Sign in to follow this  
prisonchaplain

What will post-resurrection life be like?

Recommended Posts

Christians believe the following about life in eternity:

 

We will have "glorified bodies"--like Jesus did after He rose from death.

We will "rule and reign" with Jesus.

We will worship him.

We will love everyone more than we currently love our own families.

We will see as Jesus sees.

There will be no more death, sorrow, or sin in God's kingdom.

 

I started this thread by request, so feel free to ask questions or make comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Please expound a little on points 1 & 2.

 

I believe for all practical purposes we pretty much agree with the other points.  And depending on definitions and details, the first two may be similar or different from LDS theology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christians believe the following about life in eternity:

My experience is that a more accurate statement is Some (or most?) Christians believe ...

We will have "glorified bodies"--like Jesus did after He rose from death.

Here my observation is that some Christians believe this specifically, but do not believe Jesus retains His body today. They also believe that He may come back in a physical, glorified body, but only temporarily. They believe us (you, perhaps included) odd that we would want a physical body because they do not believe even God could make a corporeal body "glorious" enough to overcome the grubby flesh.

We will "rule and reign" with Jesus

Yes. The question is, over what will we "rule and reign"? If all are rulers, there is nothing to rule. The Gospel of Jesus Christ allows us a real kingdom, peopled by our own spiritual offspring. No non-LDS Christian has answered that question well.

We will worship him.

Indeed. Both Him as our Savior and God, and His/our Father as our Father and God. In this, we will again be just like Him, for He worships the Father, as well, yet He is God.

We will love everyone more than we currently love our own families.

Yes. We will also love our families more than we love others, or, at least, in a different way from the way we will love others.

We will see as Jesus sees.

Yes, for "we shall see Him as He is" or, in other words, we will be exactly like Him.

There will be no more death, sorrow, or sin in God's kingdom.

Exactly. Why? Because our bodies will be incorruptable, and there will be no disposition to sin, for no unclean thing can inherit the Kingdom of God.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manna for breakfast, manna for lunch.....manna for

No. There will be chocolate cake and Porterhouse steak in Heaven for verily the scripture saith that every good thing is in Heaven. Is it not so surely?

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please expound a little on points 1 & 2.

 

I believe for all practical purposes we pretty much agree with the other points.  And depending on definitions and details, the first two may be similar or different from LDS theology.

 

IrishColleen mentioned she'll be walking through walls for a few days, just because it seems cool.  We do not know a lot.  We'll be recognizable, but perfected.  Like Jesus, we'll have bodies, but they can move through solid material.  I doubt we'll age there.  Some speculate that we'll all look roughly 33, because that's how old Jesus was when He died.  That's pure guess-work, though.  Part of me wonders if we'll be able to appear as different ages if we want to.  Again, it's just guessing.

 

As for reigning with Christ, the LDS answers are much more detailed than what we know.  We know we'll judge angels.  Some speculate that those redeemed during the Tribulation will be ruled over--as well as their children--for 1,000 years.  Most probably agree with me, and say we are uncertain who we'll be ruling over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the resurrection universal, or is it tied to salvation?

Yes, it is for everyone, but many Christians believe it will not be, and will be based on who's been saved. Even these are divided into two camps.

One group thinks that only the saved will be resurrected and the second group imagines that only the damned will be, because they must be punished with bodies that can be tortured for eternity; the saved, on the other hand, will not be confined by bodies of "grubby flesh". (These, too, are divided: some saying that we will all be resurrected, but the saved will be transformed into pure spirit, and others who skip the physical resurrection and go directly to spirit.)

I'm not the definitive expert on this, so take my observations with the proverbial grain of salt. Nonetheless, it's what I've heard and read in decades of watching and listening to people tell me what will happen to me because I'm a cultist pagan, and what will happen to them because they're saved (or predestinated, or chosen, or elect).

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked this in the other thread, but thought I would throw it here too.  Is the resurrection universal, or is it tied to salvation?

 

All people will be resurrected. But the saved and the righteous from the OT, and those who are saved during the tribulation will be resurrected to eternal life in the presence of God.  They have their names written in the book of life. Unbelievers will be resurrected and as their names are not found in the book of life, they will be cast into the lake of fire for eternity.

 

That is why we don't believe in universal salvation. We believe that resurrection and eternal life are different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. The question is, over what will we "rule and reign"? If all are rulers, there is nothing to rule. The Gospel of Jesus Christ allows us a real kingdom, peopled by our own spiritual offspring. No non-LDS Christian has answered that question well.

Lehi

 

If I were LDS I would want to be well-versed on these particular prophesies.  It is faith-building and encouraging to have a clearer picture of where we're headed. 

 

On the other hand, for us that are not LDS, the fact that we don't answer that question well is to our credit.  The Bible does not give many details about the millennial reign, or what comes after.  So, it's to our credit that we do not pretend to know what has not been revealed.  It's tempting to speculate, and then try to sound certain and expert.  Give us props for walking in honesty and humility about that which has not been made known to us.  :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[T]he fact that we don't answer that question well is to our credit. The Bible does not give many details about the millennial reign, or what comes after. So, it's to our credit that we do not pretend to know what has not been revealed. It's tempting to speculate, and then try to sound certain and expert. Give us props for walking in honesty and humility about that which has not been made known to us.

It is good that you all do not "go there" when the scriptures you do accept don't have the requisite information.

But, as we have shown earlier, it seems that this is an exception, because there are a myriad of places many Christians are quite willing to go without scriptural backing, creatio ex nihil being but one, and the Trinity another.

It does seem odd, however, that the Bible, being, as so many Christians remind us constantly, complete, inerrant, and sufficient, would miss this most interesting, and one might assume, important concept. It "does not," as you say, "give many details about the millennial reign, or what comes after." That's sad. Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. Paul thought it important enough to hint at it, at least.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[W]e don't believe in universal salvation. We believe that resurrection and eternal life are different things.

Please elaborate.

(I'm assuming you are not LDS. If I'm wrong, please forgive me.) We also do not believe that "resurrection" and "eternal life" are the same thing, but they are only related by chronolog: one must be resurrected before he can be granted eternal life.

What we believe that seems to differfrom your words is that "eternal life" and "immortality" are different, the second being a superset, as it were, of hte first: i.e., not all immortals have eternal life, but all those with eternal life are immortal.

Section 19 of our Doctrine and Covenants explains that "Eternal" is one of God's names. In the scriptures, therefore, "eternal", as an adjective, describes those things that pertain to God: Eternal punishment is punishment from God, eternal life is a life like God's, etc.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, just a little note as a moderator:

 

This particular sub-forum is for Christian Beliefs.  While it is perfectly ok to ask questions and even to disagree, please be careful to not impose LDS beliefs on others who do not believe as we do.  This is not the place to "prove" another wrong or to "prove" that LDS are right. It is to come to an understanding.

 

Carry on.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is good that you all do not "go there" when the scriptures you do accept don't have the requisite information.

But, as we have shown earlier, it seems that this is an exception, because there are a myriad of places many Christians ae quite willing to go without scriptural backing, creatio ex nihil being but one, and the Trinity another.

It does seem odd, however, that the Bible, being, as so many Christians remind us constantly, complete, inerrant, and sufficient, would miss this most intersting, and one might assume, important concept. It "does not," as you say, "give many details about the millennial reign, or what comes after." That's sad. Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. Paul thought it important enough to hint at it, at least.

Lehi

 

Unlike the Millenial Reign and the Post-Resurrection life, in general, there is plenty in the Bible about the nature of God and about creation.  We can argue the details, but there is scriptural material, and much intelligent writing has gone into the thinking on those issues. The Trinity doctrine, as well as the teaching of creation-out-of-nothing, did not come out of thin air.  In contrast, any offer from non-LDS of definitive doctrines and descriptions about the post-resurrection life would quickly become based on speculation.

 

As for what the Bible does not contain, I would be loathe to say anything is "missing."  I would find nothing that God chose to omit "sad."  You perceive these because you believe you have the answers, and wish we did too.  However, from our perspective, God chose not to reveal these matters.  I join Job in admitting that, as a mere man, I am in no place to counsel God on what should and should not be included in his word. 

Edited by prisonchaplain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad God does not reveal everything about the hereafter.  I think it would be like opening a birthday present before my birthday.  What I do know is that God's creation on earth is pretty amazing, even if it is marred by sin.  I practically hyperventilate we we drive in the mountains, when I see waves crashing, and when I see the fall trees. Playing under a waterfall or just in a river (favorite Virginia pastimes) makes me squeal like an excited little kid.  

 

1 Cor 2:9 says, "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him."

 

So, I know it's going to be amazing! I just have to wait to open it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please elaborate.

(I'm assuming you are not LDS. If I'm wrong, please forgive me.) We also do not believe that "resurrection" and "eternal life" are the same thing, but they are only related by chronolog: one must be resurrected before he can be granted eternal life.

What we believe that seems to differfrom your words is that "eternal life" and "immortality" are different, the second being a superset, as it were, of hte first: i.e., not all immortals have eternal life, but all those with eternal life are immortal.

Section 19 of our Doctrine and Covenants explains that "Eternal" is one of God's names. In the scriptures, therefore, "eternal", as an adjective, describes those things that pertain to God: Eternal punishment is punishment from God, eternal life is a life like God's, etc.

Lehi

 

 

I think differences in our terminology can cause confusion when we try to communicate theology.  To an evangelical, salvation and eternal life go hand in hand and are referred to as the same thing. In regards to universal salvation, my thinking on this came from LDS.org's Gospel Topics section on Salvation:

 

 

Salvation from Physical Death. All people eventually die. But through the Atonement and Resurrection of Jesus Christ, all people will be resurrected—saved from physical death. Paul testified, “As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). In this sense, everyone is saved, regardless of choices made during this life. This is a free gift from the Savior to all human beings.  https://www.lds.org/topics/salvation?lang=eng

 

An Evangelical does not consider this (saved from physical death) to be "salvation".  Being resurrected to eternal torment in the lake of fire is not considered a "gift" to us.

 

I'm not saying this to disparage your beliefs.  I'm just trying to point out the differences in our theology so we have a better understanding of where each of us is coming from. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Colleen,

 

To clarify our beliefs:  We use the term "salvation" to mean "being saved".  The question then is: saved from what?  Answer: physical death or spiritual death.  Sometimes physical only.  Sometimes both.

 

Often (depending on context) when a Mormon says "salvation" it can (as your quote did) mean from physical death only.  Many LDS make the mistake believing that it ALWAYS means physical only.  But in other quotes and treatises the word "salvation" may also mean from spiritual death (you have to follow the context).

 

Spiritual death is the separation from God we experience when we sin.  There is stain on our souls, etc.  So the atonement's power to cleanse us from sin then becomes a "saving" function as well, and can be considered a salvation.

 

But the term "Eternal Life" ALWAYS refers to living as God does.  But to have that one must first be saved from physical AND spiritual death.

 

To us, ALL people will be saved from physical death, even those going to hell.  But those going to any of the three degrees of glory will also be saved from being assigned to hell for all eternity.  And those who achieve celestial glory, having made and kept all necessary covenants, will also be given Eternal Life.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I'll interject another (I believe, related) question.  What is the position of your particular faiths on salvation by works vs grace?

 

I know that Catholics place a big importance on the sacraments (works).  

 

I also had Pentecostal friends who said something about how speaking in tongues was necessary (?) to be saved.  Is that right?  Does that qualify as works?

 

Many of those whom I call evangelicals don't believe works has anything to do with it, even to the point that if you believe you're going to in any way "earn your way to heaven" you're obviously a heretic or an apostate or whatever.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

PC,

 

When I asked you to expound a bit on the first two points, you essentially stated that you don't really know because it apparently hasn't been revealed.  Ok.  I can see that.

 

What I'm wondering is... does your not knowing, then preclude one from entertaining the notion that the LDS theology could hold water?  Or could the lack of such information allow one to entertain such?

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll interject another (I believe, related) question.  What is the position of your particular faiths on salvation by works vs grace?

 

I also had Pentecostal friends who said something about how speaking in tongues was necessary (?) to be saved.  Is that right?  Does that qualify as works?

 

There are Pentecostals who believe this.  I would call such a teaching heresy.  Speaking in tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit.  We (Pentecostals) also believe it is the first physical evidence of one's baptism in the Holy Spirit.  Still, it is a gift, not something one does to gain salvation.  Those who teach that tongues is a requirement of salvation are either poorly trained/taught, or they are part of the Oneness Pentecostal sect (who also deny the Trinity).

 

Many of those whom I call evangelicals don't believe works has anything to do with it, even to the point that if you believe you're going to in any way "earn your way to heaven" you're obviously a heretic or an apostate or whatever.

 

I actually agree with this.  We cannot "earn" salvation.  Nevertheless, we must choose it, and we must repent of our sins.  I would not consider either of these acts as "paying" or "earning."  But...without repentance there can be no salvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PC,

 

 

What I'm wondering is... does your not knowing, then preclude one from entertaining the notion that the LDS theology could hold water?  Or could the lack of such information allow one to entertain such?

 

What makes the LDS teaching of premortal existence difficult is bundled with the doctrine is the potential for human deification (we become more godlike).  That, along with the belief that "God was once man" challenges our idea of Creator and creation.

 

So...the LDS teachings are not impossible, but pre-mortal existence challenges much more than just our concept of time, or a scientific discussion on the eternal nature (or not) of matter.  Some here, like Traveler, see this distinction as essential.  He finds the traditional Christian limitation on our potential for godhood to be a horrible error.  Others have spoken of our denial of God's true role as our Father--meaning we will become what He is.

 

Then...the LDS view is not impossible--even with a Bible-only standard.  It's very difficult and challenging, but not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll interject another (I believe, related) question.  What is the position of your particular faiths on salvation by works vs grace?

 

I know that Catholics place a big importance on the sacraments (works).  

 

I also had Pentecostal friends who said something about how speaking in tongues was necessary (?) to be saved.  Is that right?  Does that qualify as works?

 

Many of those whom I call evangelicals don't believe works has anything to do with it, even to the point that if you believe you're going to in any way "earn your way to heaven" you're obviously a heretic or an apostate or whatever.

 

 

I believe that salvation is by faith alone, (Eph 2:8-9). The Bible says there is none righteous and that all our works are filthy rags.  God's standard of righteousness is perfect holiness, in actions, thought and our hearts. The only one who has met that standard is Christ. That is why He was the only one who could be a sacrifice to pay for our sin.  The only righteousness I have is what has been imputed to me through Christ (Phil 3:9, Gal. 2:16). If salvation was by works, God would owe it to me based on my performance.  It would be wages, not a gift (Rom 11:6).

 

This does not mean I thinks works are unimportant. Works are more effective at leading people to Christ that words. My faith without works will produce nothing- essentially dead, not reproducing, not growing, not working. My works are motivated out of love for God (most of the time. I am far from perfect and sometimes my works are based on selfish motives), rather than a desire to secure my position in heaven.  Christians who are not maintaining works are an unhappy lot.  I think they are like the type that hang out in anti-mormon web sites picking fights with the LDS.  They just want to argue instead of showing their faith.  They are so consumed with being right that they forget to be righteous.

 

As to whether people are heretics who think works are needed for salvation- well, I'll leave that one up to God.  He is the only one who knows the heart.  I have heard Mormons that clearly have a testimony of faith in Christ and I have seen confused Baptists trying to earn their standing before God and vice/versa. All I can say is that Christ completely changed my life, my heart, my soul.  I know how He has saved me and I will be eternally grateful for how He has worked in my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Ok, I'll try again.

 

You were relating the pre-mortal doctrine with after-life doctrines.  I understand you getting this from Traveler.  I can't say I disagree.  I believe Traveler described it pretty well.

 

Here's a "suppose":  If you had never heard of our pre-earth beliefs or our deification beliefs, and (as I asked about previously) we focus on just the first two points of the OP, I believe, much of what we believe could be compatible with similar beliefs by other faiths.

 

Example:

"We will have glorified bodies."

 

This is pretty much what we believe.  We believe in a resurrection.  We will have our bodies and spirits re-united.  I will be in an exalted and perfect form.  Sounds like "glorified bodies" to me.  I had asked for more details on your side.  But it sounded like your side is "it has not been revealed to us".  So, my last question was:

 

If you don't know what the "glorified bodies" will be like, is it too far a stretch to believe that the LDS beliefs on that matter are in reality compatible with what you already believe?

 

I'd ask a similar question of point #2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Grace/faith vs. works.

 

The reality is that we are not too far apart on this issue either.  But Mormon and non-Mormon culture tends to get in the way of that agreement. 

 

The scripture in Ephesians is similar to a scripture in 2 Nephi (BoM).  The BoM scripture is similar to v. 8 with the additional phrase "after all we can do".

 

Mormons tend to misinterpret this to mean that we do as much as we can do to earn it and the atonement picks up the rest.  This is false.  In fact Pres. Dieter F. Uchdort (current counselor of the first presidency) recently gave an address where he emphasized "it is important to recognize that AFTER does not equal BECAUSE OF." 

 

I have given several lessons in local priesthood and Sunday School meetings and asked the question:

 

          Yes, or no.  Are we saved by grace? No additions or modifications.  Are we saved by grace?

 

The responses were interesting.

 

1st class: uhm.  after all we can do... (Nope sorry no modifications or additions. Thank you for playing.). Lots of humming and hawing.  Eventually the patriarch spoke up. YES.

 

2nd class: hmmm.  Yeeess??

 

3rd class.  YES. (wow, that was fast.  This class was very well versed in the scriptures and the gospel).

 

4th class.   uhm.... (no one answered in a reasonable time, so I answered for them.  Yes.).

 

It is important to use the right words to specifically state what is meant by this.

 

It is Christ's atonement alone that brings us salvation and exaltation.  Nothing we do EARNS our reward.  But we are "required" to do certain things such as make and keep covenants, obey commandments, have a mighty change of heart, etc.  Nevertheless, none of these things earns salvation or exaltation.

 

Here is a paraphrasing of a parable I made up to illustrate the point:

 

I've fallen and I can't get up.  :P I'm in a deep pit and I can't climb out.

I call for help.

The Lord drops a rope that is tied to Himself at the top.  He tells me to tie it around myself and start climbing.

I do as he says.

I get to the top and I see the Lord extending His hand to bring me up and out.

I'm saved.

 

At no time would any reasonable or sane person in this situation EVER claim that they got out on their own merits (looking at the fact that they climbed up the rope themselves).  No such person would ever credit the tying or the rope itself as the savior.  No one would ever give credit or praise to such things.

 

Were they required?  Yes.  We needed the rope.  Climbing was required.  But these are not the things that saved us.

 

The reasonable and sane person would only give credit for the save to one person -- the Lord.  And they'd feel a debt they could never repay.

 

The rope is the commandments and covenants we've made through the power of the atonement.  The tying is making such covenants and performing certain ordinances.  The climbing is the constant effort to learn, grow, improve, and enduring to the end.

 

All these "requirements" as important as they are, will not have the power to save us without the Lord first providing the rope and keeping the rope firm at the top through His matchless power.

Edited by Guest

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
Sign in to follow this