Church attitude towards Gays.

[HEthePrimate]

The thing that comes to my mind is Jesus praying to the Father that we may all be one in Him as Jesus is one with the Father. Now, interestingly, the Catholics don't make a distinction between Father and Son except for their personage (one being God without form, the other both mortal and God). That's how One they think they are. So that, when I learned of the Godhead with Heavenly Father and Jesus as 2 separate beings, as opposed to Trinitarian understanding, I did not go so far as to say Jesus Christ has desires that are not His Father's. I mean, to me, that kinda unravels their Godhead-edness. One in words, thoughts, deeds, and desires. That's how ONE they are. And all over the scriptures we are asked to be as one as that too.

Have you noticed that every single LDS picture you see of Heavenly Father and Jesus together - they both look exactly alike? I kinda love that about them. No, of course I don't expect at all for us to look exactly alike. But, one in thoughts, words, deeds, and desires... one with God. That's like the ultimate in perfection.

Now, of course, this is just my understanding and mine alone.

If you haven't already, you should totally read the work of René Girard. I See Satan Fall Like Lightning is probably the best place to start. Girard's theory of mimetic rivalry is about how people imitate each other, and each other's desires, and this often leads to conflict. To resolve the conflict, people commonly engage the "single-victim mechanism" of scapegoating.

Jesus perfectly imitates the Father, and shares his desires, and yet does not fall into the trap of rivalry (perhaps because the Father himself does not exhibit jealousy?). Jesus short-circuits the single victim mechanism by refusing to scapegoat anybody else, instead sacrificing himself. It sounds paradoxical, but by allowing the crowd to sacrifice him as the ultimate scapegoat, he exposes the lie at the heart of the single-victim mechanism. (It's easier to understand if you read the book, where the whole theory is spelled out more completely.)

Since learning Girard's theory, it has struck me how every time the Father and the Son manifest together, or one talks about the other, they defer to each other. Jesus was always talking about how there is only one good person, namely the Father, and how what he did during his life was only what the Father would have done. During the First Vision, instead of taking all the attention, the Father, in turn, defers to his Son, "Hear him!" There is a complete absence of rivalry between the Father and the Son, only perfect accord.

But we're getting a little off-topic here.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming!

[annewandering]

Well I admit I still do not get how you think that we will lose our uniqueness. :) One point though is that being unique is not the same as being prideful. It is like saying I love roses. I love all roses. They are not exactly the same although they are very similar. One is not necessarily better or worse, just individual. If my father is a perfect rose, I want to be a perfect rose like he is but will I be the same color, the same scent, the same size? No, but I can be a perfect rose with my own individual beauty GIVEN to me by my father.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Well I admit I still do not get how you think that we will lose our uniqueness. :) One point though is that being unique is not the same as being prideful. It is like saying I love roses. I love all roses. They are not exactly the same although they are very similar. One is not necessarily better or worse, just individual. If my father is a perfect rose, I want to be a perfect rose like he is but will I be the same color, the same scent, the same size? No, but I can be a perfect rose with my own individual beauty GIVEN to me by my father.

One last try ....

If a person who finds themselves in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom says "I love roses. I love all roses" and this, we presume is a good trait, who else in the Celestial Kingdom, having a fullness of glory and goodness at that level, would love roses any less? Nobody, they would love roses with equal amount of enthusiasm.

Or if someone in the Celestial Kingdom at that highest level says, "I have an aptitude for music" and we presume this is a good trait, one that is worth seeking, then who else in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom who has received all the goodness there is to receive would have any less of an aptitude for music? Nobody, they would all have a fullness of that aptitude and trait for music.

Or if someone in the Celestial Kingdom at the highest level says, "I have an aptitude for quantum physics". Who else in the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom would say that they have any less of an aptitude for quantum physics, if we assume this is a good trait to have? Nobody, they would all have an equal amount of aptitude for any good and positive trait which is the fullest it could possibly be, it would be at 100%.

100% of any good and positive trait and like or dislike, attitude or mannerism would look like 100% for everyone who has received a fullness of that glory. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. In the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom, those people will have the opportunity to make their growth and increase eternal and to receive a fullness of all that God has, including all the things that are virtuous, lovely or of good report or praiseworthy. All the traits that our Heavenly Father has would fit that description of those things that we seek after. In the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom, which one of those traits are not achieved?

To say that someone would like this more than that or not prefer this over that or have an aptitude for this over someone else requires that at least someone does not have 100% of that particular trait or there is a trait that is not good that they are still holding on to.

(And again you are reading into what I have said "the desire for" as "being". In this life we are different which is part of our fallen state. Just like someone can be rich and get into the Celestial Kingdom. It is the desire of our heart that we will be judged by. With an eye single to the glory of God, I am not sure how one could still maintain an eye towards their own glory of what they perceive as their uniqueness. It is not ours when it is given for the glory of God. If one claims it as their own, that already falls short of the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom, in my opinion. Lucifer tried to claim his own glory, but that is not how the system works, it is shared, it is sealed by covenant to experience the whole. In the same way Jesus can take on the whole of our sins to the point of feeling them, we can have that ability to share all the wonderful traits of all as well as the glorifying successes of all in that Kingdom making it no different than if we had done it ourselves. This is what allows for eternal increase. If it was individual it would have a limit, which is short of the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.)

Edited May 12, 2012 by Seminarysnoozer

[bluedreams]

This is just so weird.

That's all I keep thinking as I'm reading your posts, seminary. I want to come up with a more intrinsic post, but I thought I'd be honest. I ain't getting it. This is not what I receive when I read the scriptures at all. And the premise behind it seems unnececessary (as i mentioned, distinction/differences is not the source of pride). And honestly, none of the scriptures/quotes necessarily point to what you've assumed.

I don't have a lot of time, so i'll keep this short. Just the other day I was reading two or three different passages. One was about Satan and his power over us. To me what has always stuck out that he gives an illusory freedom where we are truly not free nor ourselves. His plan from the get go was force and insistent sameness upon the God's children.

The other was Moses when he sees God. I was pondering nothingness for awhile. What I found interesting was in the way that he came to understand his nothingness...it was through seen all the children of men. By seeing the vast extent of humanity in his world he came to understand our nothingness. Uniqueness in my mind isn't the problem, it's individualism to the extent of self-importance. It's losing sight of our place among God's children. When one comes to understand the infinite creative power of God then we come to understand our nothingness. His creativity is well illustrated in the diversity of God's children.

Lastly is the scripture about intelligences, Though I don't claim to have the fullest understanding of it, to me it points to the fact that the Lord has no problem with distinctions among His children if he created them to differ from the beginning. And though I also have a problem with how the body is mentioned in these threads, taking the assumption that what the Lord forms is eternal then before we even had out corrupted state we had differences.

Lastly I think it is a false equality that we must all be treated the same, receive the same, and become exactly the same. Equality to me entails having the same capability to achieve our potential in the Lord's plan. It entails we recognize our dependence on the Lord and each other. I don't feel jipped because I can't play the piano. I don't need to understand the intricacies of quantum mechanics to be fulfilled. My fullfillment comes from fulfilling the measure of my creation. We were different prior to coming, we are different here, I assume we'll be different when we return. Much will change, but much will also stay the same and distinction seems to be a constant no matter what state we're in.

With luv,

BD

[annewandering]

Now that I get, BlueDreams. :)

Seminary Snoozer, I do believe that I understand what you are saying. :) I just dont agree. :) After we die come look me up and we will discuss it again. Ok?

[james12]

I have in the past considered this point about uniqueness and individuality. I admit there are a number of scriptures and teachings which allude to a oneness which seems beyond our present understanding. For example, Christ is said to be the "express image" of his Father (see Heb 1:3). What might that term imply?

And yet something feels wrong about it. I am not working so hard to become exactly like someone else. Even if that someone else is God (I hope that does not seem blasphemous, but there it is). In all the universe there is no one like me. I was a unique individual from time immemorial. Something was valuable about me.

Why then are we each unique? When time as we know it comes to an end is there something about me, apart from others, that holds value? C.S. Lewis once considered the matter and came to this conclusion, "Your place in heaven will seem to be made for you and you alone, because you were made for it - made for it stitch by stitch as a glove is made for a hand. (The Problem of Pain, p. 132) Something tells me this statement is true. How exactly it may be I do not know, but that is an eternity I want to be a part of.

[circusboy01]

I'm going to make my point one more time, then I'll shut up on the subject. We can discuss the subject until doomsday. But, it's all just speculation, as we have not been told, from the prophets, or from the scriptures exactly what will happen. We just know that,if we are worthy, a mate will be provided for us.

Whether we are allowed to choose our mate, or one is chosen for us, does not matter. It will be a part of Heavenly Fathers plan, and we will be eternally happy with our mate. No matter how we come together.

Edited May 12, 2012 by circusboy01

[daboosh]

Read this... Same-Gender Attraction - LDS Newsroom

[edgar13]

there is no problem to be a gay, the important thing is you are always keeping the commandments and besides you know already your limitation, because of the teaching of the church.

[Seminarysnoozer]

This is just so weird.

That's all I keep thinking as I'm reading your posts, seminary. I want to come up with a more intrinsic post, but I thought I'd be honest. I ain't getting it.

...

Lastly I think it is a false equality that we must all be treated the same, receive the same, and become exactly the same. Equality to me entails having the same capability to achieve our potential in the Lord's plan. It entails we recognize our dependence on the Lord and each other. I don't feel jipped because I can't play the piano. I don't need to understand the intricacies of quantum mechanics to be fulfilled. My fullfillment comes from fulfilling the measure of my creation. We were different prior to coming, we are different here, I assume we'll be different when we return. Much will change, but much will also stay the same and distinction seems to be a constant no matter what state we're in.

With luv,

BD

I think you find my posts "weird" because you keep applying them to something I am not talking about as if that is my intention.

I have already stated that I know we were different before and we are especially different here as we are given unique, temporary, probationary stewardship that should never be claimed as our own, and that most will be different in the next life. You keep talking about your feelings here as if I am talking about how things should be here. I think that is a misconception of what I am talking about. I believe that everyone here is given various stewardship for specific tests that that person must tackle while in this life.

The number of people that will achieve the fullness, all that God has is few. So, I think exactly like you said that the distinctions for the majority will remain at some level. I don't disagree with that. I am talking about those that receive everlasting to everlasting.

D&C 132: 20 "20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.

21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.

22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me."

I don't know if a person who makes it to that level in the end (again, I am not talking about during this life, because I agree it is not necessary during this life) would tell herself at that time (future), "I don't need to understand the intricacies of quantum mechanics to be fulfilled" if that in any way relates to having all the power that God has. If God does not know the intricacies of quantum mechanics then I suppose a person at that time (again, not necessary for this current part of the test) would not have interest in it. If all "things are subject unto them" it sounds like they will have no deficiencies in their power and knowledge and especially if compared one to another.

But you are right in saying the majority of people will not be in that position. I don't think I have said anything different from that. D&C 132:25 " 25 Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law." Many will try to find their own path off the straight and narrow. They will let go of the rod and try to make their way to the LARGE and SPACIOUS building. And they will mock those that want to stay on the single path, the narrow path that leads to a specific type of fruit that is as plain as plain could be, it is as white and exceedingly white (no distinguishing marks, not varied in color - metaphorically speaking) as anything ever seen. Many will end up as the stars, which are numerous and vary one from the other. That was not what I was talking about. When talking about "we" as a whole, like you keep doing in your posts, it cannot be applied to what I am saying because I am not talking about the whole but the small, few that get to the highest level of the "all" God has.

[Seminarysnoozer]

And yet something feels wrong about it. I am not working so hard to become exactly like someone else. Even if that someone else is God (I hope that does not seem blasphemous, but there it is). In all the universe there is no one like me. I was a unique individual from time immemorial. Something was valuable about me.

Why then are we each unique?

Explain to me, please, why uniqueness is more valuable to you than would be having all the good traits that would include all the ones that you find good in yourself now plus all the good traits you may not have at this time?

Having all the good traits would not take away the ones that you find good now. Having all good traits would be in addition to the deficiencies we find in this life that causes us to see ourselves as unique.

A journey from point A to point A is not really a journey. If we keep all the same differences and there is no refinement or sanctification process, I am not sure what you see the purpose of this life to be. To go through a refiner's fire is to go from point A to point B. Yes, we don't all make it there and so most people will have the differences remain, I realize that. But, I guess, the question is, do you see that process of going from point A to point B making all of us more similar or less similar or maintaining the 'differences that were there and will always be there'. I tend to think this life is a chance to refine, it is a process of perfection and there are goals and purposes of this process that result in making us more like our Heavenly parents. I realize this doesn't jive with most people in the world and several people on this forum as well but that is how I see the plan. It is an arrow head type process leading to an infinite point, that again not all will make it to that end as opposed to an entropy like process where we get further apart and more specialized in our differences.

[Guest]

Explain to me, please, why uniqueness is more valuable to you than would be having all the good traits that would include all the ones that you find good in yourself now plus all the good traits you may not have at this time?

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive?

[annewandering]

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive?

This is what I fail to understand about what you are sayng, seminarysnoozer.

[bluedreams]

I think you find my posts "weird" because you keep applying them to something I am not talking about as if that is my intention.

No seminary, I'm not talking about the other degrees of glory. I'm talking solely of exhaltation, nothing more. I keep talking about feelings here because, on this topic, as a number have pointed out, it's largely speculation. There's not exactly a scripture out there that say "thou shalt know and love quantum mechanics as thou loveth art." So I'm talking from what I currently understand about God, since it'll be He who exhalts us in the end through conversion. He is currently converting my heart and mind as he desires it to be, which is the whole purpose of this life. So I'm using that as a "type and shadow" of sorts to what will come. In my mind, if there's differences between our eternal spirits before this life, there's differences here and now, and as I convert my uniqueness remains, then I'd assume there will still be differences when I return home. Again, NOT between degrees of Glory. I have not once talked about that or thought about that as I've written my posts. I don't know much of what exhaltation will entail. The scriptures tell our state and power (which to me does not equivilate to personality nor negate uniqueness) but not much beyond that.

I also don't agree with your conclusion about how many will be exhalted. But I'll digress on that point. And the one about personality in general. I understand which angle your coming from, I just disagree with it. It's simply not what I've received or come to understand.

With luv,

BD

Edited May 13, 2012 by bluedreams

[james12]

Explain to me, please, why uniqueness is more valuable to you than would be having all the good traits that would include all the ones that you find good in yourself now plus all the good traits you may not have at this time?

I agree with Eowyn here, to posses all that God has (including His traits) does not indicate we loose individuality. As a matter of fact scripture and gospel teaching seems to imply just the opposite. Let me quote here from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism from the section "individuality".

LDS teachings make clear that living the gospel of Jesus Christ means voluntarily submitting the self to the will of God. Joseph F. Smith, felt that it shows "a stronger characteristic of individuality" to bring the self into harmony with God than to be separate from him (JD 25:245). An individual must voluntarily obey God's will to achieve righteousness (John 7:16), and God's will requires service to others in one's family and community (Matt. 20:26-27). Paradoxically, "he that loseth his life for [Christ's] sake shall find it" (Matt. 10:39)

This last scripture is particularly enlightening. When we loose ourselves for Christ we find ourselves. Spencer Kimball once said it was because there is more of us to find! The problem is the conclusion does seem paradoxical. How can we become more like our Father but have more individuality? And yet it appears this is the case. Elder Packer said it once this way.

Obedience to God can be the very highest expression of independence. Just think of giving to him the one thing, the one gift, that he would never take. Think of giving him that one thing that he would never wrest from you. ...Obedience—that which God will never take by force—he will accept when freely given. And he will then return to you freedom that you can hardly dream of—the freedom to feel and to know, the freedom to do, and the freedom to be, at least a thousandfold more than we offer him. Strangely enough, the key to freedom is obedience. (Boyd K. Packer, Obedience, Brigham Young University Speeches of the Year [7 Dec. 1971], 3–4).

Edited May 13, 2012 by james12

[Seminarysnoozer]

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive?

Because 100% of something looks like 100% every time. A whole pie looks like a whole pie, whereas if a person were to cut slices away then there could be distinguishing features from the whole pie that you could say was different one from the other.

Will everyone get to the fullness? No. So, will most have 100% of all the good traits, all the things talked about in the 13th article of faith? No. So, the argument that most will not act and be the same, to me, is not what I am talking about anyways.

If person A in this life starts out with their certain characteristics and works hard to follow the gospel of Christ and person B works hard to follow the gospel with her set of temporary characteristics, at the end of their hard work and diligence in following the gospel, would they appear to be more similar, less similar or remain equidistant in terms of their differences forever?

If you say they remain equidistant in terms of their differences, I really don't know what the purpose of this life is for in that scenario. Why go through the refiner's fire to be more like our Heavenly Father then? Why not remain in the state we were in? Or, just all die before any accountability is given so we get a body and remain in the diverse state of not moving towards being more like Christ and our Father in Heaven?

If a Heavenly Father A was standing side by side with a Heavenly Father B or a Heavenly Mother A and B compared, what differences would you see between the A and B? What would one have that the other wouldn't? Tell me one thing that one could have that the other doesn't in terms of their traits and characteristics?

[Seminarysnoozer]

I agree with Eowyn here, to posses all that God has (including His traits) does not indicate we loose individuality. As a matter of fact scripture and gospel teaching seems to imply just the opposite. Let me quote here from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism from the section "individuality". This last scripture is particularly enlightening. When we loose ourselves for Christ we find ourselves. Spencer Kimball once said it was because there is more of us to find! The problem is the conclusion does seem paradoxical. How can we become more like our Father but have more individuality? And yet it appears this is the case. Elder Packer said it once this way.

I think you are 180 degrees misinterpreting those statements. If anything, those statements are supporting what I am saying and especially in Matthew 10. The statements you provided are not speaking of "where "we are going but the "how" to get there. "How" we get there is through individual and independent effort. It is an expression of independent and individual effort, to give up our individual self to become more like Christ. But paradoxically, that is not binding or limiting, it provides more freedom. Those statements are clearly not saying to remain equidistant from Christ in one's individual traits and desires. God could not automatically make us like Him, in an instant, even though we wanted to be like Him. To get there requires coming here and having this opportunity to really see our deficiencies and to make the changes that are required to refine ourselves from the inside and become more like Him. The change can't be given, in other words, without individual and independent effort and so by going through this life with that goal in mind we are "proving" that we will do what is asked and that we really do desire to be like Him.

What is being said in the Mormon Encyclopedia is that the giving up of your own individual self is paradoxically an expression of individual effort even though it seems like one is giving up how they see themselves in this life. What Jesus is saying in Matthew 10 is to not love the things of this world more than the gospel. To not love father and mother more than the gospel (which is an interesting statement if one things about genetics and the nurturing traits obtained from father and mother). Losing one's life for Christ is to give up what one thinks naturally should be their path in life, their individually forged path to follow the straight and narrow path Christ has made for us. Instead of being fishermen, become fishers of men. Instead of being a musician, an athlete, a scientist, an artist, a doctor, lawyer or whatever other title given by men or given to one self, be a follower of Christ above that. That is more important than the individual, distinguishing titles men give themselves.

The process of going from individual and independent traits and characteristics to the oneness that Christ desires of all of us (the "how"), takes individual effort. To get there requires the person, independently, on their own effort to cause the mighty change of heart, to refine those things on their own. God will not force a person to make those changes if they don't have that desire in their heart. A person has to willingly give up those things. And that is exactly what I have been saying. I have heard from you all that you shouldn't be willing to give or your life to be like Christ, if anything. That one should maintain their own temporary corrupted set of traits as if it is their own, as if that is more valuable then what God has to offer.

I think " 38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it." in Matthew 10 is a pretty clear statement about where our desire should be. It should not be on ourselves, it should be on Christ. We should be willing to give of what we might call valuable such as a specific talent or ability and realize that this set of traits are just a temporary stewardship, it is the cross to bear, it is the life that we should give up to serve God and not claim it as our own like an unjust and unprofitable steward would. Everything in the gospel points towards Christ. It does not point to things less than Christ.

People that say things like "be yourself" or "do what makes you feel good" or "you were born that way" or anything less than "be Christlike" fall into the trap oftentimes of choosing to follow the desires that come from our carnal state over our spiritual drives of becoming more like our Heavenly Father.

To willingly give up our natural man (which is what most people perceive as their self, even though it isn't, it is just temporary) takes independent and individual effort which paradoxically provides more freedom. In other words, it seems like it is narrowing options to be just like Christ but it actually offers more freedom and choice. Whereas, to choose the narrowed and fallen natural man state (your life, to not bear the cross - giving up self) over having all is to not understand one's true value, like Jesus said in Matthew 10 " 31 Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."

I think Jesus was, in many ways, trying to say why do you fear giving up yourself? Don't you know that you are more valuable than the way you find yourself now? We are more valuable than choosing a state of having only partial good traits, God wants us to have 100% of what He has.

[annewandering]

I just dont understand why you think that would be a good thing. Consider a peach and pineapple upside down cake. Both can be perfect but they are obviously not the same flavor. Why would we want them to be exactly the same? Yet they are not flawed.

Is it more perfect that I am not fond of chocolate but Jesus may well love its taste. Should I be like Him in this since He is perfect? It does not matter if we differ on this. It has nothing to do with being perfect or not being perfect.

Jesus is perfectly honest. Should I be perfectly honest as well? Yes because that does matter. It is a moral issue but chocolate is not.

[Guest]

Thanks, SS. I understand where you're coming from now, and how you came to that conclusion. I still don't agree that perfect = absolutely identical, but I do see your point of view there. It's been an interesting discussion.

[Seminarysnoozer]

I just dont understand why you think that would be a good thing. Consider a peach and pineapple upside down cake. Both can be perfect but they are obviously not the same flavor. Why would we want them to be exactly the same? Yet they are not flawed.

Is it more perfect that I am not fond of chocolate but Jesus may well love its taste. Should I be like Him in this since He is perfect? It does not matter if we differ on this. It has nothing to do with being perfect or not being perfect.

Jesus is perfectly honest. Should I be perfectly honest as well? Yes because that does matter. It is a moral issue but chocolate is not.

A peach and a pineapple are not of the same species. One did not beget the other. If you are trying to say that God is of a different type than us, then that is a different religion than LDS that you are talking about. I guess I was speaking under the premise that most in the LDS faith had a testimony of being literal sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father (and Mother).

If a like or dislike of any particular item of your choosing "doesn't matter", if that is really true, then I would expect Jesus to say 'it doesn't matter' and anyone who reaches that level of understanding and appreciation for all things would likely say 'it doesn't matter' and they would not claim to like one thing over another as 'it doesn't matter'. So, in that sense of their indifference, they would be exactly the same. If it really doesn't matter, then a person of that level would never claim that it does, they would never claim that they "prefer" one over another in that category which has no significance. In a lower state of understanding we place significance on many things that don't matter. And then we go and claim that that is how we differ. Why would one want to hold onto differences that don't matter? That makes no sense at all.

[Guest]

If there are differences that don't matter, it wouldn't matter whether we hold on to them or not.

[annewandering]

No I wasnt speaking of outside the gospel or other species. What would make you think that? I am the child of my mom and dad but that doesnt make me them.

[Seminarysnoozer]

If there are differences that don't matter, it wouldn't matter whether we hold on to them or not.

Right! That is my point. Then why should it matter to us if we have them then? For some, obviously, it matters a lot, but then that is placing the desires of the heart on things that don't matter. If people place their desires on things of dust then they are not going to find themselves in a dustless Kingdom in the end. They will get what they want.

I really doubt that God is one to do things that don't matter or is quirky or random. From what I read, He has purpose in what He does. His purpose is what dictates who He is and how He acts, His personality and traits are all dictated by having a oneness in purpose, to bring to pass the immortality and Eternal Life of man. Of course, there are many works and things that we do not know about. I don't know if you are privy to those 'unknown' works. But to suggest, even, that those unknown works would contain an element of purposeless activity seems off the character of the God I worship.

[Seminarysnoozer]

No I wasnt speaking of outside the gospel or other species. What would make you think that? I am the child of my mom and dad but that doesnt make me them.

Are we not having the same conversation? You brought up a comparison of peaches and pineapples coming together to bring different flavors to one upside down cake. I was pointing out that the example you gave was of two different species of fruit. Now, if you would have said I think the upside down cake is better when one peach is ripe and the other is spoiled, then that is more metaphorically correct from what I think you are trying to say.

And again, I am not talking about the differences that are found in a corrupted fallen state. Yes I know how genetics works, I also know of how there are mutations and alterations to the genes passed on from parents to children. This is, in part, part of the corruption we find ourselves in. What we have now is really different from the original creation in Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, not only because of the change in the body caused by the Fall itself but also the corruption it introduced into the system of change and alteration from the original caused by the passing of genes from one generation to the next.

If one prefers the corrupted copy over the original, then the 'restoration' to the original will account for that because corruption will be restored to corruption. That is a choice depending on ones desire. Is the heart's desire on Christ or self? ... and to what degree? Nobody is perfect here but the goal, as I see it, is to focus on Christ, not self and all the imperfections that come with the natural man.

I think sometimes people want to say that Christ (perfection) is not the goal because they don't want to offend or make people feel bad about the situation they find themselves in. But, we are all in a fallen state, everyone of us. We are not expected to achieve that perfection on our own or during this life. Christ is the finisher. This life is just a test of what our true nature is, the true desire of our heart when given the choice between carnal versus spiritual influences.

Edited May 14, 2012 by Seminarysnoozer

[annewandering]

I was not talking about rotten fruit. I was talking about two perfectly good fruits. Perfect in fact. But they are not the same even though they are perfect. Different yet perfect. None of us is or will be the same. We are the same species as God. He is perfect. We will be perfect if we do what He has told us to do. Even so we are not the same as God or each other.

We have very different ideas of what is going to be but we both believe we can be perfect. Your idea of perfect seems to be a very different thing that what I understand perfect to be. What we do agree on is that we can be perfect. Maybe we ought to leave it there.