Are animals damned?

[The Folk Prophet]

19 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Its not complicated. Thats what I have been saying all along. The way the word is used in scripture always means to be condemned to hell. Its really that simple. It shouldnt be debatable.

Sure...if you cast off all LDS teachings and set yourself up as the know-it-all smarter-than-the-prophets-and-apostles authority.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Sure...if you cast off all LDS teachings and set yourself up as the know-it-all smarter-than-the-prophets-and-apostles authority.

All I am saying is that one must use the scriptures to validate teachings. Damnation as defined as condemnation to hell is thus the proper definition as validated by scripture. Thats not smarter than prophet stuff- the prophets are the ones who wrote the scriptures. The prophets cant be smarter than the prophets, that makes no sense.

[Vort]

Damnals.

[wenglund]

9 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Yeah, im not sure who started it but no dictionary I have ever encountered defined damn as "being stopped in its progress".

There is a very good reason that the word "damn" takes on a somewhat different meaning for LDS than what may be found in the dictionary or even within common Christian usages. (The difference is described in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism: Damnation, though it doesn't explain the reason for the differernce)

This is because the LDS, unlike your average English speaker or Christian, views the notion of "damnation" within the context of the Plan of PROGRESSION, with the end objective of becoming like Christ.

Thus, and in terms of the scriptures, all actions that do not result in the divinely instituted end of progression, or .all final states that fall short of the end of progression, constitute a "stop, or blockage, or limitation on progress." (ibid)

Therefore, scriptures that speak of "damnation" and "hell" may rightly be interpreted by LDS as "being stopped in progress."

Those who aren't LDS, or those LDS who fail to consider the LDS context, are free to interpret the word otherwise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 15, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

5 hours ago, wenglund said:

There is a very good reason that the word "damn" takes on a somewhat different meaning for LDS than what may be found in the dictionary or even within common Christian usages. (The difference is described in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism: Damnation, though it doesn't explain the reason for the differernce)

This is because the LDS, unlike your average English speaker or Christian, views the notion of "damnation" within the context of the Plan of PROGRESSION, with the end objective of becoming like Christ.

Thus, and in terms of the scriptures, all actions that do not result in the divinely instituted end of progression, or .all final states that fall short of the end of progression, constitute a "stop, or blockage, or limitation on progress." (ibid)

Therefore, scriptures that speak of "damnation" and "hell" may rightly be interpreted by LDS as "being stopped in progress."

Those who aren't LDS, or those LDS who fail to consider the LDS context, are free to interpret the word otherwise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

There is a fatal flaw though- its what I have been trying to explain. It largely comes from a basic yet simple misunderstanding of a couple of scriptures. The first one (even the encyclopedia you linked mentiins it) is in D&C 132:4. It reads-

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

This has been understood to mean that all those who fail to enter into eternal marriage will be damned. Its from this scripture that changed Mormon definition of the word damned. But its wrong, fatally wrong. Thats not what it is saying at all. It requires reading the surrounding verses to properly understand it. Here are the two following verses-

            5 For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.
            6 And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

Ah, now it makes sense. It says here that if one enters into the law, receives that fulness, but then abides not and breaks the law at that point he is damned. What does this mean? It means that he will be temporarily condemned to hell at death. How do we know this? By reading further into the chapter, here-

26 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man marry a wife according to my word, and they are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, according to mine appointment, and he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant whatever, and all manner of blasphemies, and if they commit no murder wherein they shed innocent blood, yet they shall come forth in the first resurrection, and enter into their exaltation; but they shall be destroyed in the flesh, and shall be delivered unto the buffetings of Satan unto the day of redemption, saith the Lord God.

It says here that if one enters into the new and everlasting marriage covenant and then committ any sin under that covenant, as long as it isnt murder (because at this point it becomes unpardonable) they shall still enter into their exaltation but before they do they will be delivered into hell after tgey die and stay there until the day of their redemption. Thus, to be damned, as explained in this chapter, means to be condemned to hell. It doesnt mean failing to enter into the eternal marriage covenant. 

I once did a study and wrote a paper on it concerning every single scripture that mentions damned, damnation. What I found is that in every single case it alwsys is used in the context of condemnation to hell. This is before my own understanding changed. But, it did indeed cause me to change my understanding. And, its only when you apply this definition that the scriptures truly unlock their mysteries and opens up and makes sense. So, why cant we as Mormons discard the faulty understanding of the word? Because to do so changes everything!

 

[The Folk Prophet]

10 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

All I am saying is that one must use the scriptures to validate teachings. Damnation as defined as condemnation to hell is thus the proper definition as validated by scripture. Thats not smarter than prophet stuff- the prophets are the ones who wrote the scriptures. The prophets cant be smarter than the prophets, that makes no sense.

Are you familiar with this:

"....when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: ‘You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.’

“When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

[Rob Osborn]

17 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Are you familiar with this:

"....when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: ‘You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.’

“When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

So, are you saying our scriptures on this topic mean nothing eh?

[The Folk Prophet]

7 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, are you saying our scriptures on this topic mean nothing eh?

Um. That was Brigham Young. You can take up your issues with him.

(And Joseph)

(And Spencer W. Kimball who used this)

Edited March 15, 2018 by The Folk Prophet

[zil]

I could recommend reading The World and the Prophets by Hugh Nibley for some very good insight on why scriptures cannot be understood correctly without living prophets, but I expect they'd hit a brick wall and fall to the ground looking like alphabet soup.

Edited March 15, 2018 by zil
Added "living"

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, zil said:

I could recommend reading The World and the Prophets by Hugh Nibley for some very good insight on why scriptures cannot be understood correctly without [living] prophets, but I expect they'd hit a brick wall and fall to the ground looking like alphabet soup.

Fixed it.

[Rob Osborn]

47 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Um. That was Brigham Young. You can take up your issues with him.

(And Joseph)

(And Spencer W. Kimball who used this)

So, in essence- irregardless of what the scriptures testify over and over again, if a living prophet says somerhing it trumps all of scripture?

[Rob Osborn]

3 minutes ago, zil said:

I could recommend reading The World and the Prophets by Hugh Nibley for some very good insight on why scriptures cannot be understood correctly without prophets, but I expect they'd hit a brick wall and fall to the ground looking like alphabet soup.

We have scripture so that tge Holy Ghost can testify to us the truth. We dont have to have prophets tell us how to understand scripture, thats usurping the role of the Holy Ghost.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, in essence- irregardless of what the scriptures testify over and over again, if a living prophet says somerhing it trumps all of scripture?

yes

[Traveler]

18 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We have scripture so that tge Holy Ghost can testify to us the truth. We dont have to have prophets tell us how to understand scripture, thats usurping the role of the Holy Ghost.

 

There is no truth that can be understood in mortality without the Holy Ghost – regardless of whether or not that truth is recorded in scripture or spoken by a living prophet.  Those that lack virtue cannot receive the promptings of the Holy Ghost which is the origin of truth both from prophets and scripture.  If one finds any discrepancy between living prophets and scripture – I would purport that such discrepancy is solely because that individual – so concluding the discrepancy – has set aside virtue.

 

The Traveler

[The Folk Prophet]

13 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, in essence- irregardless of what the scriptures testify over and over again, if a living prophet says somerhing it trumps all of scripture?

It's shocking to me that you are a long-time LDS and don't understand this principle.

YES. Of course yes.

How can you not know the history of the great apostasy? The men interpreted scriptures on their own and corrupted the meaning because the living prophets and apostles were killed.

How can you not know the importance of living prophets and apostles if you've been raised LDS?

Read these. Read, read, read. You are seriously uneducated on this matter.

https://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&query=importance+of+living+prophets

17 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We have scripture and living prophets so that tge Holy Ghost can testify to us the truth. We dont have to have prophets tell us how to understand scripture, thats usurping the role of the Holy Ghost is just as much to testify of the words of living prophets as it is to testify of the words of dead prophets, and the living prophets are more important because they recieve DIRECT revelation for OUR day.

Fixed it.

The Holy Ghost doesn't guide us away from the true living prophets who have been called of God and given authority to guide His work. Never has, never will.

If we take the living prophets and apostles out of the mix then why do they even exist? If we can all just go straight to scripture and get all the knowledge we need directly from there with the Holy Ghost then why do we have living apostles and prophets at all?

[The Folk Prophet]

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

There is no truth that can be understood in mortality without the Holy Ghost – regardless of whether or not that truth is recorded in scripture or spoken by a living prophet.  Those that lack virtue cannot receive the promptings of the Holy Ghost which is the origin of truth both from prophets and scripture.  If one finds any discrepancy between living prophets and scripture – I would purport that such discrepancy is solely because that individual – so concluding the discrepancy – has set aside virtue.

To which I'll add...not listening to or following the counsel and teachings of the living prophets is setting aside virtue.

[zil]

50 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Fixed it.

Fixed the original - yes, that was the point, we need living prophets.

[wenglund]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

There is a fatal flaw though- its what I have been trying to explain. It largely comes from a basic yet simple misunderstanding of a couple of scriptures.

The flaw is that you have the interpretive sequence backwards. As I indicated, the LDS meaning of "damned" is a function of viewing it through the lens of the context of the plan of progression, and the scriptures you cited are understood by viewing them through that same lens, and not the other way around as you suggest.

When understood in the correct way, there is no conflict between, or misunderstanding derived from, the passages you quoted--at least in terms of the meaning of the word "damned."

Quote

Thus, to be damned, as explained in this chapter, means to be condemned to hell. It doesnt mean failing to enter into the eternal marriage covenant. 

The word "damned" in that chapter, as well as the other verses you quoted, also conveys to believing members the meaning that those condemned to hell are stopped in their progress towards the divine end, irrespective of entering into the eternal covenant pf marriage or not.

The layers of meaning may be challenging to the binary mind to comprehend, but that is a flaw of the interpreter and not the suggested LDS interpretation.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 15, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

11 minutes ago, wenglund said:

The flaw is that you have the interpretive sequence backwards. As I indicated, the LDS meaning of "damned" is a function of viewing it through the lens of the context of the plan of progression, and the scriptures you cited are understood by viewing them through that same lens, and not the other way around as you suggest.

When understood in the correct way, there is no conflict between, or misunderstanding derived from, the passages you quoted--at least in terms of the meaning of the word "damned."

The word "damned" in that chapter, as well as the other verses you quoted, also conveys to believing members the meaning that those condemned to hell are stopped in their progress towards the divine end, irrespective of entering into the eternal covenant pf marriage or not.

The layers of meaning may be challenging to the binary mind to comprehend, but that is a flaw of the interpreter and not the suggested LDS interpretation.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

But its wrong to interpret the scriptures as you explain. The word "damned" stands independently on its own having only one meaning. Within "damnation" are several manifestations. What are they?

1. Removed from direct presence ofHeavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and Holy Ghost

2. In torment

3. In darkness

4. Confined and within Satans grasp and presence

5. In hell

Now, notice that I didnt put down being "stopped in ones progress". Why? Because, even a spirit in prison can progress from that judgement into salvation because of the gospel preached to them and their compliance and obedience to those laws and ordinances of the gospel. So, even someone who is damned is not stopped in their progress towards salvation. Thus, being "stopped in ones progress" is not the correct definition of damnation. One must allow principle and law to rule.

Do you see where Im coming from and why?

[Traveler]

Just now, Rob Osborn said:

But its wrong to interpret the scriptures as you explain. The word "damned" stands independently on its own having only one meaning. Within "damnation" are several manifestations. What are they?

1. Removed from direct presence ofHeavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and Holy Ghost

2. In torment

3. In darkness

4. Confined and within Satans grasp and presence

5. In hell

Now, notice that I didnt put down being "stopped in ones progress". Why? Because, even a spirit in prison can progress from that judgement into salvation because of the gospel preached to them and their compliance and obedience to those laws and ordinances of the gospel. So, even someone who is damned is not stopped in their progress towards salvation. Thus, being "stopped in ones progress" is not the correct definition of damnation. One must allow principle and law to rule.

Do you see where Im coming from and why?

 

If a river has been damned - what does that mean?

 

The Traveler

[Rob Osborn]

3 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

If a river has been damned - what does that mean?

 

The Traveler

That would strangely mean that that river was or is sent to hell. That doesnt make any sense.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

But its wrong to interpret the scriptures as you explain. The word "damned" stands independently on its own having only one meaning. Within "damnation" are several manifestations. What are they?

1. Removed from direct presence ofHeavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and Holy Ghost

2. In torment

3. In darkness

4. Confined and within Satans grasp and presence

5. In hell

Now, notice that I didnt put down being "stopped in ones progress". Why? Because, even a spirit in prison can progress from that judgement into salvation because of the gospel preached to them and their compliance and obedience to those laws and ordinances of the gospel. So, even someone who is damned is not stopped in their progress towards salvation. Thus, being "stopped in ones progress" is not the correct definition of damnation. One must allow principle and law to rule.

Do you see where Im coming from and why?

Seems pretty obvious: Those in spirit prison are freed from damnation if they accept the atonement of Christ when it is offered to them. They are damned. Then they are not. The implication of "stopped from progression" does not automatically imply "permanent" unless one qualifies it with an adjective. As in "permanent damnation".

Even if one went with the idea that damn = dam, the idea still holds. The river is dammed by the dam...until the dam is removed...then it's no longer dammed.

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

It's shocking to me that you are a long-time LDS and don't understand this principle.

YES. Of course yes.

How can you not know the history of the great apostasy? The men interpreted scriptures on their own and corrupted the meaning because the living prophets and apostles were killed.

How can you not know the importance of living prophets and apostles if you've been raised LDS?

Read these. Read, read, read. You are seriously uneducated on this matter.

https://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&query=importance+of+living+prophets

Fixed it.

The Holy Ghost doesn't guide us away from the true living prophets who have been called of God and given authority to guide His work. Never has, never will.

If we take the living prophets and apostles out of the mix then why do they even exist? If we can all just go straight to scripture and get all the knowledge we need directly from there with the Holy Ghost then why do we have living apostles and prophets at all?

So, why arent our missionaries going out and handing out Book of Mormons with the statement telling them to read it and then if they want to know its meaning to read what modern prophets say about it?

[Rob Osborn]

5 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Seems pretty obvious: Those in spirit prison are freed from damnation if they accept the atonement of Christ when it is offered to them. They are damned. Then they are not. The implication of "stopped from progression" does not automatically imply "permanent" unless one qualifies it with an adjective. As in "permanent damnation".

Even if one went with the idea that damn = dam, the idea still holds. The river is dammed by the dam...until the dam is removed...then it's no longer dammed.

That doesnt really work, you are applying a different principle-one of the effects of damnation to define itself. Thats no different than saying anyone in darkness is in a state of damnation and that of course is wrong.. Its about semantics and correctly identifying the qualifiers in words in how to correctly use them. Its a basic fundamental english mistake.

[The Folk Prophet]

6 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, why arent our missionaries going out and handing out Book of Mormons with the statement telling them to read it and then if they want to know its meaning to read what modern prophets say about it?

From "Preach My Gospel"

"As you answer concerns, remember that our understanding comes from modern prophets—Joseph Smith and his successors—who receive direct revelation from God. Therefore, the first question for an investigator to answer is whether Joseph Smith was a prophet, and he or she can answer this question by reading and praying about the Book of Mormon."