Uncomfortable Doctrine

[prisonchaplain]

I'm no expert on searching official LDS materials, but I believe I found one of the most definitive articles on premortal existence: LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Fulness of the Gospel: Life before Birth

I get the impression that investigators and non-LDS friends who want a deeper study would do better at the lds.org gospel library, than at mormon.org (which seems to be set up as an introductory site for investigators or new converts).

What I got from the article is that there is enough to the eternal intelligence to say that "man is eternal," but nothing to indicate that there is eternal self-understanding for each one of us. Thus, the creation of spirit bodies. Perhaps even with the latter day restoration, "the glass remains cloudy," and we'll see clearly when Christ returns?

[Vort]

Perhaps even with the latter day restoration, "the glass remains cloudy," and we'll see clearly when Christ returns?

You're right in this, I am sure. Latter-day Saints rejoice that we have knowledge and revelation given us, but in the end we're still in the same situation of mortality and ignorance that our non-LDS brothers and sisters are. We, all of us, must live by faith. Joining the kingdom of God doesn't change that, it just makes the journey a bit more purposeful.

[Justice]

Yes, PC... very well said.

[Hemidakota]

I'm no expert on searching official LDS materials, but I believe I found one of the most definitive articles on premortal existence: LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Fulness of the Gospel: Life before Birth

I get the impression that investigators and non-LDS friends who want a deeper study would do better at the lds.org gospel library, than at mormon.org (which seems to be set up as an introductory site for investigators or new converts).

What I got from the article is that there is enough to the eternal intelligence to say that "man is eternal," but nothing to indicate that there is eternal self-understanding for each one of us. Thus, the creation of spirit bodies. Perhaps even with the latter day restoration, "the glass remains cloudy," and we'll see clearly when Christ returns?

Come to an understanding will not be that clear. For me, it is connecting the dots that the Holy Ghost will teach at times depending our limited understanding or comprehension. Then there are other truths that are given forth immediately.

This area is not an easy subject to digest at one sitting. I would not expect it to be taught when the Savior returns unless you are prepare as I stated - dot connecting a dot until you can clearly see the true picture.

Example: if I am located outside of the universe, what would I be looking at? That is key to the understanding of the eternal principle. Abraham was shown the universe, in and out, and its operations how worlds are created. Now, most of the clergy of that time frame [300-400AD] would not adopt this discourse and I don't blame them. It was clearly above there norm of thinking or spiritual learning.

[a-train]

Joseph Smith said: "The spirit of man is not a created being; it existed from eternity, and will exist to eternity." (TPJS p158)

[Moksha]

Christ = cornerstone

Book of Mormon = keystone

Doctrine & Covenants = capstone

Gazelem = seerstone

Baptism = milestone

Diamond = birthstone

Hell = brimstone

Georgetown = brownstone

That should just about cover it.

Don't forget:

The Old Millstone

The Stones of Númenor

The Stone Age

Stone Soup

The Rock of Ages

Upon this Rock

Rock Around the Clock

Rockin' Robin

and Rocky I-V

[justamere10]

Thank you very much (I gave you a point too :D)! I realize we're in an area of theological speculation, but your suggestions have helped me understand better. I had thought that LDS teaching was that we had an individual eternal pre-existence. If so, then, perhaps we're all Gods in the making? BUT, if that pre-existent pre-Spirit (new idea for me as well--I assumed our spiritual existence was eternal) existence was not individual...well this clears up some of your teachings for me. I'll give mormon.org a good looking-at--especially the premortal existence--it's probably time I got all the information that is official, eh?

I like the way you ended that sentence. Sounded quite Canadian eh? :)

[justamere10]

Joseph Smith said: "The spirit of man is not a created being; it existed from eternity, and will exist to eternity." (TPJS p158)

In the context of course Joseph is not referring here to the spirit body that God created for each of us, but to the eternal "Intelligence" that is in all things, including that spirit body.

[Iggy]

<<snip>>

How can a teaching from the founder and first prophet NOT be a keystone to the very religion he started??? <<snip>>

God bless,

Carl

Joseph Smith is the first living prophet of this Dispensation. He did NOT start this religion. He restored Christ's true church.

We need to remember that all 15 (16?) prophets/presidents of the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS are the prophet/seer/revelator of the entire WORLD, not just to the members of the LDS Church.

[Guest ceeboo]

I haven't read this thread all the way through (and given its length, I don't plan to do so), so I am not sure which teaching you think Joseph Smith offered that LDS members don't accept.

However, I would point out that the funeral sermon for Elder Follett was not recorded in any official capacity, but was pieced together from accounts of those who did hear it, or in some cases perhaps heard it from someone who heard it. In such cases, it's difficult to determine precisely what the Prophet said. When an important doctrinal point hinges on a single word, phrase, or expression (e.g. "God was as we are" vs. "God was once mortal" vs. "God was once sinful"), such precision of wording becomes important. When that precision is lacking, no larger gospel doctrine can safely be drawn from the record.

Wow!!!! I take the gorgious bride out for an evening of "good eats" and a couple of laughs and I MISSED 3 PAGES ON THIS THREAD. I better get to work and reply to all my new friends:)

Hi Vort,

Could your suggestion be used for ALL of JS contributions ????

Peace,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

You have to understand one thing about this church. The "Rock" we have been talking about is revelation....for us. :) That means that a fallible man can receive a revelation from God. Those prophets are not perfect.

We are encouraged to listen to what comes from the pulpit and and understand the difference between what a prophet proclaims to the world vs. what he says in his backyard.

I wish Ceeboo, that you would look more to understanding the PRINCIPLE of eternal progression, rather than hanging onto the Follett discourse. What Vort said is exactly right. We don't have an accurate record of what was said that day. That is why it hasn't been added to our canon. It is the BofM that we hang everything on and the First vision of the Joseph Smith! Please try to understand the priority in which we put these ideas.

!

Hello Misshalfway,

Thanks for the comments,

JS not being perfect: I accept that completly and would certainly be the first to let you know that there is a long list of Catholic leaders that have been FAR FROM PERFECT. BUT, I was not judging JS on his human issues ( we all have them, Lord knows I have more than my share ) I was speaking about capacity as a prophet from the pulpit during a sermon ( Not in a backyard ). To be fair, a very different thing IMHO.

I appreciate the suggestion to look more at the principle of eternal progression.:)

Without sounding sarcastic, maybe some of the LDS members who post on this forum should join me in the above mentioned.

As far a Vort being right, I don't know, how does anyone conclude which of JS's offerings are " maybe not accuratly documented " and which ones are ( A VERY DANGEROUS ROAD TO GO DOWN, especialy if your LDS IMHO.)

God bless,

Carl

[bmy-]

Hello Misshalfway,

Thanks for the comments,

JS not being perfect: I accept that completly and would certainly be the first to let you know that there is a long list of Catholic leaders that have been FAR FROM PERFECT. BUT, I was not judging JS on his human issues ( we all have them, Lord knows I have more than my share ) I was speaking about capacity as a prophet from the pulpit during a sermon ( Not in a backyard ). To be fair, a very different thing IMHO.

I appreciate the suggestion to look more at the principle of eternal progression.:)

Without sounding sarcastic, maybe some of the LDS members who post on this forum should join me in the above mentioned.

As far a Vort being right, I don't know, how does anyone conclude which of JS's offerings are " maybe not accuratly documented " and which ones are ( A VERY DANGEROUS ROAD TO GO DOWN, especialy if your LDS IMHO.)

God bless,

Carl

It was a sermon.. as such it was recorded by various people. That's not even considering the people who took notes.

It's beyond solid IMO. If it wasn't the LDS church wouldn't quote it in talks, ensign articles, etc. I can't believe it isn't considered scripture.

Edited September 6, 2008 by bmy-

[Guest ceeboo]

Yes, he DID say that God is an exalted man. But he did NOT say that God was ever not God. When God came to earth to live as man, He never laid aside His Godhood. The Eternal God endured mortality, but this doesn't in any way mean that He was at some point not God. Can you see the difference?

-a-train

Hi a-train,

You have indeed been very gracious with me in regards to responding to my posts to you.

( thanks for that ):)

I simply do not know what to say to you . Forgive me but what you seem to take away from the King Follet teaching is very different from what I do.

I do appreciate your time and effort you have given me.:)

God bless,

Carl

[Misshalfway]

Hello Misshalfway,

Thanks for the comments,

JS not being perfect: I accept that completly and would certainly be the first to let you know that there is a long list of Catholic leaders that have been FAR FROM PERFECT. BUT, I was not judging JS on his human issues ( we all have them, Lord knows I have more than my share ) I was speaking about capacity as a prophet from the pulpit during a sermon ( Not in a backyard ). To be fair, a very different thing IMHO.

I appreciate the suggestion to look more at the principle of eternal progression.:)

Without sounding sarcastic, maybe some of the LDS members who post on this forum should join me in the above mentioned.

As far a Vort being right, I don't know, how does anyone conclude which of JS's offerings are " maybe not accuratly documented " and which ones are ( A VERY DANGEROUS ROAD TO GO DOWN, especialy if your LDS IMHO.)

God bless,

Carl

I see no danger in the road. :) If God answers prayers, then God can answer all of these! There is nothing more safe than personal revelation.

Either JSmith was a prophet of God and the BofM is true and he did in fact see God and Jesus that day OR it is all a load of bunk!!!!!

God is the only source to find the real truth.

I mean how do you know history is right? Because it is tradition? Because lots of people believe it? How do you KNOW that your tradition is right? How do you know the Savior is the Savior? Were you there? What proof do any of us have that he walked the earth?

[Guest ceeboo]

You probably didn't notice, but I've been riding shotgun with you throughout this thread. I applaud you for your perseverence and diplomacy. As a fellow Non-Mon with no other agenda than to try to understand, it has been a very interesting yet confusing journey!!

Thank you to all the posters (too many to name specifically) who have tirelessly provided input and insight. Your dedication is appreciated!

Hey . . . what happened to dear Fiona84? Did we lose her along this bumpy trail?

Hello TheLutheran,

Funny you mention that " riding shotgun " I was wondering who kept turning the air on .:)

" you applaud me for my perserverence and diplomacy " thanks, I think:)

IMHO, the real applause should be directed at the LDS members on this forum. I wonder if I would be as patient, willing, or kind in return, if my religion and beliefs were being questioned to such a degree.

I would second your thanks to the many LDS posters that have indeed put forth a monumetal effort to benifit folks like me.:)

Interesting and confusing journey, YES INDEED.

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

Ceeboo,

Misshalfway (and Vort too)has said it much better than my feable attempt has been. But she has said exactly what is true for me.

Of what Misshalfway has so eloquently said, don't you understand. Because, it seems to me, you keep having the same questions and we don't seem to be answering them for you.:)

I know I appear quite ignorant (and I really don't mind that). I know that I've come to Christ as a child and that I am learning. Having said that, I also know that I do have some wisdom to pass on -- and I hope that is respected.:)

Hey candyprpl,

On the contrary my friend candyprpl, It is not that you all have not answered them, it is that all the answers were all different to the same and IMHO very simple question>

Absolutly not, you do not appear ignorant at all. I have not only respected the wisdom you have offered but I do appreciate your willingness to share it with me.:)

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

Joseph Smith is the first living prophet of this Dispensation. He did NOT start this religion. He restored Christ's true church.

We need to remember that all 15 (16?) prophets/presidents of the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS are the prophet/seer/revelator of the entire WORLD, not just to the members of the LDS Church.

Hi Iggy,

You have IMHO, the second best avatar on this forum ( the first is the screen licking cow thing, it is truly AWESOME ) sorry, I forgot who has that avatar.

I would assume ( to be fair ) that your post was speaking to other LDS and not me.

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

It was a sermon.. as such it was recorded by various people. That's not even considering the people who took notes.

It's beyond solid IMO. If it wasn't the LDS church wouldn't host quote it in talks, ensign articles, etc. I can't believe it isn't considered scripture.

Hi bmy,

That is certainly what I would have thought . Thus what began all my confusion leading to gigantic confusion.

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

I see no danger in the road. :) If God answers prayers, then God can answer all of these! There is nothing more safe than personal revelation.

Either JSmith was a prophet of God and the BofM is true and he did in fact see God and Jesus that day OR it is all a load of bunk!!!!!

Hi again Misshalfway,

I am not sure you understood my post, maybe you did.

My suggestion ( " dangerous road to go down " ) meant which prophetic teaching do YOU determine to be directly from God and which ones do YOU determine to be " just his speculations " or " backyard talk " . Indeed, IMHO, a VERY DANGEROUS road to go down

Peace,

Carl

Edited September 6, 2008 by ceeboo
typo

[bmy-]

Hi bmy,

That is certainly what I would have thought . Thus what began all my confusion leading to gigantic confusion.

God bless,

Carl

Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, Thomas Bullock, and William Clayton were a few who recorded this sermon. Big names.. reputable names.. honest men.

I can't speak for the church.. but for myself.. it's doctrine. I see no reasons it shouldn't be.

[Guest ceeboo]

I don't know if this helps or not but the king follet discourse is not the keystone of our religion. The Book of Mormon is. It is thru this book that a man gets nearer to God. Any ideas from this discourse that are true are icing on the cake.

Hi Misshalfway,

:confused: The two you mention ( King Follet and BofM ) are both recieved by the exact same prophet ?? Why so much weight on one and so little on the other ??

[prisonchaplain]

I see no danger in the road. :) If God answers prayers, then God can answer all of these! There is nothing more safe than personal revelation.

Either JSmith was a prophet of God and the BofM is true and he did in fact see God and Jesus that day OR it is all a load of bunk!!!!!

God is the only source to find the real truth.

I mean how do you know history is right? Because it is tradition? Because lots of people believe it? How do you KNOW that your tradition is right? How do you know the Savior is the Savior? Were you there? What proof do any of us have that he walked the earth?

It would be very difficult for a Protestant or Catholic (or atheist for that matter) to prove to a faithful LDS person that Joseph Smith is not a prophet from God. And, indeed, most of us who frequent this site have no intention of doing so. Rather, we raise our questions as non-LDS, who have much that prevents us from easily accepting LDS claims. If Joseph Smith is a prophet, it means that my church is seriously wrong it so much of what it teaches. It also means that I have badly misunderstood many spiritual experiences and promptings that I have had.

So...when we discuss these things, we learn the other's perspectives, gain some new understanding of our current faith, and, in some cases, find ourselves nudged in one spiritual direction or another.

[Guest ceeboo]

It would be very difficult for a Protestant or Catholic (or atheist for that matter) to prove to a faithful LDS person that Joseph Smith is not a prophet from God. And, indeed, most of us who frequent this site have no intention of doing so. Rather, we raise our questions as non-LDS, who have much that prevents us from easily accepting LDS claims. If Joseph Smith is a prophet, it means that my church is seriously wrong it so much of what it teaches. It also means that I have badly misunderstood many spiritual experiences and promptings that I have had.

So...when we discuss these things, we learn the other's perspectives, gain some new understanding of our current faith, and, in some cases, find ourselves nudged in one spiritual direction or another.

Hello PC,

I ABSOBATOOOOOOTLY 100% agree and certainly could not have said it any better.:)

God bless,

Carl

[richlittell]

Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, Thomas Bullock, and William Clayton were a few who recorded this sermon. Big names.. reputable names.. honest men.

I can't speak for the church.. but for myself.. it's doctrine. I see no reasons it shouldn't be.

I can tell you why it's NOT doctrine, though it may very well be true. Just look at this thread. It is a tough and difficult concept. The church's purpose is for presenting the principles of salvation and the support of the family. There are many truths that go beyond the average person's ability to understand--especially those from different cultural backgrounds. These things will never be doctrines until the minds of the people are ready.

Ceeboo, Many prophets have spoken on thousands of topics on many occasions to diverse audiences. We do not hold every word spoken out of their mouths to be the indisputable word of God.

[richlittell]

Hi Misshalfway,

:confused: The two you mention ( King Follet and BofM ) are both recieved by the exact same prophet ?? Why so much weight on one and so little on the other ??

Ceeboo, Many prophets have spoken on thousands of topics on many occasions to diverse audiences. We do not hold every word spoken out of their mouths to be the indisputable word of God.