". Consider the process Moses went through to be able to see God's realm and then back. There is a process that has to take place to move from one to the other, a change of the materials. Often the change as described as physically moving like falling from a high mountain or place or being "caught up". In guide to the scriptures, Transfiguration means; " The condition of persons who are temporarily changed in appearance and nature—that is, lifted to a higher spiritual level—so that they can endure the presence and glory of heavenly beings. " If it can go in one direction it can go in the other as it did with Moses.

I don't interpret any of what is in Elder Neal A. Maxwell's talk as "experiencing" the future as if it is now. The scriptures say things like "sees" it as if it is now, or made manifest. There is a difference. God can see the glory in some future act which becomes purpose and a work and then as it comes to pass the glory from that act is experienced and obtained or brought to pass. I think the jump from seeing, even seeing as if it is now to experiencing it as if it has taken place is a big jump that changes everything we know about our reasons even to be here. Hypothetically, if God has "experienced" all, for all time, then how does He increase in glory and works? Or is God stagnant for you? Also, if God's experience never changes then He would not be emotional or express any different emotion than He is currently expressing. God would just be one emotion all the time, never added and never increasing. The other thing to consider is that if God could re-experience something that is glorious than all He would need to do is re-experience a single act over and over again to increase in glory without doing more works. There must be a reason why His works are works without end.

"Spirit" has many meanings as do many words in the scriptures. Things that are spiritual are eternal and things that are temporal are temporary. We have two components in this life, one that is temporal - the physical body and one that is eternal - the spiritual body (our spirit). When we resurrect we will not be dual natured but joined as one eternal being, the body being made into an eternal physical body and therefore could be called "spirit". When we are dual natured we do not rest, there is internal strife. When we are made one in resurrection there is rest from that battle. We are all supposed to take on the body of Christ, we covenant to do so in the Sacrament. Christ invites us to come unto His rest, to be worthy or Celestial resurrection. When Christ returns all will see that it is possible to be Eternal and physical at the same time.

How do you know where the thought came from, whether it is from spirit or body? For example, the thought to sleep for the apostles in the Garden of Gethsemane was from the spirit or from the body? It was the spirit that could not filter out the thought from the brain at that moment, not the other way around. When one wants to eat during Fast Sunday, is that thought from the spirit or the brain? The spirit filters out the thought from the brain at that moment if one is successful with the fast. We are dual natured, we have two competing thoughts while in this life, the test is to see which one we feed. The most prominent thought pattern is from the brain, not the spirit. It is difficult to discern the spirit's thoughts, to be spiritually minded. It is more natural to be carnally minded. The default thought pattern in this life is from the brain, not the spirit.

It would only be a lie if Nephi at that moment said that it has already come to pass. So long as he takes it as such, that it is a future event then there is no disruption of linear time. The passing of linear time does not preclude the idea that one can "see" into the past or the future. It only requires that one realize that there is value in something coming to pass, that it has happened, making it different from something that will happen. I know, some day, I will be resurrected but I do not call myself or glory in the idea of being resurrected until it is brought to pass. I can hope for it, even have a perfect hope but that is different than knowing that something has happened. I believe there is value to God even in knowing that something has happened as opposed to will happen. The thing that is lost if someone does not believe in the passage of time for God is to say that God gains no value in knowing that something has happened as opposed to will happen. And if that is the case then there is no increase for God. "Increase" requires the passage of time or at least the distinction of past present and future. Explain how God can have works and the resultant increase in glory without the passage of time or the recognition of the passage of time.

I don't think we knew about some things we would face in mortality while in the premortal life as there is such a thing as experiential knowledge. I liken it to a soldier in boot camp that swears they will go back to save their fallen soldier in battle but until they are actually in the heat of the battle they may not really realize what they had signed up for. Only the most heroic will actually go back to save their fallen fellow soldiers when faced with the horrors of battle and that is the true test of character, the oath before the battle is easily made but the true test of character is when one is disoriented by the confusion and threats during the battle. Likewise only the most faithful and righteous will rise beyond the corruption we face in this life, the true test of our heart's desire.

It is not only necessary for the Plan it is necessary for God's work and glory. While in the presence of God and including all those who were cast out, all God's spirit children matured before the great counsel in Heaven. In other words, there was a time, in the presence of God, that we were not matured. Then there came a time, in the presence of God, that the Plan of Salvation was presented to us.

When one loves their neighbor as their self as is required by all who make it to the Celestial Kingdom, the joy that is experienced by glorious acts is felt to the same degree that Christ experienced all of our sins. One Celestial being will not have anything over another, otherwise that changes the definition of what is Celestial. The telestial kingdom is described as one where one star differs from another. I think if one has the mindset that they could have one above or less than another than they are setting their self up for something other than a Celestial life. This is why the greatest commandments are what they are, to learn to love things that are not ours and therefore be able to experience them as if they were ours. Joy is endless when one gains joy and glory from the actions of others as God does, then there is no end but when one defines their glory as personal acts then it is limited.