Gospel of Jesus Christ - Easy or hard


Traveler
 Share

Recommended Posts

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.

Exactly, which is also my point that we all suffer, whether we live for one minute, or 90 years. It is a condition of life since the Fall of Man. Can a baby use suffering? Well, probably not, but that most of us can and should use suffering, does not cover every person, explain how each of us suffer or whether we are given enough life to use that experience. It is each our own private cross to bear, but bear them we must.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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.

Yes, I did miss that. Thanks. Sorry DeseretKnight, I thought we were talking about LDS doctrine. As to other doctrine, I am not really qualified to discuss that with much detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I agree with this. If the older brother takes to heart what the father tells him, then he too will rejoice with equal enthusiasm. If the older brother does not rejoice with the father, then he really doesn't have "all" the father has. But it is there for the taking. We too should feel equally happy whenever anyone returns or finds there way into the fold no matter where they have been before.

I think one of the underlying points of the story too is that "all" can be given without exhaustion. By giving "all" it isn't divided or lessened. And it can be "given"! Which means it doesn't have to be earned, penny for penny, it is an inheritance meaning it is given without it being a wage or of equal value for a certain service. We can be unprofitable servants and still have "all" (through the grace of Christ - as you stated). Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Suffering is not exclusive to sinning and repenting. Although everyone sins and has to repent. I have heard many talks about the Lord giving us trials for our growth. Those trials would count as suffering to us.

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)

We are told in the scriptures that everybody who comes to earth wanted to be here. That even includes those who were only here for a short time, a child who dies. With that in mind, never being allowed the blessing of mortality, seems like more suffering then anything else.

I also believe that we are appointed to our time of death. That means God knows when we will die and has it planned. For the child who only lives an hour I believe he is a greater spirit then me. That the child did not need to go through mortality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

1. I agree! It is important to talk to people with differing views. :ahhah:

2. In the specific case of the prodigal son, it most definitely does refer to great sinning on his part...

"And the son said to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, I am not now worthy to be called thy son." Luke 15:21.

3. I must disagree with you that God is "wasteful". God cannot sin and no true gift is a waste. That is where I believe your analogy is wrong. God did not "invest" in us. Our salvation is a free gift of His ultimate act of Love.

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.

Well, it has always been historically rendered as suffering, tribulation, because in passage after passage of the Holy Bible, that is how it is written...

"We boast in the hope of the glory of God. Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance;" Rom. 5:2-3.

Can suffering have no point? Most certainly and tragically, when we fail to use it as God intends.

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.

If that is true, Sacred Scripture makes no mention of it. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that I can't go beyond what Sacred Scripture has written. I think like all great biblical parables, it probably has meanings that I have yet to explore, but for me, it's main meaning is that God's forgiveness and love is unfathomable and endless. We need only to respond. Edited by Desertknight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I agree! It is important to talk to people with differing views. :ahhah:

2. In the specific case of the prodigal son, it most definitely does refer to great sinning on his part...

"And the son said to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, I am not now worthy to be called thy son." Luke 15:21.

3. I must disagree with you that God is "wasteful". God cannot sin and no true gift is a waste. That is where I believe your analogy is wrong. God did not "invest" in us. Our salvation is a free gift of His ultimate act of Love.

Well, it has always been historically rendered as suffering, tribulation, because in passage after passage of the Holy Bible, that is how it is written...

"We boast in the hope of the glory of God. Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance;" Rom. 5:2-3.

Can suffering have no point? Most certainly and tragically, when we fail to use it as God intends.

Again - thank you for your point of view.

Part of the both the intent and extend in the definition of prodigal is the giving of gifts for which the benefit there is little or none. You may want to review the history and definition of prodigal - it does included the giving of gifts to those un-thankful and unworthy.

As far as the son being sinful - these are the words of the son to himself thinking that by so separating himself for the love of his father that he MIGHT be accepted back. The father never indicated any such thing.

Are you sure you meant to say a gift cannot be wasted? In the parable of the prodigal son - was that not the point of the son being prodigal and why we call him prodigal? This his "gift" from his father was wasted? The gift of G-d is to all man and is free - but do not some men wast the gift of G-d in the likeness of the prodigal son before his return?

As to suffering - Do not the wicked suffer more than the righteous? How then is suffering a benefit if those that suffer most benefit least?

I believe the point is that the suffering of the righteous (as per the example of Jesus) is also a sacrifice and is done out of discipline over one's will to avoid suffering - which in reality is harmful. Thus sacrifice through discipline is the element the separates the suffering of the righteous to a benefit from the suffering of the wicked that only continues because there is no benefit to suffer without sacrifice - none - ever.

If that is true, Sacred Scripture makes no mention of it. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that I can't go beyond what Sacred Scripture has written. I think like all great biblical parables, it probably has meanings that I have yet to explore, but for me, it's main meaning is that God's forgiveness and love is unfathomable and endless. We need only to respond.

Hmmmm -- I am trying to understand why you make the above statement. The entire chapter of Luke 15 (that contains the parable of the prodigal son) is focused on the return of that which was lost.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we should rejoice in the lost sheep being returned to the fold, we should not denegrate the flock which did not wander. I think the point of being sheep is to generally stay together, if not then it would be more like herding cats.

I think it's safe to assume that the prodigals older brother, ever faithful and obedient, upon hearing the chastisment of his father repented and joined in the celebration. If not then I guess it was his turn to wander and blow his inheritence.

Edited by Windseeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we should rejoice in the lost sheep being returned to the fold, we should not denegrate the flock which did not wander. I think the point of being sheep is to generally stay together, if not then it would be more like herding cats.

I think it's safe to assume that the prodigals older brother, ever faithful and obedient, upon hearing the chastisment of his father repented and joined in the celebration. If not then I guess it was his turn to wander and blow his inheritence.

Interesting point of view. Are we not all sheep gone astray. The older brother so thinking himself faithful and obedient was and is an illusion. I agree on the point that "individual salvation" is also an illusion and that there is a "flock" to which the individual must return and thus it is the flock that remains with G-d.

And so who is loyal, faithful and obedient - he that upon learning of the commandments says that they will not keep the commandments but later comes to realize better and then does keep the commandments or he that says that they will keep the commandments but then later puts away the commandments for not.

The message of the scirpture - as I understand - is that we change our mind (and heart - or core essence) that we are always obedient and thus repent and take upon us a new birth and newness in order to return (be restored) with G-d.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point of view. Are we not all sheep gone astray. The older brother so thinking himself faithful and obedient was and is an illusion.

Not sure I agree. On the contrary, the father did not dispute the older son's self-characterization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the both the intent and extend in the definition of prodigal is the giving of gifts for which the benefit there is little or none. You may want to review the history and definition of prodigal - it does included the giving of gifts to those un-thankful and unworthy.

My answers may conflict with the doctrine you know so bear with me. Yes, it does refer to that, but we are all unworthy. Every one of us. We do not save ourselves. We are saved by God's free gift of Grace, in spit of ourselves. It is the unthankful who are dammed. The Father's true gift was not the wealth that was squandered, but the gift of forgiveness and love.

As far as the son being sinful - these are the words of the son to himself thinking that by so separating himself for the love of his father that he MIGHT be accepted back. The father never indicated any such thing.

Well, I hate to belabour the point but he didn't just think it to himself, he confessed it to his father (Luke 15:21). Are you saying that the son actually did NOT commit sin and so returned to his father to ask forgiveness for something he was not actually guilty of? Not simply wasteful spending and living, (which btw, is almost always sinful.), but having, "sinned against heaven and against you"? I think this is the heart of our disconnect. The classic meaning of the parable which I adhere to, is that no matter how grievous our sin and unworthiness, we need only to ask the Father contritely for forgiveness, and we will be born again.

Are you sure you meant to say a gift cannot be wasted? In the parable of the prodigal son - was that not the point of the son being prodigal and why we call him prodigal? This his "gift" from his father was wasted? The gift of G-d is to all man and is free - but do not some men wast the gift of G-d in the likeness of the prodigal son before his return?

No, I said that God's true gift cannot be wasted. God and God alone, decides who is saved and who is not and so gives the gifts of grace to accomplish all according to His divine will. This may be one of those points of irreconcilable religious difference. Only God makes the righteous. We can only cooperate with that will.

As to suffering - Do not the wicked suffer more than the righteous? How then is suffering a benefit if those that suffer most benefit least?

Because it matters whether that suffering is redemptive suffering or not. A heroin addict may suffer and in his suffering turn his hatred toward God. Another heroin addict may suffer equally and cry out, "Lord Jesus, save me!", and be given grace and healing. He may never have uttered that cry without the suffering. Think of the two men crucified next to Our Lord.

I believe the point is that the suffering of the righteous (as per the example of Jesus) is also a sacrifice and is done out of discipline over one's will to avoid suffering - which in reality is harmful. Thus sacrifice through discipline is the element the separates the suffering of the righteous to a benefit from the suffering of the wicked that only continues because there is no benefit to suffer without sacrifice - none - ever.

Your terminology is different than what I am used to but your point here, is one that I have agreed with. Suffering is not beneficial for it's own sake, but only when united with the Cross.

Hmmmm -- I am trying to understand why you make the above statement. The entire chapter of Luke 15 (that contains the parable of the prodigal son) is focused on the return of that which was lost.

I don't understand your confusion. The return of the lost and the feast that awaits. Hence...

it's main meaning is that God's forgiveness and love is unfathomable and endless.

Even if we have so sinned as the prodigal and turned our backs on God, so that we think we can never be forgiven....all that we need is to return to the Father with head bowed and ask for forgiveness with true contrition, and the fatted calf will be slaughtered for the banquet.

Edited by Desertknight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And so who is loyal, faithful and obedient - he that upon learning of the commandments says that they will not keep the commandments but later comes to realize better and then does keep the commandments or he that says that they will keep the commandments but then later puts away the commandments for not.

The one who is loyal, faithful and obedient, is the one who is loyal, faithful and obedient now. Which all of us fall short of course in varying degrees.

Sometimes I feel like the prodigal and other times like the obedient son.

Do we strive to be the lost sheep or the flock. Or is our goal to be the shepherd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That even includes those who were only here for a short time, a child who dies. With that in mind, never being allowed the blessing of mortality, seems like more suffering then anything else.

Mortality is with a certain purpose in mind, to qualify for entrance into the Celestial Kingdom and Eternal Life. I think a spirit who died before the age of accountability's entrance into the Celestial Kingdom preempts any self-pity one might feel for not having certain experiences in this fallen state. I think the eternal treasures far outweigh any missed earthly treasures and they will see it as far beneath them to feel any suffering for missing time in mortality.

If I had to choose between a real castle and a sand castle I am not going to suffer one bit in giving up the sand castle for the real one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason we have suffering in this life is part and partial to proving ourselves. Those that pass on as children have proved themselves already and suffering is not necessary.

The question was asked if the wicked suffer? ...Answer...they seem to be doing just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason we have suffering in this life is part and partial to proving ourselves. Those that pass on as children have proved themselves already and suffering is not necessary.

The question was asked if the wicked suffer? ...Answer...they seem to be doing just fine.

To tell you the truth, I'm not all that sold on the necessity of suffering. Although I'm sure that there are definitely some essential and effectual strugglings allowed and even inflicted by God. Perhaps I mean to differentiate between the experience of pain and the unnecessary sufferings of say... sin. Or girl drama! :D

There is no doubt in my mind that pain is one of life's greatest teachers. And there is also no doubt in my mind that our comfort is far less important to God than our lessons. And I guess "proving" is part of that. I guess I see more going on too. The "more" that is about changing us...not just seeing if we get the right answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mortality is with a certain purpose in mind, to qualify for entrance into the Celestial Kingdom and Eternal Life. I think a spirit who died before the age of accountability's entrance into the Celestial Kingdom preempts any self-pity one might feel for not having certain experiences in this fallen state. I think the eternal treasures far outweigh any missed earthly treasures and they will see it as far beneath them to feel any suffering for missing time in mortality.

If I had to choose between a real castle and a sand castle I am not going to suffer one bit in giving up the sand castle for the real one.

Don't you think that is the case for everyone who reaches the Celestial Kingdom? We will all look back at our experiences on earth and laugh. That does not negate the fact that we or those who only live an hour still suffer. Once we reach the Celestial Kingdom everything is beneath everybody. Although at that moment the child dies, before he enters the Celestial Kingdom his spirit must feel sorrow. After all, babies are closer to the veil.

The child after all did sacrifice an experience God created for us. God being omnipotent could have just skipped the earth life and sent us straight to the Celestial Kingdom. That is what leads me to believe there must be great benefits to mortality. Namely, get a body and gain experience.

I really believe suffering and sacrifice help us reach our full potential. That is why we are given so many trials to strengthen us. Without the trials we would not be refined enough to be exalted. I really like the saying, "what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger." If God really wanted to he could make everyone of our trials go away. That is not what God wants, he wants us to become like him.

That is why a child dying early, either didn't need mortality or the suffering is so great from not gaining experience.

Edited by Tyler90AZ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I quite agree.

I'm fairly sure I'm good. It's the doing good that seems to be more of a problem. :)

I quite agree too. My mom has always told me, be careful of things that are too easy... lots of bad stuff are in the road paved with rose petals. Lots of good stuff are in the road paved with thorns. Of course, it's also true vice versa.

Edited by anatess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you think that is the case for everyone who reaches the Celestial Kingdom? We will all look back at our experiences on earth and laugh. That does not negate the fact that we or those who only live an hour still suffer. Once we reach the Celestial Kingdom everything is beneath everybody. Although at that moment the child dies, before he enters the Celestial Kingdom his spirit must feel sorrow. After all, babies are closer to the veil.

The child after all did sacrifice an experience God created for us. God being omnipotent could have just skipped the earth life and sent us straight to the Celestial Kingdom. That is what leads me to believe there must be great benefits to mortality. Namely, get a body and gain experience.

I really believe suffering and sacrifice help us reach our full potential. That is why we are given so many trials to strengthen us. Without the trials we would not be refined enough to be exalted. I really like the saying, "what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger." If God really wanted to he could make everyone of our trials go away. That is not what God wants, he wants us to become like him.

That is why a child dying early, either didn't need mortality or the suffering is so great from not gaining experience.

I think you have to ask yourself, what is the experience and refinement for?

Just today I went out to a restaurant with a girlfriend that I've wanted to go to for quite some time. I was told the Chinese Salad was great so that is what I ordered. I hardly looked at the menu. My friend on the other hand took 15 minutes and many questions for our patient waiter until she finally made a decision. She took a few bites of what she ordered and then had some of mine. She then said "I should have ordered the Chinese Salad".

The experienced gained in this life is to allow us to express our agency, to choose what we want. Especially when there is some ambivalence or reluctance to make the choice, refinement in our desires needs to occur. I believe there are some souls who have expressed well enough the desires of their hearts, there is no need to place before them some alternative choices (they don't need to look at the menu). Their faith is strong enough to say 'if God wants me to do it this way, that is what I choose.' Whereas the rest of us require a test of faith and a test of the true desire of our heart. The experience is one of understanding oneself better. What is really in the heart and in some ways develop a change of heart. If the individual who dies after living one hour in this life has a pure desire to be with God and live that type of life and God knows it, then there is nothing missed by not trying everything on the menu.

Specifically, what "sorrow" do you think the soul that died as an infant feels before entering into the Celestial Kingdom, as they sit there in Paradise and have entered into His rest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there is also no doubt in my mind that our comfort is far less important to God than our lessons.

Unless the lessons and the tests are about "comfort" then that would be hard to distinguish one from the other. I think the lesson and the test is over "comfort". Where do we put the desire of the heart? Over things that provide physical comfort and are pleasing to the body versus spiritual comfort and things that are eternal and pleasing to the spirit. That is the lesson and the test.

If the gospel is where we find our comfort or at least learn to like our comfort there, then the gospel is easy. If we find comfort in the things of the world or our concerns and focus is on making the physical more comfortable (i.e. - removing the thorn in the flesh in stead of just living with it) then that is to prove where we place our treasures, of the things of this world. If our heart is in the things of this world and that is where we find our comfort then the gospel is hard.

"Comfort" and lessons are pretty much one in the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share