Are animals damned?

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

@anatess owes me $20.

Oh no no no... I never took that bet. 

 

[anatess2]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

So tell me, how is it that children have exaltation in the highest degree within the celestial glory?

Such judgments are left to God.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

You are perhaps one of the most difficult individuals to have discussion with.

You are under the wrong impression. We are not having a discussion. There is no mutual discourse going on here. There is one individual claiming the prophets and apostles are wrong and the other telling him he's full of it. You have every right to believe the prophets and apostles are wrong. Your view that I, or anyone else here it seems, wishes to "discuss" that is as delusional as your understanding of the scriptures.

[SpiritDragon]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

You are perhaps one of the most difficult individuals to have discussion with. Your constant jabs are so devilish I have a hard time seeing you in heaven unless ye repent. Nevertheless...

I read all of the quotes and it is readily apparent that everyone you quoted had various ideas on heaven and they all use the words kind of interchangably but not in a consistant sense. In one quote its going from exaltations to exaltations and yet in another its equated with salvation. In yet another it speaks separately of eternal life and exaltation as two different things. Yet, even in another it brings up eternal lives as equating to the seed continuing on. I am glad you quoted these because it most brilliantly proves my point that prophets and apostles have used these words interchangably but not always in harmony with how the scriptures defines them which are consistent. One of the big problems that exists when we start quoting prophets and apostles from latter day times is that you can find one end of the spectrum to the other and you end up pitting them against each other. For example- take eternal progression, you can find quotes from prophets from one end to the other and everything inbetween. Its just not consistent. What is generally consistent is the scriptures- its WHY we have them- to keep us from creating strange doctrines. Thats why I am always saying "give me a scripture". We could get lost in the myriads of ways prophets used words. We could find 20 different meanings for each word and never make heads or tails out of the doctrine.

Personally, I think it's because they are quite interchangeable terms. The scriptures are no more consistent in the usage of these terms than the prophets as you assert - in fact the whole concept is silly as the scriptures are simply records of the words of prophets.

Clearly words such as immortality, eternal life, everlasting life, endless, forever, salvation, exaltation don't all mean exactly the same thing but there is a great deal of overlap in the concepts conveyed. 

Take, for instance, this excerpt from Doctrine and Covenants section 19:

Quote

4 And surely every man must repent or suffer, for I, God, am endless.

5 Wherefore, I revoke not the judgments which I shall pass, but woes shall go forth, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth, yea, to those who are found on my left hand.

6 Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment.

7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.

8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles.

9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest.

10 For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—

11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment.

12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment.

13 Wherefore, I command you to repent, and keep the commandments which you have received by the hand of my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., in my name;

14 And it is by my almighty power that you have received them;

It's a great explanation of how Endless and Eternal which would seem to equate with never-ending and forever - simply refer to terms set by God. One could extrapolate from this that Eternal Life is God's life and that Endless life is God's life. 

 

I think some of these terms would be as closely related as house and home, they don't mean the same thing (but they can refer to the same thing) while others are probably even more closely related like trying to parse out the difference between being a dad and being a father - terms that are so closely related that any perceived distinction between the two is not going to be agreed upon and probably isn't worth the effort to try. I believe, for instance, that immortality and eternal life can be fairly agreed upon to fall into the house and home category within the LDS umbrella of usage whereas eternal life and exaltation are more closely related and would be akin to trying to create a distinction between a dad and a father.

 

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

Personally, I think it's because they are quite interchangeable terms. The scriptures are no more consistent in the usage of these terms than the prophets as you assert - in fact the whole concept is silly as the scriptures are simply records of the words of prophets.

Clearly words such as immortality, eternal life, everlasting life, endless, forever, salvation, exaltation don't all mean exactly the same thing but there is a great deal of overlap in the concepts conveyed. 

Take, for instance, this excerpt from Doctrine and Covenants section 19:

It's a great explanation of how Endless and Eternal which would seem to equate with never-ending and forever - simply refer to terms set by God. One could extrapolate from this that Eternal Life is God's life and that Endless life is God's life. 

 

I think some of these terms would be as closely related as house and home, they don't mean the same thing (but they can refer to the same thing) while others are probably even more closely related like trying to parse out the difference between being a dad and being a father - terms that are so closely related that any perceived distinction between the two is not going to be agreed upon and probably isn't worth the effort to try. I believe, for instance, that immortality and eternal life can be fairly agreed upon to fall into the house and home category within the LDS umbrella of usage whereas eternal life and exaltation are more closely related and would be akin to trying to create a distinction between a dad and a father.

 

I disagree. Specific words and terms in scripture dealing with the plan of salvation mean specific things. They have well defined meanings. Speaking of the word "exaltation", it is mentioned very sparingly in scripture. In context of the plan of salvation and covenants its only mentioned in the D&C in section 132. In that section it specifically means being sealed to ones spouse in eternity in the highest glory. That really is all it can mean in context of LDS doctrine as its not synonymous with "saved", "salvation", "eternal life". They arent interchangable.

Disecting the term "eternal life" doesnt make sense as you put it- "God's life". Why? Because we know from scripture the opposite of eternal life is eternal death. If we translated like you say that would mean "God's death". Well, that makes no sense whatsoever. Neither is it to be equated with immortality as immortality comes to the sons of perdition. In its proper context, eternal life has to do with the life of things spiritually- being spiritually alive. Its in this context that the term makes sense as eternal death refers to the eternal spiritual death that befalls the wicked after resurrection and judgment.

The word "salvation" is synonymous with "saved". Salvation means deliverence from judgment and condemnation that befalls the fate of the wicked. There isnt varrying degrees of salvation, either one is delivered from hell or he isnt, thats all it means. Its in this light that defines damnation. Damnation is the condemnation that befalls the wicked in hell. Thats all it means, no more, no less. That condemnation can have a lesser or greater duration depending on the length of duration of sentence there.

We therefore just cant mix the words around as we please. The scriptures always use the words I put forth the same way. Thus, someone can be saved yet not have exaltation even though both conditions are within the qualification of having eternal life as both types are still alive to spiritual things. Its in this proper light that explain how its possible that little children have eternal life yet arent under a marriage covenant- they dont have exaltation, at least not yet. Thus, salvation, meaning deliverence from condemnation, into eternal life, meaning into being spiritually alive and then from there one can have exaltation if he has entered into proper eternal marriage.

Thus- all people saved have salvation and eternal life. But not everyone saved and enjoying eternal life have exaltation. 

[Rob Osborn]

4 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You are under the wrong impression. We are not having a discussion. There is no mutual discourse going on here. There is one individual claiming the prophets and apostles are wrong and the other telling him he's full of it. You have every right to believe the prophets and apostles are wrong. Your view that I, or anyone else here it seems, wishes to "discuss" that is as delusional as your understanding of the scriptures.

Yeah, I believe you are dilusional. It was sonewhat tortuous talking with you but I learned a few things so it was of benefit to me. And, I am writing most of what I wrote not in defense of your childish attacks but in hopes it awakens others to truth. Have a nice day. Bye.

[SpiritDragon]

7 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I disagree. Specific words and terms in scripture dealing with the plan of salvation mean specific things. They have well defined meanings. Speaking of the word "exaltation", it is mentioned very sparingly in scripture. In context of the plan of salvation and covenants its only mentioned in the D&C in section 132. In that section it specifically means being sealed to ones spouse in eternity in the highest glory. That really is all it can mean in context of LDS doctrine as its not synonymous with "saved", "salvation", "eternal life". They arent interchangable.

I agree that Exaltation is not interchangeable with saves and salvation - although salvation is prerequisite to exaltation and may sometimes be used to convey the same thought, although less explicitly. Eternal life and exaltation, however, are much more tightly knit terms that for practical purposes are synonymous. @The Folk Prophet already did a great job of pointing this out, if you want to believe that your interpretation of scripture is superior to the prophet's you do so at your own peril... it's not a humble approach.

14 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Disecting the term "eternal life" doesnt make sense as you put it- "God's life". Why? Because we know from scripture the opposite of eternal life is eternal death. If we translated like you say that would mean "God's death". Well, that makes no sense whatsoever. Neither is it to be equated with immortality as immortality comes to the sons of perdition. In its proper context, eternal life has to do with the life of things spiritually- being spiritually alive. Its in this context that the term makes sense as eternal death refers to the eternal spiritual death that befalls the wicked after resurrection and judgment.

My broader point, which was admittedly not well articulated, is that terminology does have a great degree of overlap while also sometimes needing divine clarity. The example given shows the Lord using the terms endless and eternal interchangeably while also clarifying that these terms are not referring to punishment that has no end or lasts indefinitely, which would otherwise be what the terms would appear to mean. If God wants to clarify when words mean something different to him than they would otherwise mean to a language in general or our own private interpretation, He can clarify such - and He'll do so through his prophets... what do they say about exaltation and eternal life again? I think we covered that already.

Further to this, for one who claims to have everything proven through scripture, can you show me a single instance in scripture that uses the term eternal death? I mean I agree the state exists as death refers simply to separation of body and spirit or separation from God. Thus an eternal death would simply refer to someone being separated from God which, to me, would still fit eternal death = (God) (separation) for all intents and purposes while eternal life being the opposite would still represent living with God and being one with God - in essence living the life God lives or God's life.

35 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

The word "salvation" is synonymous with "saved". Salvation means deliverence from judgment and condemnation that befalls the fate of the wicked. There isnt varrying degrees of salvation, either one is delivered from hell or he isnt, thats all it means. Its in this light that defines damnation. Damnation is the condemnation that befalls the wicked in hell. Thats all it means, no more, no less. That condemnation can have a lesser or greater duration depending on the length of duration of sentence there.

This is your interpretation - which leads into what I was saying about splitting meanings of words that are closely related such as father and dad. Some might think of a father as one who has done the physical part to bring offspring into the world, but think of a dad as one who is there day in and day out with a vested interest in a child (possibly even in the absence of fathering the child). To others these definitions might mean the inverse, but realistically the terms mean the same thing for all intents and purposes. I agree that words have meanings and it's important to understand those meanings - but sometimes they mean different things to different people which can make communicating complicated. I, personally, lean toward the idea of salvation as having more to do with the universal gift of immortality to all of God's children. The Saviour overcame death and hell. The free gift if you will is that we'll all be saved because everyone who kept their first estate will be resurrected. Period. But that is only the primary application of salvation as i see it, beyond that there is indeed salvation that is gradated based upon faithfulness. Some will be delivered from hell after being left to the buffetings of Satan for a season while others will be spared such suffering - both are saved, but you can't tell me it's exactly the same thing.

Same thing with Damnation - this is Rob's interpretation. where do you get this exactly? The scripture I quoted above would refer to what you are calling damnation as endless or eternal punishment. Here is the definition from the guide to the scriptures that you seemed to agree with when it suited your fancy to do so for a different definition:

Quote

Damnation: The state of being stopped in one’s progress and denied access to the presence of God and His glory. Damnation exists in varying degrees. All who do not obtain the fullness of celestial exaltation will to some degree be limited in their progress and privileges, and they will be damned to that extent.

 

53 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We therefore just cant mix the words around as we please.

Remind me who has been bringing up definitions to words from valid church sources and then proceeding to say that they don't mean what they mean?

Quote

... In the "Guide to the Scriptures" it gives the definition of exaltation as- "The highest state of happiness and glory in the celestial kingdom." I would fully agree with this... But then, in a different part of the website it uses different language-

In Gospel Topics it states- "Eternal life, or exaltation, is to live in God's presence and to continue as families...After we are baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, much of our progress toward eternal life depends on our receiving other ordinances of salvation: for men, ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood; for men and women, the temple endowment and marriage sealing. When we receive these ordinances and keep the covenants that accompany them, we prepare ourselves to inherit eternal life."

...I disagree

I'm just sayin' there is someone here who seems to be switching meanings to mean what only he thinks they mean while disregarding what the terms do mean by consensus - it's not me, anatess or TFP.

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

The scriptures always use the words I put forth the same way. Thus, someone can be saved yet not have exaltation even though both conditions are within the qualification of having eternal life as both types are still alive to spiritual things. Its in this proper light that explain how its possible that little children have eternal life yet arent under a marriage covenant- they dont have exaltation, at least not yet. Thus, salvation, meaning deliverence from condemnation, into eternal life, meaning into being spiritually alive and then from there one can have exaltation if he has entered into proper eternal marriage.

Thus- all people saved have salvation and eternal life. But not everyone saved and enjoying eternal life have exaltation. 

Your fixation on this passage of scripture referring to little children doesn't make sense to me in regard to what you're trying to say. On the one hand you have trouble with the concept that the children aren't married yet, so how can they have eternal life akin to exaltation if the latter requires marriage? But then on the other hand, you don't bat an eye at the fact that little children are mortal still and this is clearly equally inconsistent with eternal life.

[Rob Osborn]

24 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

can you show me a single instance in scripture that uses the term eternal death?

Sure-

28 And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit;
            29 And not choose eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom. (2 Nephi 2:28-29)

26 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

I, personally, lean toward the idea of salvation as having more to do with the universal gift of immortality to all of God's children.

Well, you can lean that way, its all in what one wishes to do. However, there isnt any instance in scripture where salcation is equated with the universal gift of immortality. Salvation is always used in context of being saved from hell into heaven.

29 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

Same thing with Damnation - this is Rob's interpretation. where do you get this exactly? The scripture I quoted above would refer to what you are calling damnation as endless or eternal punishment. Here is the definition from the guide to the scriptures that you seemed to agree with when it suited your fancy to do so for a different definition:

Damnation always means to condemn to hell. Seeing as it was Joseph Smith who translated and wrote our scripture we must or should use the word how he intended it. Joseph Smith always used damnation to mean condemnation to hell. So, in reality, its not my definition but rather the standard dictionary definition which happens to be the same definition Joseph Smith used.

 

34 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

Your fixation on this passage of scripture referring to little children doesn't make sense to me in regard to what you're trying to say. On the one hand you have trouble with the concept that the children aren't married yet, so how can they have eternal life akin to exaltation if the latter requires marriage? But then on the other hand, you don't bat an eye at the fact that little children are mortal still and this is clearly equally inconsistent with eternal life.

So, I guess I should ask- if eternal life= exaltation and exaltation is the highest degree which requires eternal marriage then how is it that children have exaltation? Also, do only those who are eternally married in the highest celestial glory have access to the tree of life whose fruit is that of "eternal life"?

[askandanswer]

On 3/29/2018 at 12:00 PM, Rob Osborn said:

What I do know, and its personal (my Patriarchal blessing), is that it states that at a certain time in the future I will take my research and findings to the church leaders and receive confirmation from them which is their right to do. Now, perhaps my approach here is wrong and I shouls keep more of these things to myself but there is no denying that my patriarchal blessing states I have the gift to find these gospel truths out using my own mind. 

A suggestion and reminder for, and an agreement with, you, Rob:

The suggestion: Perhaps now is the time to take your research findings to the church leaders and seek for a confirmation rather than arguing about it here. I know someone who did this once. Their letter to the Prophet was referred to the Area Presidency, one of whom wrote a thoughtful answer which made clear that the answer being given was not to be interpreted as the church's official position on the matter being asked about.

The reminder: From Elder Ballard's conference address last October:

Today I repeat earlier counsel from Church leaders.

• Brothers and sisters, keep the doctrine of Christ pure and never be deceived by those who tamper with the doctrine. The gospel of the Father and the Son was restored through Joseph Smith, the prophet for this last dispensation.

• Do not listen to those who have not been ordained and/or set apart to their Church calling and are not acknowledged by common consent of the members of the Church.¹⁰

• Be aware of organizations, groups, or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand.

The agreement: Yes, perhaps you should keep more of these things to yourself.

 

[askandanswer]

7 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

One of the big problems that exists when we start quoting prophets and apostles from latter day times is that you can find one end of the spectrum to the other and you end up pitting them against each other. For example- take eternal progression, you can find quotes from prophets from one end to the other and everything inbetween. Its just not consistent. What is generally consistent is the scriptures- its WHY we have them- to keep us from creating strange doctrines. Thats why I am always saying "give me a scripture". We could get lost in the myriads of ways prophets used words. We could find 20 different meanings for each word and never make heads or tails out of the doctrine.

What are the scriptures, other than the words of prophets and apostles? Surely pitting the words of modern prophets and apostles against each other is no better or no worse that pitting the words of ancient prophets against modern prophets. Personally, I'd be more inclined to go with the modern prophets as events and circumstances associated with the passage of time have a tendency to distort and obscure meaning.

[Rob Osborn]

2 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

A suggestion and reminder for, and an agreement with, you, Rob:

The suggestion: Perhaps now is the time to take your research findings to the church leaders and seek for a confirmation rather than arguing about it here. I know someone who did this once. Their letter to the Prophet was referred to the Area Presidency, one of whom wrote a thoughtful answer which made clear that the answer being given was not to be interpreted as the church's official position on the matter being asked about.

The reminder: From Elder Ballard's conference address last October:

Today I repeat earlier counsel from Church leaders.

• Brothers and sisters, keep the doctrine of Christ pure and never be deceived by those who tamper with the doctrine. The gospel of the Father and the Son was restored through Joseph Smith, the prophet for this last dispensation.

• Do not listen to those who have not been ordained and/or set apart to their Church calling and are not acknowledged by common consent of the members of the Church.¹⁰

• Be aware of organizations, groups, or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand.

The agreement: Yes, perhaps you should keep more of these things to yourself.

 

There was a time, nearly twenty years ago, that I did take some of my material to my local leader. He basically told me if I believed it was right and that I should seek clarification from my father of which I already did and he believed it was correct and so he concurred. It was kind of a runaround. Another time I went to a local leader and he basically looked at my question regarding that particular doctrine and he told me I was correct and no need to forward my letter up any farther. Again- a confirmation of sorts but no official clarification.

I want to say something here which is very important. In no way am I teaching or advocating what you quoted as being warned about. For instance- I can teach that all men must repent and be baptized or they must be cast off with the devil and his angels. That is a revealed gospel doctrine fact. I have actually had people tell me Im wrong until I show them the scriptures and they go "oh..."

None of my answers are secret knowlege that the prophets and apostles dont have. For instance- my teaching that we are in the telestial kingdom now is common knowledge by at least one prophet who stated exactly that teaching in the last conference.

I also find it rather ironic that I have spent most of my time in here defending the actual pure doctrines of the Book of Mormon and yet I am somehow accused of the one changing it. That is strange indeed.

In due time I will finish the research and work I have been putting together and present it to my leaders for confirmation. There is still a few things in my inquiry that needs fine tuning. I am fully confident though that in my life I will live to see the doctrine I understand to be clarified.

[Rob Osborn]

6 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

What are the scriptures, other than the words of prophets and apostles? Surely pitting the words of modern prophets and apostles against each other is no better or no worse that pitting the words of ancient prophets against modern prophets. Personally, I'd be more inclined to go with the modern prophets as events and circumstances associated with the passage of time have a tendency to distort and obscure meaning.

The scriptures are unique in that its extremely selective in its process of what was caused to be recorded as scripture. Everyone has opinions and beliefs, even prophets and apostles. I cant help but recall the ongoing debate dealing with the origin of man and evolution. For a hundred years apostles and prophets have gone back and forth in great debate. Some of that was even published officially in the Ensign, etc. Its a good thing though we dont see all of that debate as "scripture". We reserve carefully worded beliefs and revelation to be accounted on that high level status as scripture or on par with it. Thus, our actual scriptures, are what we base our beliefs off of. As Mormons we are taught that the Book of Mormon is the most correct (yes, that means currently)book on the face of the earth. Its more correct than an apostles opinion, more correct than an article in the Ensign, more correct than any teaching manual, etc. We never teach that a latter day doctrine supercedes the teachings of Christ from the Book of Mormon. Until a prophet declares the Book of Mormon out of date doctrinally or incorrect (never gonna happen) I will continue to use it as my primary source for establishing the principle foundations of the truth of Jesus Christ and what He himself taught. So, in that regards, what I understand and teach is done in defense of Christ and his testimony found in the Book of Mormon because it establishes his doctrine in purity. It defines the doctrine not thevopinions of others. Its the Holy Ghost that witnesses that revealed truth to us.

[SpiritDragon]

48 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Sure-

28 And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit;
            29 And not choose eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom. (2 Nephi 2:28-29)

Good find. Touche. I had thought the phrase should exist myself until I did some quick searching that brought up nothing leading to my question. 

57 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, you can lean that way, its all in what one wishes to do. However, there isnt any instance in scripture where salcation is equated with the universal gift of immortality. Salvation is always used in context of being saved from hell into heaven.

Quick snippet from lds.org 

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.

However, for a more rich read on the many possible arenas salvation can refer to according to that source please read: https://www.lds.org/topics/salvation?lang=eng

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

Damnation always means to condemn to hell. Seeing as it was Joseph Smith who translated and wrote our scripture we must or should use the word how he intended it. Joseph Smith always used damnation to mean condemnation to hell. So, in reality, its not my definition but rather the standard dictionary definition which happens to be the same definition Joseph Smith used.

I doubt this very much, and even so it opens up a whole 'nother conversation about what it even means to be condemned to hell. Is it a temporary state of being in spirit prison. Is it the agony of suffering endless torment (which doesn't mean it last forever). Does it mean being cast into outer darkness? How about living out the eternities alone in the terrestrial kingdom ultimately happy - yet tormented by regret that if you had made better choices you could be with your family and have eternal increase. These are all certainly aspects of damnation because there is a stoppage to the opportunities to progress, but are they all hell? Perhaps so... in a sense anyway.

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, I guess I should ask- if eternal life= exaltation and exaltation is the highest degree which requires eternal marriage then how is it that children have exaltation? Also, do only those who are eternally married in the highest celestial glory have access to the tree of life whose fruit is that of "eternal life"?

No, I guess you shouldn't ask, because that is what you already asked.Young children are innocent and uncorrupted before the age of accountability. However God works out His promises is up to Him. Just because you can't wrap your mind around one random scripture that you use as some sort of defacto argument to distinguish eternal life from exaltation doesn't make your finite understanding surpass the teachings of multiple prophets and apostles to the contrary of your position.

There is a rich wealth of beautiful doctrine to be gleaned from Lehi's vision of the tree of life with many parallels. The fruit and the tree are compared to the love of god and the living waters as well as eternal life. The love of God and living waters are reference to the atonement of Jesus Christ as the quintessential act of love and conquering of death leading to eternal life. All of god's children are blessed by the love of God and have access to the atoning power of Christ. Little children will not be denied.

[Rob Osborn]

6 hours ago, SpiritDragon said:

Good find. Touche. I had thought the phrase should exist myself until I did some quick searching that brought up nothing leading to my question. 

Quick snippet from lds.org 

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.

However, for a more rich read on the many possible arenas salvation can refer to according to that source please read: https://www.lds.org/topics/salvation?lang=eng

I doubt this very much, and even so it opens up a whole 'nother conversation about what it even means to be condemned to hell. Is it a temporary state of being in spirit prison. Is it the agony of suffering endless torment (which doesn't mean it last forever). Does it mean being cast into outer darkness? How about living out the eternities alone in the terrestrial kingdom ultimately happy - yet tormented by regret that if you had made better choices you could be with your family and have eternal increase. These are all certainly aspects of damnation because there is a stoppage to the opportunities to progress, but are they all hell? Perhaps so... in a sense anyway.

No, I guess you shouldn't ask, because that is what you already asked.Young children are innocent and uncorrupted before the age of accountability. However God works out His promises is up to Him. Just because you can't wrap your mind around one random scripture that you use as some sort of defacto argument to distinguish eternal life from exaltation doesn't make your finite understanding surpass the teachings of multiple prophets and apostles to the contrary of your position.

There is a rich wealth of beautiful doctrine to be gleaned from Lehi's vision of the tree of life with many parallels. The fruit and the tree are compared to the love of god and the living waters as well as eternal life. The love of God and living waters are reference to the atonement of Jesus Christ as the quintessential act of love and conquering of death leading to eternal life. All of god's children are blessed by the love of God and have access to the atoning power of Christ. Little children will not be denied.

Your link about salvation from physical death is problematic. This is what I have been saying all along. In the plan of salvation, from scripture, "salvation" is never referred to as resurrection that comes to all. Salvation is the great work of saving the dead from hell. In the Guide to the Scriptures it defines salvation this way- "To be saved from both physical and spiritual death." That is a correct definition.

Damnation always means condemnation to hell. It can be temporary such as those spirits in prison right now, or it can be permanant such as the fate of the sons of perdition. "Hell" is defined as both spirit prison and outer darkness. There is no part of heaven that is hell. There is no suffering such as being in "torment" in any region of heaven for the saved. This is a false dogmatic teaching or idea that continues to persist. I always say- okay, where in the scriptures or temple does it say that? Thats where the rubber meets the road. There is no "hell in a sense" for someone saved from literal hell and into heaven. Thats another annoying dogmatic teaching that persists.

[Guest]

I haven't really been following this thread.  But I'm just curious.  In the last 15 pages or so, has anyone actually answered the OP's question?

[anatess2]

16 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

You are perhaps one of the most difficult individuals to have discussion with. Your constant jabs are so devilish I have a hard time seeing you in heaven unless ye repent. Nevertheless...

I read all of the quotes and it is readily apparent that everyone you quoted had various ideas on heaven and they all use the words kind of interchangably but not in a consistant sense. In one quote its going from exaltations to exaltations and yet in another its equated with salvation. In yet another it speaks separately of eternal life and exaltation as two different things. Yet, even in another it brings up eternal lives as equating to the seed continuing on. I am glad you quoted these because it most brilliantly proves my point that prophets and apostles have used these words interchangably but not always in harmony with how the scriptures defines them which are consistent. One of the big problems that exists when we start quoting prophets and apostles from latter day times is that you can find one end of the spectrum to the other and you end up pitting them against each other. For example- take eternal progression, you can find quotes from prophets from one end to the other and everything inbetween. Its just not consistent. What is generally consistent is the scriptures- its WHY we have them- to keep us from creating strange doctrines. Thats why I am always saying "give me a scripture". We could get lost in the myriads of ways prophets used words. We could find 20 different meanings for each word and never make heads or tails out of the doctrine.

Rob, this comment reminds me of one of Jordan Peterson's lectures on Autism, specifically, the difference in how an Autistic person grasps reality out of abstraction versus a non-Autistic (neuro-typical) person.  Bear with me for a little while I summarize the gist of that lecture... in the end, I'll show how it relates to your post I quoted above.

So... according to Peterson - if you ask a preschool child to draw a person, most of them will draw a stick figure - this includes children who has never seen a stick figure before.  The stick figure does not look like any person the child has ever encountered in his life.  But the child draws a stick figure, hands it to another child and the other child somehow understands that it's a drawing of a person.  This is a process of abstraction that is neuro-typical people do.  They abstract out all the details of the face into a circle, abstracts out the body and limbs into sticks.  This results in a simple, small, efficient representation of a person that they can then easily reference for communication - like when they tell stories with their drawings.  A child may draw 1 tall stick figure, a shorter stick figure, and a small stick figure in between them and their sticks overlap to connect all 3 to tell a story.   A neuro-typical person then receives that communication, sees the stick figures, and they disassemble the figures into details - the tall person, next to a shorter person, and a small person in between... details get added in their head, that tall person is the father, the short person, the mother, the little person the child, their hands connected... It's the family of the child drawing the picture! 

Now, an Autistic person does not abstract out something in the same manner as a neuro-typical person.  Their brains are too good at retaining details that it doesn't find the need to abstract things out.  So an autistic child may not recognize a stick figure as anything representing a person because... it doesn't have eyes, nose, and mouth, etc. etc.  

So, then an Autistic child tries to dress himself.  He sees a blue tee-style shirt.  He learns that is a shirt and you put it on by pulling it over your head. Ok, got it.  He wakes up the next day and he sees a red shirt.  He doesn't know what to do because that's not a shirt anymore.  So he has to re-learn his understanding of Shirt to add red shirts.  Then the next day, the shirt has a vee neck.  Not a shirt anymore... so he has to re-learn his understanding of Shirt to add blue, red, round-necks, and vee-necks.  The next day, the shirt has a front pocket.... 

This reminds me of your post above.  ALL of those quotes of those prophets do not contradict each other.  Rather they provide detail to the abstract whole.  Just like a vee-neck and a round-neck are still Shirts.

Don't take this as anything rude... I'm just truly a bit curious... are you, per chance, on the autism spectrum?

 

[Rob Osborn]

23 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Rob, this comment reminds me of one of Jordan Peterson's lectures on Autism, specifically, the difference in how an Autistic person grasps reality out of abstraction versus a non-Autistic (neuro-typical) person.  Bear with me for a little while I summarize the gist of that lecture... in the end, I'll show how it relates to your post I quoted above.

So... according to Peterson - if you ask a preschool child to draw a person, most of them will draw a stick figure - this includes children who has never seen a stick figure before.  The stick figure does not look like any person the child has ever encountered in his life.  But the child draws a stick figure, hands it to another child and the other child somehow understands that it's a drawing of a person.  This is a process of abstraction that is neuro-typical people do.  They abstract out all the details of the face into a circle, abstracts out the body and limbs into sticks.  This results in a simple, small, efficient representation of a person that they can then easily reference for communication - like when they tell stories with their drawings.  A child may draw 1 tall stick figure, a shorter stick figure, and a small stick figure in between them and their sticks overlap to connect all 3 to tell a story.   A neuro-typical person then receives that communication, sees the stick figures, and they disassemble the figures into details - the tall person, next to a shorter person, and a small person in between... details get added in their head, that tall person is the father, the short person, the mother, the little person the child, their hands connected... It's the family of the child drawing the picture! 

Now, an Autistic person does not abstract out something in the same manner as a neuro-typical person.  Their brains are too good at retaining details that it doesn't find the need to abstract things out.  So an autistic child may not recognize a stick figure as anything representing a person because... it doesn't have eyes, nose, and mouth, etc. etc.  

So, then an Autistic child tries to dress himself.  He sees a blue tee-style shirt.  He learns that is a shirt and you put it on by pulling it over your head. Ok, got it.  He wakes up the next day and he sees a red shirt.  He doesn't know what to do because that's not a shirt anymore.  So he has to re-learn his understanding of Shirt to add red shirts.  Then the next day, the shirt has a vee neck.  Not a shirt anymore... so he has to re-learn his understanding of Shirt to add blue, red, round-necks, and vee-necks.  The next day, the shirt has a front pocket.... 

This reminds me of your post above.  ALL of those quotes of those prophets do not contradict each other.  Rather they provide detail to the abstract whole.  Just like a vee-neck and a round-neck are still Shirts.

Don't take this as anything rude... I'm just truly a bit curious... are you, per chance, on the autism spectrum?

 

No, I dont think Im autistic. I dont want this to sound eogotistical or boastful but I am gifted with an ability to understand the gospel, I have an intelligent mind in solving problems and understanding truth. My mind does work different than others. Its very principly based. You build truth from solid principles. The Book of Mormon provide that base set of principles. All truth is then based off those principles. For instance, in this passage-

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 this passage it spells out a principle that "all men" must be born again. Failure in this redults in being cast out with the devil and his angels. This is a truth based on principle. The principle is that Christ has no power to save someone in their sins but rather from their sins through repentance and being born again.

All doctrine regarding salvation must be built off this principle. There will not be whoremongers, liars, etc, in heaven as they are not changed, born again. 

Understanding principle helps us to understand why Christs gospel is based on a very strict absolute dichotomy- either saved to heaven or damned to hell. There is no other scenerio.

[SpiritDragon]

@Rob Osborn Can you clarify for me whether you believe all the kingdoms of glory represent salvation or if you only believe the Celestial kingdom is Heaven. You continue to go on in an speaking of an exclusive group who are saved when the scriptures teach otherwise.

Quote

30 And we saw a vision of the sufferings of those with whom he made war and overcame, for thus came the voice of the Lord unto us:

31 Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy my power—

32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;

33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;

34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—

35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.

36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—

37 And the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power;

38 Yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath.

39 For all the rest shall be brought forth by the resurrection of the dead, through the triumph and the glory of the Lamb, who was slain, who was in the bosom of the Father before the worlds were made.

40 And this is the gospel, the glad tidings, which the voice out of the heavens bore record unto us—

41 That he came into the world, even Jesus, to be crucifiedfor the world, and to bear the sins of the world, and to sanctify the world, and to cleanse it from all unrighteousness;

42 That through him all might be saved whom the Father had put into his power and made by him;

43 Who glorifies the Father, and saves all the works of his hands, except those sons of perdition who deny the Son after the Father has revealed him.

44 Wherefore, he saves all except them—they shall go away into everlasting punishment, which is endless punishment, which is eternal punishment, to reign with the devil and his angels in eternity, where their wormdieth not, and the fire is not quenched, which is their torment—

45 And the end thereof, neither the place thereof, nor their torment, no man knows;

46 Neither was it revealed, neither is, neither will be revealed unto man, except to them who are made partakers thereof;

47 Nevertheless, I, the Lord, show it by vision unto many, but straightway shut it up again;

48 Wherefore, the end, the width, the height, the depth, and the misery thereof, they understand not, neither any man except those who are ordained unto this condemnation.

49 And we heard the voice, saying: Write the vision, for lo, this is the end of the vision of the sufferings of the ungodly.

The scriptures are clear that through the Atonement of Jesus Christ all mankind is saved. The degree of glory attained is dependent on faithfulness.

[Rob Osborn]

21 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

@Rob Osborn Can you clarify for me whether you believe all the kingdoms of glory represent salvation or if you only believe the Celestial kingdom is Heaven. You continue to go on in an speaking of an exclusive group who are saved when the scriptures teach otherwise.

The scriptures are clear that through the Atonement of Jesus Christ all mankind is saved. The degree of glory attained is dependent on faithfulness.

And how are the saved saved? By strict obedience to the gospel. My view of heaven is more traditional one could say. I believe there is only "one world" the saved go to and all of the saved go there. Within that one world are three degrees of glory based on where one is currently at in their progression. I base this knowledge off of principles of truth as found in scripture.

I dont believe in three worlds of glory after resurrection for the saved to go to. It creates many contradictions and destroys principles of revealed truth. 

Fir instance, in Johns Revelation he speaks of the celestial kingdom as being the earth after resurrection and judgment. He speaks that all of the saved will dwell there in God and the Sons presence in the holy city. The only ones excluded are the sons of perdition. Everyone who is saved has their names written and retained in the Book of Life. Whosoever name is not found written in the Book of Life is cast into the lake of fire and brimstone which is the second death. That is revealed truth, it cannot be changed and as such no modern prophet has changed it. We can add to it though, and we certainly have. For instance, we know all of the saved have their names in that book. Therefore-

2 Behold, this is pleasing unto your Lord, and the angels rejoice over you; the alms of your prayers have come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, and are recorded in the book of the names of the sanctified, even them of the celestial world.
            3 Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.
            4 This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom;
            5 Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son- (D&C 88:2-5)

[SpiritDragon]

2 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

And how are the saved saved? By strict obedience to the gospel. My view of heaven is more traditional one could say. I believe there is only "one world" the saved go to and all of the saved go there. Within that one world are three degrees of glory based on where one is currently at in their progression. I base this knowledge off of principles of truth as found in scripture.

I dont believe in three worlds of glory after resurrection for the saved to go to. It creates many contradictions and destroys principles of revealed truth. 

Fir instance, in Johns Revelation he speaks of the celestial kingdom as being the earth after resurrection and judgment. He speaks that all of the saved will dwell there in God and the Sons presence in the holy city. The only ones excluded are the sons of perdition. Everyone who is saved has their names written and retained in the Book of Life. Whosoever name is not found written in the Book of Life is cast into the lake of fire and brimstone which is the second death. That is revealed truth, it cannot be changed and as such no modern prophet has changed it. We can add to it though, and we certainly have. For instance, we know all of the saved have their names in that book. Therefore-

2 Behold, this is pleasing unto your Lord, and the angels rejoice over you; the alms of your prayers have come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, and are recorded in the book of the names of the sanctified, even them of the celestial world.
            3 Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.
            4 This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom;
            5 Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son- (D&C 88:2-5)

So you believe that everyone who has or will come to this earth in it's current state is filling the measure of the Telestial Kingdom, while during the millenium the Terrestrial Kingdom will be in place, and after that everyone will be in the Celestial Kingdom? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth if this is not what you're saying, I'm just trying to understand your unique perspective at this point. 

[Rob Osborn]

32 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

So you believe that everyone who has or will come to this earth in it's current state is filling the measure of the Telestial Kingdom, while during the millenium the Terrestrial Kingdom will be in place, and after that everyone will be in the Celestial Kingdom? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth if this is not what you're saying, I'm just trying to understand your unique perspective at this point. 

This earth right now is the telestial kingdom. At the beginning of the millenium it will increase in glory to the Terrestrial kingdom and then finally at the end of the thousand years God will come in his glory and the earth will attain its celedtial glory. All of the saved will then dwell in celestial glory.

[wenglund]

On 3/29/2018 at 9:52 AM, Rob Osborn said:

so, what do you make of the passage in section 29 I quoted. Am I wrong to teach everyone saved from the eternal hell receive eternal life?

What do you make of John 6:53? Is it wrong to teach that people must become cannibals to gain eternal life?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

No, I dont think Im autistic. I dont want this to sound eogotistical or boastful but I am gifted with an ability to understand the gospel, I have an intelligent mind in solving problems and understanding truth. My mind does work different than others. Its very principly based. You build truth from solid principles. The Book of Mormon provide that base set of principles. All truth is then based off those principles. For instance, in this passage-

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 this passage it spells out a principle that "all men" must be born again. Failure in this redults in being cast out with the devil and his angels. This is a truth based on principle. The principle is that Christ has no power to save someone in their sins but rather from their sins through repentance and being born again.

All doctrine regarding salvation must be built off this principle. There will not be whoremongers, liars, etc, in heaven as they are not changed, born again. 

Understanding principle helps us to understand why Christs gospel is based on a very strict absolute dichotomy- either saved to heaven or damned to hell. There is no other scenerio.

Hmm... I'm not a doctor or anywhere close to a clinical psychologist and I'm just this random gal on the internet so what I say have zero credibility.  I think it is very possible that you're on the spectrum with a savant skill on religious principles.

You know, like Rainman is a numbers savant so he can tell you how many toothpicks are on the floor or how many face cards are in a deck and he does some wow-tastic mathematical computations.  But at the same time he misses relational connections that give numbers certain relational meaning kinda thing?

Anyway, this is just a side thought and may just add noise to this conversation.  So yeah, you can ignore it at your leisure. 

 

[wenglund]

19 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

I have never lost an argument with TFP so Im not sure what you are saying...

...so says the Black Knight to King Arthur on the bridge:

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Hmm... I'm not a doctor or anywhere close to a clinical psychologist and I'm just this random gal on the internet so what I say have zero credibility.  I think it is very possible that you're on the spectrum with a savant skill on religious principles.

You know, like Rainman is a numbers savant so he can tell you how many toothpicks are on the floor or how many face cards are in a deck and he does some wow-tastic mathematical computations.  But at the same time he misses relational connections that give numbers certain relational meaning kinda thing?

 

Very insightful!

Edited March 30, 2018 by DoctorLemon