Baptism For The Dead

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Mar 7 2005, 07:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Mar 7 2005, 07:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Mar 7 2005, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Mar 7 2005, 06:02 PM

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Mar 7 2005, 04:57 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Mar 7 2005, 05:45 PM

Randy, I believe that the resurrection of the just signals the end of the missionary phase of those who have died.  If they are not resurrected in that resurrection, they are destined for Telestial glory or outer darkness.

Dawn,

Then are you saying that those in the spirit world will have had to already accepted the gospel and been baptized before the Resurrection of the Just?

I thought you were putting forth the idea that a spirit could be resurrected THEN be baptized. Did I miss understand you?

Also....I didnt know if you noticed my other question about males needing to have been ordained to the MP in order to enter the Celestial Kingdom....do you believe that as well?

randy

I thought I made it clear that I believe that they will have the opportunity during the Zionic reign to be baptized. I do not believe it is a requirement to be baptized to be resurrected in the Resurrection of the Just.

I do not read that it is a requirement for one to be a MP member to enter Celestial Glory, no.

Dawn,

We both agree that people on both sides of the veil during the millennium will have the opportunity to accept the gospel and be baptized. You seem to be reversing your course. On the other board you specifically stated that it was your belief that Baptism was necessary to enter the Celestial Kingdom. Period. In order for a person to inherit a Celestial glory, he must come forth in the morning of the First Resurrection, or Resurrection of the Just. So, it stands to reason.....Baptism is necessary.

You say baptism is NOT a requirement to come forth in the Resurrection of the Just..yet how do you explain D&C 76:51 where it spells it out plainly?

Explain to me what you believe it is saying.

Explain what D&C 76:57 means when it says speaking of those males who shall come forth in the resurrection of the Just:

"And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son."

Is this not the MP that is being referenced?

randy

Randy, you cannot look at an isolated scripture in that section because the eligibility goes on for several verses. It states that those eligible for both Celestial Glory and Terrestrial Glory are to arise in the Resurrection of the Just. That one verse is only the requirement for Celestial Glory. You have to go down further to see the requirements for Terrestrial Glory.

So, are you implying that only MP members will be in Celestial Glory?

Dawn,

I read and re-read the entire section.

Lets take this a step at a time. First of all, for the sake of this discussion....lets only talk about what is required for Celestial Glory. Truthfully...I dont dwell on anything else. I want first string varsity, not water boy!

The verse I quoted you is supported by the other scriptures, but most importantly by the inspired guidance and counsel the Prophet voluminously gave to the Saints. His instructions alone clarify perfectly all these points.

The verse I gave specifically and clearly states that baptism is necessary before the Resurrection of the Just.

If you read it differently....please, explain it to me. I really am sincere when I ask that.

You state that "that requirement is only for Celestial glory"....so what is that telling you Dawn???? It's right there in front of you!

Regarding the verse about the need for the MP....you tell me what it is saying.....I want to know what you believe it means.

randy

[Jenda]

You know better than that. Truth is....there isn't anyone they could have selected other than Wallace B. Smith that would have satisfied you or the Restorationists.

Yes there is one that I would have loved to have seen placed in that spot. It is another of the apostles, and I know his heart very well, as I lived with his mother for a while in college, and I stayed with them last year when his father died. He would do the right thing for the church. Of that I know.

So...with this selection...do you feel the CoC is now in complete apostacy? You have made the comment before that you felt the CoC was, for lack of a better phrase...in "partial apostacy". Does this seal the deal for you? Are you going to continue to attend the CoC church or are you going to take a stand and leave and come to Independence?

The church has the potential to go into complete apostasy at that time. It depends on who ordains him, and who he chooses to replace him as apostle, and who ordains that person.

If the church goes into complete apostasy, this is the same exact situation that they church faced when BY was elevated to president. Exactly. The governance of the church then falls to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself. As what happened between 1844 and 1860. Of course the church will never admit that this is happening, as the LDS church never admitted it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

As for myself, I cannot pick up and leave without my family. It is now, and will continue to be, my strong wish to gather so that I can attend a church I feel is not in apostasy.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Mar 7 2005, 07:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Mar 7 2005, 07:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Mar 7 2005, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Mar 7 2005, 06:02 PM

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Mar 7 2005, 04:57 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Mar 7 2005, 05:45 PM

Randy, I believe that the resurrection of the just signals the end of the missionary phase of those who have died.  If they are not resurrected in that resurrection, they are destined for Telestial glory or outer darkness.

Dawn,

Then are you saying that those in the spirit world will have had to already accepted the gospel and been baptized before the Resurrection of the Just?

I thought you were putting forth the idea that a spirit could be resurrected THEN be baptized. Did I miss understand you?

Also....I didnt know if you noticed my other question about males needing to have been ordained to the MP in order to enter the Celestial Kingdom....do you believe that as well?

randy

I thought I made it clear that I believe that they will have the opportunity during the Zionic reign to be baptized. I do not believe it is a requirement to be baptized to be resurrected in the Resurrection of the Just.

I do not read that it is a requirement for one to be a MP member to enter Celestial Glory, no.

Dawn,

We both agree that people on both sides of the veil during the millennium will have the opportunity to accept the gospel and be baptized. You seem to be reversing your course. On the other board you specifically stated that it was your belief that Baptism was necessary to enter the Celestial Kingdom. Period. In order for a person to inherit a Celestial glory, he must come forth in the morning of the First Resurrection, or Resurrection of the Just. So, it stands to reason.....Baptism is necessary.

You say baptism is NOT a requirement to come forth in the Resurrection of the Just..yet how do you explain D&C 76:51 where it spells it out plainly?

Explain to me what you believe it is saying.

Explain what D&C 76:57 means when it says speaking of those males who shall come forth in the resurrection of the Just:

"And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son."

Is this not the MP that is being referenced?

randy

Randy, you cannot look at an isolated scripture in that section because the eligibility goes on for several verses. It states that those eligible for both Celestial Glory and Terrestrial Glory are to arise in the Resurrection of the Just. That one verse is only the requirement for Celestial Glory. You have to go down further to see the requirements for Terrestrial Glory.

So, are you implying that only MP members will be in Celestial Glory?

Dawn,

Just as a clarification....and I know you know this....but baptism is NOT a requirement to be resurrected. Baptism is only required of those who accept the restored gospel and desire to inherit a Celestial glory.

As I showed earlier....there is a specific order in which the dead will be raised. In the Resurrection of the Just...there are two resurrection events....the first is the "Morning of the First Resurrection" these are they who shall inherit the Celestial Kingdom, and the second is the "afternoon of the First Resurrection"...these are they who shall inherit a terrestial glory.

We do not know how long a period of time it will be between those two events.

Again...as long we know that those who desire to be resurrected to a Celestial Glory will need to have been baptized prior to the "morning of the First Resurrection" that is enough to know. IMO.

So....since you agree that those who inherit a Celestial glory will have already been baptized, as taught in that verse in Section 76...how would those baptisms been performed?

randy

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda@Mar 8 2005, 07:54 AM

You know better than that. Truth is....there isn't anyone they could have selected other than Wallace B. Smith that would have satisfied you or the Restorationists.

Yes there is one that I would have loved to have seen placed in that spot. It is another of the apostles, and I know his heart very well, as I lived with his mother for a while in college, and I stayed with them last year when his father died. He would do the right thing for the church. Of that I know.

So...with this selection...do you feel the CoC is now in complete apostacy? You have made the comment before that you felt the CoC was, for lack of a better phrase...in "partial apostacy". Does this seal the deal for you? Are you going to continue to attend the CoC church or are you going to take a stand and leave and come to Independence?

The church has the potential to go into complete apostasy at that time. It depends on who ordains him, and who he chooses to replace him as apostle, and who ordains that person.

If the church goes into complete apostasy, this is the same exact situation that they church faced when BY was elevated to president. Exactly. The governance of the church then falls to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself. As what happened between 1844 and 1860. Of course the church will never admit that this is happening, as the LDS church never admitted it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

As for myself, I cannot pick up and leave without my family. It is now, and will continue to be, my strong wish to gather so that I can attend a church I feel is not in apostasy.

Dawn,

See, this is what I find hard to understand. You state that there is an Apostle whom you felt would have "done the right thing" for the church. This Apostle has supported and sustained all this doctrinal change which you so vehemently oppose. I know this sound harsh, but how can you say he would do the right thing for the Church when he has supported all that has caused the CoC to go down this road to apostacy and evidently...will continue to?

I dont get it.

Dawn, you say the church "has the potential" to go into complete apostacy at that time, then you list all these scenario's that would have to fall into place to make it happen. Looks like to me you have already rationalized that whatever takes place...you have an "out" that will allow you to continue the path you are on.

You are treading water...thats it. You are not moving forward. This same mindset probably will be manifest in the Restorationists as a whole. Why? Because they know that their hope lies in the repentance and restitution of the Institutional Church.

You say the "governance" of the Church then would fall to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself".

I thought that is what the "Restorationist" movement was all about in the first place! I thought that since 1984 this has been the position of the "Restorationists". Now you are telling me that that's not true? Thats not what happened in 1984, but could be true in 2005?

Do you see all the confusion that is inherit in all of this? Can you not see that this will never change?

randy

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Mar 8 2005, 07:22 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Mar 8 2005, 07:22 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Mar 8 2005, 07:54 AM

You know better than that. Truth is....there isn't anyone they could have selected other than Wallace B. Smith that would have satisfied you or the Restorationists.

Yes there is one that I would have loved to have seen placed in that spot.  It is another of the apostles, and I know his heart very well, as I lived with his mother for a while in college, and I stayed with them last year when his father died.  He would do the right thing for the church.  Of that I know.

So...with this selection...do you feel the CoC is now in complete apostacy? You have made the comment before that you felt the CoC was, for lack of a better phrase...in "partial apostacy". Does this seal the deal for you? Are you going to continue to attend the CoC church or are you going to take a stand and leave and come to Independence?

The church has the potential to go into complete apostasy at that time.  It depends on who ordains him, and who he chooses to replace him as apostle, and who ordains that person.

If the church goes into complete apostasy, this is the same exact situation that they church faced when BY was elevated to president.  Exactly.  The governance of the church then falls to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself.  As what happened between 1844 and 1860.  Of course the church will never admit that this is happening, as the LDS church never admitted it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

As for myself, I cannot pick up and leave without my family.  It is now, and will continue to be, my strong wish to gather so that I can attend a church I feel is not in apostasy.

Dawn,

See, this is what I find hard to understand. You state that there is an Apostle whom you felt would have "done the right thing" for the church. This Apostle has supported and sustained all this doctrinal change which you so vehemently oppose. I know this sound harsh, but how can you say he would do the right thing for the Church when he has supported all that has caused the CoC to go down this road to apostacy and evidently...will continue to?

I dont get it.

You seem to think that everyone has to believe the same exact things in order to be in leadership positions. I happen to know that some of the apostles are very liberal, in all ways. Some are conservative Christians, but liberal regarding the restoration, some are traditional in all ways. Some have testified that things that they did not believe to be true were ramrodded through by the liberals above them (the 1st presidency) and they did not support those changes. I do not believe that the church would go in a direction that the upper leadership does not endorse. And if a conservative (in all respects) gets into the top leadership position, I believe the eventual outcome would be entirely different.

If the person I mentioned was put into the top leadership position, the church would turn around it's belief about the Book of Mormon, and in many other "traditional restoration" beliefs, and become, once again, a restoration church. Can they do anything about things like women in the priesthood, I seriously doubt it, but that is not what makes it or breaks it to me.

Dawn, you say the church "has the potential" to go into complete apostacy at that time, then you list all these scenario's that would have to fall into place to make it happen.  Looks like to me you have already rationalized that whatever takes place...you have an "out" that will allow you to continue the path you are on. 

You are treading water...thats it.  You are not moving forward.  This same mindset probably will be manifest in the Restorationists as a whole.  Why?  Because they know that their hope lies in the repentance and restitution of the Institutional Church.

You say the "governance" of the Church then would fall to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself".

I thought that is what the "Restorationist" movement was all about in the first place!  I thought that since 1984 this has been the position of the "Restorationists".  Now you are telling me that that's not true?  Thats not what happened in 1984, but could be true in 2005?

Do you see all the confusion that is inherit in all of this? Can you not see that this will never change?

                                                          randy

This is all I have to say about that. http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/g/m/gmovesmw.htm

Let me add that what you have said about the position of the restoration branches. That is true. But it would become true for every branch in the church if it goes into apostasy. But efforts are underway to try to gain control of the situation by a group of restorationists for the eventuality that is approaching.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson@Mar 8 2005, 06:49 AM

Dawn,

I read and re-read the entire section.

Lets take this a step at a time. First of all, for the sake of this discussion....lets only talk about what is required for Celestial Glory. Truthfully...I dont dwell on anything else. I want first string varsity, not water boy!

The verse I quoted you is supported by the other scriptures, but most importantly by the inspired guidance and counsel the Prophet voluminously gave to the Saints. His instructions alone clarify perfectly all these points.

The verse I gave specifically and clearly states that baptism is necessary before the Resurrection of the Just.

If you read it differently....please, explain it to me. I really am sincere when I ask that.

You state that "that requirement is only for Celestial glory"....so what is that telling you Dawn???? It's right there in front of you!

Regarding the verse about the need for the MP....you tell me what it is saying.....I want to know what you believe it means.

randy

Let's look at the set-up of Section 76. I will start at the beginning of the vision, and I will use RLDS scriptures because it is easier for me to find things there. But rest assured, they are the same.

First it talks about the sons of Perdition, who they are and how they will go to outer darkness. I won't post all those scriptures, I think we agree on that point. I will point out one scripture, though. I will highlight an important phrase within that scripture.

76:4e these are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the Devil and his angels, and the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power; yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath;

76:4f for all the rest shall be brought forth by the resurrection of the dead, through the triumph and the glory of the Lamb, who was slain, who was in the bosom of the Father before the worlds were made.

Then we move on to this scripture.

76:5a And again, we bear record for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ, concerning them who come forth in the resurrection of the just:

And there are a bunch of scriptural requirements that are listed in verses 5b through 6h.

And then we get to this scripture.

76:7a And again, we saw the glory of the telestial, which glory is that of the lesser, even as the glory of the stars differs from that of the glory of the moon in the firmament;

7b these are they who received not the gospel of Christ, neither the testimony of Jesus;

7c these are they who deny not the Holy Spirit;

7d these are they who are thrust down to hell;

7e these are they who shall not be redeemed from the Devil, until the last resurrection, until the Lord, even Christ the Lamb, shall have finished his work;

This last scripture I quoted shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that only those who are to receive the Telestial Glory will not be resurrected in the Resurrection of the Just. Which means that those who are eligible for Terrestrial Glory will be resurrected in that resurrection.

You can look it up in your own D&C. It is all there.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Mar 8 2005, 08:38 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Mar 8 2005, 08:38 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Mar 8 2005, 07:22 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Mar 8 2005, 07:54 AM

You know better than that. Truth is....there isn't anyone they could have selected other than Wallace B. Smith that would have satisfied you or the Restorationists.

Yes there is one that I would have loved to have seen placed in that spot.  It is another of the apostles, and I know his heart very well, as I lived with his mother for a while in college, and I stayed with them last year when his father died.  He would do the right thing for the church.  Of that I know.

So...with this selection...do you feel the CoC is now in complete apostacy? You have made the comment before that you felt the CoC was, for lack of a better phrase...in "partial apostacy". Does this seal the deal for you? Are you going to continue to attend the CoC church or are you going to take a stand and leave and come to Independence?

The church has the potential to go into complete apostasy at that time.  It depends on who ordains him, and who he chooses to replace him as apostle, and who ordains that person.

If the church goes into complete apostasy, this is the same exact situation that they church faced when BY was elevated to president.  Exactly.  The governance of the church then falls to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself.  As what happened between 1844 and 1860.  Of course the church will never admit that this is happening, as the LDS church never admitted it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

As for myself, I cannot pick up and leave without my family.  It is now, and will continue to be, my strong wish to gather so that I can attend a church I feel is not in apostasy.

Dawn,

See, this is what I find hard to understand. You state that there is an Apostle whom you felt would have "done the right thing" for the church. This Apostle has supported and sustained all this doctrinal change which you so vehemently oppose. I know this sound harsh, but how can you say he would do the right thing for the Church when he has supported all that has caused the CoC to go down this road to apostacy and evidently...will continue to?

I dont get it.

You seem to think that everyone has to believe the same exact things in order to be in leadership positions. I happen to know that some of the apostles are very liberal, in all ways. Some are conservative Christians, but liberal regarding the restoration, some are traditional in all ways. Some have testified that things that they did not believe to be true were ramrodded through by the liberals above them (the 1st presidency) and they did not support those changes. I do not believe that the church would go in a direction that the upper leadership does not endorse. And if a conservative (in all respects) gets into the top leadership position, I believe the eventual outcome would be entirely different.

If the person I mentioned was put into the top leadership position, the church would turn around it's belief about the Book of Mormon, and in many other "traditional restoration" beliefs, and become, once again, a restoration church. Can they do anything about things like women in the priesthood, I seriously doubt it, but that is not what makes it or breaks it to me.

Dawn, you say the church "has the potential" to go into complete apostacy at that time, then you list all these scenario's that would have to fall into place to make it happen.  Looks like to me you have already rationalized that whatever takes place...you have an "out" that will allow you to continue the path you are on. 

You are treading water...thats it.  You are not moving forward.   This same mindset probably will be manifest in the Restorationists as a whole.  Why?  Because they know that their hope lies in the repentance and restitution of the Institutional Church.

You say the "governance" of the Church then would fall to local leadership, and each branch would be "responsible" for itself".

I thought that is what the "Restorationist" movement was all about in the first place!   I thought that since 1984 this has been the position of the "Restorationists".  Now you are telling me that that's not true?  Thats not what happened in 1984, but could be true in 2005?

Do you see all the confusion that is inherit in all of this? Can you not see that this will never change?

                                                           randy

This is all I have to say about that. http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/g/m/gmovesmw.htm

Let me add that what you have said about the position of the restoration branches. That is true. But it would become true for every branch in the church if it goes into apostasy. But efforts are underway to try to gain control of the situation by a group of restorationists for the eventuality that is approaching.

Dawn,

It would not be true for every branch in the Church because not every branch would believe that the church is in apostacy.

Actually...for those members of the CoC who feel that the church is finally in complete apostacy...all they would simply have to do is affiliate with a restoration branch. I dont see a major rift occuring because of this selection.

I believe the CoC will simply keep going down the path it has chosen to be on and will continue to pursue all it's various agenda's.

But, I suspect there will not be much of a departure of the members because many will feel the same as you...in that they will keep hoping against hope that something, sometime....somewhere....somehow will take place to bring the institutional church back into line. It is never going to happen. IMO.

Yes..I have heard about the group of people who are endeavouring to "gather the flock" against what is around the corner.

What is around the corner is the extreme impatientence now on the part of the Restorationists. They want structure. They want unity. They want to organize the upper quorums. They want to feel energized like the members of the Remnant Church do. They do not want to continue to feel like the world is passing them by while they twiddle their thumbs complaining of all the same old stuff, and at the same time resisting the idea of coming together and organizing because they have no leader. They cant have because the Lord has not called one.

Even "if" the Lord called one, ie; Pres. Larsen of the Remnant Church, that person would probably not be sustained by the majority because...well, there is simply no unity of thought or agreement on how this situation is going to be resolved except uttering the ever popular "the Lord will set his church in order in his own due time".

The Remnant Church's message to the CoC and the Restorationists is that it has already been accomplished. That Church was organized by a group of men as conservative and knowledgeable of RLDS history etc as anyone, yet many do not follow them. Why? For the same reasons that will be given for not following the next group who attempts the same thing.

Its just a cycle that keeps repeating...and repeating...and repeating....

randy

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Mar 8 2005, 09:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Mar 8 2005, 09:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Randy Johnson@Mar 8 2005, 06:49 AM

Dawn,

I read and re-read the entire section.

Lets take this a step at a time.  First of all, for the sake of this discussion....lets only talk about what is required for Celestial Glory.  Truthfully...I dont dwell on anything else.  I want first string varsity, not water boy!

The verse I quoted you is supported by the other scriptures, but most importantly by the inspired guidance and counsel the Prophet voluminously gave to the Saints.  His instructions alone clarify perfectly all these points.

The verse I gave specifically and clearly states that baptism is necessary before the Resurrection of the Just. 

If you read it differently....please, explain it to me.  I really am sincere when I ask that.

You state that "that requirement is only for Celestial glory"....so what is that telling you Dawn????  It's right there in front of you!

Regarding the verse about the need for the MP....you tell me what it is saying.....I want to know what you believe it means.

                                                      randy

Let's look at the set-up of Section 76. I will start at the beginning of the vision, and I will use RLDS scriptures because it is easier for me to find things there. But rest assured, they are the same.

First it talks about the sons of Perdition, who they are and how they will go to outer darkness. I won't post all those scriptures, I think we agree on that point. I will point out one scripture, though. I will highlight an important phrase within that scripture.

76:4e these are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the Devil and his angels, and the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power; yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath;

76:4f for all the rest shall be brought forth by the resurrection of the dead, through the triumph and the glory of the Lamb, who was slain, who was in the bosom of the Father before the worlds were made.

Then we move on to this scripture.

76:5a And again, we bear record for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ, concerning them who come forth in the resurrection of the just:

And there are a bunch of scriptural requirements that are listed in verses 5b through 6h.

And then we get to this scripture.

76:7a And again, we saw the glory of the telestial, which glory is that of the lesser, even as the glory of the stars differs from that of the glory of the moon in the firmament;

7b these are they who received not the gospel of Christ, neither the testimony of Jesus;

7c these are they who deny not the Holy Spirit;

7d these are they who are thrust down to hell;

7e these are they who shall not be redeemed from the Devil, until the last resurrection, until the Lord, even Christ the Lamb, shall have finished his work;

This last scripture I quoted shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that only those who are to receive the Telestial Glory will not be resurrected in the Resurrection of the Just. Which means that those who are eligible for Terrestrial Glory will be resurrected in that resurrection.

You can look it up in your own D&C. It is all there.

Dawn,

Maybe you missed one of my posts. I agree with this last post of yours.

I have already explained about who will come forth in the Resurrection of the Just. Those who will inherit a Celestial glory will come forth in the "Morning" of the First Resurrection or Resurrection of the Just......then

...those who will inherit the Terrestial Glory will come forth in the "afternoon" of the First Resurrection or Resurrection of the Just.

I have not said otherwise.

The two points I want to make...again, is that

1) those who shall come forth in the Morning of the First Resurrection will already have been baptized as stated in the Section. They will not be baptized "after" they are resurrected.

2) Those who shall come forth with Terrestial bodies will not have needed to be baptized. You will notice when the section talks of the requirement for entrance into that Glory....there is no mention of the necessity of baptism, that necessity is only found for entrance to the Celestial kingdom.

I do want to make the point that the majority of Restorationists that I have spoken with do not believe that "any" baptisms will take place after a person has died. To them....any baptism after this life is akin to Baptism for the Dead...which position I agree with.

Dawn...answer me this...then we can agree to disagree....what is your position as to the veracity of the Sections that were put in the Appendix and subsequently removed altogether that spoke clearly on this subject?

randy

[Jenda]

Randy, I thank you for your concern, but what happens and how we deal with it is really up to us and what we believe the Lord directs us to do. If we feel that we still need to wait, then we will wait (or those that believe that will). If we feel that organization is what the Lord directs, then we will organize (or at least, those that believe that will). I do not believe that dropping what I believe to be the truth, no matter the state of the church, to become a member of a church that I do not believe embraces the truth (no matter it's state), is an option.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson@Mar 8 2005, 08:32 AM

Dawn,

Maybe you missed one of my posts. I agree with this last post of yours.

I have already explained about who will come forth in the Resurrection of the Just. Those who will inherit a Celestial glory will come forth in the "Morning" of the First Resurrection or Resurrection of the Just......then

...those who will inherit the Terrestial Glory will come forth in the "afternoon" of the First Resurrection or Resurrection of the Just.

I have not said otherwise.

The two points I want to make...again, is that

1) those who shall come forth in the Morning of the First Resurrection will already have been baptized as stated in the Section. They will not be baptized "after" they are resurrected.

2) Those who shall come forth with Terrestial bodies will not have needed to be baptized. You will notice when the section talks of the requirement for entrance into that Glory....there is no mention of the necessity of baptism, that necessity is only found for entrance to the Celestial kingdom.

I do want to make the point that the majority of Restorationists that I have spoken with do not believe that "any" baptisms will take place after a person has died. To them....any baptism after this life is akin to Baptism for the Dead...which position I agree with.

Dawn...answer me this...then we can agree to disagree....what is your position as to the veracity of the Sections that were put in the Appendix and subsequently removed altogether that spoke clearly on this subject?

randy

I am not sure what you mean when you say morning and afternoon. There is no time restriction, that I am aware of, except that I believe it will be one resurrection. Everyone will come forth at the same time.

As far as your #2, no, those who will proceed to Terrestrial glory will have no need for baptism, but that will not be determined till final judgment. If they have resurrected in the resurrection of the just, they all have the potential to go to Celestial Glory because they have learned of Christ and accepted Him in the spiritprison. It is what they do with that knowledge and belief during the millenium (and what happens when Satan is loosed for the short period), that will determine which glory they will receive. They still have the chance to be baptized (which will make them eligible for Celestial glory) during the millenium.

I will get to your other question later. I gots places to go, people to see, things to do right now. B)

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda@Mar 8 2005, 09:33 AM

Randy, I thank you for your concern, but what happens and how we deal with it is really up to us and what we believe the Lord directs us to do. If we feel that we still need to wait, then we will wait (or those that believe that will). If we feel that organization is what the Lord directs, then we will organize (or at least, those that believe that will). I do not believe that dropping what I believe to be the truth, no matter the state of the church, to become a member of a church that I do not believe embraces the truth (no matter it's state), is not an option.

Dawn,

Forgive me for having to ask this....but, in your last post....are you referring to your membership in the CoC or your affiliation with the Restoration movement? You have a "duel thing" going on and I wanted to be clear on it.

randy

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Mar 8 2005, 08:47 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Mar 8 2005, 08:47 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Mar 8 2005, 09:33 AM

Randy, I thank you for your concern, but what happens and how we deal with it is really up to us and what we believe the Lord directs us to do.  If we feel that we still need to wait, then we will wait (or those that believe that will).  If we feel that organization is what the Lord directs, then we will organize (or at least, those that believe that will).  I do not believe that dropping what I believe to be the truth, no matter the state of the church, to become a member of a church that I do not believe embraces the truth (no matter it's state), is not an option.

Dawn,

Forgive me for having to ask this....but, in your last post....are you referring to your membership in the CoC or your affiliation with the Restoration movement? You have a "duel thing" going on and I wanted to be clear on it.

randy

Randy, while there are some who have removed their names from the rolls of the church, the Restorationists are still members of the RLDS church. However, I was referring to those who are restorationists now and those who will feel the need to leave the institutional church in the future for whatever reason.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Mar 8 2005, 09:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Mar 8 2005, 09:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Randy Johnson@Mar 8 2005, 08:32 AM

Dawn,

Maybe you missed one of my posts.  I agree with this last post of yours.

I have already explained about who will come forth in the Resurrection of the Just.  Those who will inherit a Celestial glory will come forth in the "Morning" of the First Resurrection or Resurrection of the Just......then

...those who will inherit the Terrestial Glory will come forth in the "afternoon" of the First Resurrection or Resurrection of the Just.

I have not said otherwise.

The two points I want to make...again, is that

1)  those who shall come forth in the Morning of the First Resurrection will already have been baptized as stated in the Section.  They will not be baptized "after" they are resurrected. 

2)  Those who shall come forth with Terrestial bodies will not have needed to be baptized.  You will notice when the section talks of the requirement for entrance into that Glory....there is no mention of the necessity of baptism,  that necessity is only found  for entrance to the Celestial kingdom.

I do want to make the point that the majority of Restorationists that I have spoken with do not believe that "any" baptisms will take place after a person has died.  To them....any baptism after this life is akin to Baptism for the Dead...which position I agree with.

Dawn...answer me this...then we can agree to disagree....what is your position as to the veracity of the Sections that were put in the Appendix and subsequently removed altogether that spoke clearly on this subject?

                                                                randy

I am not sure what you mean when you say morning and afternoon. There is no time restriction, that I am aware of, except that I believe it will be one resurrection. Everyone will come forth at the same time.

As far as your #2, no, those who will proceed to Terrestrial glory will have no need for baptism, but that will not be determined till final judgment. If they have resurrected in the resurrection of the just, they all have the potential to go to Celestial Glory because they have learned of Christ and accepted Him in the spiritprison. It is what they do with that knowledge and belief during the millenium (and what happens when Satan is loosed for the short period), that will determine which glory they will receive. They still have the chance to be baptized (which will make them eligible for Celestial glory) during the millenium.

I will get to your other question later. I gots places to go, people to see, things to do right now. B)

Dawn,

Well go have fun then!!

Within the resurrection we call the Resurrection of the Just...there are two separate resurrections.

1) Those who shall come forth in the "Morning of the First Resurrection" will be those who are destined to receive a Celestial glory. (See LDS D&C 29:13, 43:18, 76:50-70, 88:97-98)

2) Those who shall come forth in the "Afternoon of the First Resurrection" will be those who are destined to receive a Terrestial glory. (See LDS D&C 88:99) This 2nd resurrection event takes place after the Lord has ushered in the Millennium.

So...we just need to remember that when we speak of the Resurrection of the Just...that within it are two resurrection events....and that we do not know how much time, if any, will elapse between them. Based on the scriptures I have read though....those who will come forth with Celestial and Terrestial bodies will NOT be brought forth all at the same time. As I have pointed out, there will be a specific order in which the dead shall be brought forth. The Lord's house is a house of order.

Dawn, no....those who come forth in the Resurrection of the Just will be brought forth with either their Celestial bodies or with their Terrestial bodies.....so in that sense, they have already been judged. A person who comes forth in the Resurrection with a Terrestial body in no way could have the potential for Celestial glory. That doesnt make sense.

What you say about Satan being able to tempt us after he is loosed is true, but it is only true for those found on the earth at that time. Nowhere have I found that those who have already been resurrected will be subjected to that same temptation thus putting themselves at risk of falling.

Are you suggesting that a person who has been resurrected with a Celestial body could be tempted by Satan and thus have that resurrected Celestial body taken away from him/her? No....that is false.

Although the scriptures attest that there will be a "Final Judgement" when all of us shall stand before God and give an accounting for our life....we know from the scriptures we have already read that we will already know which Kingdom of Glory we shall inherit by the mere fact of the type of body we would have already been resurrected with. That will tell us where we are headed for.

Also, we must remember that though there shall be a formal judgement for all men, yet there is no question, for instance....of the reward of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in that day.

Ok....my little fingers are worn down to a nubbin! See ya!

randy

[Jenda]

What was it I came back to respond to? hmmmm..........

Oh, yeah, this was the question.

Dawn...answer me this...then we can agree to disagree....what is your position as to the veracity of the Sections that were put in the Appendix and subsequently removed altogether that spoke clearly on this subject?

randy

Well, to tell you the truth, don't know much about Section 110, and 1 , the only one I have read in any depth is Section 107. So it is really hard to comment on them.

But I have mixed feelings about section 107. On one hand, I believe that by that point that Joseph was not functioning as a prophet anymore, so don't put much stock in it, but on the other hand, I believe that I have read that Joseph took the matter to God a few times, and each times was told it was not proper, and that Section 107 is the result of God finally saying, Try it if you want, but if you do, dire things will happen to you. Couched in the revelation is God warning them that there would be a set period of time that they will have to complete the temple, and that at the end of that time, the church (with it's dead) will be rejected. The temple was not finished and dedicated in a proper amount of time, and the church was rejected.

That is my opinion.