angels and gods

[Edspringer]

Hi, everyone. It’s been a while!

Pondering D&C 131, I was reading the part that refers to three distinct levels or degrees within the Celestial Kingdom and was speculating about the two lowest degrees therein and their inhabitants.

Then I proceeded to the next section. Reading D&C 132:19, I stopped in the following part: “[…] and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever”.

So I’d like to get some insights from you whether this ‘angels and gods’ could possibly be the inhabitants of the first two degrees of the CK or not. I’d appreciate any comments on the subject.

[Fether]

1 hour ago, Edspringer said:

Hi, everyone. It’s been a while!

Pondering D&C 131, I was reading the part that refers to three distinct levels or degrees within the Celestial Kingdom and was speculating about the two lowest degrees therein and their inhabitants.

Then I proceeded to the next section. Reading D&C 132:19, I stopped in the following part: “[…] and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever”.

So I’d like to get some insights from you whether this ‘angels and gods’ could possibly be the inhabitants of the first two degrees of the CK or not. I’d appreciate any comments on the subject.

"The Lord has not revealed to the Church who will live in two of the three degrees in the celestial kingdom. Any discussion on this topic is speculation. More has been revealed about the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, or exaltation. That is where the Father would have all of His children live if they keep His commandments." D+C 131 Institute manual 

its speculation. God has not revealed much about the three levels besides the fact that there are three levels. We can speculate, but we can't "know".

[bytebear]

My speculation on the three divisions within the celestial kingdom.

1. Those who were baptized only.

2. Those who were endowed

3. Those who were sealed.

I believe angels make up 1 & 2, and gods 3.

[Edspringer]

11 hours ago, Fether said:

"The Lord has not revealed to the Church who will live in two of the three degrees in the celestial kingdom. Any discussion on this topic is speculation. More has been revealed about the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, or exaltation. That is where the Father would have all of His children live if they keep His commandments." D+C 131 Institute manual 

its speculation. God has not revealed much about the three levels besides the fact that there are three levels. We can speculate, but we can't "know".

Thanx for replying.

Of course there's nothing official on the matter. Of course our Father wants the best spot for us His children. "No ad for what  is not the best". 

I quoted a verse of scripture and asked everyone's opinion about it in relation to the degrees within the CK. If we can at least speculate... Why not?

[Anddenex]

12 hours ago, Fether said:

"The Lord has not revealed to the Church who will live in two of the three degrees in the celestial kingdom. Any discussion on this topic is speculation. More has been revealed about the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, or exaltation. That is where the Father would have all of His children live if they keep His commandments." D+C 131 Institute manual 

its speculation. God has not revealed much about the three levels besides the fact that there are three levels. We can speculate, but we can't "know".

The only thing I would differ in thought is the last statement of the last sentence. We "can" know, for the Spirit is able to teach all truth, even unrevealed truth. 

@Edspringer, this is a good question. I wouldn't be surprised if part of the lower kingdoms are those who even were baptized, endowed, and sealed but were not diligent in keeping the covenants. More sins of omission rather than commission. Individuals who lived good lives but did not serve. Individuals who did not learn their duty, proactively learn their duty, and to act in all diligence. That member that shows up once every few months, never receives a calling, when asked for assistance they would rather watch TV, but in all they live honorable lives and have all the necessary ordinances in this life.

[CV75]

In the spirit of speculation: the non-exalted kingdoms are celestial beings who are not married (one for males, one for females) living "separately and singly" (D&C 132:17). These are angels. I do not know who the gods might be, unless they are those who are yet preparing to receive their exaltation (per another thread: https://mormonhub.com/forums/topic/61876-celestial-kingdom-and-exaltation/#comment-916268 ):

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught: “When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the gospel—you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith [2007], 268). https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-47-exaltation?lang=eng

[Fether]

44 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

The only thing I would differ in thought is the last statement of the last sentence. We "can" know, for the Spirit is able to teach all truth, even unrevealed truth. 

You are totally right! Thanks for the reminder

[Fether]

1 hour ago, Edspringer said:

 

I quoted a verse of scripture and asked everyone's opinion about it in relation to the degrees within the CK. If we can at least speculate... Why not?

I like that attitude

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

I wouldn't be surprised if part of the lower kingdoms are those who even were baptized, endowed, and sealed but were not diligent in keeping the covenants. More sins of omission rather than commission. Individuals who lived good lives but did not serve. Individuals who did not learn their duty, proactively learn their duty, and to act in all diligence. That member that shows up once every few months, never receives a calling, when asked for assistance they would rather watch TV, but in all they live honorable lives and have all the necessary ordinances in this life.

What you are describing is a Terrestrial person. "Not valiant in their testimony..."

[Rob Osborn]

Interesting just how little we know of the kingdom of heaven.

I will say that in the highest degree one must be married. But, it never says the lower two will all be single. My belief is that married couples will be found in all three degrees within the CK. It is also my belief however that eventually all the saved will become married and achieve exaltation in the highest degree.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

What you are describing is a Terrestrial person. "Not valiant in their testimony..."

My thoughts are slightly different than what is described for a Terrestrial person.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

My thoughts are slightly different than what is described for a Terrestrial person.

How so?

[Anddenex]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

How so?

Well, how do you know your interpretation of "valiant" is the one that determines my statement is not a Terrestial person? There are aspects of the descriptions within scripture that are very clear. There are aspects that are vague. As I shared, I am describing a slight difference as to what I understand of the Terrestial description. In your thoughts, you are not seeing the difference. I never said they were exalted, but still receive Celestial glory. To me "valiant in their testimony of Christ" are those who become exalted.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Anddenex said:

Well, how do you know your interpretation of "valiant" is the one that determines my statement is not a Terrestial person? There are aspects of the descriptions within scripture that are very clear. There are aspects that are vague. As I shared, I am describing a slight difference as to what I understand of the Terrestial description. In your thoughts, you are not seeing the difference. I never said they were exalted, but still receive Celestial glory. To me "valiant in their testimony of Christ" are those who become exalted.

OK, so explain the difference.  What does "not valiant in their testimony" mean to you?  And how are those who were "not valiant" Terrestrial different than "not valiant" Celestial?

[Anddenex]

12 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

OK, so explain the difference.  What does "not valiant in their testimony" mean to you?  And how are those who were "not valiant" Terrestrial different than "not valiant" Celestial?

Oath & Covenant for one reason. Those who receive servants, receive Son, and receive the Father. These are members of the Church who have taken upon themselves the covenants to receive the Father, but have been less diligent in their covenants. They still receive the servants, they still pray to the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. They partake of his life and death (on occassion). They live lives that are not Telestial. I can't see any reason why they would be Terrestial beings. I can see how they would not be exalted.

As a note: I am not presenting any thing that I have felt witnessed as true via the Spirit. These are thoughts I have according to the mercies of God, which in my opinion, do not rob justice. I could be totally wrong. I could be correct.

EDIT: An example of "not valiant" in my opinion are those members who have received all covenants, but have left the gospel, but remain honorable Christians with a different church, these are Terrestial beings.

Edited May 31, 2017 by Anddenex

[Guest]

Just now, Anddenex said:

Oath & Covenant for one reason. Those who receive servants, receive Son, and receive the Father. These are members of the Church who have taken upon themselves the covenants to receive the Father, but have been less diligent in their covenants. They still receive the servants, they still pray to the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. They partake of his life and death (on occassion). They live lives that are not Telestial. I can't see any reason why they would be Terrestial beings. I can see how they would not be exalted.

As a note: I am not presenting any thing that I have felt witnessed as true via the Spirit. These are thoughts I have according to the mercies of God, which in my opinion, do not rob justice. I could be totally wrong. I could be correct.

Anddenex,

I am not trying to be argumentative.  I'm asking because I still don't get what you're saying.  So, without knowing what you're saying I can't agree or disagree.

You still haven't explained a "difference".  You keep describing your idea of "not valiant" Celestial.  But I have yet to read anything on your idea of "not valiant" Terrestrial.  How can you say they are different when you've only defined one side?

[The Folk Prophet]

I've never understood the thinking that taking covenants upon us makes us less culpable for a shortage of valiance.

[Fether]

@Carborendum @Anddenex

May be redundant, but let's take this into context what has been said by the church officially.

"Sometimes the things that go without saying need to be said" -Pres. Nelson (I think)

"The celestial kingdom is the place prepared for those who have “received the testimony of Jesus” and been “made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, who wrought out this perfect atonement through the shedding of his own blood” (D&C 76:51, 69). To inherit this gift, we must receive the ordinances of salvation, keep the commandments, and repent of our sins....

...we learn that there are three degrees within the celestial kingdom. To be exalted in the highest degree and continue eternally in family relationships, we must enter into “the new and everlasting covenant of marriage” and be true to that covenant. In other words, temple marriage is a requirement for obtaining the highest degree of celestial glory. (See D&C 131:1–4.) All who are worthy to enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage will have that opportunity, whether in this life or the next...

...Generally speaking, individuals in the terrestrial kingdom will be honorable people “who were blinded by the craftiness of men” (76:75). This group will include members of the Church who were “not valiant in the testimony of Jesus” (D&C 76:79). It will also include those who rejected the opportunity to receive the gospel in mortality but who later received it in the postmortal spirit world"

- True to the Faith "Kingdom of Glory"

Edited May 31, 2017 by Fether

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Fether said:

@Carborendum @Anddenex

May be redundant, but let's take this into context what has been said by the church officially.

"Sometimes the things that go without saying need to be said" -Pres. Nelson (I think)

"The celestial kingdom is the place prepared for those who have “received the testimony of Jesus” and been “made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, who wrought out this perfect atonement through the shedding of his own blood” (D&C 76:51, 69). To inherit this gift, we must receive the ordinances of salvation, keep the commandments, and repent of our sins....

...we learn that there are three degrees within the celestial kingdom. To be exalted in the highest degree and continue eternally in family relationships, we must enter into “the new and everlasting covenant of marriage” and be true to that covenant. In other words, temple marriage is a requirement for obtaining the highest degree of celestial glory. (See D&C 131:1–4.) All who are worthy to enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage will have that opportunity, whether in this life or the next...

...Generally speaking, individuals in the terrestrial kingdom will be honorable people “who were blinded by the craftiness of men” (76:75). This group will include members of the Church who were “not valiant in the testimony of Jesus” (D&C 76:79). It will also include those who rejected the opportunity to receive the gospel in mortality but who later received it in the postmortal spirit world"

- True to the Faith "Kingdom of Glory"

And...?  This doesn't define Anddenex's "difference" of valiant vs valiant.

Edited May 31, 2017 by Guest

[Fether]

4 hours ago, Carborendum said:

And...?  This doesn't define Anddenex's "difference" of valiant vs valiant.

I was trying to explain it. It seems like one of you was confused or unaware of this section of TTTF, or that you are arguing the same point. Maybe Anddenex was just meaning that we can't define what "valiant" means how extending that definition on a particular person because we haven't received a complete definition from the prophets? Not sure. But I posted that so we had a definitive source of doctrine making the basic claim of who goes where to pull from in this discussion (even if it was only one).

[Anddenex]

53 minutes ago, Fether said:

I was trying to explain it. It seems like one of you was confused or unaware of this section of TTTF, or that you are arguing the same point. Maybe Anddenex was just meaning that we can't define what "valiant" means how extending that definition on a particular person because we haven't received a complete definition from the prophets? Not sure. But I posted that so we had a definitive source of doctrine making the basic claim of who goes where to pull from in this discussion (even if it was only one). (emphasis noted)

Precisely. @Carborendum response highlighted the notion "not valiant" and my response was how do we know whose interpretation of what this means is correct? Whose definition of "valiant" do we adhere to, and is there a difference between the "valiance" of those in the lower kingdoms verses the exalted glory within the Celestial kingdom (because both are in the Celestial kingdom, which means there is some "valiance" to be there in the presence of the Father). I provided three variations of possibilities: the first example is the lower kingdoms (which one, doesn't matter), the second is the exalted, and the third are those in the Terrestial kingdom. All three lead different lives.

I also noted, that this was opinion, thoughts (in light of the OPs question), according to scripture which are clear on some points and vague on others, which is good in the sense, because God is the only individual who has the right to determine someone who is "not valiant in the testimony of Christ" in comparison to those who are "valiant in the testimony of Christ." We have to remember to be in the celestial kingdom means that someone was "valiant" to a point, otherwise they could not be in the presence of the Father -- they are still made perfect in Christ, how else could they endure the Father's presence?

[Fether]

30 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Precisely. @Carborendum response highlighted the notion "not valiant" and my response was how do we know whose interpretation of what this means is correct? Whose definition of "valiant" do we adhere to, and is there a difference between the "valiance" of those in the lower kingdoms verses the exalted glory within the Celestial kingdom (because both are in the Celestial kingdom, which means there is some "valiance" to be there in the presence of the Father). I provided three variations of possibilities: the first example is the lower kingdoms (which one, doesn't matter), the second is the exalted, and the third are those in the Terrestial kingdom. All three lead different lives.

I also noted, that this was opinion, thoughts (in light of the OPs question), according to scripture which are clear on some points and vague on others, which is good in the sense, because God is the only individual who has the right to determine someone who is "not valiant in the testimony of Christ" in comparison to those who are "valiant in the testimony of Christ." We have to remember to be in the celestial kingdom means that someone was "valiant" to a point, otherwise they could not be in the presence of the Father -- they are still made perfect in Christ, how else could they endure the Father's presence?

Ya! And I don't know how intrinsically connected the term "valiant" and "works" are. I don't know that God is only going to only allow those that were fully active, didntheir home teaching and magnified their calling. I say this not to lower the standards of entering the celestial kingdom, but really it is all about progression. I could be fully active, study scriptures every day, Do my calling, but choose that I know longer want to improve beyond that. With an attitude like that, I don't know that the Celestial Kingsombwould be for me.

Exaltation is all about eternal increase and eternal progression. I feel like our desire to progress combined with works will be what gets us there (and of course through Christ). "Valiance" is not a measurable thing on others, rather, we should focus wholly on how valiant are we and what can we do to become MORE valiant no matter how good we think we currently are. We stop progressing as soon as we say we are good enough... and if I may say, at that point we damn ourselves and prevent us from receiving exaltation.

[The Folk Prophet]

We can't define what valiance is?

Wow...we're all out of luck then.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

Precisely. @Carborendum response highlighted the notion "not valiant" and my response was how do we know whose interpretation of what this means is correct? Whose definition of "valiant" do we adhere to, and is there a difference between the "valiance" of those in the lower kingdoms verses the exalted glory within the Celestial kingdom (because both are in the Celestial kingdom, which means there is some "valiance" to be there in the presence of the Father). I provided three variations of possibilities: the first example is the lower kingdoms (which one, doesn't matter), the second is the exalted, and the third are those in the Terrestial kingdom. All three lead different lives.

I also noted, that this was opinion, thoughts (in light of the OPs question), according to scripture which are clear on some points and vague on others, which is good in the sense, because God is the only individual who has the right to determine someone who is "not valiant in the testimony of Christ" in comparison to those who are "valiant in the testimony of Christ." We have to remember to be in the celestial kingdom means that someone was "valiant" to a point, otherwise they could not be in the presence of the Father -- they are still made perfect in Christ, how else could they endure the Father's presence?

My line of questioning was not to immediately determine whose definition is correct.  My line of questioning was to understand what your definitions were to begin with.  And you haven't differentiated between the two.

It seems incomprehensible to me that you would choose to have a disagreement without knowing what you're disagreeing with.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

We can't define what valiance is?

Wow...we're all out of luck then.

How are we out of luck? Please do your best to define what the Lord means by "valiant in the testimony of Christ"? I would love to hear it, as your personal interpretation is just as good as anyone else.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Anddenex