We Are In The Telestial Kingdom Now, Proof By Contradiction

[Rob Osborn]

2 minutes ago, wenglund said:

It has nothing to do with you being serious. It has to do with your incapacity to see beyond the binary--which has proven itself out consistently over and over, making it pointless to try again.

Had you presented even the least glimmer of hope in the past, I might have tried once again. But, no, you are obviously cemented in your view. Think and say what you will...

To each their own.

However, for other people's benefit, I may address Section 101 when I get time, since I have already addressed the wheat and tares.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I will anxiously await your analysis of section 101 regarding the parable of the wheat and the tares.

[wenglund]

11 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

I will anxiously await your analysis of section 101 regarding the parable of the wheat and the tares.

D&C 76 speaks about salvation in terms of the resurrection in heaven, whereas the wheat and tares parable in D&C 101 speaks of salvation through the gathering of mortal saints.to Zion.  Two separate contexts, and thus two separate kinds of salvation. I appreciate you inadvertently helping make my case.

Granted, the wheat and tares analogy of D&C 101 is binary. However, in light of D&C 76, one may reasonably conclude  that the use of binary analogies is for simplicity sake rather than to be taken as an absolute. The same is true for a number of binary phrases (righteous/wicked, good/evil, Israel/gentiles,  etc.) in not a few section revealed after Section 76. 

Now, what may appear at first glance and on the surface as a binary condition, may, upon further examination be trivariate or multivariate. Take, for example, the relevant notion of Zion, or Mount Zion, or the city of Zion.  It is often depicted in binary terms wherein it is distinguished from the rest of earth.  Yet, as with all mountains, Mount Zion has a top, a middle and a bottom--which, metaphorically, has its counterpart in temple architecture, where there is an area outside the wall, and within the wall there is the great or outer court, the upper or inner court,  and the temple (the astute pupil may pick up on the correlation between outer darkness, the telestial kingdom, the terrestrial kingdom, and the celestial kingdom).

Then within the temple there is the Court, then the Holy Place, and finally the Holy of Holies (here the astute pipol may draw a connection to the three degrees of the celestial kingdom)

According to Joseph Smith, the city of Zion is, not coincidentally, to consist of three concentric zones--the central or public zone, the residential zone, and the outer lands (see HERE) , symbolic of the three degrees of glory of the celestial kingdom. The cited article goes on to explain:

Quote

Each of Zion’s settlement “squares,” patterned after the “center place,” would be dominated by centripetal symbolism that defined a hierarchy of significant places descending from temple to residence to work place. Continuing this concentric spatial organization of the Kingdom of God, early Latter-day Saints located Zion’s “center place” within increasingly more general levels of geographical perception. In official descriptions, Church leaders referred to Zion variously as being centrally located within western Missouri, the central United States, the entire United States, all of North America, and all of the Western Hemisphere (HC 1:198; Roberts 1:260). Thus the entire Western Hemisphere was perceived as a series of concentric spheres, whose center was Zion’s “center place.” And at the center of the “center place” was the sacred temple complex. While the accuracy of some of these descriptions might be disputed by the evidence of cartography, they were probably more in reference to Zion’s spiritual location than its empirical one. The perspective of early Mormon thought suggests that Zion, in Jackson County, Missouri, was not just a place; it was the place. The early LDS hope for salvation in the Kingdom of God depended upon its proper settlement.

Again, not coincidentally, we have symbolic representation of the celestial, terrestrial, and telestial kingdoms, along with outer darkness.

In short, a closer examination of black and white may reveal a range of shades and colors. 

While all of this may be beyond the binary mind, it will take on significance and meaning to those minds open to new light and knowledge.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 10, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

5 hours ago, wenglund said:

D&C 76 speaks about salvation in terms of the resurrection in heaven, whereas the wheat and tares parable in D&C 101 speaks of salvation through the gathering of mortal saints.to Zion.  Two separate contexts, and thus two separate kinds of salvation. I appreciate you inadvertently helping make my case.

Granted, the wheat and tares analogy of D&C 101 is binary. However, in light of D&C 76, one may reasonably conclude  that the use of binary analogies is for simplicity sake rather than to be taken as an absolute. The same is true for a number of binary phrases (righteous/wicked, good/evil, Israel/gentiles,  etc.) in not a few section revealed after Section 76. 

Now, what may appear at first glance and on the surface as a binary condition, may, upon further examination be trivariate or multivariate. Take, for example, the relevant notion of Zion, or Mount Zion, or the city of Zion.  It is often depicted in binary terms wherein it is distinguished from the rest of earth.  Yet, as with all mountains, Mount Zion has a top, a middle and a bottom--which, metaphorically, has its counterpart in temple architecture, where there is an area outside the wall, and within the wall there is the great or outer court, the upper or inner court,  and the temple (the astute pupil may pick up on the correlation between outer darkness, the telestial kingdom, the terrestrial kingdom, and the celestial kingdom).

Then within the temple there is the Court, then the Holy Place, and finally the Holy of Holies (here the astute pipol may draw a connection to the three degrees of the celestial kingdom)

According to Joseph Smith, the city of Zion is, not coincidentally, to consist of three concentric zones--the central or public zone, the residential zone, and the outer lands (see HERE) , symbolic of the three degrees of glory of the celestial kingdom. The cited article goes on to explain:

Again, not coincidentally, we have symbolic representation of the celestial, terrestrial, and telestial kingdoms, along with outer darkness.

In short, a closer examination of black and white may reveal a range of shades and colors. 

While all of this may be beyond the binary mind, it will take on significance and meaning to those minds open to new light and knowledge.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You bring up several good points that perhaps are relevant to the building up of Zion but Im not sure how it applies to understanding the different groups in the parable. In the parable the field is the world. In this field comes all of mankind- everyone who comes to this earth. They grow together as a symbol of what they are becoming. It is only in the end that the harvest begins. The garners are the holy temples of the Lord. Everyone born into this world ends up in this world and in the end will either be harvested out to be stored in the garners or be left to be burned. This harvest has to do with the kingdom that Christ is perfecting to present to the Father spotless. It is binary in the fact that Christ isnt saving two or three separate folds, nor is he the master of other fields of which bear different fruit to receive a different reward. His gospel is meant to only save his one fold by obedience to the one and only path of salvation. 

In order for you to be correct the parable would have to read that the wheat were all stored up to receive salvation and be crowned with telestial, terrestrial or celestial glory. But it doesnt say that. All of those Christ is able to save are the "wheat" in the parable. He only saves the wheat. They are the only ones whose names have been properly recorded in the garners (holy temples) and have shown obedience to those ordinances. These are the ones whose names are thus retained in heaven and in the book of life. Christ saves no others. This is why, when you read Revelations, that all of the saved are saved inside the holy city where their names are written and have access to the tree of life. Everyone else are in the lake of fire and brimstone which is the second death. In the parable of the wheat and the tares the burning of the field to burn the bundled tares represents thate fateful time when the wicked are cast into tge lake of fire and brimstone while all of the saved receive celestial glory and have access to the holy city because their names have been properly recorded in the temples and their works are recorded as complete in showing obedience unto the law of salvation. It is only these who have been thus cleansed and allowed back into Gods presence in the holy city (celestial kingdom). 

[wenglund]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

You bring up several good points that perhaps are relevant to the building up of Zion but Im not sure how it applies to understanding the different groups in the parable. In the parable the field is the world. In this field comes all of mankind- everyone who comes to this earth. They grow together as a symbol of what they are becoming. It is only in the end that the harvest begins. The garners are the holy temples of the Lord. Everyone born into this world ends up in this world and in the end will either be harvested out to be stored in the garners or be left to be burned. This harvest has to do with the kingdom that Christ is perfecting to present to the Father spotless. It is binary in the fact that Christ isnt saving two or three separate folds, nor is he the master of other fields of which bear different fruit to receive a different reward. His gospel is meant to only save his one fold by obedience to the one and only path of salvation. 

In order for you to be correct the parable would have to read that the wheat were all stored up to receive salvation and be crowned with telestial, terrestrial or celestial glory. But it doesnt say that. All of those Christ is able to save are the "wheat" in the parable. He only saves the wheat. They are the only ones whose names have been properly recorded in the garners (holy temples) and have shown obedience to those ordinances. These are the ones whose names are thus retained in heaven and in the book of life. Christ saves no others. This is why, when you read Revelations, that all of the saved are saved inside the holy city where their names are written and have access to the tree of life. Everyone else are in the lake of fire and brimstone which is the second death. In the parable of the wheat and the tares the burning of the field to burn the bundled tares represents thate fateful time when the wicked are cast into tge lake of fire and brimstone while all of the saved receive celestial glory and have access to the holy city because their names have been properly recorded in the temples and their works are recorded as complete in showing obedience unto the law of salvation. It is only these who have been thus cleansed and allowed back into Gods presence in the holy city (celestial kingdom). 

It helps to understand the purpose in using parables, particularly given that the wheat and tares was only one of several parables spoken in section 101, each relating to gathering of the saints in the last day.

Most often we view parables as an effective way to convey complex concept so that they can be simply and easily understood. And, I believe there is an element of truth to this. Certainly, comprehension can be facilitated by providing concrete examples of intangible precepts.

However, as Jesus explains in Matt 13 and Luke 8, parables are also given to prevent those without eyes to see from seeing unto their detriment, while still revealing the mysteries of the kingdom to those with eyes to see.

Granted, there are times when Christ has expounded upon the parables to his followers, though, with good reason,  not always, and not necessarily to the full extent--trusting that the humble and diligent student will be able to use the instances where he does expound so as to generalize comprehendingly to instances where he does not.

I believe that D&C 76 was just such an expounding of parables intended to be generalized in other instances as with D&C 101.

If what I have just said helps you to grasp the application of my previous post to the parable of the wheat and tares, then great. Welcome to the unfolding of God's wondrous mysteries.

If, however, it wasn't of help, then that, too, is great since it would have been to your detriment.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, wenglund said:

It helps to understand the purpose in using parables, particularly given that the wheat and tares was only one of several parables spoken in section 101, each relating to gathering of the saints in the last day.

Most often we view parables as an effective way to convey complex concept so that they can be simply and easily understood. And, I believe there is an element of truth to this. Certainly, comprehension can be facilitated by providing concrete examples of intangible precepts.

However, as Jesus explains in Matt 13 and Luke 8, parables are also given to prevent those without eyes to see from seeing unto their detriment, while still revealing the mysteries of the kingdom to those with eyes to see.

Granted, there are times when Christ has expounded upon the parables to his followers, though, with good reason,  not always, and not necessarily to the full extent--trusting that the humble and diligent student will be able to use the instances where he does expound so as to generalize comprehendingly to instances where he does not.

I believe that D&C 76 was just such an expounding of parables intended to be generalized in other instances as with D&C 101.

If what I have just said helps you to grasp the application of my previous post to the parable of the wheat and tares, then great. Welcome to the unfolding of God's wondrous mysteries.

If, however, it wasn't of help, then that, too, is great since it would have been to your detriment.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

And, you may find that God only saves the saints, everyone else is an enemy to God. Thanks for validating my point-

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. (Mosiah 3:19)

 

[wenglund]

47 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

And, you may find that God only saves the saints, everyone else is an enemy to God. Thanks for validating my point-

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. (Mosiah 3:19)

 

 

[Response deleted for reasons of futility]

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 10, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

25 minutes ago, wenglund said:

Yet, one may know from personal experience that the saints are comprised of children, young adults, and adults. They range from inactive, to semi-active, to active. There are Wards, Stakes, and world-wide church. There are children of record, baptize members, and endowed members. I could go on and on.

As for the so-called "enemies," there are the non-believers, believers in God, and believers in God and Christ. Here, too, I could go on and on.

But, I understand that with you I am wasting my breath. I should have ignored your comments as I previously intended to do, and waited to see if anyone else had open-minded concerns or interest.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

And yet, even though we are now considered saints, even "the wheat" we still have to show forth the obedience to ordinances and those covenants that go along with them in order to be cleansed and still be classified as such at the great and last day. At that point there will be a separation of the righteous from the wicked. At that point its a strict dichotomy of who is saved and who is damned to hell. The saved "all receive eternal life" not just some of them. 

[wenglund]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

And yet, even though we are now considered saints, even "the wheat" we still have to show forth the obedience to ordinances and those covenants that go along with them in order to be cleansed and still be classified as such at the great and last day. At that point there will be a separation of the righteous from the wicked. At that point its a strict dichotomy of who is saved and who is damned to hell. The saved "all receive eternal life" not just some of them. 

[Response deleted for reasons of futility, while allowing to each their own]

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[anatess2]

On 4/10/2018 at 1:32 PM, Rob Osborn said:

And yet, even though we are now considered saints, even "the wheat" we still have to show forth the obedience to ordinances and those covenants that go along with them in order to be cleansed and still be classified as such at the great and last day. At that point there will be a separation of the righteous from the wicked. At that point its a strict dichotomy of who is saved and who is damned to hell. The saved "all receive eternal life" not just some of them. 

So... you believe, that a baptized member who has not paid his tithes is.... damned to hell?

[Rob Osborn]

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

So... you believe, that a baptized member who has not paid his tithes is.... damned to hell?

What?

[anatess2]

24 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

What?

Binary results.

A baptized member, did not pay tithes... saved or damned?

[Rob Osborn]

1 minute ago, anatess2 said:

Binary results.

A baptized member, did not pay tithes... saved or damned?

Well, it all depends on where we all are- end up, at the great and last day of judgment. Thats more than a thousand years off still. 

[The Folk Prophet]

3 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Binary results.

A baptized member, did not pay tithes... saved or damned?

Of course we aren't supposed to judge such things, but leave it to God.

But in theory....

[anatess2]

49 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, it all depends on where we all are- end up, at the great and last day of judgment. Thats more than a thousand years off still. 

Yes.  But let’s just say the guy went through a thousand years being baptized and not paying tithing when he faced Jesus in the last day.  So, according to your statement before about either saved or damned, where is this guy at?

[Rob Osborn]

13 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Yes.  But let’s just say the guy went through a thousand years being baptized and not paying tithing when he faced Jesus in the last day.  So, according to your statement before about either saved or damned, where is this guy at?

What state are the saved in? Completely cleansed of all sin. If even the smallest sin isnt repented of at that day they cannot be saved.

[person0]

A few sincere questions for everyone:

Do most people believe that the lower kingdoms will actually be located on different planets other than this earth?  (I have generally thought this to be the case in the past)  If so, where will those planets come from? Mars?  If not, how would a telestial body be able to physically abide the presence of a celestial earth?  And how would the Kingdoms be organized all onto one planet?

[zil]

2 minutes ago, person0 said:

A few sincere questions for everyone:

Do most people believe that the lower kingdoms will actually be located on different planets other than this earth?  (I have generally thought this to be the case in the past)  If so, where will those planets come from? Mars?  If not, how would a telestial body be able to physically abide the presence of a celestial earth?  And how would the Kingdoms be organized all onto one planet?

Scriptures tell us this planet will become the celestial kingdom for those who lived on this planet and are worthy of celestial glory.  It does not tell us anything about the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms beyond their existence and the types of people who inherit them (ditto perdition).  But it sure seems like they'll be elsewhere.  In conclusion...no clue.

(As for how elsewhere will be constructed, or where it will come from - I'm reasonably certain there's no shortage of options there.)

[The Folk Prophet]

4 minutes ago, person0 said:

Do most people believe that the lower kingdoms will actually be located on different planets [places] other than this earth?  

With the above change, yes.

5 minutes ago, person0 said:

If so, where will those planets come from? 

How do you know they'll live on a "planet"?

How do we even know that the earth will still be a "planet" as the Celestial Kingdom? Maybe it'll look to the mortal eye more like a nebula or some such. We don't know.

[anatess2]

10 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

What state are the saved in? Completely cleansed of all sin. If even the smallest sin isnt repented of at that day they cannot be saved.

Okay.  He repented so he's in the Celestial Kingdom, right?

So, another guy.  His name is Joseph Bishop.  Baptized.  Raped a girl.  Repented.  Celestial Kingdom?

Another guy.  His name is Joseph Stalin.  Baptized by proxy.  Caused the death of millions of kulaks.  Repented.  Celestial Kingdom?

[Fether]

7 minutes ago, person0 said:

A few sincere questions for everyone:

Do most people believe that the lower kingdoms will actually be located on different planets other than this earth?  (I have generally thought this to be the case in the past)  If so, where will those planets come from? Mars?  If not, how would a telestial body be able to physically abide the presence of a celestial earth?  And how would the Kingdoms be organized all onto one planet?

“In that great change, or resurrection, which shall come to this earth, it shall be sanctified, celestialized and made a fit abode even for God the Father, who shall grace it with his presence. (D.C. 88:19.) Then shall the righteous, those who have become sanctified through the law of God, possess it for ever as their abode. This earth is destined to become the everlasting residence of its inhabitants who gain the glory of the celestial kingdom. It shall become in that day like the throne of God and shall shine forth with all the splendor and brightness of celestial glory in its eternal, sanctified and glorious state” (Smith, Way to Perfection, 351).

Pretty clear the Earth will be only for the celestial kingdom.

[The Folk Prophet]

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Okay.  He repented so he's in the Celestial Kingdom, right?

So, another guy.  His name is Joseph Bishop.  Baptized.  Raped a girl.  Repented.  Celestial Kingdom?

Another guy.  His name is Joseph Stalin.  Baptized by proxy.  Caused the death of millions of kulaks.  Repented.  Celestial Kingdom?

Are you implying otherwise?

[person0]

11 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

How do you know they'll live on a "planet"?

How do we even know that the earth will still be a "planet" as the Celestial Kingdom? Maybe it'll look to the mortal eye more like a nebula or some such. We don't know.

Interesting thought.  I simply had not considered anything else aside from a planet.  I seriously doubt that the earth will lose its form as a planet, though.  I suppose we just don't know.

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Are you implying otherwise?

Just wanting to understand Rob's point of view.  I can't get there by taking big giant chunks of stuff.  I have to take tiny miniscule steps to see the divergence because there are things I think to be true interspersed tightly with things that I think to be false so when it's all big chunks I find myself both in agreement and disagreement with him both at the same time and it's super confusing.

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, person0 said:

Interesting thought.  I simply had not considered anything else aside from a planet.  I seriously doubt that the earth will lose its form as a planet, though.  I suppose we just don't know.

Well, global warming is supposed to blow it all up.

[Fether]

@anatess2

“What is the damnation of hell? To go with that society who have not obeyed His commands” - Joseph Smith

I assume the opposite is true. The celestial kingdom is for that society that chose to obey.

We also know that David fell from his exaltation. So that sure is possible.

From what I understand. The celestial kingdom is for the society of people that have decided to not just obey, but abide the celestial law willfully and joyfully.

It is more than just an arbitrary check list of good, bad, and ugly.

If Hitler and Stallin repented and became wonderful guys, fully accepting the gospel to the point where they would never turn back, then sure! Open those wide pearly gates to him. I’ll be the first to shake their hands.

I don’t feel like it is any more complicated than this.

granted if you want to dive into Justice, mercy, and the atonement of Christ then we ought to discuss the ins and outs more.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Fether