Brigham Quote - Why aren't we all rich?

[Seminarysnoozer]

I know it's not entirely what you mean...but this isn't exactly accurate. We do, indeed, need to have more than that. Acting in faith is good enough, but the reason it is good enough is because doing so will bring greater light and knowledge to us. If we are acting in faith we are constantly being given more and more, and this is imperative. If we are not moving forward, we are moving backwards. The acquisition of light and knowledge is key. It is by this means that we know our Heavenly Father, and it is through knowing Him that we become like Him. Stagnant faith will not yield this end. (Though, from a certain point of view, the term stagnant faith is an oxymoron, so....)

But I think you are saying so as part of the bigger picture which I don't disagree with.  As far as this life though, it is sufficient enough to make it a desire of the heart even if it isn't made a reality.  A testimony of this is in describing those that die before the age of 8 and what happens to them.  Certainly a child that dies after one hour of life in this world did not have much time to acquire "light and knowledge" and that being "key" as you are describing.

 

This life is simply the time to prepare to meet God which sometimes takes the form of enduring till the end or having patience and faith.  That may be the test for some, to simply not "fall asleep on the watch".  Or to hold Zion where you are.

 

I think your description of acquiring light and knowledge is not across the board for everyone. Maybe it is your calling in life, maybe it is mine (and that is why I spend so much time on this forum as well as studying scriptures attending church etc.)  The main goal is to first have faith, then repent and then life by the following ordinances of the gospel.  We will not be judged on some universal scale that measures the quantity of light and knowledge obtained in this life but we will be judged by some unique to our circumstance scale that only God can use in His understanding of all the variables we face in this world including how thick the veil of forgetfulness is in our way.  Where much is given much is required.

 

So, the trajectory is a more important "key" than is the maping of what point along the trajectory one finds oneself.  One can reach the Celestial Kingdom by being in the right trajectory while still flying through the opening of the cannon the same as one who is miles away from the cannon, so-to-speak, so long as they are on the same trajectory.

 

President Uchtdorf; "Patience means accepting that which cannot be changed and facing it with courage, grace, and faith. It means being “willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon [us], even as a child doth submit to his father.”⁸ Ultimately, patience means being “firm and steadfast, and immovable in keeping the commandments of the Lord”⁹ every hour of every day, even when it is hard to do so. In the words of John the Revelator, “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and … faith [in] Jesus.”¹⁰

Patience is a process of perfection. The Savior Himself said that in your patience you possess your souls.¹¹ Or, to use another translation of the Greek text, in your patience you win mastery of your souls.¹² Patience means to abide in faith, knowing that sometimes it is in the waiting rather than in the receiving that we grow the most. This was true in the time of the Savior. It is true in our time as well, for we are commanded in these latter days to “continue in patience until ye are perfected.”

 

D&C 67; " 13 Ye are not able to abide the presence of God now, neither the ministering of angels; wherefore, continue in patience until ye are perfected."

[The Folk Prophet]

Semsnooze:

 

What, exactly, do you think light and knowledge are?  Is not every bit of information we gain from the heavens given as light an knowledge? How can you think this does not apply to all?

 

It's like you're thinking light and knowledge only means grandiose ideas, feelings and thoughts. As you well know, most of the communication from heaven we receive is not grandiose. But it is all light and knowledge.

 

And it is, indeed, across the board for everyone! Including small children. Even a newborn baby. They, as we all are, are born with the light of Christ. Every moment of existence in this life it to acquire light and knowledge. It is why we are here.

 

Surely you don't believe that because a child is unaccountable that they are also incapable of receiving light and knowledge.

 

As to all your mapping of trajectory and patience comments and quotes...not relevant whatsoever. Logical fallacy alert.

[Vort]

I personally find it both unsatisfying and unconvincing to answer such questions by saying, "Oh, we're already rich, because we aren't starving to death and we have lots of electronic toys." In the context of the statements, this is very clearly not what was intended. The intent of the word "rich" is "having lots of excess means that can be used either to feather your own nest or to bless others". That is much different from saying that you have a warm apartment and a smartphone, so therefore you're rich.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Semsnooze:

 

What, exactly, do you think light and knowledge are?  Is not every bit of information we gain from the heavens given as light an knowledge? How can you think this does not apply to all?

 

It's like you're thinking light and knowledge only means grandiose ideas, feelings and thoughts. As you well know, most of the communication from heaven we receive is not grandiose. But it is all light and knowledge.

 

And it is, indeed, across the board for everyone! Including small children. Even a newborn baby. They, as we all are, are born with the light of Christ. Every moment of existence in this life it to acquire light and knowledge. It is why we are here.

 

Surely you don't believe that because a child is unaccountable that they are also incapable of receiving light and knowledge.

 

As to all your mapping of trajectory and patience comments and quotes...not relevant whatsoever. Logical fallacy alert.

You used the words, 'that is not all we need' in reference to me saying all we need is faith (in Christ, implied) and acting on that faith.  In other words, I interpret that to mean that there is more that we need to bring to the table.  You said receiving light and knowledge is a consequence to faith and acting on faith.  If that is the case then it is not "needed" to pass this test in this life, because those rewards could certainly be received after this life. The receiving of the reward is not needed.  That is all I was saying.  I was not trying to uncouple the reaping of what is sown but that state that which was told to Joseph Smith in essense that if one struggles all their life and simply endures in faith till the end it is not lost as the result does not have to be realized in this life, it will be rewarded in the end.

Psalm 30; "‘Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning"  - the light could come in the morning - after this life, therefore not needed to pass the test but as a result of passing the test.

[Traveler]

I personally find it both unsatisfying and unconvincing to answer such questions by saying, "Oh, we're already rich, because we aren't starving to death and we have lots of electronic toys." In the context of the statements, this is very clearly not what was intended. The intent of the word "rich" is "having lots of excess means that can be used either to feather your own nest or to bless others". That is much different from saying that you have a warm apartment and a smartphone, so therefore you're rich.

 

There is a difference between being poor and being broke.  True poverty is not having access to resources - being broke is having wasted or misused resources.

 

 

he that hath eternal life is rich.

 

 

I would add those that do not repent are broke, which is worse that being poor because they have wasted infinite resources. 

[Traveler]

You used the words, 'that is not all we need' in reference to me saying all we need is faith (in Christ, implied) and acting on that faith.  In other words, I interpret that to mean that there is more that we need to bring to the table.  You said receiving light and knowledge is a consequence to faith and acting on faith.  If that is the case then it is not "needed" to pass this test in this life, because those rewards could certainly be received after this life. The receiving of the reward is not needed.  That is all I was saying.  I was not trying to uncouple the reaping of what is sown but that state that which was told to Joseph Smith in essense that if one struggles all their life and simply endures in faith till the end it is not lost as the result does not have to be realized in this life, it will be rewarded in the end.

Psalm 30; "‘Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning"  - the light could come in the morning - after this life, therefore not needed to pass the test but as a result of passing the test.

 

According to the Apostle Paul:

 

Faith without works is dead.

 

Obviously faith is not all we need.  We needs the works of faith because faith alone is not enough and never has been.

[The Folk Prophet]

You used the words, 'that is not all we need' in reference to me saying all we need is faith (in Christ, implied) and acting on that faith.  In other words, I interpret that to mean that there is more that we need to bring to the table.  You said receiving light and knowledge is a consequence to faith and acting on faith.  If that is the case then it is not "needed" to pass this test in this life, because those rewards could certainly be received after this life. The receiving of the reward is not needed.  

 

In theory I can sort of agree...except if one exercises faith and receives nothing in return, how long is that faith really going to last? Certainly we don't need the full reward. But to spend a lifetime of faith for nothing? No light and knowledge? No spiritual witness? No revelation? No guidance? No peace?

 

I think not. To some level, oh yes, we do too need the reward. We need the peace. We need the revelation. We need the guidance. We NEED the Holy Spirit -- whose very purpose is to bring us light and knowledge. You seem to be contending that the Gift of the Holy Ghost is unnecessary.

[Seminarysnoozer]

According to the Apostle Paul:

 

Obviously faith is not all we need.  We needs the works of faith because faith alone is not enough and never has been.

Yes, that is why I said 'and acting on it' which is works.  But even then he said we need more than that.

[Seminarysnoozer]

In theory I can sort of agree...except if one exercises faith and receives nothing in return, how long is that faith really going to last? Certainly we don't need the full reward. But to spend a lifetime of faith for nothing? No light and knowledge? No spiritual witness? No revelation? No guidance? No peace?

 

I think not. To some level, oh yes, we do too need the reward. We need the peace. We need the revelation. We need the guidance. We NEED the Holy Spirit -- whose very purpose is to bring us light and knowledge. You seem to be contending that the Gift of the Holy Ghost is unnecessary.

We were talking about what was needed to receive the reward and to pass the test.  Now you are extending that to the reward itself.  Do we need the reward? Yes.  Okay.   Then again, those that die before the age of 8 do not receive the laying on of hands while in this life for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Since you pulled my phrase out of context you applied it to a lot more than what I was talking about.  We were talking about the need to know something as empirical evidence, to know it at that level.  My response to that was that we do not need to know it at that level in this life, we can know it via faith and the confirmation via the Holy Ghost etc.  Now if you want to argue that works and Holy Ghoost are empirical evidence so be it.  I am sure Traveler will already make that arguement.

[The Folk Prophet]

We were talking about what was needed to receive the reward and to pass the test.  Now you are extending that to the reward itself.  Do we need the reward? Yes.  Okay.   Then again, those that die before the age of 8 do not receive the laying on of hands while in this life for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Since you pulled my phrase out of context you applied it to a lot more than what I was talking about.  We were talking about the need to know something as empirical evidence, to know it at that level.  My response to that was that we do not need to know it at that level in this life, we can know it via faith and the confirmation via the Holy Ghost etc.  Now if you want to argue that works and Holy Ghoost are empirical evidence so be it.  I am sure Traveler will already make that arguement.

 

I thought it would have been clear from my original post concerning the matter that I was pulling your phrase out of context. As in...

 

I know it's not entirely what you mean...but

[Traveler]

Yes, that is why I said 'and acting on it' which is works.  But even then he said we need more than that.

 

Which is true - we need the atonement - but he did not say that. 

[Seminarysnoozer]

Which is true - we need the atonement - but he did not say that. 

Yes, those things are included in the having faith in Christ and acting on it, if you want to play with semantics.  I thought we were having a conversation about what is required from us.  But now I am not sure what we are talking about.

A child that dies within one hour of life and makes it into the Celestial Kingdom does not NEED light an enlightenment in this life to pass the second estate test (in this life)  The child does need the atonement and accepting it which we all did by passing the first estate test.  Now, we are talking about the second estate test ... I think.

[Traveler]

Yes, those things are included in the having faith in Christ and acting on it, if you want to play with semantics.  I thought we were having a conversation about what is required from us.  But now I am not sure what we are talking about.

A child that dies within one hour of life and makes it into the Celestial Kingdom does not NEED light an enlightenment in this life to pass the second estate test (in this life)  The child does need the atonement and accepting it which we all did by passing the first estate test.  Now, we are talking about the second estate test ... I think.

 

Have you stopped to consider the child that dies within one hour of life being forced into the Celestial Kingdom - that it might be possible that among all that so die that it is possible that even one really would be much more happy somewhere else if given the agency or choice?  What is the purpose of this life?

 

You do not need to answer - we have sort of rowed our boats down this stream - Just wondering if you have taken the possibility of agency and choice into account?

[Seminarysnoozer]

Have you stopped to consider the child that dies within one hour of life being forced into the Celestial Kingdom - that it might be possible that among all that so die that it is possible that even one really would be much more happy somewhere else if given the agency or choice?  What is the purpose of this life?

 

You do not need to answer - we have sort of rowed our boats down this stream - Just wondering if you have taken the possibility of agency and choice into account?

Of course I have, there was agency given for the first estate test and they all chose that they would want to live with our Heavenly Father as we all did.

[Traveler]

Of course I have, there was agency given for the first estate test and they all chose that they would want to live with our Heavenly Father as we all did.

Agency - really?   What agency without any knowledge of evil or good?

[Seminarysnoozer]

Agency - really?   What agency without any knowledge of evil or good?

Is this one of those rhetorical questions that I so love?  (I guess I just used one myself)

 

Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual Chapter 6; "4. God gave us agency in the premortal life (see Moses 4:3; D&C 29:36)."

 

D&C 29; " 36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;"

 

Moses 4: " 3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;"

[Traveler]

Is this one of those rhetorical questions that I so love?  (I guess I just used one myself)

 

Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual Chapter 6; "4. God gave us agency in the premortal life (see Moses 4:3; D&C 29:36)."

 

D&C 29; " 36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;"

 

Moses 4: " 3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;"

 

I was hopping that you would see a slightly different angle.  In the Doctrine and Covenants https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/93.27-31?lang=eng#26 - hope this link works for you - if not try highlighting the link and pressing the control key and right click your mouse.  If not just reference D&C 93:27-31 the old faction way.

 

Anyway, we learn that man is intelligent and is independent "Within the sphere in which he is placed" and this independence defines our agency (verses 30-31).  However, if placed in a different sphere then it is by agency for that sphere that we become independent in that sphere.  So as Isaiah says - it becomes a matter of line upon line upon line.  As we progress to higher spheres we also progress to higher (more complete of whole) agency.  It is not a once and done progression but an eternal progression.  :)

[Seminarysnoozer]

I was hopping that you would see a slightly different angle.  In the Doctrine and Covenants https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/93.27-31?lang=eng#26 - hope this link works for you - if not try highlighting the link and pressing the control key and right click your mouse.  If not just reference D&C 93:27-31 the old faction way.

 

Anyway, we learn that man is intelligent and is independent "Within the sphere in which he is placed" and this independence defines our agency (verses 30-31).  However, if placed in a different sphere then it is by agency for that sphere that we become independent in that sphere.  So as Isaiah says - it becomes a matter of line upon line upon line.  As we progress to higher spheres we also progress to higher (more complete of whole) agency.  It is not a once and done progression but an eternal progression.  :)

Agreed but there are also these two huge gates we have to pass through, the first and second estates. Thus by the agency given in the premortal life we are placed in this sphere.  The two estate gates are both launching pads for progression and after the second estate is over it is more like boarding a train that does not change tracks, no further forks in the road.  The two gates is what, likely, produces the three parts of the host of heaven, those that fail the first estate test, those that pass the first estate and fail the second estate test and those that pass both estate tests.  Those three parts of the host of heaven generate three distinct spheres.

 

Here we go back to that word glorified.  Can man be glorified and remain man? 

 

As we fell, did we also fall in terms of agency?

Edited December 1, 2014 by Seminarysnoozer

[Traveler]

Agreed but there are also these two huge gates we have to pass through, the first and second estates. Thus by the agency given in the premortal life we are placed in this sphere.  The two estate gates are both launching pads for progression and after the second estate is over it is more like boarding a train that does not change tracks, no further forks in the road.  The two gates is what, likely, produces the three parts of the host of heaven, those that fail the first estate test, those that pass the first estate and fail the second estate test and those that pass both estate tests.  Those three parts of the host of heaven generate three distinct spheres.

 

Here we go back to that word glorified.  Can man be glorified and remain man? 

 

As we fell, did we also fall in terms of agency?

 

I find your term of gates most interesting.  Many times I have used the analogy of doors or gates concerning agency and free will.  In order for there to be agency, choice or expression of free will there must be a possibility of more than one gate or door.   But I believe there is at least one more element necessary in the analogy of doors or gates as an expression of actual agency and free will.  That is that the doors or gates must be transparent and not opaque.  In other words in order for the doors or gates to represent agency, choice and free will the person choosing the doors or gates must have all necessary understanding of what is and possible behind or beyond the gates and doors.

 

In the scripture we are given revelation that that the possibilities (gates or doors) were in essence infinite choices (no two being the same) but as vast as the choices were that the society was in essence divided into 3 parts.  One of these three parts of heaven took the gate or door to Satan becoming their G-d.  We are left to believe that the other two parts of heaven took gates or doors that resulted in their coming to earth for a mortal experience. 

 

Again in scripture we are given insight that the gates or doors that bring the children of G-d to mortality that there are in essence again 3 classifications of doors.  In Genesis this is given following the flood in the three sons of Noah – Shem being the symbol of those of divine covenant.  Japheth is the symbol of what is termed as “Gentiles” and Ham symbolizing the “infidel”.  I find the symbol of Ham most interesting because I thought that infidels are the rejection of the laws and covenants of G-d and that is what I thought was the choice or agency of those that selected the gate or door in support of Satan in the pre-existence.   The explanations of the infidel door (as well as the others) are quite vague so it is difficult to have complete understanding of the choices of the pre-existence as opposed to the choices we now face.

 

Again we will face choices following this probation.  The agency, choices or free will shall again have infinite choices that result in basically three (perhaps four) categories.  They are given the names of Celestial, Telestial and Terrestrial.   Again it is obvious to me that if we have agency or free will then we will act upon to choose and not be acted upon.

 

One last problem that is most difficult: That is a conformal mapping of the choices in this life (meaning that which is chosen between birth and death) as being expressions of agency, choice and free will.  I personally believe that if we consider only birth through death that we cannot intelligently argue this life as expressions of agency, choice or free will.   That we are obviously being acting upon and not acting out.

[Seminarysnoozer]

I find your term of gates most interesting.  Many times I have used the analogy of doors or gates concerning agency and free will.  In order for there to be agency, choice or expression of free will there must be a possibility of more than one gate or door.   But I believe there is at least one more element necessary in the analogy of doors or gates as an expression of actual agency and free will.  That is that the doors or gates must be transparent and not opaque.  In other words in order for the doors or gates to represent agency, choice and free will the person choosing the doors or gates must have all necessary understanding of what is and possible behind or beyond the gates and doors.

 

In the scripture we are given revelation that that the possibilities (gates or doors) were in essence infinite choices (no two being the same) but as vast as the choices were that the society was in essence divided into 3 parts.  One of these three parts of heaven took the gate or door to Satan becoming their G-d.  We are left to believe that the other two parts of heaven took gates or doors that resulted in their coming to earth for a mortal experience. 

 

Again in scripture we are given insight that the gates or doors that bring the children of G-d to mortality that there are in essence again 3 classifications of doors.  In Genesis this is given following the flood in the three sons of Noah – Shem being the symbol of those of divine covenant.  Japheth is the symbol of what is termed as “Gentiles” and Ham symbolizing the “infidel”.  I find the symbol of Ham most interesting because I thought that infidels are the rejection of the laws and covenants of G-d and that is what I thought was the choice or agency of those that selected the gate or door in support of Satan in the pre-existence.   The explanations of the infidel door (as well as the others) are quite vague so it is difficult to have complete understanding of the choices of the pre-existence as opposed to the choices we now face.

 

Again we will face choices following this probation.  The agency, choices or free will shall again have infinite choices that result in basically three (perhaps four) categories.  They are given the names of Celestial, Telestial and Terrestrial.   Again it is obvious to me that if we have agency or free will then we will act upon to choose and not be acted upon.

 

One last problem that is most difficult: That is a conformal mapping of the choices in this life (meaning that which is chosen between birth and death) as being expressions of agency, choice and free will.  I personally believe that if we consider only birth through death that we cannot intelligently argue this life as expressions of agency, choice or free will.   That we are obviously being acting upon and not acting out.

Thanks for your comments. 

 

I have seen some description (exact references I am not remembering at the moment) that our inheritance is full to begin with and it is ours to lose.  By even continuing with the plan in the premortal realm, by being faithful either in an exceedingly valiant way or not so valiant way, we all chose to hold onto our potential, our birthright.  The choice of something less than 100% of what God has to offer is by way of losing what we have or veering off the path we are on.

 

Even Lucifer fell away from the original path but before that he was in line to receive a full inheritance, it was his to lose.  He chose to trade it for something else.  I think of the story of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob.  He despised his birthright, he had it then he didn't want it.  Genesis 25; "34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright."

 

D&C 93; "21 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn;

 22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.  23 Ye were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is Spirit, even the Spirit of truth;"

 

So, we have the potential to be as the Firstborn and receive of that inheritance, unless we defile that inheritance or do not follow the commandments thus making a choice away from our original choice in the beginning to be with the Father. That potential was there in the beginning as we were with the Father from the beginning.  We receive the fullness of truth line upon line but the trajectory starts fullly pointed at God's glory and is only there to be lost or fall short.