horax

The fate of Judas Iscariot

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Starwatcher said:

I don't think he's said anyone here has said so.  

"and yet to hear conversations in here it appears, in some people's eyes, it's impossible for anyone to become such!"

Yes, it appears people "in here" meaning this thread of conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To those that might be lurking and reading this thread:  "Some" of the comments are merely personal opinion and not taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

To those in this thread...if you are going to state something as opinion please say that it is your opinion only.  Do not post it as if it is fact and true doctrine.  

Thank you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2019 at 3:34 AM, Anddenex said:

"and yet to hear conversations in here it appears, in some people's eyes, it's impossible for anyone to become such!"

Yes, it appears people "in here" meaning this thread of conversation.

Yes, yes, I know, but...   He doesn't seem to be saying anyone has said it explicitly, but he infers that is what they believe from what he has seen them post.  That's what I'm trying to say.

And for the record, I don't see what he sees.  Nobody's saying it doesn't happen.  There's only been some equivocating over whether Judas has joined the SoP club.  And even if this is true, that he's the club vice president, even Rob can only come up with two names: Cain and Judas.  Two out of how many people who have ever lived?  Comes to a very very minuscule fraction.  This makes it, in fact, nearly impossible for anyone to become such, just judging by the numbers.  But as someone or other once pointed out, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  The Book of Mormon only mentions two women by name: Sariah the wife of Lehi, and Isabel the harlot.  This is not evidence that there are no other women in the book.  So perhaps, and surely, there have been more than 2 SoPs.  But it still seems to be a very very exclusive club. 

I do wonder if the bar to membership is as high as some think it is, however.  

DC 76:35 - "Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame."

I believe I have received the Holy Spirit -- in other words, having been confirmed by the authority of the priesthood, it having been commanded to me: "Receive the Holy Ghost", and afterwards having actually received it, in multiple experiences.  Can I therefore not become a SoP by denying the experience?  Therefore there would be tons of potential candidates.

Or does it require having received more than this?  Say, for example, having received a visitation of the Son?  That would really contract the circle of potential members of the club.

 

Edited by Starwatcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starwatcher said:

Yes, yes, I know, but...   He doesn't seem to be saying anyone has said it explicitly, but he infers that is what they believe from what he has seen them post.  That's what I'm trying to say.

And for the record, I don't see what he sees.  Nobody's saying it doesn't happen.  There's only been some equivocating over whether Judas has joined the SoP club.  And even if this is true, that he's the club vice president, even Rob can only come up with two names: Cain and Judas.  Two out of how many people who have ever lived?  Comes to a very very minuscule fraction.  This makes it, in fact, nearly impossible for anyone to become such, just judging by the numbers.  But as someone or other once pointed out, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  The Book of Mormon only mentions two women by name: Sariah the wife of Lehi, and Isabel the harlot.  This is not evidence that there are no other women in the book.  So perhaps, and surely, there have been more than 2 SoPs.  But it still seems to be a very very exclusive club. 

I do wonder if the bar to membership is as high as some think it is, however.  

DC 76:35 - "Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame."

I believe I have received the Holy Spirit -- in other words, having been confirmed by the authority of the priesthood, it having been commanded to me: "Receive the Holy Ghost", and afterwards having actually received it, in multiple experiences.  Can I therefore not become a SoP by denying the experience?  Therefore there would be tons of potential candidates.

Or does it require having received more than this?  Say, for example, having received a visitation of the Son?  That would really contract the circle of potential members of the club.

 

In my recent researching, I’ve been enlightened to discover some of the General Authorities have said there are two general classifications that fall under the heading of the sons of perdition. The first group are those who are cast into outer darkness and lost forever in hell. The second group are those, like Judas, who have gone down a very dark spiritual path but will eventually be rescued from hell because they are deeply remorseful and were not enlightened spiritually enough to have committed the unpardonable sin. These Church leaders say King David and Judas fall into the latter category. But in spite of the fact that both King David and Judas were clearly not spiritually enlightened enough to have totally rebelled against God in the light of spiritual noonday, Rob believes David and Judas are indeed sons of perdition in the former sense.

But there’s an important element in this discussion that needs to be considered that most haven’t even stopped to think about, and that is that in the cases of both king David and Judas they did not at all behave like sons of perdition after committing their crimes. The fact is both David and Judas were filled with tremendous regret, remorse and sorrow for the wrongs they had committed.

Meanwhile the sons of perdition hate God so much much that they take great delight in evil and laugh cruelly in psychopathic triumph when they commit their evil deeds. But such rejoicing in iniquity is not at all seen in David and Judas after they sinned. In the case of David, he spent the rest of his life seeking forgiveness with tears for the wrongs he had committed. And in the case of Judas, he was so remorseful that he tried to return the thirty pieces of silver to the Jewish Elders and then took his own life because he was so remorseful and conscience stricken.

The sons of perdition don’t have guilty consciences and don’t want to be forgiven. Speaking only for myself, I must say I would be very disappointed to learn God doesn’t look down in compassion and pity on these two sons of his who were filled with so much bitter remorse and regret for the wrongs they had done. Again, the sons of perdition don’t have guilty consciences.

Edited by Jersey Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jersey Boy said:

 In the case of David, he spent the rest of his life seeking forgiveness with tears for the wrongs he had committed.

Indeed.  He wrote in Ps 32:5 "I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah."

Either he was actually forgiven, meaning that his sin was not against the Holy Ghost, or this was wishful thinking.

I don't see how one could regard what David did as the unpardonable sin, in any case.  In and of itself, at least.

11 minutes ago, Jersey Boy said:

The sons of perdition don’t have guilty consciences and don’t want to be forgiven.

I'm uncertain about this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2019 at 11:06 AM, JohnsonJones said:

IÔĽŅ trustÔĽŅ that the Lord MEANT what he said and that this path of trying to prove Judas was otherwise, for now, unless the Lord states something different, is a path that is NOT a good one for someone to pursue.ÔĽŅÔĽŅÔĽŅÔĽŅ

After reading numerous posts, and the different opinions, feelings, and statements vs scriptural facts; I just want to add this to the quarrels over who is right, who is wrong and who cares more.....

We ALL have our own opinions on different things, different views, different speculations, and discussion is all good until one persons opinion is vilified because he has a different view of something, and then it's open season on that one person"s every opinion or statement.

Debate is good, discussions are good, but not when it's the mentality of 'let's tear Rob Osborn apart on anything he says'. I don't get it- It just doesn't seem right.

I was used to the older site and I haven't gotten all the bells and whistles figured out with this newer one, so I don't know how to move quotes around within my posting, and don't know how to do the blue highlight name thing- but I love the quote from Johnson Jones, and intend to copy it down and stick it in my scriptures. It's a great quote. Thank you Johnson Jones for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Starwatcher said:

Yes, yes, I know, but...   He doesn't seem to be saying anyone has said it explicitly, but he infers that is what they believe from what he has seen them post.  That's what I'm trying to say.

And for the record, I don't see what he sees.  Nobody's saying it doesn't happen.  There's only been some equivocating over whether Judas has joined the SoP club.  And even if this is true, that he's the club vice president, even Rob can only come up with two names: Cain and Judas.  Two out of how many people who have ever lived?  Comes to a very very minuscule fraction.  This makes it, in fact, nearly impossible for anyone to become such, just judging by the numbers.  But as someone or other once pointed out, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  The Book of Mormon only mentions two women by name: Sariah the wife of Lehi, and Isabel the harlot.  This is not evidence that there are no other women in the book.  So perhaps, and surely, there have been more than 2 SoPs.  But it still seems to be a very very exclusive club. 

I do wonder if the bar to membership is as high as some think it is, however.  

DC 76:35 - "Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame."

I believe I have received the Holy Spirit -- in other words, having been confirmed by the authority of the priesthood, it having been commanded to me: "Receive the Holy Ghost", and afterwards having actually received it, in multiple experiences.  Can I therefore not become a SoP by denying the experience?  Therefore there would be tons of potential candidates.

Or does it require having received more than this?  Say, for example, having received a visitation of the Son?  That would really contract the circle of potential members of the club.

 

In reality, everyone of us who come to earth are potential members. We may not remember now but all of us have the knowledge of Christ. In time, after we are dead there won't be even one of us who will not know, without any doubt, of Christ and his mission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Starwatcher said:

Indeed.  He wrote in Ps 32:5 "I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah."

Either he was actually forgiven, meaning that his sin was not against the Holy Ghost, or this was wishful thinking.

I don't see how one could regard what David did as the unpardonable sin, in any case.  In and of itself, at least.

I'm uncertain about this.  

The essence of the unpardonable sin is making a final decision to not want to be pardoned. God’s endless punishment only becomes endless when one decides he doesn’t want to do what’s necessary to make God’s punishment come to an end.

As to your uncertainty, it must be remembered that within the framework of the eternal priciple of diametric opposition in all things there must be intelligences who are the exact opposite of God in order for things to exist, and that there might also be laws that allow things to work in a logical and predictable way. So just as on one end of the eternal continuum there must be a perfectly good, loving and just God, there must also be intelligences on the opposite end of the spectrum who are completely and utterly evil, hateful and unjust. Remember father Lehi said that if such polar opposites were not allowed to exist there could be no existence. In other words, because there are devils who are perfectly evil it allows the opposite of those perfectly evil creatures to also exist, namely our perfectly good and righteous God.

But in spite of all I’ve just said, I agree with you that there may be some undisclosed way for the sufferings of these wretched beings to come to an end. But if they do come to an end, it will only be because there are others who will come to take their place in the eternal scheme of things.

Let’s now take a look at a couple of examples of how the devil and his angels think and behave, and then let’s ask ourselves if this is how Judas behaved after he betrayed the Lord?

26 And he beheld Satan; and he had a great chain in his hand, and it veiled the whole face of the earth with darkness; and he looked up and laughed, and his angels rejoiced. (Moses 7)

and...

2 Wo, wo, wo unto this people; wo unto the inhabitants of the whole earth except they shall repent; for the devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice, because of the slain of the fair sons and daughters of my people; and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen! (3 Nephi 9)

 
Edited by Jersey Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lindy said:

Debate is good, discussions are good, but not when it's the mentality of 'let's tear Rob Osborn apart on anything he says'. I don't get it- It just doesn't seem right.

If you think anyone in this thread has posted for reasons of, "let's tear Rob Osborn apart..." you aren't reading the responses correctly. There are people in this thread who are drilling him for sources, calling out aspects that aren't 100% for sure, making sure when one contradicts apostles and prophets that they state their "opinion" as an opinion -- not fact (as @pam emphasized). No one here was tearing into Rob. People here were pointing out alternatives (interpretations of scripture as given by modern apostles and prophets that relate to scripture) and things that are not within our scope to make.

Edited by Anddenex
hear to here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lindy said:

and don't know how to do the blue highlight name thing-

How to do the blue highlight name thing:

While holding down the @ key on your device, start to write the name of the person you are referring to. As you write their name, a drop down list with a series of names with similar spelling will appear and then you just choose which name you want to use. Like this:

@Lindy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

If you think anyone in this thread has posted for reasons of, "let's tear Rob Osborn apart..." you aren't reading the responses correctly. There are people in this thread who are drilling him for sources, calling out aspects that aren't 100% for sure, making sure when one contradicts apostles and prophets that they state their "opinion" as an opinion -- not fact (as @pam emphasized). No one here was tearing into Rob. People here were pointing out alternatives (interpretations of scripture as given by modern apostles and prophets that relate to scripture) and things that are not within our scope to make.

I just called it as it appeared to me- it was just disturbing to me personally.  Thank you for giving me your insight on the matter. 

And thank you @askandanswer you made my day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lindy said:

I just called it as it appeared to me- it was just disturbing to me personally.  Thank you for giving me your insight on the matter. 

And thank you @askandanswer you made my day!

Lindy good to see you again my friend.  I can understand how this would appear to you.  But for those of us that have recognized the history of the poster we tend to be a little more defensive of our religion and beliefs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pam said:

Lindy good to see you again my friend.  I can understand how this would appear to you.  But for those of us that have recognized the history of the poster we tend to be a little more defensive of our religion and beliefs.  

I understand the history of the poster and it APPEARED to me that it was a big pile on.

It's not just this thread either.  There were some instances where that poster has quoted direct scriptures (the one that made my jaw drop was where he basically just quoted a scripture and someone disagreed with the scripture...I think purely because it was the poster of discussion who quoted it rather than anything else) and people disagreed with the scripture. 

The poster in some threads actually just simply quoted scripture and to my surprise, instead of interpreting it how they understood the scripture...simply disagreed that the scriptures were correct.  That was a little Jaw Dropping.  There comes a point where one must ask if they are disagreeing just to disagree or whether we are actually reading what is posted and thinking about it.

One reason I sometimes write VERY LONG posts is because I understand how easy it is to be misunderstood.  I try to over explain in many instances simply so that, hopefully, they do not misconstrue what my thought is (and even then, sometimes I still fail at the attempt).

If we are discussing @Rob Osborn and what he posted, posting that he feels Judas Iscariot is a Son of Perdition as per the exact statements that the Lord made in the New Testament, and then cross referenced with the words of what makes a Son of Perdition with the exact wording of the Lord about Judas in the New Testament and the D&C is not against church doctrine. 

What he has expressed is that his opinion on the matter is not exactly aligned with the opinion (and Joseph F. Smith made clear it was his opinion....on the otherhand, Joseph Fielding Smith did not exactly make it clear that it was his opinion and actually was writing as if it was a doctrine of salvation...so...) of some Prophets and General Authorities.

However, it was not contrary (as they each never said that Judas was NOT a Son of Perdition and in fact stated that if he actually was able to meet certain conditions that he undeniably WOULD BE a Son of Perdition), but did not share the doubt (as they also stated that they were uncertain whether he could have had the knowledge to even become one, and hence, did not know if he actually was or was not) that they did regarding Judas's final situation.

In the overall picture, it is a VERY SMALL thing.  I find it far more crazy that there are those who appear (and as I've said, appearances can be deceiving) to be arguing that Judas may have been right all along or had the best intentions towards the Savior and the Twelve when he betrayed our Lord.  That is FAR different than anything our Prophets and General Authorities have stated and as I tried to make clear, unless we have a direct revelation that says something like that, everything I've seen and read is that Judas committed some very grievous sins and did some very terrible things when he betrayed our Lord.

This defense of Judas seems strange to me and why I stated in an earlier post

Quote

Are we Saints and followers of Jesus Christ or are we followers of Judas?

I, for one, believe and follow Jesus Christ and trust the words of his apostles and disciples in the New Testament as well as that of the Book of Mormon and the Revelations of the Prophets in our Modern times.

There are many Saints who have the same or at least a very similar opinion to what @Rob Osborn stated.  Though I imagine most do not have a binary idea of the afterlife as he does and which influences his thoughts on the matter greatly, the idea that Judas is a Son of Perdition in that he is going to outer darkness rather than one of the THREE DEGREES OF GLORY is actually something I find is quite common among the Saints.  I have heard it many times in Church and other locations that Judas Iscariot is a Son of Perdition (and of course we have that of which was stated by the Lord in the New Testament).  This was not from Saints in apostasy, but at times by Leaders of the Church (Stake Presidents and even Area Authorities).  This is not some new or off the wall idea.  In my life it is a very common belief and opinion.  Thus, to crash down on a poster who is stating the same idea does not sit all that well with me.

Thus, it seems very unfair and more like a pile on to a poster (especially when it is know that discussing it in such a manner will probably just mean that a poster will keep replying).

On the otherhand, we DO have the opinions of some very enlightened men (Joseph F. Smith saw the spirit world and received revelation on it, and other unpublished items have his commentary on even further).  I think some have misconstrued these Prophets and General Authorities opinion on the matter.  They NEVER STATED (that I am aware of) that Judas was NOT a Son of Perdition.  Ever.  In fact, in many of their statements they say he very well could be if he had the knowledge to do so.  What they say is that they have doubts that he could have had this knowledge to become such.  In their mind then, it seems as if they are saying that we cannot judge or know his final fate at this time, but as with us all, it will be up to the Lord and his judgment. 

That said, I think it is a GREAT and GOOD thing to bring up what they said about this matter in this thread.  I think it helps with our understanding and helps to enlighten our minds and spirits in regards to these ideas.  I think it is praiseworthy that people have thought about such things and bring them up.  I think some have been very correct in their understanding regarding Prophets like Joseph F. Smith and the greater picture on how he did not know what Judas's fate was and the knowledge required to fall into such a fallen state.  I find that those who did so in this thread did a praiseworthy action.

To say that we do not know the final fate, or that it is up to the Lord and his judgment or items like that I feel is also a good opinion. 

However, it is NOT an uncommon belief among the Saints in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to number Judas Iscariot among the Sons of Perdition.  I have heard it multiple times within the Church and even during Church lessons.  I think acknowledging this is a common belief among Saints and moving on is better than what has occurred.  (IN MY OPINION...which should be obvious).  I think it is GREAT that we also mention the Prophets such as JSF and his son's opinion on the matter and their expressions of the situation.  They had access to a great deal of revelation and insight in spiritual matters and their words should hold a great deal of weight (and they do with me).  But, one should also recognize that there are some beliefs or ideas that are very common in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints among it's members, and that when one expresses one of these common beliefs it should be understood as such.

I'm positive I'm not the ONLY one who has heard on multiple occasions that Judas is a Son of Perdition while at church.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I understand the history of the poster and it APPEARED to me that it was a big pile on.

It's not just this thread either.  There were some instances where that poster has quoted direct scriptures (the one that made my jaw drop was where he basically just quoted a scripture and someone disagreed with the scripture...I think purely because it was the poster of discussion who quoted it rather than anything else) and people disagreed with the scripture. 

The poster in some threads actually just simply quoted scripture and to my surprise, instead of interpreting it how they understood the scripture...simply disagreed that the scriptures were correct.  That was a little Jaw Dropping.  There comes a point where one must ask if they are disagreeing just to disagree or whether we are actually reading what is posted and thinking about it.

One reason I sometimes write VERY LONG posts is because I understand how easy it is to be misunderstood.  I try to over explain in many instances simply so that, hopefully, they do not misconstrue what my thought is (and even then, sometimes I still fail at the attempt).

If we are discussing @Rob Osborn and what he posted, posting that he feels Judas Iscariot is a Son of Perdition as per the exact statements that the Lord made in the New Testament, and then cross referenced with the words of what makes a Son of Perdition with the exact wording of the Lord about Judas in the New Testament and the D&C is not against church doctrine. 

What he has expressed is that his opinion on the matter is not exactly aligned with the opinion (and Joseph F. Smith made clear it was his opinion....on the otherhand, Joseph Fielding Smith did not exactly make it clear that it was his opinion and actually was writing as if it was a doctrine of salvation...so...) of some Prophets and General Authorities.

However, it was not contrary (as they each never said that Judas was NOT a Son of Perdition and in fact stated that if he actually was able to meet certain conditions that he undeniably WOULD BE a Son of Perdition), but did not share the doubt (as they also stated that they were uncertain whether he could have had the knowledge to even become one, and hence, did not know if he actually was or was not) that they did regarding Judas's final situation.

In the overall picture, it is a VERY SMALL thing.  I find it far more crazy that there are those who appear (and as I've said, appearances can be deceiving) to be arguing that Judas may have been right all along or had the best intentions towards the Savior and the Twelve when he betrayed our Lord.  That is FAR different than anything our Prophets and General Authorities have stated and as I tried to make clear, unless we have a direct revelation that says something like that, everything I've seen and read is that Judas committed some very grievous sins and did some very terrible things when he betrayed our Lord.

This defense of Judas seems strange to me and why I stated in an earlier post

There are many Saints who have the same or at least a very similar opinion to what @Rob Osborn stated.  Though I imagine most do not have a binary idea of the afterlife as he does and which influences his thoughts on the matter greatly, the idea that Judas is a Son of Perdition in that he is going to outer darkness rather than one of the THREE DEGREES OF GLORY is actually something I find is quite common among the Saints.  I have heard it many times in Church and other locations that Judas Iscariot is a Son of Perdition (and of course we have that of which was stated by the Lord in the New Testament).  This was not from Saints in apostasy, but at times by Leaders of the Church (Stake Presidents and even Area Authorities).  This is not some new or off the wall idea.  In my life it is a very common belief and opinion.  Thus, to crash down on a poster who is stating the same idea does not sit all that well with me.

Thus, it seems very unfair and more like a pile on to a poster (especially when it is know that discussing it in such a manner will probably just mean that a poster will keep replying).

On the otherhand, we DO have the opinions of some very enlightened men (Joseph F. Smith saw the spirit world and received revelation on it, and other unpublished items have his commentary on even further).  I think some have misconstrued these Prophets and General Authorities opinion on the matter.  They NEVER STATED (that I am aware of) that Judas was NOT a Son of Perdition.  Ever.  In fact, in many of their statements they say he very well could be if he had the knowledge to do so.  What they say is that they have doubts that he could have had this knowledge to become such.  In their mind then, it seems as if they are saying that we cannot judge or know his final fate at this time, but as with us all, it will be up to the Lord and his judgment. 

That said, I think it is a GREAT and GOOD thing to bring up what they said about this matter in this thread.  I think it helps with our understanding and helps to enlighten our minds and spirits in regards to these ideas.  I think it is praiseworthy that people have thought about such things and bring them up.  I think some have been very correct in their understanding regarding Prophets like Joseph F. Smith and the greater picture on how he did not know what Judas's fate was and the knowledge required to fall into such a fallen state.  I find that those who did so in this thread did a praiseworthy action.

To say that we do not know the final fate, or that it is up to the Lord and his judgment or items like that I feel is also a good opinion. 

However, it is NOT an uncommon belief among the Saints in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to number Judas Iscariot among the Sons of Perdition.  I have heard it multiple times within the Church and even during Church lessons.  I think acknowledging this is a common belief among Saints and moving on is better than what has occurred.  (IN MY OPINION...which should be obvious).  I think it is GREAT that we also mention the Prophets such as JSF and his son's opinion on the matter and their expressions of the situation.  They had access to a great deal of revelation and insight in spiritual matters and their words should hold a great deal of weight (and they do with me).  But, one should also recognize that there are some beliefs or ideas that are very common in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints among it's members, and that when one expresses one of these common beliefs it should be understood as such.

I'm positive I'm not the ONLY one who has heard on multiple occasions that Judas is a Son of Perdition while at church.

Here‚Äôs the rub that you are either unaware of¬†or ignoring. The poster in question says¬†he KNOWS for a surety that King David and Judas Iscariot are both going to spend all eternity suffering¬†in outer darkness. And he knows this even though there are Church leaders who aren‚Äôt so sure.¬†Meanwhile, there are¬†other participants on this thread who hold the OPINION¬†that King David and Judas ‚ÄĒ¬†both of whom had not yet even received the gift of the Holy Ghost when they committed their crimes ‚ÄĒ¬†might ultimately receive saving¬†mercy at the hand of the God of mercy who descended in suffering below all things that he might save all who sincerely plead for forgiveness.¬†It‚Äôs the cocksure and exceedingly harsh judgemental attitude ‚ÄĒ¬†a stubborn¬†refusal¬†to even consider the possibility that the prophet Joseph Smith might be right when he said¬†David will ultimately obtain mercy in the resurrection ‚ÄĒ¬†that creates the rancor.¬†

The poster in question also routinely says that the official Church interpretations of many verses of scripture are erroneous, that the leaders of the Church have incorrectly interpreted some of the most important and consequential scriptural passages, and that he’s the one who knows better than the prophets what those verses of scripture really mean. Pure unadulterated arrogance...

And with regard to the Savior’s statement concerning Judas, no less a no-nonsense authority figure like Bruce R McConkie opined that there are two different categories of the sons of perdition, namely those whose sins are so egregious that they will spend thousands of years isuffering in hellfire before being allowed to inherit a place in the lowest level of the telestial kingdom, and then those who will spend all eternity suffering in outer darkness. But such statements of possible mercy from even prominent Church leaders have no effect on him because he seems to perversely enjoy consigning people to the pains of hell forever. Even the Lord of heaven weeps bitter tears of heartbreak over the loss of his children. Meanwhile, as I said, the poster in question seems to callously enjoy condemning people to an everlasting hell. 

If the poster in question comes down off his high horse and admits the possibility that he might actually be wrong on occasion, it will go a long way toward creating an environment of mutual respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John 6:64

Quote

64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

Judas (and others of the apostles) did not believe in Jesus as the Christ. Judas could not have qualified to be a Son of Perdition. 

 

 

And as for King David, Joseph Fielding Smith helps us out:

Quote

Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, commenting on David‚Äôs sin, said: ‚ÄúDavid committed a dreadful crime, and all his life afterwards sought for forgiveness. Some of the Psalms portray the anguish of his soul; yet David is still paying for his sin. He did not receive the resurrection at the time of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Peter declared that his body was still in the tomb, and the Prophet Joseph Smith has said, ‚ÄėDavid sought repentance at the hand of God carefully with tears, for the murder of Uriah; but he could only get it through hell: he got a promise that his soul should not be left in hell.‚Äô Again we ask: Who wishes to spend a term in hell with the devil before being cleansed from sin?‚ÄĚ (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:74.)

Also see D&C 132:39

Quote

39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

King David will receive his portion, just not the full portion he could have had through exaltation. If you're a Son of Perdition, you don't get any portion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

There were some instances where that poster has quoted direct scriptures (the one that made my jaw drop was where he basically just quoted a scripture and someone disagreed with the scripture...I think purely because it was the poster of discussion who quoted it rather than anything else) and people disagreed with the scripture. 

Here's the thing, and you see a very similar pattern when people discuss scientific issues:  It's one thing to read Scripture.  It's another thing entirely to interpret it.  Different people with different worldviews often get a different understanding of the meaning of Scriptural passages.  Don't believe that?  Just look at all the different denominations of Christianity there are.  Thousands.  Literally.  All using the same book and with thousands of years to reach something like consensus.  Hasn't happened yet, has it?  In scientific arenas, different people might interpret the same set of data in different ways.  It isn't hard to find scientific theories that are controversial, despite everybody working off of the same measurements and observations.

Differing opinions are one thing, but when you have somebody making absolute statements, that attracts attention.  When those absolute statements contradict people who are authorities in the subject, it starts looking pretty unreasonable.  When people ask for citations and support for the absolute statement, and what they get is weak evidence, it starts looking irrational.  But there really aren't any irrational people on here, so we debate on, trying to find some piece of common ground.  For my part, I was satisfied when it was acknowledged that it was a matter of opinion.  

12 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

Here’s the rub that you are either unaware of or ignoring. The poster in question says he KNOWS for a surety that King David and Judas Iscariot are both going to spend all eternity suffering in outer darkness.

This.  People don't mind being disagreed with.  Disagreement is the basis for all good discussion, but "I see it differently" is a very different statement from "I'm absolutely right and therefore you're absolutely wrong if you disagree with me."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, unixknight said:

"I see it differently" is a very different statement from "I'm absolutely right and therefore you're absolutely wrong if you disagree with me."

It's been my experience that the people who act like this are usually deeply unsure of their views, but figure "If I yell loud enough maybe I will convince myself." 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

On the otherhand, we DO have the opinions of some very enlightened men (Joseph F. Smith saw the spirit world and received revelation on it, and other unpublished items have his commentary on even further).  I think some have misconstrued these Prophets and General Authorities opinion on the matter.  They NEVER STATED (that I am aware of) that Judas was NOT a Son of Perdition.  Ever.  In fact, in many of their statements they say he very well could be if he had the knowledge to do so.  What they say is that they have doubts that he could have had this knowledge to become such.  In their mind then, it seems as if they are saying that we cannot judge or know his final fate at this time, but as with us all, it will be up to the Lord and his judgment. 

Let's review what has been posted in this thread pertaining what modern prophets and apostles have said regarding the state of Judas Iscariot (which differs from Rob, which is what was being pointed out), and which is taught by the Church in the manuals they send out to the Church members (I provide sources people can actually read on the Church's website and published books):

1) Bruce R. McConkie

Quote

It appears that Jesus Christ used the words ‚Äúson of perdition‚ÄĚ to refer to Judas Iscariot, who at this point had left Jesus and the other eleven Apostles in order to betray Jesus to the corrupt Jewish leaders. Elder Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles noted, ‚ÄúJudas ‚Ķ was probably not a son of perdition in the sense of one who is damned forever, but in the sense that he was a son or follower of Satan in this life. See Matt. 26:21‚Äď25‚ÄĚ (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3 vols. [1965‚Äď73], 1:765). (Source) (emphasis mine)

Notice, they do not deny the use of Christ's word pertaining to son of perdition, and then give interpretation as to what Christ have meant, which again differs from Rob's "Judas is lost. Forever lost" statement. Bruce R. McConkie says that Judas is probably not damned forever.

2) President Joseph F. Smith (1838‚Äď1918)

Quote

President Joseph F. Smith (1838‚Äď1918)ÔĽŅ wrote about whether or not Judas is a son of perdition, after first referring to Doctrine and Covenants 76:31‚Äď37, 43, which describes the knowledge that must be understood and then rejected by those who become sons of perdition: ‚ÄúThat Judas did partake of all this knowledge‚ÄĒthat these great truths had been revealed to him‚ÄĒthat he had received the Holy Spirit by the gift of God, and was therefore qualified to commit the unpardonable sin, is not at all clear to me. To my mind it strongly appears that not one of the disciples possessed sufficient light, knowledge nor wisdom, at the time of the crucifixion, for either exaltation or condemnation; for it was afterward that their minds were opened to understand the scriptures, and that they were endowed with power from on high; without which they were only children in knowledge, in comparison to what they afterwards became under the influence of the Spirit‚ÄĚ (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. [1939], 433). (https://www.lds.org/manual/new-testament-student-manual/introduction-to-the-gospel-according-to-st-john/chapter-27-john-17-19?lang=eng) (emphasis mine)

We can see that Joseph F. Smith doesn't deny the words used by Christ, and provides his thoughts on the matter emphasized above. This would mean that Joseph F. Smith doesn't equate the use of "son of perdition" (like Rob has been this whole thread) with equal to the adversary -- outer darkness.

3) @Jersey Boy pointed out the following from Joseph F. Smith

Joseph F Smith, the author of Doctrine and Covenants 138, said the following:

Quote

 

‚ÄúIf Judas really had known God's power, and had partaken thereof, and did actually "deny the truth" and "defy" that power, "having denied the Holy Spirit after he had received it," and also "denied the Only Begotten," after God had "revealed him" unto him, then there can be no doubt that he "will die the second death. That Judas did partake of all this knowledge‚ÄĒthat these great truths had been revealed to him‚ÄĒthat he had received the Holy Spirit by the gift of God, and was therefore qualified to commit the unpardonable sin, is not at all clear to me. To my mind it strongly appears that not one of the disciples possessed sufficient light, knowledge nor wisdom, at the time of the crucifixion, for either exaltation or condemnation; for it was afterward that their minds were opened to understand the scriptures, and that they were endowed with power from on high; without which they were only children in knowledge, in comparison to what they afterwards become under the influence of the Spirit.....

But not knowing that Judas did commit the unpardonable sin; nor that he was a "son of perdition without hope" who will die the second death, nor what knowledge he possessed by which he was able to commit so great a sin, I prefer, until I know better, to take the merciful view that he may be numbered among those for whom the blessed Master prayed, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."(Joseph F. Smith Gospel Doctrine p 433-435)

 

Let's review what was said by Joseph F. Smith. He first places all the conditions for Judas to become a "Son of Perdition" without hope, and says "IF" he qualified he "will die the second death. By which he confirms twice in these two quotes the sentence of Judas is not clear, and that he prefers to take a "merciful view" rather than an unmerciful view (which Rob is taking and providing an eternal judgement).

4) Joseph F. Smith says it in a different way this time

Quote

They must have had a fullness of knowledge; a testimony which cannot be destroyed. One must be on a high eminence to fall so low; and few in world’s history have attained such a height.It is doubtfu l if even Judas, who betrayed Jesus, was sufficiently enlightened to become a son of perdition (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p. 545).

We see again that Joseph Smith doesn't deny what has been said, but is willing to also say it is doubtful even Judas qualified to be a "son of perdition" like Satan.

5) John A. Widstoe ( @Jersey Boy  correct if I am wrong if this is the statement you quoted from him)

Quote

Moreover, the expression, sons of perdition, is often used in the scriptures to describe disciples of Satan, all who defy God and teach untruth, and who delight in lies, without necessarily committing the unpardonable sin. The many brethren and sisters who have propounded questions about the sons of perdition may rest secure that with their present knowledge they cannot become sons of perdition. (Evidences and ReconciliationsÔĽŅ, pp.212)

We are given an added possible interpretation regarding what a son of perdition is (dual meanings). They can be people who defy God and teach untruth, and other other things without committing the unpardonable sin.

6) Spencer W. Kimball who gives second witness to Joseph F. Smith quoted above

Quote

 

The Prophet Joseph Smith gives us this further picture:

¬†¬†¬†¬†¬† ‚Äú. . . Those who commit the unpardonable sin are doomed to Gnolom to dwell in hell, worlds without end. As they concocted scenes of bloodshed in this world, so they shall rise to that resurrection which is as the lake of fire and brimstone. Some shall rise to the everlasting burnings of God; for God dwells in everlasting burnings and some shall rise to the damnation of their own filthiness, which is as exquisite a torment as the lake of fire and brimstone.‚ÄĚ

      Speculation as to individual sons of perdition is at best unprofitable. Some have consigned Judas Iscariot to this doom, based on certain scriptural passages. (See John 12:6; 6:70; 17:12; Acts 1:20.) President Joseph F. Smith questions this interpretation:

¬†¬†¬†¬†¬† ‚ÄúTo my mind it strongly appears that not one of the disciples possessed sufficient light, knowledge nor wisdom, at the time of the crucifixion, for either exaltation or condemnation; for it was afterward that their minds were opened to understand the scriptures, and that they were endowed with power from on high; without which they were only children in knowledge, in comparison to what they afterwards became under the influence of the Spirit.‚ÄĚ (The Miracle of Forgiveness, pp.125-127) (emphasis mine) (Source)

 

While none of them denied what Jesus Christ said, none of them have consigned Judas to the fate of committing the unpardonable sin, and give interpretation that it is doubtful. Others have shared since they don't know, it is not sure, and it is doubtful that they take the merciful approach toward Judas, whereas Rob is taking an unmerciful approach.

This is what I have been stating this whole thread: 1) Leave the judgement to Christ, don't make eternal judgements. 2) Modern apostles and prophets aren't even sure, by which they even used the phrase "It is doubtful" regarding Judas as a Son of Perdition without hope. 3) It is fine to quote scripture and then to state a personal opinion of interpretation. Rob would at one time, say my opinion the next time he would say it as a statement of fact.

 

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2019 at 1:50 PM, pam said:

Lindy good to see you again my friend.  I can understand how this would appear to you.  But for those of us that have recognized the history of the poster we tend to be a little more defensive of our religion and beliefs.  

Hi Pam! Yep, it's me jumping to the defense of someone I don't know of. You'd think I would learn wouldn't you?  I was only thinking about what I was reading on this one discussion, and not on other (previous) ones. I understood the scriptures he posted, and honestly didn't see anything troubling about his posts on this subject.

Of course it was after only 2 hours of sleep, and upper body agony from helping push a stuck car out of snow ruts.  Maybe I should reread the pages of posts and see what I missed........ after I am able to get a decent night's sleep.

:-) 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2019 at 11:03 PM, JohnsonJones said:

I understand the history of the poster and it APPEARED to me that it was a big pile on.

I agree that it appears he was being piled upon.

On 2/5/2019 at 11:03 PM, JohnsonJones said:

It's not just this thread either.  There were some instances where that poster has quoted direct scriptures (the one that made my jaw drop was where he basically just quoted a scripture and someone disagreed with the scripture...I think purely because it was the poster of discussion who quoted it rather than anything else) and people disagreed with the scripture. 

The poster in some threads actually just simply quoted scripture and to my surprise, instead of interpreting it how they understood the scripture...simply disagreed that the scriptures were correct.  That was a little Jaw Dropping.  There comes a point where one must ask if they are disagreeing just to disagree or whether we are actually reading what is posted and thinking about it.

Having read some of what Bart Ehrman has written about the New Testament texts, I find that I have modified the 8th Article of Faith in my own mind to read: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it was transmitted accurately and is translated correctly".  Witness the Johannine Comma, and tell me that even if that was translated correctly, it represents true doctrine.  I trust the New Testament, and love it, but I only trust it implicitly so far as it correlates with modern revelation and the Book of Mormon. See DC 91:2 in connection with the Apocrypha: "There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men."  Besides the Apocrypha what is there in the NT besides the Comma that is an "interpolation by the hand of men"? 

The Book of Mormon itself verifies my caution:

Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God. [1 Nephi 13:28]  (see 1 Nephi 13:20-29 for the full context)

As for Sons of Perdition, I'm pretty sure King David is not one.  Don't know about Judas, but it he is a member of that club, so be it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2019 at 6:34 AM, Lindy said:

After reading numerous posts, and the different opinions, feelings, and statements vs scriptural facts; I just want to add this to the quarrels over who is right, who is wrong and who cares more.....

We ALL have our own opinions on different things, different views, different speculations, and discussion is all good until one persons opinion is vilified because he has a different view of something, and then it's open season on that one person"s every opinion or statement.

Debate is good, discussions are good, but not when it's the mentality of 'let's tear Rob Osborn apart on anything he says'. I don't get it- It just doesn't seem right.

I was used to the older site and I haven't gotten all the bells and whistles figured out with this newer one, so I don't know how to move quotes around within my posting, and don't know how to do the blue highlight name thing- but I love the quote from Johnson Jones, and intend to copy it down and stick it in my scriptures. It's a great quote. Thank you Johnson Jones for sharing.

Thanks for your defense. I do believe it was a pile on. I quote a lot of scripture, it's my usual source. People seem enamored with manuals and opinions of prophets over scripture. This past week, as I have contemplated while in purgatory, I have come to a better understanding of truth and how it's separate from "doctrine" as doctrine is merely "that which is taught". But thanks for the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

Thanks for your defense. I do believe it was a pile on. I quote a lot of scripture, it's my usual source. People seem enamored with manuals and opinions of prophets over scripture. This past week, as I have contemplated while in purgatory, I have come to a better understanding of truth and how it's separate from "doctrine" as doctrine is merely "that which is taught". But thanks for the defense.

It's hard to be Langdon Cobb, ain't it?  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now