Gospel of Jesus Christ - Easy or hard

[prisonchaplain]

prisonchaplain & Traveler, sounds like the classic debate between Calvinism and Arminianism.

Sounds like it, but actually we're looking at the question of whether "holiness" is a spiritual experience or an on-going discipline. In this case there is no answering, "Well both," because to call it a discipline is to say it cannot be spiritually endowed. So, in this either/or I'd say that holiness is a discipline, though surely the Holy Spirit empowers us as we pursue it. Did Jesus not say that we are blessed if we hunger and thirst after righteousness?

[Desertknight]

Sounds like it, but actually we're looking at the question of whether "holiness" is a spiritual experience or an on-going discipline. In this case there is no answering, "Well both," because to call it a discipline is to say it cannot be spiritually endowed. So, in this either/or I'd say that holiness is a discipline, though surely the Holy Spirit empowers us as we pursue it. Did Jesus not say that we are blessed if we hunger and thirst after righteousness?

Got it, and I see that really is where the debate is. Related to C. vs. A., however.

I would agree with "both", Reverend. Even in our cooperation, it's prime cause is still the work of the Holy Spirit. We don't save ourselves...at any step of that salvation. We only cooperate with that grace freely given and must have grace to even do that.

[Traveler]

This link is to a relatively short statement about sanctification and holiness. It describes an understanding that's come to be known as "progressive sanctification." It contrasts with "entire sanctification," and suggests that we strive for holiness, rather than expecting to attain "sinless perfection" within mortality. Are you addressing this issue and agreeing with the idea of mortal perfection, or am I misunderstanding you?

Sanctification & Holiness

Thanks for the link. You have chosen your words well – I too believe deeply in discipline and that until we discipline ourselves we cannot call ourselves a disciple. But to illustrate my point I will use the symbolism of light and darkness. Light being in the likeness of that which is whole and holy and darkness being in the likeness of sin, corruption and that which is unholy.

When we stand in the light of G-d there is no darkness for there can be no darkness or sin in that which is sanctified – there can only be light. Thus it is that in order to touch darkness we must separate ourselves from G-d and turn away from the light. In this life it is a rare opportunity to stand in the light of G-d but it can and does happen. We know we are in the light of G-d when sin and all desire for sin has left us. When there is still some darkness (attachment to sin) we are in the presents of a being or being pretending to be a being of light.

For this reason we must be cleansed from all sin in order to return to live with G-d. Jesus has promised to do the cleansing part but to be with G-d we must let go of the hand of darkness. The reality is that we must love the light of G-d (where there is not darkness) or find a place where we can still have some measure of darkness. But when the spirit of G-d is upon us there is no possibility to sin. To sin we must turn from the light. Thus the discipline is to remain focused on the light.

The other symbol used to denote discipline in LDS teaching is holding on to the “iron rod” which is the word of G-d through prophets (which includes ancient scripture). The spirit can only remain with us while we hold on to the iron rod. Sometimes we are so surrounded by darkness the iron rod is the only means through the darkness to the light. But the iron rod is not the light though it will lead us to the light and we may enjoy some light in following the iron rod – it is not the source of light.

Anyway - that is my understanding.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

The reality is that we must love the light of G-d (where there is not darkness) or find a place where we can still have some measure of darkness.

I think that is the "trick", to love the light. The gospel is easy when we love it, it is hard when our hearts are not in it. The gospel (the iron rod) is used to teach men to love the right things, to place their hearts in godliness and not the things of the world (the large and spacious building). And that is because there are may aspects of being like God, I suspect, that we still have to learn to love. If we haven't yet developed a love for the things of God, now is the time. Now is the time to hold onto the iron rod so that we can "love the light". I think the admonition of Paul spells that out pretty well. That is the process of the gospel but the goal is to develop the same "oneness" in heart that Christ has towards what is good and right.

The discipline of the gospel is the method in which we can mold the desires of our heart to match what Christ lived.

(I may have mentioned this story already once, sorry) My husband was not a soccer fan growing up, he played football and basketball. I played soccer and am a fan. I have taken him (by force, lol) to games over the years and now he has developed a liking for the game. He has even coached some of our children. He now follows the local college team more than I do. I believe that one of the purposes of the discipline aspect of the gospel is to show us the things that will bring the most joy so that we can "learn to love" that light and in some cases develop the liking for these things as we will be judged by what is in our heart, not just whether we follow some regimen to the letter of the law. Doing it for the right reasons becomes just as important as following the laws. The gospel is the method in which we learn about the right reasons so we can even have a chance of developing a liking for those things, i.e. - the value of the family, service, power of the priesthood etc.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Seminarysnoozer

[Traveler]

I think that is the "trick", to love the light. The gospel is easy when we love it, it is hard when our hearts are not in it. The gospel (the iron rod) is used to teach men to love the right things, to place their hearts in godliness and not the things of the world (the large and spacious building). And that is because there are may aspects of being like God, I suspect, that we still have to learn to love. If we haven't yet developed a love for the things of God, now is the time. Now is the time to hold onto the iron rod so that we can "love the light". I think the admonition of Paul spells that out pretty well. That is the process of the gospel but the goal is to develop the same "oneness" in heart that Christ has towards what is good and right.

The discipline of the gospel is the method in which we can mold the desires of our heart to match what Christ lived.

(I may have mentioned this story already once, sorry) My husband was not a soccer fan growing up, he played football and basketball. I played soccer and am a fan. I have taken him (by force, lol) to games over the years and now he has developed a liking for the game. He has even coached some of our children. He now follows the local college team more than I do. I believe that one of the purposes of the discipline aspect of the gospel is to show us the things that will bring the most joy so that we can "learn to love" that light and in some cases develop the liking for these things as we will be judged by what is in our heart, not just whether we follow some regimen to the letter of the law. Doing it for the right reasons becomes just as important as following the laws. The gospel is the method in which we learn about the right reasons so we can even have a chance of developing a liking for those things, i.e. - the value of the family, service, power of the priesthood etc.

Oh my - could we be having a moment of agreement with one another? I have come to believe that we give ourselves too much credit with concepts of free will and agency. Perhaps we are not so strong to stand alone but rather are more like sponges soaking up whatever it is that we are immersed in. We are not corrupted by the many steps towards sin or enlightened so much by the many steps towards light as we are the first.

There is one other thought that deeply interest me. It comes from the parable of “The Prodigal Son”. When the son was in the home of his father, he did not love and appreciate it so much but was so very curious about elements of darkness that had not been experienced nor could be while living with his father. Once immersed into and surrounding himself with darkness – it seemed joyous for a while but eventually the path lead to degradation and despair. Upon realizing how his individual wealth is spent and diminished in darkness he determined to return home.

Upon returning home he saw the light of his father’s house in a “new light” – for the first time in his life he experienced joy. Interesting to that his older brother did not comprehend the light or the joy even though he had never removed himself from what light he comprehended. Many of us think on Jesus as the “older brother” that has never strayed but always been faithful to the Father. Maybe we should understand being perfect, that a pure sanctified being of light is in reality more like the “Prodigal Son” who had strayed and returned to enjoy the light.

My purpose in this thread is to all those that have strayed (as I have) but having tasted of the misery of self-indulgence – who have come to realize what degradation and unhappiness comes from abandoning discipline – Come and taste of the pure waters of light and discipline of the master Jesus Christ. Immerse yourself (baptize) as Jesus did in the ritual of covenant discipline and ordnance with the saints of G-d.

If you try to return but to hold on to the pleasures of self and to the dark elements you think so fun and interesting – you will fail for it is impossible to serve two masters. But come – forget the past – put off what was and stand with Christ and a miracle will occur in that which was impossible will not only become possible but so very easy. If it is not easy it is because (like the beginner – playing seems more fun than practice and so you gaze out the window at the other children playing and ignore your practice) you are not disciplined – you have not determined to return.

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

Oh my - could we be having a moment of agreement with one another? I have come to believe that we give ourselves too much credit with concepts of free will and agency. Perhaps we are not so strong to stand alone but rather are more like sponges soaking up whatever it is that we are immersed in. We are not corrupted by the many steps towards sin or enlightened so much by the many steps towards light as we are the first.

There is one other thought that deeply interest me. It comes from the parable of “The Prodigal Son”. When the son was in the home of his father, he did not love and appreciate it so much but was so very curious about elements of darkness that had not been experienced nor could be while living with his father. Once immersed into and surrounding himself with darkness – it seemed joyous for a while but eventually the path lead to degradation and despair. Upon realizing how his individual wealth is spent and diminished in darkness he determined to return home.

Upon returning home he saw the light of his father’s house in a “new light” – for the first time in his life he experienced joy. Interesting to that his older brother did not comprehend the light or the joy even though he had never removed himself from what light he comprehended. Many of us think on Jesus as the “older brother” that has never strayed but always been faithful to the Father. Maybe we should understand being perfect, that a pure sanctified being of light is in reality more like the “Prodigal Son” who had strayed and returned to enjoy the light.

My purpose in this thread is to all those that have strayed (as I have) but having tasted of the misery of self-indulgence – who have come to realize what degradation and unhappiness comes from abandoning discipline – Come and taste of the pure waters of light and discipline of the master Jesus Christ. Immerse yourself (baptize) as Jesus did in the ritual of covenant discipline and ordnance with the saints of G-d.

If you try to return but to hold on to the pleasures of self and to the dark elements you think so fun and interesting – you will fail for it is impossible to serve two masters. But come – forget the past – put off what was and stand with Christ and a miracle will occur in that which was impossible will not only become possible but so very easy. If it is not easy it is because (like the beginner – playing seems more fun than practice and so you gaze out the window at the other children playing and ignore your practice) you are not disciplined – you have not determined to return.

The Traveler

Thanks, in regard to your prodigal son idea, remember that there are many who will die that never experience sin, all those who die before the age of 8 and those that have diseases in which there was no real accountability between good and evil here. They will go onto glory without having any experience of "darkness".

I could be very wrong but if you count the number of children that die before the age of 8 that ever was, that probably outnumbers the total number of members of the church both during Jesus day, those described in the Book of Mormon and those of our day combined. In other words, there will be a lot of people found in the Celestial Kingdom that did not experience straying away nor have to.

[Windseeker]

Oh my - could we be having a moment of agreement with one another? I have come to believe that we give ourselves too much credit with concepts of free will and agency. Perhaps we are not so strong to stand alone but rather are more like sponges soaking up whatever it is that we are immersed in. We are not corrupted by the many steps towards sin or enlightened so much by the many steps towards light as we are the first.

There is one other thought that deeply interest me. It comes from the parable of “The Prodigal Son”. When the son was in the home of his father, he did not love and appreciate it so much but was so very curious about elements of darkness that had not been experienced nor could be while living with his father. Once immersed into and surrounding himself with darkness – it seemed joyous for a while but eventually the path lead to degradation and despair. Upon realizing how his individual wealth is spent and diminished in darkness he determined to return home.

Upon returning home he saw the light of his father’s house in a “new light” – for the first time in his life he experienced joy. Interesting to that his older brother did not comprehend the light or the joy even though he had never removed himself from what light he comprehended. Many of us think on Jesus as the “older brother” that has never strayed but always been faithful to the Father. Maybe we should understand being perfect, that a pure sanctified being of light is in reality more like the “Prodigal Son” who had strayed and returned to enjoy the light.

My purpose in this thread is to all those that have strayed (as I have) but having tasted of the misery of self-indulgence – who have come to realize what degradation and unhappiness comes from abandoning discipline – Come and taste of the pure waters of light and discipline of the master Jesus Christ. Immerse yourself (baptize) as Jesus did in the ritual of covenant discipline and ordnance with the saints of G-d.

If you try to return but to hold on to the pleasures of self and to the dark elements you think so fun and interesting – you will fail for it is impossible to serve two masters. But come – forget the past – put off what was and stand with Christ and a miracle will occur in that which was impossible will not only become possible but so very easy. If it is not easy it is because (like the beginner – playing seems more fun than practice and so you gaze out the window at the other children playing and ignore your practice) you are not disciplined – you have not determined to return.

The Traveler

I don't think it's necessary to remove oneself form the light in order to appreciate it. The concept would turn much of the gospel on it's head. It's always better to not sin at all then to sin and then have to repent. The time and opportunities lost simply can never be reclaimed.

Perhaps we can compare a Nephi to an Alma the younger. We know that the Prodigal son blew his inheritance, we don't know if he recieved more inheritance. We do know that the older son was told “Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine”.

I also don't agree that the older brother could not comprehend the light, he just was frustrated that he never received such a celebration.

[Desertknight]

For me, the Prodigal Son is less about the son than about the father. It is representative of God's boundless love and forgiveness for all of us, no matter how much we may have sinned or strayed.

As far as spiritual growth, better not to sin may be, but without suffering, I don't think our faith really grows. Suffering, (and I don't mean just any suffering), is akin to athletes who say, "No pain, no gain". Some of the greatest saints were people who underwent great spiritual suffering, and yes, some were even prodigious sinners before returning to the Father, head bowed.

[Vort]

For me, the Prodigal Son is less about the son than about the father. It is representative of God's boundless love and forgiveness for all of us, no matter how much we may have sinned or strayed.

The "prodigal son" is the last of a trio of parables illustrating how the lost can be found, and the rejoicing that subsequently ensues. After indulging his prodigality, the younger son comes to himself and returns -- the lost is found. And what of the rejoicing? The father rejoices, as is appropriate. But the older son does not rejoice, and for what seems to many to be good reason: Always faithful, never celebrated over. Seems unfair. The "fairness" comes in the father's words: "All that I have is thine." But if we believe the lost to be truly found, then we might assume that the younger son, having acted the prodigal and wasted his inheritance already, will still be granted a portion.

[Windseeker]

As far as spiritual growth, better not to sin may be, but without suffering, I don't think our faith really grows. Suffering, (and I don't mean just any suffering), is akin to athletes who say, "No pain, no gain".

I agree to an extent. There is suffering because we are simply present in this life and there is suffering caused by our sins. Again I would prefer to suffer knowing it's part of the purpose and experience in life then to suffer knowing I caused it and it could have been avoided. Either way we are blessed at each point to learn and grow from it.

Some of the greatest saints were people who underwent great spiritual suffering, and yes, some were even prodigious sinners before returning to the Father, head bowed.

I like this. I'm reminded of a passage from Les Miserables where Jean ValJean was confronted with his own fallen state in the fierce light of the goodness of the Bishop of D. Forgive me for this long quote but I love it.

In the presence of these lights, he proceeded like a man who is intoxicated. As he walked thus with haggard

eyes, did he have a distinct perception of what might result to him from his adventure at D----? Did he

understand all those mysterious murmurs which warn or importune the spirit at certain moments of life? Did a

voice whisper in his ear that he had just passed the solemn hour of his destiny; that there no longer remained a middle course for him; that if he were not henceforth the best of men, he would be the worst; that it behooved him now, so to speak, to mount higher than the Bishop, or fall lower than the convict; that if he wished to become good he must become an angel; that if he wished to remain evil, he must become a monster?

....

Thus he contemplated himself, so to speak, face to face, and at the same time, athwart this hallucination, he

perceived in a mysterious depth a sort of light which he at first took for a torch. On scrutinizing this light

which appeared to his conscience with more attention, he recognized the fact that it possessed a human form

and that this torch was the Bishop.

His conscience weighed in turn these two men thus placed before it,-- the Bishop and Jean Valjean. Nothing

less than the first was required to soften the second. By one of those singular effects, which are peculiar to this

sort of ecstasies, in proportion as his revery continued, as the Bishop grew great and resplendent in his eyes,

so did Jean Valjean grow less and vanish. After a certain time he was no longer anything more than a shade.

All at once he disappeared. The Bishop alone remained; he filled the whole soul of this wretched man with a

magnificent radiance.

Jean Valjean wept for a long time. He wept burning tears, he sobbed with more weakness than a woman, with

more fright than a child.

As he wept, daylight penetrated more and more clearly into his soul; an extraordinary light; a light at once

ravishing and terrible. His past life, his first fault, his long expiation, his external brutishness, his internal

hardness, his dismissal to liberty, rejoicing in manifold plans of vengeance, what had happened to him at the

Bishop's, the last thing that he had done, that theft of forty sous from a child, a crime all the more cowardly,

and all the more monstrous since it had come after the Bishop's pardon,--all this recurred to his mind and

appeared clearly to him, but with a clearness which he had never hitherto witnessed. He examined his life, and

it seemed horrible to him; his soul, and it seemed frightful to him. In the meantime a gentle light rested over

this life and this soul. It seemed to him that he beheld Satan by the light of Paradise.

How many hours did he weep thus? What did he do after he had wept? Whither did he go! No one ever knew.

The only thing which seems to be authenticated is that that same night the carrier who served Grenoble at that

epoch, and who arrived at D---- about three o'clock in the morning, saw, as he traversed the street in which the

Bishop's residence was situated, a man in the attitude of prayer, kneeling on the pavement in the shadow, in

front of the door of Monseigneur Welcome.

I think some may never arise to become Saints or Apostles, but I think there will be a measure in how high we have risen from the lot we have been handed. Possibly giving the ex-convict a chance to mount higher than the Bishop.

[Desertknight]

The "prodigal son" is the last of a trio of parables illustrating how the lost can be found, and the rejoicing that subsequently ensues. After indulging his prodigality, the younger son comes to himself and returns -- the lost is found. And what of the rejoicing? The father rejoices, as is appropriate. But the older son does not rejoice, and for what seems to many to be good reason: Always faithful, never celebrated over. Seems unfair. The "fairness" comes in the father's words: "All that I have is thine." But if we believe the lost to be truly found, then we might assume that the younger son, having acted the prodigal and wasted his inheritance already, will still be granted a portion.

Oh, I don't think the prodigal will simply get "a portion". I think the father was pointing out the ingratitude of the dutiful son by saying to him, "all that I have has always been yours.", in essence. i.e., don't be ungrateful but understand that there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance" (Lk. 15:7).

[Desertknight]

I agree to an extent. There is suffering because we are simply present in this life and there is suffering caused by our sins. Again I would prefer to suffer knowing it's part of the purpose and experience in life then to suffer knowing I caused it and it could have been avoided. Either way we are blessed at each point to learn and grow from it.

Certainly what you do with suffering is the key, but as far as not causing it, even then, (if correctly engaged in), it is beneficial. Do Mormons fast? In my tradition, fasting and abstaining for penitential reasons is done for that benefit. Part of being more "Christ like" is to know more completely, His suffering.

I like this. I'm reminded of a passage from Les Miserables where Jean ValJean was confronted with his own fallen state in the fierce light of the goodness of the Bishop of D. Forgive me for this long quote but I love it.

If you get a hankering, you might try this. It is on my bookshelf and was reminded of it from your quote. It has deep meaning for me.

I think some may never arise to become Saints or Apostles, but I think there will be a measure in how high we have risen from the lot we have been handed. Possibly giving the ex-convict a chance to mount higher than the Bishop.

Most certainly, if that be God's grace. Again, I'm not sure what LDS theology may correspond, but we are all called to be saints. It is what our baptism does. Life is about that rebirth (baptism), then that often painful but ultimately joyous unshackling from "self" and partaking of the Divine Nature, every day (theosis). If you reach heaven, you will most certainly be a saint. They are the only ones there.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Certainly what you do with suffering is the key, but as far as not causing it, even then, (if correctly engaged in), it is beneficial. Do Mormons fast? In my tradition, fasting and abstaining for penitential reasons is done for that benefit. Part of being more "Christ like" is to know more completely, His suffering.

At the same time one thing gathered from Christ's life is that the knowing doesn't have to come in the form of experience based in the consequences of one's own actions. I think the child who dies with one day of life in this world can still "know" of the price paid for salvation without really experiencing anything in this world.

To make faith grow suffering might be the price, as you stated. But there are individuals who don't need a test of faith, so, therefore, it is not "necessary". It isn't a rung of the ladder that all have to step on.

[Desertknight]

At the same time one thing gathered from Christ's life is that the knowing doesn't have to come in the form of experience based in the consequences of one's own actions. I think the child who dies with one day of life in this world can still "know" of the price paid for salvation without really experiencing anything in this world.

Well, if the child dies with only one day of life...they did suffer. Even if they were not conscious. Suffering is not necessarily physical pain. Secondly, if they can really "know" of the price paid for salvation, then they did suffer with Christ. Suffering is a condition of life, whether lived from one day to +90 years. All have suffered since the 'fall of man'. But, related to your statement below...

To make faith grow suffering might be the price, as you stated. But there are individuals who don't need a test of faith, so, therefore, it is not "necessary". It isn't a rung of the ladder that all have to step on.

I believe all do. Now that not all may suffer to the same degree or in the same way is true, but we must all do so, according to God's will, in order to have life eternal.

"Now if we are children, then we are heirs —heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory." Rom. 8:17.

[Tyler90AZ]

Oh, I don't think the prodigal will simply get "a portion". I think the father was pointing out the ingratitude of the dutiful son by saying to him, "all that I have has always been yours.", in essence. i.e., don't be ungrateful but understand that there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance" (Lk. 15:7).

Agree Desertknight

The laborers in the vineyard illustrate that anybody who returns to Christ will get all that is his. I don't think anybody will get just a portion and that was illustrated this past conference by Jeffrey R. Holland. The Laborers in the Vineyard - general-conference

"It is with that reading of the story that I feel the grumbling of the first laborers must be seen. As the householder in the parable tells them (and I paraphrase only slightly): “My friends, I am not being unfair to you. You agreed on the wage for the day, a good wage. You were very happy to get the work, and I am very happy with the way you served. You are paid in full. Take your pay and enjoy the blessing. As for the others, surely I am free to do what I like with my own money.” Then this piercing question to anyone then or now who needs to hear it: “Why should you be jealous because I choose to be kind?”"

Truly the person who has remained in the church his whole life has been blessed more abundantly. Which is a great thing and due to his own actions. The person who has not been in the church his whole life has paid a seen and unseen price. Regardless if they deserved to pay that price it matters not. Our Lord is merciful beyond belief and we should rejoice in his mercy.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Well, if the child dies with only one day of life...they did suffer. Even if they were not conscious. Suffering is not necessarily physical pain. Secondly, if they can really "know" of the price paid for salvation, then they did suffer with Christ. Suffering is a condition of life, whether lived from one day to +90 years. All have suffered since the 'fall of man'. But, related to your statement below...

I believe all do. Now that not all may suffer to the same degree or in the same way is true, but we must all do so, according to God's will, in order to have life eternal.

"Now if we are children, then we are heirs —heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory." Rom. 8:17.

Obviously, the "suffering" we are talking about is related to sin, right? I just assumed that is what you were talking about. I guess not. You did say "and I don't mean just any suffering" and then go on to talk about "spiritual suffering". So, I am confused about your statements. Specifically, then, what kind of suffering are you talking about that can be experienced by an infant who might live less than an hour in this world?

Moroni 8: " 8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little cchildren are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me."

...

"“He that supposeth that little children need baptism is in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; for he hath neither faith, hope, nor charity; wherefore, should he be cut off while in the thought, he must go down to hell.

“For awful is the wickedness to suppose that God saveth one child because of baptism, and the other must perish because he hath no baptism.

“Wo be unto them that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner, for they shall perish except they repent. Behold, I speak with boldness, having authority from God”

President Hinckley said; "The innocence of little children is another revelation which God has given through the instrumentality of the Prophet Joseph. The general practice is the baptism of infants to take away the effects of what is described as the sin of Adam and Eve. Under the doctrine of the Restoration, baptism is for the remission of one’s individual and personal sins. It becomes a covenant between God and man. It is performed at the age of accountability, when people are old enough to recognize right from wrong. It is by immersion, in symbolism of the death and burial of Jesus Christ and His coming forth in the Resurrection."

If they aren't even old enough to recognize right from wrong, what suffering was experienced? He is saying here that little children are not under the effects of the Fall, there is nothing to take away until they are accountable.

Explain what suffering you are talking about then for the child that lives one hour or is born without a brain to experience anything, anencephaly.

[Desertknight]

Agree Desertknight

The laborers in the vineyard illustrate that anybody who returns to Christ will get all that is his. I don't think anybody will get just a portion and that was illustrated this past conference by Jeffrey R. Holland. The Laborers in the Vineyard - general-conference

"It is with that reading of the story that I feel the grumbling of the first laborers must be seen. As the householder in the parable tells them (and I paraphrase only slightly): “My friends, I am not being unfair to you. You agreed on the wage for the day, a good wage. You were very happy to get the work, and I am very happy with the way you served. You are paid in full. Take your pay and enjoy the blessing. As for the others, surely I am free to do what I like with my own money.” Then this piercing question to anyone then or now who needs to hear it: “Why should you be jealous because I choose to be kind?”"

Truly the person who has remained in the church his whole life has been blessed more abundantly. Which is a great thing and due to his own actions. The person who has not been in the church his whole life has paid a seen and unseen price. Regardless if they deserved to pay that price it matters not. Our Lord is merciful beyond belief and we should rejoice in his mercy.

Oh, that's good! Yes.

[Desertknight]

Obviously, the "suffering" we are talking about is related to sin, right? I just assumed that is what you were talking about. I guess not. You did say "and I don't mean just any suffering" and then go on to talk about "spiritual suffering". So, I am confused about your statements. Specifically, then, what kind of suffering are you talking about that can be experienced by an infant who might live less than an hour in this world?

Moroni 8: " 8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little cchildren are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me."

...

"“He that supposeth that little children need baptism is in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; for he hath neither faith, hope, nor charity; wherefore, should he be cut off while in the thought, he must go down to hell.

“For awful is the wickedness to suppose that God saveth one child because of baptism, and the other must perish because he hath no baptism.

“Wo be unto them that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner, for they shall perish except they repent. Behold, I speak with boldness, having authority from God”

President Hinckley said; "The innocence of little children is another revelation which God has given through the instrumentality of the Prophet Joseph. The general practice is the baptism of infants to take away the effects of what is described as the sin of Adam and Eve. Under the doctrine of the Restoration, baptism is for the remission of one’s individual and personal sins. It becomes a covenant between God and man. It is performed at the age of accountability, when people are old enough to recognize right from wrong. It is by immersion, in symbolism of the death and burial of Jesus Christ and His coming forth in the Resurrection."

If they aren't even old enough to recognize right from wrong, what suffering was experienced? He is saying here that little children are not under the effects of the Fall, there is nothing to take away until they are accountable.

Explain what suffering you are talking about then for the child that lives one hour or is born without a brain to experience anything, anencephaly.

Note: we will of course, have differing beliefs on the nature of baptism and original sin, so bear with me. No one is saying (Let alone my Church.) that un-baptised children may not be saved. But in regards to the issue of suffering,

Did not the children of Adam and Eve suffer even in their first hour of life? First minute? Suffering is a condition of life itself from the moment of birth, since the fall of man in the garden. Indeed, the very fact that any child can suffer death, is a result of that fall.

"To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children ; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you." Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field ; By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken ; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." Gen. 3:16-19.

Suffering takes many forms, and yes, can come from our actions in sin, but the suffering that I was referring to in my previous posts, is the result of how we use suffering. It can be destructive or it can be redemptive. When we join it to the cross, it becomes redemptive.

Edited May 31, 2012 by Desertknight

[Tyler90AZ]

Oh, that's good! Yes.

Oh, I just realized you were Catholic. Nonetheless, our churches have more in common then different.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Note: we will of course, have differing beliefs on the nature of baptism and original sin, so bear with me. No one is saying (Let alone my Church.) that un-baptised children may not be saved. But in regards to the issue of suffering,

Did not the children of Adam and Eve suffer even in their first hour of life? First minute? Suffering is a condition of life itself from the moment of birth, since the fall of man in the garden. Indeed, the very fact that any child can suffer death, is a result of that fall.

"To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children ; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you." Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field ; By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken ; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." Gen. 3:16-19.

Suffering takes many forms, and yes, can come from our actions in sin, but the suffering that I was referring to in my previous posts, is the result of how we use suffering. It can be destructive or it can be redemptive. When we join it to the cross, it becomes redemptive.

Okay. But then that act of faith took place before the child was born, it was an act of faith in keeping the first estate. To say that they were willing to be born as the faith requiring step, otherwise they are just along for the short ride. There was no decision to be made after keeping the first estate. As it says in Moroni, the effect of the fall of Adam has been taken away.

Here you are pointing out it is as a result of how "we use suffering" and my point is that the child who dies in one hour didn't "use" anything in this life as there was no action on their part outside of the action to keep the first estate made long ago. More specifically there was no suffering experienced. And while here there was no action. And since they later don't feel any effect from this life as the effect of the fall of Adam is taken away from them, I am not sure how they can "use" any of that suffering even if you want to call something that isn't felt "suffering". That seems like a stretch to me. I don't think suffering is a requirement for those that are not required to suffer and have not experienced sin.

D&C 19: " 15 Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.

16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;

17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink—

19 Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men."

I think it states pretty clearly here, when we talk about suffering, it is in relationship to not repenting from sin. Christ suffered these things so we do not have to if we repent. For those that do not need to repent, those that die before the age of accountability, I do not see how they suffer.

[Dravin]

Seminary, DeseretKnight is Catholic. I'm not sure if you realize that, that's what he was talking about with differing beliefs, it's a difference of a different nature than when say you and I share different beliefs about the nature of perfection or what have you. As such while referencing Doctrine and Covenants and the first estate is pertinent to explaining your position, it's of limited utility in trying to convince him. I'm not sure which is your intention, so I'm just throwing it out there a a heads up in case you missed that he's Catholic.

Edited May 31, 2012 by Dravin

[Traveler]

For me, the Prodigal Son is less about the son than about the father. It is representative of God's boundless love and forgiveness for all of us, no matter how much we may have sinned or strayed.

As far as spiritual growth, better not to sin may be, but without suffering, I don't think our faith really grows. Suffering, (and I don't mean just any suffering), is akin to athletes who say, "No pain, no gain". Some of the greatest saints were people who underwent great spiritual suffering, and yes, some were even prodigious sinners before returning to the Father, head bowed.

Desertknight – thank you for your thought. I believe if we only talk to individuals that we agree with – we will not learn. However there are two very important points that I think you have not considered in you view – or point of view.

Point 1: Prodigal does not mean sinful or rebellious even though such understanding is often attached to the term prodigal, most likely because of this parable and the evolution of traditional religious thinking. The term prodigal means wasteful, lavish and extravagant. We may define that as sinful because of the relationship we all think that prodigal has to pride but as much as we would press the issue it is in the full extension of meaning, border line sinful at best. In essence to exist in a mortal state makes us prodigal and unprofitable before G-d – Regardless of how pure or repentant we may attempt to live. Thus it could also be understood that G-d himself is prodigal and wasteful in the very redemption of man from his fallen state – because G-d will never nor can G-d ever be repaid and receive a “return” or profit from the investment made for mankind.

Point 2: I believe that you are attaching too much of the meaning that we should have to sacrifice to your meaning of suffering. It is very possible that suffering can have no point what-so-ever. Suffering has absolutely nothing to do with spiritual growth without sacrifice. Thus the point is not in suffering but in sacrifice. The net very point about sacrifice is that sacrifice itself is indirect and an outgrowth of something of greater essence – and that is discipline. Without discipline sacrifice cannot exist. It is interesting to me that Jesus called his followers that believe on him disciples – which has the same core concept as discipline.

You indicate that you believe the parable of the Prodigal Son is more about the Father than the son – and thus I think you miss the focus that Jesus gave to the parable. The concept is that the younger son became disciplined – even more so than the older brother and if we are not careful we will lose this focus that Jesus intended. The older brother lost nothing but the reason the father rejoiced in the younger over the older is because the younger achieved a greater discipline.

The Traveler

Edited May 31, 2012 by Traveler

[Windseeker]

The concept is that the younger son became disciplined – even more so than the older brother and if we are not careful we will lose this focus that Jesus intended. The older brother lost nothing but the reason the father rejoiced in the younger over the older is because the younger achieved a greater discipline.

The Traveler

So is that what Christ meant when he said we must lose our life in order to find it. Disobey and squander the blessings and knowledge we have been given in order to appreciate them and become disciplined?

Interesting concept but I just don't agree with this. I don't see why you insist that the younger son became more disciplined then the older.

It's a great story of hope and love but I think the only message to those who remain true is simply to rejoice when a brother returns to the fold, and that's about it. Included is a simple reminder that the older brother has all that the father has. Again I don't see if the older brother has "ALL" how that makes the younger brother better. There is no hint as to what the younger brother receives after blowing his inheritance other than a celebration at returning. Perhaps there is an underlying theme that no matter how good we try to be we are all unworthy and rely on his grace so don't judge.

[Tyler90AZ]

Desertknight – thank you for your thought. I believe if we only talk to individuals that we agree with – we will not learn. However there are two very important points that I think you have not considered in you view – or point of view.

Point 1: Prodigal does not mean sinful or rebellious even though such understanding is often attached to the term prodigal, most likely because of this parable and the evolution of traditional religious thinking. The term prodigal means wasteful, lavish and extravagant. We may define that as sinful because of the relationship we all think that prodigal has to pride but as much as we would press the issue it is in the full extension of meaning, border line sinful at best. In essence to exist in a mortal state makes us prodigal and unprofitable before G-d – Regardless of how pure or repentant we may attempt to live. Thus it could also be understood that G-d himself is prodigal and wasteful in the very redemption of man from his fallen state – because G-d will never nor can G-d ever be repaid and receive a “return” or profit from the investment made for mankind.

Point 2: I believe that you are attaching too much of the meaning that we should have to sacrifice to your meaning of suffering. It is very possible that suffering can have no point what-so-ever. Suffering has absolutely nothing to do with spiritual growth without sacrifice. Thus the point is not in suffering but in sacrifice. The net very point about sacrifice is that sacrifice itself is indirect and an outgrowth of something of greater essence – and that is discipline. Without discipline sacrifice cannot exist. It is interesting to me that Jesus called his followers that believe on him disciples – which has the same core concept as discipline.

You indicate that you believe the parable of the Prodigal Son is more about the Father than the son – and thus I think you miss the focus that Jesus gave to the parable. The concept is that the younger son became disciplined – even more so than the older brother and if we are not careful we will lose this focus that Jesus intended. The older brother lost nothing but the reason the father rejoiced in the younger over the older is because the younger achieved a greater discipline.

The Traveler

It seems to me that desertknight is correct in his view about suffering. Without suffering you can not grow to your full potential. Suffering does not have to be associated with a prodigal. As you know, all members of the church even active, suffer greatly. We all endure trials. That is the meaning of bearing our cross and the nails.

As far as sacrifice, that is also a type of suffering. Maybe we are all meaning the same thing just using different words. Sacrifice just seems to be a Latter-day Saint word for suffering. To me if I lost a child the better word would be suffering and not sacrificing. Saying it is sacrifice is also a better way to look at it then suffering.

[Seminarysnoozer]

It seems to me that desertknight is correct in his view about suffering. Without suffering you can not grow to your full potential. Suffering does not have to be associated with a prodigal. As you know, all members of the church even active, suffer greatly. We all endure trials. That is the meaning of bearing our cross and the nails.

As far as sacrifice, that is also a type of suffering. Maybe we are all meaning the same thing just using different words. Sacrifice just seems to be a Latter-day Saint word for suffering. To me if I lost a child the better word would be suffering and not sacrificing. Saying it is sacrifice is also a better way to look at it then suffering.

So, what suffering does the child go through who lives only one hour or the child born without a brain, such as with anencephaly? Usually, the word "all" implies something that becomes a necessary step for anyone and everyone. I think that is too strong. Yes, for all of us that are left to make choices between good and evil that would apply as we sin then we have to suffer with repentance.

But, for the child who dies before the age of accountability, specifically, what cross is carried? (I'm talking from the child's perspective, not the suffering from the parents who lost the child)