Do "Born again" Churches Seriously Believe This?!

[BenRaines]

As I recall Mormon Doctrine, as a book, was Bruce R. McKonkie's understanding of the doctrine the Mormon's believed. I don't believe it was a church published book by McKonkie of Mormon Doctrine.

Ben Raines

[Dravin]

Dravin, thanks for your post. Which "Hell" was McConkie referring to, then, in the quote I posted? the Spirit Prison one?

From what little is provided I'm assuming he's talking about Spirit Prison as he states it isn't endless and the people who have gone there obtaining a kingdom of glory (the telestial), one way to look at outer darkness is a kingdom of no glory.

I'm assuming its not the one that includes "good burning", because his quote mentions that their "suffering" would end.

You're mixing two conversations. :) Good burning is talking about the Celestial Kingdom (from how I read it), not either hell.

Spirit prison would include suffering, I assume? What are your thoughts?

Yes, though the exact nature of the suffering is up to debate. For instance I don't think it's physical torment as the suffering of hell is portrayed in popular media, if nothing else lacking a body would make that kind of pointless. I've heard the opinion expressed that the suffering is mental and spiritual in nature with things like lakes of fire being used as metaphors, makes sense to me.

That said we don't know very much on Jung Wei's suffering, is it a languid sadness for what he missed? Sadness at waiting for proxy ordinances to be done? Or if he's even suffering in the sense that the scriptures talk about? The scriptures generally when describing Spirit Prison expound on how the rebellious feel, not so much those who didn't have a chance to learn, but, and this is my own opinion not necessarily doctrine, the experience of Jung Wei and an Anti-Christ/Ex-Mormon are not the same even if it happens in the same place, this is made possible by it not being from sitting in a literal lake of fire, else everyone sitting in that lake would be experiencing the same thing, I think Spirit Prison is a more personal experience than that.

As I recall Mormon Doctrine, as a book, was Bruce R. McKonkie's understanding of the doctrine the Mormon's believed. I don't believe it was a church published book by McKonkie of Mormon Doctrine.

Ben Raines

That is my understanding as well. Bruce R. McKonkie didn't publish a book on behalf of the Church. He was just a member (admittedly an Apostle) who published a book with his own insights on Mormon Doctrine.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Dravin

[Carl62]

As I recall Mormon Doctrine, as a book, was Bruce R. McKonkie's understanding of the doctrine the Mormon's believed. I don't believe it was a church published book by McKonkie of Mormon Doctrine.

Ben Raines

What is so confusing with that book is because he is an apostle and the book is called Mormon Doctrine, people in the church automatically assume that everything in it does officially say what is taught as doctrines of the church. However more times than I can count, whenever it was brought up to talk about any of the teachings that needed to be cleared up and the book was used to do such, then people who just say "Oh well that's just Bruce R. McKonkie's opinion. That's not really etched in stone as to what the church teaches". You'd think after all these years, the church would come out with an uncanonized book of what exactly is and isn't the teachings of the church and where the church stands on controversial issues, or else simply change the title of 'Mormon Doctrine' since according to some members, that is really not 100% of the case in regards to that book.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Carl62

[BenRaines]

Personal experience:

While serving my mission an Elder used Mormon Doctrine for a talk. After talk Mission President spoke to him, he left, went to apartment and mailed it home and came back and bore his testimony without Mormon Doctrine reference. Mission conferences are all day events.

Ben Raines

[Dravin]

or else simply change the title of 'Mormon Doctrine' since according to some members, that is really not 100% of the case in regards to that book.

That church isn't in a position to change the title of the book (at least directly) as they don't own the rights to it as far as I know. You are right though, the title does cause people (both members and not) to give it more authority than they otherwise would.

[prisonchaplain]

This may be an aside, but if I want an authorative source on LDS doctrine, beyond LDS.org, should I limit my search, at least initially, to books published directly by the church?

[Maxel]

This may be an aside, but if I want an authorative source on LDS doctrine, beyond LDS.org, should I limit my search, at least initially, to books published directly by the church?

I dunno about books published directly by the Church, but books written by LDS apostles would all be ideal places to start.

[prisonchaplain]

BUT Maxel, that's the whole gist of the last few posts--that Mormon Doctrine, though written by LDS Apostle Bruce McKonkie, is "merely" or "only" his personal perspective, since it was not published by the church? So, I took it that such would not be a good place to learn LDS doctrine--especially for non-LDS.

[Dravin]

A good place to start might be the study manuals produced by the church, you can find many online here: LDS.org - Prepare a Lesson or buy them from here LDS Distribution Center.

The only problem though is most of them aren't in the same convenient format as Mormon Doctrine, the closest would be True to the Faith ( Product Details ( True to the Faith: A Gospel Reference. also online: LDS.org - Aaronic Priesthood Table of Contents - True to the Faith ). Also Gospel Princples ( Product Details ( Gospel Principles (new edition) also online LDS.org - Sunday School Table of Contents - Gospel Principles ) might be useful (though it doesn't share the same format with True to the Faith) its aimed at investigators and new members though, may not be as meaty as you want.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Dravin

[Maxel]

I was guilty of offering my opinion without reading the proceeding pages (my bad). I don't feel like wading into the discussion about Mormon Doctrine...

[prisonchaplain]

Dravin, thank you much. I decided to take a quick look. We've often discussed "born again," and it's in the title of this string. So, I looked it up, was directed to "Conversion," and found this: LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Conversion

It does not resolve the on-going conversation about the role of grace and works in our salvation, but it does present the LDS perspective in a clear cut, intelligent, and authoritative way. Thanks.

[Dravin]

No problem. Its all part of my philosophy, if you throw up enough links the chances somebody will find something of interest increases. :)

I like True to the Faith, its handy for when people ask you questions for just the reasons you state, when people try to draw upon a life time of study and experience to answer things in their own words things can get convoluted pretty quick.

[Galatians220]

But what if some people in no way, shape or form ever do get to hear it? Suppose an 18 year old kid who lives in China and has only ever known Taoism his whole life goes out and gets killed in a car accident. Where, according to "born again" beliefs on heaven and hell, would he end up? I've even heard it said from many "born again" Protestants that somebody like Mother Teresa would end up burning forever in hell simply because she was Catholic! I guess it's this slightly narrow, black and white view of the Protestant heaven/hell that I'm trying to understand and am wondering what scriptural basis there is for it.:)

Hey Carl, I actually addressed that kind of question on the very first page of this thread listing scriptures to show that no one is without an excuse if they are given sufficient evidence to believe.

Mine is hard to miss because my words and scripture is colored

[Guest]

My issue with how many LDS express things is that, virutally everyone is saved and there isn't much cost to enter heaven. Your path to heaven can appear a wide and broad road that many can easily pass, whereas your path to hell is a narrow road that is exceeding difficult to enter. This comes across as reverse to Jesus' clear statement on the issue.

This is not what LDS believes. There is a very big cost to enter the highest glory of heaven. Maintaining a temple recommend is about one of the hardest things to do as a Christian. It is so hard that even physical witnesses to the Book of Mormon fell away from the church.

You and I may have a different understanding of what "saved" means. I'm a very logical person so I tend to split hairs with the way a word is used. If what you mean by "saved" is "resurrected", then yes, virtually everyone is saved. But, there is a lot more to it than that. Let's take Telestial glory for instance - the lowest degree of glory. Sure, it is better than earth. Satan is on earth but not in Telestial kingdom. But, you cannot live with the Father and the Son in the Telestial Kingdom. Is that not a hell of some kind? If I were to think of my own parents with the knowledge that I had a testimony that if I would just be obedient I could live with mom and dad through eternities and then because I was being an idiot and did not follow through I ended up apart from them for all time and eternity - that would be a big hell for me! So, does that mean I'm saved?

LDS appear to believe that people, if given enough time will eventually respond and accept God's mercy. Besides what appears to be a lack of NT support for such an idea, I have two objections. Firstly many people, despite God's clear invitation through scripture, nature and loving believers about them in this life, refuse God. I don't see why nearly everyone would change. if so may reject the message here, I find it hard to reconcile with a near universal acceptance, even if given enough time after death.

This is not true of LDS teachings either. Each and every person who has ever lived on earth have equal opportunity to hear the gospel and accept God's mercy. There's no such thing as "given enough time"... Nope. It's either you accept or you don't. The only difference is - LDS teaches that if you didn't get the opportunity to hear the truth on earth, you still have the opportunity to hear it after you pass through the veil of death.

Secondly entry to heaven (even if your lowest level exists) must require the absolute willingness to relinquish sin, a journey to on going holiness. LDS clearly have a much more positive of people then I do because in the world I live I think many would, like in Lewis' book, find excuses or small sins that they would not give up. A righteous God must either cure of us of all evil or the smallest evil will fester and painand suffering continue. Heaven cannot be held captive to the whim of some person to maintain even the smallest sin, to refuse to be cured of it and thus spread its evil and misery to others.

I think you need to read a bit more about the levels of glory. I gave an inkling of the Telestial kingdom (lowest kingdom) on the paragraph above.

Edited September 21, 2009 by anatess

[thews]

This is not what LDS believes. There is a very big cost to enter the highest glory of heaven. Maintaining a temple recommend is about one of the hardest things to do as a Christian. It is so hard that even physical witnesses to the Book of Mormon fell away from the church.

You and I may have a different understanding of what "saved" means. I'm a very logical person so I tend to split hairs with the way a word is used. If what you mean by "saved" is "resurrected", then yes, virtually everyone is saved. But, there is a lot more to it than that. Let's take Telestial glory for instance - the lowest degree of glory. Sure, it is better than earth. Satan is on earth but not in Telestial kingdom. But, you cannot live with the Father and the Son in the Telestial Kingdom. Is that not a hell of some kind? If I were to think of my own parents with the knowledge that I had a testimony that if I would just be obedient I could live with mom and dad through eternities and then because I was being an idiot and did not follow through I ended up apart from them for all time and eternity - that would be a big hell for me! So, does that mean I'm saved?

I don't understand this. Are you saying the reward you'll get for being obidient is to attain a level of heaven where you'll get to be with your parents?

This is not true of LDS teachings either. Each and every person who has ever lived on earth have equal opportunity to hear the gospel and accept God's mercy. There's no such thing as "given enough time"... Nope. It's either you accept or you don't. The only difference is - LDS teaches that if you didn't get the opportunity to hear the truth on earth, you still have the opportunity to hear it after you pass through the veil of death.

OK, so I did hear it, I was baptized a Mormon and now I reject Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God. I am a Christian though, but I did get the opportunity... please explain what I can expect in the afterlife per LDS doctrine.

I think you need to read a bit more about the levels of glory. I gave an inkling of the Telestial kingdom (lowest kingdom) on the paragraph above.

The levels of glory were written in the late 1700's before Joseph Smith. Who should one read?

[Guest]

I don't understand this. Are you saying the reward you'll get for being obidient is to attain a level of heaven where you'll get to be with your parents?

That's not what I said. I'm making the comparison of living without our Heavenly Father in the celestial kingdom comparable to not living with my own beloved father here on earth. I love my dad very much and I cannot imagine not being with him. How much more for living without my Heavenly Father in the eternities?

OK, so I did hear it, I was baptized a Mormon and now I reject Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God. I am a Christian though, but I did get the opportunity... please explain what I can expect in the afterlife per LDS doctrine.

Ayayay. That may have been your opportunity Thews because you were baptized. It would be different if you were taught by the missionaries or something and never gained a testimony enough to be baptized. You may still have the opportunity to be baptized in the after-life.

But then, it could be that you never really gained a testimony when you were a member of the church. Only you can answer that.

I'm not in a position to judge though. None of us are. So, we really never know.

The levels of glory were written in the late 1700's before Joseph Smith. Who should one read?

I started here.

[FunkyTown]

OK, so I did hear it, I was baptized a Mormon and now I reject Joseph Smith as a false prophet of God. I am a Christian though, but I did get the opportunity... please explain what I can expect in the afterlife per LDS doctrine.

Thews? If you reject Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, then obviously anything he says holds no weight. May I ask what difference it makes whether Celestial, Telestial or Terrestrial you will be granted? If you don't believe he was a prophet, then you believe that what he preached was wrong. If what he preached was wrong, then the only reason to find out what he preached with regards to you is to stir up contention because you want to fight about it.

Unless you're actually just going through a crisis of faith and are worried. If that's the case, just let us know. It 'feels' much more like a search for contention, though.

[Relentless]

Then why did Joseph Smith say that if we could just get a tiny glimpse into the TELESTIAL kingdom ( the one reserved for people who've commited the more serious sins) that it would be so nice that we'd kill ourselves just to get there? I don't know exactly where the quote is, but I've heard it said since day one of my 30+ years in the church. That's why the church does have a "kinder and gentler" view on the afterlife because even though people do sin and fall short of the glory of God, the majority of people for the most part are good, kind hearted people who don't deserve an eternal afterlife that would be equated to that of your most absolute worst horror movie. And for those that never do get the chance to hear the gospel in this life but who are kind to their fellow man, where does that leave them?

First, Carl62, you have the quote wrong.

Joseph Smith never said that we would kill ourselves to get to the Telestial Kingdom. Just like he never said we would crawl across America on our hands and knees to get there. According to the Diary of Charles C. Walker (August 1837, in the Church Historical Department), Wilford Woodruff said the Prophet taught this, roughly: "that if we could see what is beyond the veil we couldn't stand to stay here in mortality for five minutes." The context it was delivered in suggests that he was not talking about the telestial kingdom. He was talking about what it was like to be in the presence of God and the family. reference here

Secondly,

That said, I understand that when a soul is baptized for, by proxy, she may accept or reject the sacrament. So, for the sake of argument, on the Day of Judgment, if you were to find out that 35 billion souls rejected their baptism for the dead, and refused to recognize that God had any say in their lives, and were thus cast into the outer darkness...would you then be okay with that?

We don't believe that these people would go to outer darkness. See Doctorine and Covenants 76:81-86

81 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.

82 These are they who received not the gospel of Christ, neither the testimony of Jesus.

83 These are they who deny not the Holy Spirit.

84 These are they who are thrust down to hell.

85 These are they who shall not be redeemed from the devil until the last resurrection, until the Lord, even Christ the cLamb, shall have finished his work.

86 These are they who receive not of his fulness in the eternal world, but of the Holy Spirit through the ministration of the terrestrial;

[ozzy]

I found a few points in a few posts here to be kind of interesting so I thought I would add my 2 cents. One point I found was towards the beginning and was a constant reference to rebels being cast into hell. While I don't believe this principle, I would like to say that it doesn't really negate Gods love. You can't rebel against what you don't know. So on this point, I don't think that born again christians are teaching a lack of love, I think they are being misunderstood. However if I am wrong, I invite any of them to correct me.

I admit I didn't read the whole thread, but another post I found interesting involved a reference to Joseph Smith not being the original author of the degrees of glory, and these having been discussed in the 1700's. While I understand that this individual is no longer with us, I would like to make a point should the subject come up again later. Whoever said it in the 1700's didn't originate it either. To my knowledge, the most original writings we have that discuss the degrees of glory are by Paul in the New Testament. So really, the only kingdom discussed that is never mentioned by name in the scriptures is the telestial. So this shouldn't really be a faith shattering principle.

Just my thoughts and I have no idea if anyone will actually read this since it is so late in the game.

[Texaspride]

I got to thinking the other day about something I heard at a fireside a number of years ago when a General Authority said that from the time of Christ 'til now, approximately 70 billion people will have inhabited the earth. That figure of 70 billion stuck in my head after that talk and what I was wondering is do the Christian religions who teach that unless you accept Jesus as your personal Savior you will really go to an everlasting, literal burning lake of fire where you will be tortured day and night forever and ever? When you think of that figure of 70 billion, can you honestly say AT LEAST HALF of those people will be in such a fiery state, especially since most "born again" style religions teach that the majority will NOT make heaven? DOES THIS MEAN THAT WELL OVER 35 BILLION PEOPLE WILL BE BURNING FOREVER AND EVER???!!!! That's over 5x our earth's total population right now!!! I cannot possibly fathom such a thing as that!!! Also, are all these people in the center of the earth right now, according to what most Christian churches teach? What about the people that lived for 4,000 years before the time of Christ where nothing about a lake a fire was ever taught in the Old Testament? Are they in for a fiery surprise when they die? Just honestly trying to understand all of this. Thanks.

We'll friend, Jesus Christ preached more on Hell than He did Heaven. And He referred to it as "a lake fire which burns forever" He went as far to say it would be better to cut out your eye if it causes you to sin" than it would be to go to Hell. It is not something many want to believe, but Jesus Christ does not lie!!!!!!! You should believe what He says, and not listen to false teachers that dont teach truth.I would say at least 99.9 percent of people on this earth have heard the Biblical message of salvation. But people's sinful lifestyle overides their desire to repent. Jesus Christ offers all the gift of repentance. He died for the ungodly so they dont have to go to Hell. But if they reject repentance, why would He allow them in His Heaven? He is a God of Justice. And yes you can read about hell in the old testament. Later when I have time I can send ya some references if your seriouse about knowing. Jesus said, if we look at a women to lust we have commited adultery. This is seriouse. Sin is seriouse. We must desire truth and seek the Lord with a repentant humble heart. He will forgive us our sin. Who can say they havent sinned? Everyone needs a Saviour!

[prisonchaplain]

We'll friend, Jesus Christ preached more on Hell than He did Heaven. And He referred to it as "a lake fire which burns forever" He went as far to say it would be better to cut out your eye if it causes you to sin" than it would be to go to Hell. It is not something many want to believe, but Jesus Christ does not lie!!!!!!! You should believe what He says, and not listen to false teachers that dont teach truth.I would say at least 99.9 percent of people on this earth have heard the Biblical message of salvation. But people's sinful lifestyle overides their desire to repent. Jesus Christ offers all the gift of repentance. He died for the ungodly so they dont have to go to Hell. But if they reject repentance, why would He allow them in His Heaven? He is a God of Justice. And yes you can read about hell in the old testament. Later when I have time I can send ya some references if your seriouse about knowing. Jesus said, if we look at a women to lust we have commited adultery. This is seriouse. Sin is seriouse. We must desire truth and seek the Lord with a repentant humble heart. He will forgive us our sin. Who can say they havent sinned? Everyone needs a Saviour!

That hell "outer darkness" is reserved for only a very few in LDS teaching is both a great attraction (to investigators, and to liberal Christians) and a great concern to us evangelicals & fundamentalists. Texas states our belief with great clarity. If, as I was taught and believe, "Heaven's real and hell's hot!" than should I not be motivated by the hope of heaven, and the fear of hell? And, this drive is not only for myself, but for my loved ones. And, indeed, for all peoples "to the utter most parts of the Earth." If we remove (mostly) the fear of hell, do we not blunt the double-edged sword that is the Word of God?

[ozzy]

That hell "outer darkness" is reserved for only a very few in LDS teaching is both a great attraction (to investigators, and to liberal Christians) and a great concern to us evangelicals & fundamentalists. Texas states our belief with great clarity. If, as I was taught and believe, "Heaven's real and hell's hot!" than should I not be motivated by the hope of heaven, and the fear of hell? And, this drive is not only for myself, but for my loved ones. And, indeed, for all peoples "to the utter most parts of the Earth." If we remove (mostly) the fear of hell, do we not blunt the double-edged sword that is the Word of God?

Hmmm, on some level I do agree that we shouldn't remove a fear of hell. Fear is something of a motivator. I personally think though that faith is a greater motivator and it carries with it the righteous intent. For instance, if I follow God's commandments, I think it is more effective and better for me to do so because I love Him than because I fear punishment. Under the premise that I obey out of fear, one could easily argue that I still don't love Him. I think this would still keep me out of heaven.

With reference to the burning Hell, this is my understanding. The outer darkness is what most Mormons think of when we consider endless hell. I dunno about the burning part with reference to that. When I consider eternal, burning hell, I think of it in ths respect. First, I think it is a spiritual burning. Guilt would be an earthly equivalent, but I don't think that it holds a candle to the post life burning. I also think of the the word 'eternal' when I consider things relating to God. An example is the phrase 'eternal life.' I understand this to mean 'God's life.' Hence when we consider eternal life we come across the part of LDS doctrine that involves becoming like Him. I consider the same when I thik of eternal hell. What might God's hell be? The atonement. Even God trembled because of that mix of spiritual and physical pain. I believe we are promised the same demise when we don't accept the atonement and repent because we must pay for our own sins rather than allowing Christ to.

The biggest difference between what I understand to be typical Christian hell doctrine and what I have described above is timing. My understanding is that most christians believe this happens after the judgment. I (and the rest of my Mormon cohorts) believe that it occurs in the spirit world.

I hope that explains adequately my position, and perhaps adds clarification to the difference between LDS and typical Christian doctrines/ideals.

[Carl62]

You should believe what He says, and not listen to false teachers that dont teach truth.

I do sincerely believe in what He says and I don't believe I'm listening to teachers who are teaching false truths. BTW, who do you think these teachers might be? Please tell me so that I know to avoid them. Thanks.:)

[prisonchaplain]

Hmmm, on some level I do agree that we shouldn't remove a fear of hell. Fear is something of a motivator. I personally think though that faith is a greater motivator and it carries with it the righteous intent. For instance, if I follow God's commandments, I think it is more effective and better for me to do so because I love Him than because I fear punishment. Under the premise that I obey out of fear, one could easily argue that I still don't love Him. I think this would still keep me out of heaven.

And yet, Jesus teaches about hell. Heavenly Father made hell. Who am I to think that I am above teaching what my master taught? If God chooses to use a carrot and a stick, how dare I say that I am above teaching the stick myself. Am I greater than my master? Can I counsel my God?

With reference to the burning Hell, this is my understanding. The outer darkness is what most Mormons think of when we consider endless hell. I dunno about the burning part with reference to that. When I consider eternal, burning hell, I think of it in ths respect. First, I think it is a spiritual burning. Guilt would be an earthly equivalent, but I don't think that it holds a candle to the post life burning. I also think of the the word 'eternal' when I consider things relating to God. An example is the phrase 'eternal life.' I understand this to mean 'God's life.' Hence when we consider eternal life we come across the part of LDS doctrine that involves becoming like Him. I consider the same when I thik of eternal hell. What might God's hell be? The atonement. Even God trembled because of that mix of spiritual and physical pain. I believe we are promised the same demise when we don't accept the atonement and repent because we must pay for our own sins rather than allowing Christ to.

I kinda simple minded about this subject. Jesus said the rich man was hot, and begged for water. Allegory and symbolism are poetic and pretty--but the problem is, Jesus wasn't telling a parable. He's retelling what actually happened. He actually names the poor guy--Lazarus. He doesn't do that in parables. So, shallow as it may be, I think hell is literally hot.

The biggest difference between what I understand to be typical Christian hell doctrine and what I have described above is timing. My understanding is that most christians believe this happens after the judgment. I (and the rest of my Mormon cohorts) believe that it occurs in the spirit world.

I'm not sure how the end of Revelation can be other than at the end of time, but yes, this is a major difference.

[prisonchaplain]

I do sincerely believe in what He says and I don't believe I'm listening to teachers who are teaching false truths. BTW, who do you think these teachers might be? Please tell me so that I know to avoid them. Thanks.:)

If you just read my posts for a few days, then come back and read others. Any that seem to teach in opposition to mine...well, there ya go.