Do other religions have some bit of truth to them?

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

OK... so follow the logic...

The scriptures say only that the Kingdom of Heaven must be pure and clean.  If only the Celestial Kingdom is the Heaven that is the Kingdom of God/Heaven.  Then the Terrestial an Telestial kingdoms have no such promise because they are not the Kingdom of Heaven/God. In fact per Nephi 15:34 we can conclude that they must be designed for some level of filthiness (if they are not part of the Kingdom).

Either way your argument still fails.  Either the Telestial kingdom is part of the Kingdom of God/Heaven... in which case all that enter must be made clean by the atonement (Thru repentance)...  Or the Telestial kingdom is not part of the Kingdom of God/Heaven and there is no requirement for the people who enter to be made clean.  No matter what direction you wish to take the church does not teach that the unrepentant with be part of the Kingdom of God/Heaven.  The closest case that can be made is that at the final judgement Christ might decide in his wisdom that some unrepentant should not receive the Son of Perdition level punishment, and give them rest in a place prepared for them outside of the Kingdom of God.

Your answer here in such great vagueness is exactly the point of what I am saying. On one hand you say heaven must include filthy people but at the same time you also say it can only include clean people. Thats exactly my point and thus why it doesnt work and must be wrong.

[estradling75]

21 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Your answer here in such great vagueness is exactly the point of what I am saying. On one hand you say heaven must include filthy people but at the same time you also say it can only include clean people. Thats exactly my point and thus why it doesnt work and must be wrong.

Reading comprehension fail.

Early in the Church the model of the next world was a simple Heaven/Hell.  Many LDS would call this model wrong...  But the reality is that the model is simplistic (as all models are)  With Joseph Smith and the D&C our model of Heaven and Hell became more complex, but it is still a model so it is still simplistic compared to the reality.

In this thread we have discussed two variation of that model.  The first variation has the Terrestial and Telestial kingdoms being part of Heaven.  Most LDS think and follow that models.  Per the scriptures this requires anyone entering those Kingdoms be repentant and clean.  Which we see and have shared how that can happen.

However you have made a decent case for a different variation of that model.  That variation that has Telestial kingdom being a part of Hell (the nicer part clearly).  This fits really well with the quote "Salvation with out Exaltation is damnation"

What you have not ever done was make the case that the unrepentant make it into Heaven.  Your own quotes clearly state that the Telestial kingdom is not Heaven. Which shots your argument in the foot.   Also all your quotes however fall in the category of least binding (non canonized in scripture) which means they do represent current church teaching they can be superseded by additional light and knowledge.

 

Edited December 31, 2016 by estradling75

[zil]

46 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Your answer here in such great vagueness is exactly the point of what I am saying. On one hand you say heaven must include filthy people but at the same time you also say it can only include clean people. Thats exactly my point and thus why it doesnt work and must be wrong.

You're mis-reading.  What he wrote was perfectly clear.

 

[Rob Osborn]

55 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Reading comprehension fail.

Early in the Church the model of the next world was a simple Heaven/Hell.  Many LDS would call this model wrong...  But the reality is that the model is simplistic (as all models are)  With Joseph Smith and the D&C our model of Heaven and Hell became more complex, but it is still a model so it is still simplistic compared to the reality.

In this thread we have discussed two variation of that model.  The first variation has the Terrestial and Telestial kingdoms being part of Heaven.  Most LDS think and follow that models.  Per the scriptures this requires anyone entering those Kingdoms be repentant and clean.  Which we see and have shared how that can happen.

However you have made a decent case for a different variation of that model.  That variation that has Telestial kingdom being a part of Hell (the nicer part clearly).  This fits really well with the quote "Salvation with out Exaltation is damnation"

What you have not ever done was make the case that the unrepentant make it into Heaven.  Your own quotes clearly state that the Telestial kingdom is not Heaven. Which shots your argument in the foot.   Also all your quotes however fall in the category of least binding (non canonized in scripture) which means they do represent current church teaching they can be superseded by additional light and knowledge.

 

I have tried to show that the telestial and terrestrial worlds as shown in vision from section 76 cant possibly be a part of the "kingdom of heaven" after resurrection and judgement. I have tried to show that these two kingdoms cant exist at that point. The point here being that the scriptures, along with the temple endowment, almost exclusively, show that only the celestial kingdom/celestial world or outer darkness will exist at judgement. Our LDS doctrine however trys to shoehorn in the two lower kingdoms into the plan. But, in order to do so it has to redefine words like "damnation" and "kingdom of heaven" to make it fit. But, in so doing it just keeps compounding the problem and making more contradictions. Its a pileup effect that creates so many problems that entire volumes of scripture must be disregarded, thus it that has no answer.

For instance, in order to make our current plan of salvation work, the entire dichotomy of heaven/hell as taught in the Book of Mormon must be disregarded. Scriptures like this one make no sense in our current plan-

"25 And the Lord said unto me: Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters;
26 And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.
27 I say unto you, unless this be the case, they must be cast off; and this I know, because I was like to be cast off." (Mosiah 27:25-27)

In order to make that scripture work we have to redefine being "cast off" as something different than being cast into an eternal hell or perhaps the timung. In so doing, we then try to redefine the timing of this "cast off" event as happening before resurrection. It thus just keeps compounding problem upon problem. This scripture is either right or its wrong. If its right then there is only one means of salvation and that is to be born again into the kingdom of heaven becoming his sons and daughters. But, according to the D&C, all those begotten through Christ are celestial heirs. Thus you can see why the church doctrine elects to dusregard the Book of Mormon teaching almost entirely because it doesnt fit with the interpretation we believe in now.

[Rob Osborn]

Here is another scripture to show the point-

"7 And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.
8 And under this head ye are made free, and there is no other head whereby ye can be made free. There is no other name given whereby salvation cometh; therefore, I would that ye should take upon you the name of Christ, all you that have entered into the covenant with God that ye should be obedient unto the end of your lives.
9 And it shall come to pass that whosoever doeth this shall be found at the right hand of God, for he shall know the name by which he is called; for he shall be called by the name of Christ.
10 And now it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall not take upon him the name of Christ must be called by some other name; therefore, he findeth himself on the left hand of God." (Mosiah 5:7-10)

Compare withe D&C

"22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn." (D&C 93:22)

Compare with section 76-

"54 They are they who are the church of the Firstborn" (vs.54 defing the celestial heirs)

 

In order for all these scriptures to he in harmony, there can only be the celestial kingdom or outer darkness at judgment. 

[Guest]

My main question for @Rob Osborn is, what is it about you that makes you smarter/wiser/better informed than every prophet of our dispensation, who presumably agrees with the Plan of Happiness as it's always been taught?

[estradling75]

39 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I have tried to show that the telestial and terrestrial worlds as shown in vision from section 76 cant possibly be a part of the "kingdom of heaven" after resurrection and judgement. I have tried to show that these two kingdoms cant exist at that point. The point here being that the scriptures, along with the temple endowment, almost exclusively, show that only the celestial kingdom/celestial world or outer darkness will exist at judgement. Our LDS doctrine however trys to shoehorn in the two lower kingdoms into the plan. But, in order to do so it has to redefine words like "damnation" and "kingdom of heaven" to make it fit. But, in so doing it just keeps compounding the problem and making more contradictions. Its a pileup effect that creates so many problems that entire volumes of scripture must be disregarded, thus it that has no answer.

For instance, in order to make our current plan of salvation work, the entire dichotomy of heaven/hell as taught in the Book of Mormon must be disregarded. Scriptures like this one make no sense in our current plan-

"25 And the Lord said unto me: Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters;
26 And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.
27 I say unto you, unless this be the case, they must be cast off; and this I know, because I was like to be cast off." (Mosiah 27:25-27)

In order to make that scripture work we have to redefine being "cast off" as something different than being cast into an eternal hell or perhaps the timung. In so doing, we then try to redefine the timing of this "cast off" event as happening before resurrection. It thus just keeps compounding problem upon problem. This scripture is either right or its wrong. If its right then there is only one means of salvation and that is to be born again into the kingdom of heaven becoming his sons and daughters. But, according to the D&C, all those begotten through Christ are celestial heirs. Thus you can see why the church doctrine elects to dusregard the Book of Mormon teaching almost entirely because it doesnt fit with the interpretation we believe in now.

What a load of crap..  You wrest things like crazy.

Here is a simple question for you.  Do you think that the Telestial Kingdom is part of the Kingdom of God/Heaven?  Yes or No?

If you think yes... then all the scriptures you should be studying and know tells you that everyone in there is repentant and clean. No conflict

If you think no... then nothing in the scriptures requires them to be repentant or clean. No conflict

But what is it really...  Alot of people think that is it part of it...  And I am sure that many teachings could be quoted that support that idea...  On the other hand you have pointed out teachings that seem to support that it is not.  For those of us who have a testimony of the church and understand how it works this apparent conflict means one thing.

That one thing is that the Lord as not given a "Thus saith the Lord" on the topic.  There are a lot of such topic.  While we claim to have truth and a lot of it... all we have to do is read the Articles of Faith 9 to realize that there is more to come.  When we reach this areas it is common to speculate, which poses a very real danger if we get so caught up in our speculation that we turn on the scriptures and the prophets and the church and declare them false.

And that is exactly what you are doing.  It is one thing to in your studies find church teaching that you think are speculative and wrong based on what you think is truth.  It is quite another to publicly declare that they are wrong and thereby set yourself up as the Oracle of God with greater truth then his chosen prophet

[Rob Osborn]

35 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

My main question for @Rob Osborn is, what is it about you that makes you smarter/wiser/better informed than every prophet of our dispensation, who presumably agrees with the Plan of Happiness as it's always been taught?

Im not smarter. I just have differing opinions. If you research where prophets have opinions on things such as "eternal progression" you will find they are from one end of the spectrum to the other.

If you research Joseph Smith's opinions on heaven you will see that his views on salvation changed drastically over the course of his adult life. Later on, after his death, his opinions were picked over to fibd doctrines that fit with peoples opiniobs themselves. Go and read the Kubg Follett discourse and you will notice just how different his views had changed since the early church. He had pretty much gobe back to an understanding of salvation more consistant with the NT and BoM than what was later recorded as scrioture now found in the D&C. Yes, even Josrph Smiths own expoubding if doctrine cobtradicted itself over time. Does this make Jiseph Smith not a prophet, or smarter than himself?

[Vort]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

In order for all these scriptures to he in harmony, there can only be the celestial kingdom or outer darkness at judgment.

Rob, you have been shown how the scriptures are in accord with current teachings. You are riding your hobby horse most furiously.

Differences of opinions are fine. You are going several steps beyond that in declaring that the teachings of the Church and her leaders on this topic are wrong, and you are right. Don't you see that it's only a step away from declaring the Church to be in apostasy and yourself as the one anointed to reclaim her? Please stop pursuing this path.

[estradling75]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

Im not smarter. I just have differing opinions. If you research where prophets have opinions on things such as "eternal progression" you will find they are from one end of the spectrum to the other.

If you research Joseph Smith's opinions on heaven you will see that his views on salvation changed drastically over the course of his adult life. Later on, after his death, his opinions were picked over to fibd doctrines that fit with peoples opiniobs themselves. Go and read the Kubg Follett discourse and you will notice just how different his views had changed since the early church. He had pretty much gobe back to an understanding of salvation more consistant with the NT and BoM than what was later recorded as scrioture now found in the D&C. Yes, even Josrph Smiths own expoubding if doctrine cobtradicted itself over time. Does this make Jiseph Smith not a prophet, or smarter than himself?

Typical... You ignore the very clear and simple counters to your statement.   Instead you continue to flog your hobby horse to death and avoid any real attempts at discussing the subject.  I see no reason to continue such a time wasting with you.

[Rob Osborn]

I am not sure if I am getting my point across. Anyway, happy new year!

[mordorbund]

On 12/30/2016 at 6:56 PM, Vort said:

Holy cow. It's Teddy Roosevelt carved into the mountain. I guess I stuck my foot into that pile. I've never actually been there, but I guess I thought it was carved in the 1950s, not in the 1930s. Duh.

You win. I admit defeat. I guess you really are older than I am.

You have been there, but that was before it was carved up. So your mistake is understandable.

(Am I doing this right @MormonGator?)

[anatess2]

On 12/29/2016 at 2:38 PM, Rob Osborn said:

Only those who repent and are baptized will be saved from eternal hell after resurrection.

 

Correct.  That is the Plan of SALVATION.  In that Salvation, you are correct.  It is a dichotomy.  Either you are SAVED or you are NOT SAVED.  In this, we are saved by Christ's grace and not by our works.  And such grace is predicated by our acceptance of Christ's atoning sacrifice.  I posit that the FACT that we are on earth already indicates that we have accepted Christ's atoning sacrifice at least with our pre-mortal knowledge.  Those that did not accept Christ went with Lucifer in pre-mortality and did not progress to gaining mortal bodies.  Of course, one can work his way through mortality to end up rejecting Christ in the final judgment after gaining full knowledge.  They would join Lucifer as well and join the NOT SAVED camp.

Where you veer off is where it goes from being Saved to being Exalted.  This is also where the Catholics veer off.  The Catholics believe in heaven and hell as end-states.  Further, they believe that there are no degrees to heaven.  It's just heaven.  You go to heaven out of Christ's grace alone.  Your works do nothing to merit salvation.  Rather, you do righteous works because you love God.  Baptism, therefore, is only a requirement to those to whom the gospel has been proclaimed and that people who have not been baptized may still attain salvation.  The Catholic position of the 2 end-states of heaven and hell is the only position that they can possibly hold from the scholarly study of the scriptures because they are missing the doctrine of Exaltation and post-mortal Ordinances restored in these latter days.

The 3 degrees of glory is not a progression (that's a Catholic teaching - progress from earth to purgatory before making it to heaven).  Rather, they are inheritances as taught by the latter day prophets for all those who are SAVED.  You are saved by grace alone.  You inherit a degree of glory that your mortal and spirit world works indicate is where your heart is.  Therefore, the Saved = Heaven, Not Saved = Hell becomes insufficient in the depiction of the Plan of Salvation.  It becomes further detailed with Heaven separated out into 3 Degrees - Telestial, Terrestrial, Celestial - with Hell qualified as Outer Darkness (spiritual death - that being completely separated from God).  Of course, to those who have full knowledge of our Potential for Celstial glory and because of the state of their hearts did not attain that potential, we could surmise that it would be hell for them to inherit terrestrial or telestial glory.  King David, for example, would be in such a hell I would imagine even as he is Saved.

Do you see how I have that picture all clear in my head without having to point out details in minutae on the ancient meaning of a word or a detailed unpacking of possible alternate interpretation of some prophet's teaching?  I have studied the gospel in minute details as a Catholic and then as a Latter-day Saint but all this minutae contribute to that overall picture in my head.  So that, when I go teach in Primary or listen to the teachings in Sunday School or RS or listen to conference talks or study different books in the scriptures or attend the temple... all of them don't clang around in my head conflicting with each other... rather they all fit in with the general picture. 

There's these 3 guys who described an elephant.  One guy was observing its leg and said an elephant is a giant tree.  The other guy was observing its tail and said an elephant is a rope.  They other guy was observing its ear and said the elephant is a cloth.  They all offered conflicting descriptions and if they don't step back and look at the elephant as a whole, they'll argue all day long.

 

 

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, mordorbund said:

You have been there, but that was before it was carved up. So your mistake is understandable.

(Am I doing this right @MormonGator?)

Carry on my brother. Carry on. 

[anatess2]

I would like to make a guess... just by observation... this is said in kindness and not in insolence... I think @Rob Osborn may be an OCD pedant?  If that's the case, then I can see how he doesn't resolve Church concepts the way the majority of us do on this thread (or in the Church) and that he approaches learning differently and that until we can understand how he processes information in his head, we can't possibly understand where he is coming from and how to bring his knowledge into harmony with the prophets?

My only problem in addressing his posts is - Faith (to which Rob has professed he has complete faith in the prophets) is supposed to put the teachings of the prophets as our guiding post to which our own study has to bounce off of.  So, this faith requires us to study in such a way as to understand how the prophets are right instead of how the prophets are wrong.  This is the only problem I see with the way Rob approaches the teachings of the Church, at least in this thread.  It makes it very difficult for us not to sink into prophet-defense-mode which leads to negative feelings.

In any case, I've tried to put my 2 cents worth into this discussion but I don't think we're making any progress so I'm going to bow out.  I loved the exchange between Rob and CV75 though.  I learned some stuff.

 

[prisonchaplain]

Mine does.

Disclosure:  No, I didn't read all 130+ posts in this string.

Thought on the straight and narrow way:  Are we so sure it's a particular church or religious organization?  Perhaps it's just Jesus.  He said he was the way, truth and life.  Now, there could still be a most correct church or practice, but at 30AD, Jesus surely did not have the restored church at the forefront of his mind. 

[Rob Osborn]

8 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Correct.  That is the Plan of SALVATION.  In that Salvation, you are correct.  It is a dichotomy.  Either you are SAVED or you are NOT SAVED.  In this, we are saved by Christ's grace and not by our works.  And such grace is predicated by our acceptance of Christ's atoning sacrifice.  I posit that the FACT that we are on earth already indicates that we have accepted Christ's atoning sacrifice at least with our pre-mortal knowledge.  Those that did not accept Christ went with Lucifer in pre-mortality and did not progress to gaining mortal bodies.  Of course, one can work his way through mortality to end up rejecting Christ in the final judgment after gaining full knowledge.  They would join Lucifer as well and join the NOT SAVED camp.

Where you veer off is where it goes from being Saved to being Exalted.  This is also where the Catholics veer off.  The Catholics believe in heaven and hell as end-states.  Further, they believe that there are no degrees to heaven.  It's just heaven.  You go to heaven out of Christ's grace alone.  Your works do nothing to merit salvation.  Rather, you do righteous works because you love God.  Baptism, therefore, is only a requirement to those to whom the gospel has been proclaimed and that people who have not been baptized may still attain salvation.  The Catholic position of the 2 end-states of heaven and hell is the only position that they can possibly hold from the scholarly study of the scriptures because they are missing the doctrine of Exaltation and post-mortal Ordinances restored in these latter days.

The 3 degrees of glory is not a progression (that's a Catholic teaching - progress from earth to purgatory before making it to heaven).  Rather, they are inheritances as taught by the latter day prophets for all those who are SAVED.  You are saved by grace alone.  You inherit a degree of glory that your mortal and spirit world works indicate is where your heart is.  Therefore, the Saved = Heaven, Not Saved = Hell becomes insufficient in the depiction of the Plan of Salvation.  It becomes further detailed with Heaven separated out into 3 Degrees - Telestial, Terrestrial, Celestial - with Hell qualified as Outer Darkness (spiritual death - that being completely separated from God).  Of course, to those who have full knowledge of our Potential for Celstial glory and because of the state of their hearts did not attain that potential, we could surmise that it would be hell for them to inherit terrestrial or telestial glory.  King David, for example, would be in such a hell I would imagine even as he is Saved.

Do you see how I have that picture all clear in my head without having to point out details in minutae on the ancient meaning of a word or a detailed unpacking of possible alternate interpretation of some prophet's teaching?  I have studied the gospel in minute details as a Catholic and then as a Latter-day Saint but all this minutae contribute to that overall picture in my head.  So that, when I go teach in Primary or listen to the teachings in Sunday School or RS or listen to conference talks or study different books in the scriptures or attend the temple... all of them don't clang around in my head conflicting with each other... rather they all fit in with the general picture. 

There's these 3 guys who described an elephant.  One guy was observing its leg and said an elephant is a giant tree.  The other guy was observing its tail and said an elephant is a rope.  They other guy was observing its ear and said the elephant is a cloth.  They all offered conflicting descriptions and if they don't step back and look at the elephant as a whole, they'll argue all day long.

 

 

It may be clear in your head to you but the truth is that a person who is saved is saved from hell. A saved person isnt or wont be in hell. Misunderstandings like that cause all sorts of head clanging to me. And trust me, other religions pound us to death on those misunderstandings. As sad as it is, they are right on a lot of the things they pound us over. So we have bits of truth but so do other religions. I think our own membership are too seminary answer trained to think for themselves. Thats also a problem.

[Sunday21]

On 2016-12-30 at 7:01 PM, Carborendum said:

That's what they tell  me.

I recently had a "brain scan" which told me that I have poor memory, poor math skills, poor organizational skills, and poor communication skills. 

I picked up my stuff and headed for the door.  The "doctor" asked if I wanted a copy of the report.  I laughed at him.

Based on a concentrated analysis of your writing patterns, I respectfully disagree. You communicate good. ?

[anatess2]

11 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

It may be clear in your head to you but the truth is that a person who is saved is saved from hell. A saved person isnt or wont be in hell. Misunderstandings like that cause all sorts of head clanging to me. And trust me, other religions pound us to death on those misunderstandings. As sad as it is, they are right on a lot of the things they pound us over. So we have bits of truth but so do other religions. I think our own membership are too seminary answer trained to think for themselves. Thats also a problem.

That misunderstanding is your STRICT USE of the word Hell.  The Strict Use is Outer Darkness.  Nobody who is saved will be in Outer Darkness.

Hell, on the other hand is a place of torment.  There are 2 kinds - temporary hell (before Final Judgement) and eternal hell (after Final Judgement).  The Bible Dictionary is pretty clear on this matter.

And then there is that torment of missed potential - an allegorical use of the word Hell... "Man, I got an F in Algebra!  I'm in hell!" or "If I end up in the telestial Kingdom and not be able to live with the Father and Christ, that would be hell for me!"

In any case, I didn't attend seminary - I'm a convert.  And yeah, it would take a whole lot of thinking for myself to have the courage to go against my upbringing, my family, my friends, and my country.  I'm Filipino.  The vast majority of us are Catholics who grew up in Catholic Schools from Kindergarten through College.  And Catholics have a pretty extensive teaching on Hell.  So, it is quite frustrating for me to hear someone say, "You don't agree with me, you must not be capable of thinking for yourself".

Now, why it clangs in your head, in my humble opinion, is because you have a seemingly OCD way of using/understanding words in communication.   In this instance, Hell.  In a previous instance, Damnation.  And in another instance, Telestial.  English is only my 3rd language yet I can mostly detect the nuances of words and their usage in communication and teaching.

Edited January 5, 2017 by anatess2

[mrmarklin]

On 12/27/2016 at 7:28 PM, Zarahemla said:

Obviously the LDS church is the only church on earth with the full truth, but are there other religions that have some of the truths? Catholicism, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. like some have beliefs about loving one another as you would like to be treated, but then they turn around with a fictitious belief like the idea of reincarnation, which is totally against resurrection and heaven. Other religions believe in a heaven, but only in the heaven and hell, and not in the Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial Kingdoms like we have the knowledge of.  And in respect to the topic, how lucky do you feel to be in a world full of 7 plus billion people and 1 of only 15 million in the world that is part of the correct path?

Since all world religions are offshoots of the true gospel introduced to Adam by the Lord, of course there is some truth in all of them. 

[Rob Osborn]

On 1/5/2017 at 8:26 AM, anatess2 said:

That misunderstanding is your STRICT USE of the word Hell.  The Strict Use is Outer Darkness.  Nobody who is saved will be in Outer Darkness.

Hell, on the other hand is a place of torment.  There are 2 kinds - temporary hell (before Final Judgement) and eternal hell (after Final Judgement).  The Bible Dictionary is pretty clear on this matter.

And then there is that torment of missed potential - an allegorical use of the word Hell... "Man, I got an F in Algebra!  I'm in hell!" or "If I end up in the telestial Kingdom and not be able to live with the Father and Christ, that would be hell for me!"

In any case, I didn't attend seminary - I'm a convert.  And yeah, it would take a whole lot of thinking for myself to have the courage to go against my upbringing, my family, my friends, and my country.  I'm Filipino.  The vast majority of us are Catholics who grew up in Catholic Schools from Kindergarten through College.  And Catholics have a pretty extensive teaching on Hell.  So, it is quite frustrating for me to hear someone say, "You don't agree with me, you must not be capable of thinking for yourself".

Now, why it clangs in your head, in my humble opinion, is because you have a seemingly OCD way of using/understanding words in communication.   In this instance, Hell.  In a previous instance, Damnation.  And in another instance, Telestial.  English is only my 3rd language yet I can mostly detect the nuances of words and their usage in communication and teaching.

I can assure you that "hell" as used in the scriptures will not come to any of the saved, literally or figuratively.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

I can assure you that "hell" as used in the scriptures will not come to any of the saved, literally or figuratively.

Yes.  As an eternal state.  AS USED in the Scriptures.  That does not mean that I (or any Gen Authority for that matter) can't use the word Hell in communication or in talks or in manuals figuratively in the modern English language usage.  And there it is - the crux of the issue isn't it?  Because of your strict linguistic requirements of anything coming out of the Church (and Mormonhub posts for that matter)?

Edited January 6, 2017 by anatess2

[Rob Osborn]

15 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Yes.  As an eternal state.  AS USED in the Scriptures.  That does not mean that I (or any Gen Authority for that matter) can't use the word Hell in communication or in talks or in manuals figuratively in the modern English language usage.  And there it is - the crux of the issue isn't it?  Because of your strict linguistic requirements of anything coming out of the Church (and Mormonhub posts for that matter)?

I agree that we can use it figuratively to describe cuurent events or comparisons. But, its a diservice to use it in any way to describe a soul after resurrection who is saved.

[CV75]

On 12/31/2016 at 4:57 PM, Rob Osborn said:

I am not sure if I am getting my point across. Anyway, happy new year!

The dichotomous heaven/hell // saved/damned motif serves one purpose in describing a set of spiritual principles, and the three kingdom motif serves another, and either motif can be applied to describing spiritual principles that are active, sometimes in he same ways and sometimes in unique or different ways, in this world, the spirit world or the resurrection.

The limiting principle that prevents a resurrected terrestrial being from advancing to a celestial glory is the “ministration” law of the terrestrial kingdom.

In this world, the Prophet, holding the keys for all offices delegates authority to everyone from apostles to members, and thus he mingles with the rest of humanity, no matter how base, to share with all the fulness of what he has been given to offer.

In contrast, in the resurrected world, the Father does not share His fullness with those in the terrestrial world (neither does the Christ descend into the telestial world; only angels do, and Jesus also followed this pattern according to the vision in D&C 138:19, 20). The continuity we see in this world and the spirit world to some degree does not occur in the resurrection.

“[The telestial resurrected people] are they who receive not of his fulness in the eternal world, but of the Holy Spirit through the ministration of the terrestrial; And the terrestrial [resurrected people are they who receive not of the fulness of the Father in the eternal world, but of the presence of the Son] through the ministration of the celestial.” (D&C 76:77, 86-87). The ministration is conducted by administering angels.

Any progress from a terrestrial spirit to a celestial spirit must occur before the resurrection, and all opportunity is afforded in all that transpires this life and the spirit world.

When I conceptualize the three kingdoms as having a form of expression in three major ways, it helps me see where (and how) we can and cannot progress from the terrestrial to the celestial kingdom:

Our mortal lifetime of flesh and blood: telestial world (life without the Gospel or much of the light of Christ); terrestrial world (life with a form of the Gospel, familiarity with the light of Christ, and/or or pre-temple covenants); celestial world (life with a fullness of the Gospel and / or temple covenants). This life is the time to prepare.

The spirit world: telestial world (Prison); terrestrial world (Prison but hearing and applying the word with faith); celestial world (Paradise and teaching the word). The spirit world is part of “this life.”

The resurrected world: As D&C describes it. Progress is found only in the sense of the continuation of the seeds (exaltation). The scriptures indicate that there is no kingdom higher than exaltation, so progression beyond it would not be a thing; all the progress (in the form of a continuation of the seeds) is within the kingdom. This indicates that progress within lesser kingdoms is also prescribed by the laws of the respective kingdom; neither can they have an increase. The levels and forms of “ministration” limit how far the inhabitants of a kingdom can possibly progress, and limits it to within their kingdom.

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

The dichotomous heaven/hell // saved/damned motif serves one purpose in describing a set of spiritual principles, and the three kingdom motif serves another, and either motif can be applied to describing spiritual principles that are active, sometimes in he same ways and sometimes in unique or different ways, in this world, the spirit world or the resurrection.

 

The limiting principle that prevents a resurrected terrestrial being from advancing to a celestial glory is the “ministration” law of the terrestrial kingdom.

 

In this world, the Prophet, holding the keys for all offices delegates authority to everyone from apostles to members, and thus he mingles with the rest of humanity, no matter how base, to share with all the fulness of what he has been given to offer.

 

In contrast, in the resurrected world, the Father does not share His fullness with those in the terrestrial world (neither does the Christ descend into the telestial world; only angels do, and Jesus also followed this pattern according to the vision in D&C 138:19, 20). The continuity we see in this world and the spirit world to some degree does not occur in the resurrection.

 

“[The telestial resurrected people] are they who receive not of his fulness in the eternal world, but of the Holy Spirit through the ministration of the terrestrial; And the terrestrial [resurrected people are they who receive not of the fulness of the Father in the eternal world, but of the presence of the Son] through the ministration of the celestial.” (D&C 76:77, 86-87). The ministration is conducted by administering angels.

 

Any progress from a terrestrial spirit to a celestial spirit must occur before the resurrection, and all opportunity is afforded in all that transpires this life and the spirit world.

 

When I conceptualize the three kingdoms as having a form of expression in three major ways, it helps me see where (and how) we can and cannot progress from the terrestrial to the celestial kingdom:

 

Our mortal lifetime of flesh and blood: telestial world (life without the Gospel or much of the light of Christ); terrestrial world (life with a form of the Gospel, familiarity with the light of Christ, and/or or pre-temple covenants); celestial world (life with a fullness of the Gospel and / or temple covenants). This life is the time to prepare.

 

The spirit world: telestial world (Prison); terrestrial world (Prison but hearing and applying the word with faith); celestial world (Paradise and teaching the word). The spirit world is part of “this life.”

 

The resurrected world: As D&C describes it. Progress is found only in the sense of the continuation of the seeds (exaltation). The scriptures indicate that there is no kingdom higher than exaltation, so progression beyond it would not be a thing; all the progress (in the form of a continuation of the seeds) is within the kingdom. This indicates that progress within lesser kingdoms is also prescribed by the laws of the respective kingdom; neither can they have an increase. The levels and forms of “ministration” limit how far the inhabitants of a kingdom can possibly progress, and limits it to within their kingdom.

Im curious what you think of these verses which describe the white stone given to those of the celestial world'

10 Then the white stone mentioned in Revelation 2:17, will become a Urim and Thummim to each individual who receives one, whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms will be made known;
11 And a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon is a new name written, which no man knoweth save he that receiveth it. The new name is the key word." (D&C 130:10-11)

According to these verses there are higher orders of kingdoms above the celestial glory. Logically, one could progress higher in the eternities. Eternal progression is a heavenly principle. All those who keep their second estate (all the saved) will have glory added upon their heads forever and ever-

 

"26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever." (Abraham 3:26)

As for the terrestrial kingdom, it has some issues as we define it. Here is a short list of issues that dont make sense-

1. Those who die without law. This makes no sense, if they die without law they cant be judged by law and are thus not condemned. 

2. We know that terrestrial heirs reign on earth with Christ for the millennium. We also know that in the spirit world they repented, accepted Christ and his gospel and were washed clean. So then, at the beginning of the millennium they are quickened and dwell with Christ for the thousand years on the earth building the kingdom with Christ. So then why at the end of the millennium are they booted off the planet to inherit some other lower world?

3. The terrestrial receive the presence of the Son in their kingdom but not the presence of the Father. This supposedly happens after resurrection and the crowing of glories. So, Christ having the same glory as the Father is somehow able to dwell with the terrestrials but not the Father? Is the Fathers glory just that much better that they cant endure his presence but they can endure the Sons for all eternity? Why is Christ going to dwell in that kingdom for eternity, or is it just a part time cameo like appearance thing every so often? I thought Christ was supposed to receive his crown and reign alongside the Father never to go out again in the celestial kingdom.