Traveler Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said: So you're selling the idea of a lesser kingdom being one of eternal sex without procreation? I am trying to sell the idea that those that seek personal pleasures will seek out a kingdom of pleasure – those that seek out a kingdom of sacrifice for the benefit of others (a work and glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of others) will seek out such a kingdom. The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, CV75 said: Mormon 9:3-4 says, "Then will ye longer deny the Christ, or can ye behold the Lamb of God? Do ye suppose that ye shall dwell with him under a consciousness of your guilt? Do ye suppose that ye could be happy to dwell with that holy Being, when your souls are racked with a consciousness of guilt that ye have ever abused his laws? Behold, I say unto you that ye would be more miserable to dwell with a holy and just God, under a consciousness of your filthiness before him, than ye would to dwell with the damned souls in hell." I think the phrase, "ye would be more miserable to dwell with a holy and just God... than ye would to dwell with the damned souls in hell" can be rephrased as a corollary, "ye would be happier to dwell with the damned souls in hell than to dwell with a holy and just God." What it does NOT correlate to is the ideas: "you will be happy in hell" or, "you will be happier having broken the commandments than you would have if you kept them" or to any sort of real happiness at all, actually, unless one casts aside the "wickedness never was happiness" concept entirely. More miserable than another miserable, semantically, can mean less happy than another happy, but practically speaking, getting one arm cut off is better than getting both arms cut off, but they both suck. Edited May 29, 2017 by The Folk Prophet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV75 Posted May 29, 2017 Report Share Posted May 29, 2017 2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said: What it does NOT correlate to is the ideas: "you will be happy in hell" or, "you will be happier having broken the commandments than you would have if you kept them" or to any sort of real happiness at all, actually, unless one casts aside the "wickedness never was happiness" concept entirely. More miserable than another miserable, semantically, can mean less happy than another happy, but practically speaking, getting one arm cut off is better than getting both arms cut off, but they both suck. Hence the kingdoms of glory. “And they who remain shall also be quickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received. For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.” (D&C 88: 32-33) They still, for a practical matter, enjoy something, however semantically unpalatable you may find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 5 hours ago, CV75 said: however semantically unpalatable you may find it. Curious. Do you think the condescension helps get your view across? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askandanswer Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 On 2017-5-29 at 0:00 PM, The Folk Prophet said: Rather, I think, we'll be excessively and eternally traumatized by having not achieved something that we actually did, very much, want. I think that comments like the above down play the remarkable ability of the human spirit to adapt to whatever circumstances it may find itself in. Even the most miserable and uncomfortable of circumstances can be adapted to after a while, often to the point that the uncomfortableness is no longer even noticed, and is eventually accepted as being part of our ordinary, normal circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV75 Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 11 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said: Curious. Do you think the condescension helps get your view across? LOL, It's just semantics. If you can use "suck" to get your point across, I can use big words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 If a maggot is perfectly "happy" feasting on dead flesh, then it will attain a level of happiness based on that behavior. But is that more fulfilling to someone who takes the time, effort, and sacrifice to raise children up unto the Lord? I'd daresay, the maggot is perfectly "happy". But we are happier still. And we will know a level of happiness much greater than that of a maggot. By way of analogy, I read an article once with an excerpt from a former Playboy playmate who described what it was like living in the mansion. She described a particular behavior of Hugh Hefner. While I'm sure he gained some level of pleasure out of the experience, I read the description with some degree of horror. I thought I was looking at a rat that had been caught in a mousetrap just waiting to die, but still feasting on the bait as happy as could be. If some people are perfectly happy with that maggot or rat-like behavior and want nothing more, then it is no wonder they will not be happy in the Celestial Kingdom. On the other hand, a person who is struggling (perhaps even clinically depressed) may easily interpret this to mean,"Well, I'm just a maggot anyway. I'm not going to be happy in the Celestial Kingdom. So I'll just set my sights on the Telestial Kingdom." That is a very real danger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 52 minutes ago, CV75 said: LOL, It's just semantics. If you can use "suck" to get your point across, I can use big words. You're under the impression that I viewed that statement as condescending because it used "big words"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV75 Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 7 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said: You're under the impression that I viewed that statement as condescending because it used "big words"? It appears that I was, but thanks for clarifying! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 (edited) I think it's funny that the title of the thread is "Quick question..." Here we are, six years later. Edited May 30, 2017 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 30, 2017 Report Share Posted May 30, 2017 46 minutes ago, Carborendum said: I think it's funny that the title of the thread is "Quick question..." Here we are, six years later. The question was quick. The answer, on the other hand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mordorbund Posted May 31, 2017 Report Share Posted May 31, 2017 16 hours ago, Eowyn said: The question was quick. The answer, on the other hand... The answer, on the other hand, takes several pages when you serialize it and leave cliffhangers. The answer really is quite simple. It was explained to me by the 3 Nephites, named .... zil 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.