We Are In The Telestial Kingdom Now, Proof By Contradiction

[wenglund]

On 4/6/2018 at 12:53 PM, zil said:

The wrong path, but that's about all he's onto.

Where I believe Rob gets stalled out, and is missing things, if not veers onto the wrong path, is that he may not grasp that the resurrection isn't part of the mortal and earthly spiritual ascension process.  Rather, it is the culmination of that process, or more correctly, it is the point of transition from that process to a new process. The resurrection is a new birth, a new creation, and thus it follows the eternal pattern of creation, from that which is spiritual to that which is less spiritual, from celestial creation to terrestrial creation, to telestial creation.

Contrary to what Rob assumes, It isn't inverted in order to the fall in creation because it is, itself, a creation. And, rather than it marking a fall in creation (celestial down to telestial), it marks the success or failure to ascend from the fall--meaning, those who ascend during mortality and somewhat beyond to where they abide a celestial law, and subject themselves to celestial ordinances, and enter into and keep celestial covenants, will be resurrected to celestial glory, as directly stated in Section 76. These are they that will rise in the millennial morning of the resurrection, and are the first to be resurrected. This makes sense, not just because of the eternal order of creation, but because the first person to be resurrected, so as to enable all else to be resurrected, was and is a celestial man--even Jesus Christ.

Then, those who ascended to abide the terrestrial law and no further, will be resurrected next, during the millennial noon of the resurrection--as directly noted in Section 76.

Followed by those who abode the tellestial law and no further, will be resurrected during the evening of the resurrection.

Finally, those who ascended to abide a celestial law, but who turned and willfully fell again in open rebellion, will be resurrected and cast into outer darkness.

And, because there will yet be men on earth who aren't resurrected during the morning or noon of the millennial resurrection, the earth, itself will not be celestial until the end of the millennium. 

All precisely as D&C 76 and other illuminating sections directly describe it, and as hinted at by Paul in 1 Cor. 15.

Hopefully, though I won't hold my breath, at least on this issue Rob with open his mind to this new, celestial  light and knowledge (likened unto the sun), and advance spiritually from the terrestrial kingdom (likened unto the moon), so he can be worthy of celestial resurrected glory.

Now, I suspect that Rob may raise, again,  the issue of perfection  as it relates to the celestial kingdom. If he does, I am prepared with a response.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 9, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

10 minutes ago, wenglund said:

Where I believe Rob gets stalled out, and is missing things, if not veers onto the wrong path, is that he may not grasp that the resurrection isn't part of the mortal and earthly spiritual ascension process.  Rather, it is the culmination of that process, or more correctly, it is the point of transition from that process to a new process. The resurrection is a new birth, a new creation, and thus it follows the eternal pattern of creation, from that which is spiritual to that which is less spiritual, from celestial creation to terrestrial creation, to telestial creation.

Contrary to what Rob assumes, It isn't inverted in order to the fall in creations because it is, itself, a creations. And, rather than it marking a fall in creations (celestial down to telestial), it marks the success or failure to ascend from the fall--meaning, those who ascended during mortality and somewhat beyond to where they abide a celestial law, and subject themselves to celestial ordinances, and enter into and keep celestial covenants, will be resurrected to celestial glory, as directly stated in Section 76. These are they that will rise in the millennial morning of the resurrection, and are the first to be resurrected. This makes sense, not just because of the eternal order of creation, but because the first person to be resurrected, so as to enable all else to be resurrected, was and is a celestial man--even Jesus Christ.

Then, those who ascended to abide the terrestrial law and no further, will be resurrected next, during the millennial noon of the resurrection--as directly noted in Section 76.

Followed by those who abode the tellestial law and no further, will be resurrected during the evening of the resurrection.

Finally, those who ascended to abide a celestial law, but who turned and willfully fell again in open rebellion, will be resurrected and cast into outer darkness.

And, because there will yet be men on earth who aren't resurrected during the morning or noon of the millennial resurrection, the earth, itself will not be celestial until the end of the millennium. 

All precisely as D&C 76 and other illuminating sections directly describe it, and as hinted at by Paul in 1 Cor. 15.

Hopefully, though I won't hold my breath, at least on this issue Rob with open his mind to this new, celestial  light and knowledge (likened unto the sun), and advance spiritually from the terrestrial kingdom (likened unto the moon), so he can be worthy of celestial resurrected glory.

Now, I suspect that Rob may raise, again,  the issue of perfection  as it relates to the celestial kingdom. If he does, I am prepared with a response.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Im going to go back to basic principle. Contrary to Wades assumptions of me stuck in a lower vein of knowledge I believe Im actually graduated to a much higher level of knowledge but its kind of akin to trying to teach trigonometry to 2nd graders. So I want to go back to a principle approach dealing with the foundation framework of gospel principle. 

We know from the scriptures that when men sin and become spiritually fallen they are on a path that leads to damnation in hell. Because of the atonement however men can be redeemed from this spiritual death. But, men must repent and become baptized. This is a principle of truth. There is no salvation from hell without this strict diligence and work. The only way Christ can cleanse someone from sin is through repentance from "all sin" through the necessary covenant and ordinance of baptism. There is no other way. This also is a principle of truth.

So, if we can all agree on those basic principles of truth then we can begin to properly understand how the gospel works and what its ordinances are for. Now, next principle-

Baptism by itself doesnt save. Baptism is merely the gate by which we enter the path leading to eventual salvation. This is a principle of truth. Lets add to it more-

Baptism is the covenant we enter in which we promise to be obedient to all that God commands. This also is a principle of truth. What has God commanded? That we be perfect even as our Father in heaven is perfect. This is the law. Perfection as it applies means to be without sin. It means overcoming all sin. Thus, only if we overcome all sin will we be holy without spot. Failure to be unrepentant in even one small sin and we cannot be accounted spotless. This is a principle of truth.

Now, we are finally to the crux of the issue. We know from scripture that Christ saves all except for the sons of perdition. All of those he saves are made spotless and cleased from all sin because of their good works in repenting and entering all the covenants and ordinances with obedience to them. They have thus become holy and pure. 

 

[wenglund]

14 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Im going to go back to basic principle. Contrary to Wades assumptions of me stuck in a lower vein of knowledge I believe Im actually graduated to a much higher level of knowledge but its kind of akin to trying to teach trigonometry to 2nd graders. So I want to go back to a principle approach dealing with the foundation framework of gospel principle. 

It is more like trying to teach triganometry using only base two or binary numbers.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Osborn]

4 minutes ago, wenglund said:

It is more like trying to teach triganometry using only base two or binary numbers.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Are we in agreement that everything I posted in my previous post is correct?

[wenglund]

18 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Are we in agreement that everything I posted in my previous post is correct?

Yes and no. I believe you are correct to some extent and in some ways, but not in others. 

I  believe there are various types of salvation in addition to salvation from sin--such as, salvation from ignorance, salvation from bondage, salvation from corruptible physical bodies and death, etc..

And, I believe there are varying degrees of salvation, including salvation from sin, with the highest degree of salvation consisting of exaltation..

While authorized baptism is required for full or celestial CLEANSING of sin, it isn't required for lower kingdom FORGIVENESS of sins. God can forgive whomever he wishes to forgive (D&C 64:140), and Christ will forgive the sins of all men, with one exception (Mk 3:28) and he will forgive all who repent of their sins (Mk 3:21 JST). Jesus even asked for forgiveness for those who knew not what they were doing, and this in spite of their not being baptized. (Lk 23:34). And, sins can be forgiven based on one's faith. (Lk 5) Charity also covers a multitude of sins. (1 Pet 4:8)  Furthermore, the degree of forgiveness is, to some extent, dependent upon one's forgiveness of others (Mt 6; LK 11:4) Cleansing of sin is one degree of salvation , while forgiveness of sins is another, or multiple degrees of salvation.

So, at one level of light and knowledge, salvation of various sorts, and salvation from sin in particular, may appear to be binary in nature, while at a higher level of light and knowledge (like what one my find in reading D&C 76 in context and with Spirit-led comprehension) it will appear as many kingdoms, ordered into three super and discrete kingdoms. 

This holds true not only in terms of the process of salvific spiritual ascension during mortality and somewhat beyond the grave,  but culminating in the three degrees of resurrected glory contingent up upon the degree of ascension.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Osborn]

18 minutes ago, wenglund said:

While authorized baptism is required for full or celestial CLEANSING of sin, it isn't required for lower kingdom FORGIVENESS of sins.

I think this is where the train derails. The principle of forgiveness and sanctification from sin comes only through repentance, baptism and gift of the Holy Ghost. Without this one cannot be cleansed.

59 That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory;
            60 For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified; (Moses 6:59-60)

 You cannot cheat this principle of truth. Without baptism there is no salvation.

[wenglund]

2 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I think this is where the train derails. The principle of forgiveness and sanctification from sin comes only through repentance, baptism and gift of the Holy Ghost. Without this one cannot be cleansed.

59 That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory;
            60 For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified; (Moses 6:59-60)

 You cannot cheat this principle of truth. Without baptism there is no salvation.

The scripture you quoted above doesn't mention salvation, nor does it speak to the matter of forgiveness of sins. This means that your conclusion doesn't follow, nor does it contravene the multiple scriptures I quoted and the conclusion I drew from said scriptures..

Now, if you are assuming that forgiveness, itself, isn't a form of salvation or redemption, check out Col. 1:14 and Eph 1:7.

In other words, for someone who is attempting figuratively to teach trigonometry, your comments have failed the basics by simply not adding up.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[NightSG]

4 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Are we in agreement that everything I posted in my previous post is correct?

No.  Your punctuation was far from correct.

[Rob Osborn]

5 hours ago, wenglund said:

The scripture you quoted above doesn't mention salvation, nor does it speak to the matter of forgiveness of sins. This means that your conclusion doesn't follow, nor does it contravene the multiple scriptures I quoted and the conclusion I drew from said scriptures..

Now, if you are assuming that forgiveness, itself, isn't a form of salvation or redemption, check out Col. 1:14 and Eph 1:7.

In other words, for someone who is attempting figuratively to teach trigonometry, your comments have failed the basics by simply not adding up.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

31 Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine.
            32 And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me.
            33 And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.
            34 And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. (3 Nephi 11:31-34)

[wenglund]

12 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

31 Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine.
            32 And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me.
            33 And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.
            34 And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. (3 Nephi 11:31-34)

While this scripture supports the undisputed notion that  baptism is necessary for one type and degree of salvation (exaltation), it doesn't negate the reality of other types and degrees of salvation, and in particularly it doesn't address the scriptures I posted regarding salvation and redemption through forgiveness of sin regardless of baptism..

And, no, the implication that those who are not baptized  shall be damned, does not negate the reality of other types and degrees of salvation since there are also varying types and degrees of damnation as well.

However, I get that, figuratively speaking, regardless of the new HD color broadcast of a TV program, it will only be displayed in black and white on an old low resolution monochrome TV receiver. It is best that I accept this and not cast HD color pearls before the monocrome whatever.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 9, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, wenglund said:

While this scripture supports the undisputed notion that  baptism is necessary for one type and degree of salvation (exaltation), it doesn't negate the reality of other types and degrees of salvation, and in particularly it doesn't address the scriptures I posted regarding salvation and redemption through forgiveness of sin regardless of baptism..

And, no, the implication that those who are not baptized  shall be damned, does not negate the reality of other types and degrees of salvation since there are also varying types and degrees of damnation as well.

However, I get that, figuratively speaking, regardless of the new HD color broadcast of a TV program, it will only be displayed in black and white on an old low resolution monochrome TV receiver. It is best that I accept this and not cast HD color pearls before the monocrome whatever.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I can tell that Im gonna have to explain in a little more depth as it appears I must have skipped a few principles.

When the scriptures speak of "saving" what do you think Christ is saving us from? In the scripture I quoted Christ says that those who repent and are baptized shall be "saved". In the third article of faith it reads-

"3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel."

Again, through the atonement and by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel man can be "saved". What is it though that man gets saved from?

The principle here is that one cannot be saved from a reward. So, they obviously are saved from a judgment against them. That judgment is upon all sinners which consigns them to an eternal hell. The scriptures, especially the Book of Mormon are replete with this doctrine. Its a well established principle that if one is saved its from hell that he is saved from. Through the atonement and by obedience to the ordinance of baptism a person can be saved from the eternal hell. There is no other way. There isnt some principle that states that man can merely acknowledge Christ and be forgiven his sins without baptism. Neither is there any principle that states a man can be saved just by asking forgiveness without obedience to the command of baptism. He cannot qualify for salvation without repentance and baptism. 2 Nephi 31 is a great sermon on this principle of truth.

[wenglund]

23 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

When the scriptures speak of "saving" what do you think Christ is saving us from? I

As previously mentioned, there are a variety of things the scriptures tell us from which we may be saved. In addition to salvation from sin, the atonement and gospel of Christ can save us from ignorance and ineptitude, digression, bondage of various types (addictions, cultural exploitation, political enslavement, intellectual subjugation, etc.), ill emotions and appetites (pride, misery, hate, envy, greed, lust),  chaotic and destructive conditions (self-centeredness, war, contention, dishormony, etc.), corrupt physical bodies and death, to name just a few off the top of my head.

Then, as also previously intimated, there are various degrees of salvation. In addition to varied degrees of salvation from sin (dependent upon the level of forgiveness and cleansing), we are saved in varying degrees from ignorance and ineptitude and bondage (contingent upon the level of salvific truth we attain that makes us free, and the extent to which we serve the Lord, magnify our callings, and turn weakness into strengths, etc.), ill emotions and appetites and dis-beneficial circumstances (conditioned upon the measure we develop in love and charity and kindness and joy and peace, etc.), all of which will in turn impact the degree of glory we attain in the resurrection.

The same holds for the inverse--i.e. damnation. Meaning, there is a spectrum from complete damnation on one end to complete salvation on the other, with varying admixtures of both in between, divisible into three main kingdoms, as noted in several scriptures, most notably D&C 76.

So, what may be viewed as binary at one level of old light and knowledge, may appear as multiple levels when viewed through new and greater light and knowledge.

Even still, this new HD color broadcast will only be displayed in black and white on a monochrome TV receiver. To each their own. Welcome to old Pleasantville.

Thanks, -Wade ENglund-

[Rob Osborn]

7 hours ago, wenglund said:

As previously mentioned, there are a variety of things the scriptures tell us from which we may be saved. In addition to salvation from sin, the atonement and gospel of Christ can save us from ignorance and ineptitude, digression, bondage of various types (addictions, cultural exploitation, political enslavement, intellectual subjugation, etc.), ill emotions and appetites (pride, misery, hate, envy, greed, lust),  chaotic and destructive conditions (self-centeredness, war, contention, dishormony, etc.), corrupt physical bodies and death, to name just a few off the top of my head.

Then, as also previously intimated, there are various degrees of salvation. In addition to varied degrees of salvation from sin (dependent upon the level of forgiveness and cleansing), we are saved in varying degrees from ignorance and ineptitude and bondage (contingent upon the level of salvific truth we attain that makes us free, and the extent to which we serve the Lord, magnify our callings, and turn weakness into strengths, etc.), ill emotions and appetites and dis-beneficial circumstances (conditioned upon the measure we develop in love and charity and kindness and joy and peace, etc.), all of which will in turn impact the degree of glory we attain in the resurrection.

The same holds for the inverse--i.e. damnation. Meaning, there is a spectrum from complete damnation on one end to complete salvation on the other, with varying admixtures of both in between, divisible into three main kingdoms, as noted in several scriptures, most notably D&C 76.

So, what may be viewed as binary at one level of old light and knowledge, may appear as multiple levels when viewed through new and greater light and knowledge.

Even still, this new HD color broadcast will only be displayed in black and white on a monochrome TV receiver. To each their own. Welcome to old Pleasantville.

Thanks, -Wade ENglund-

Christ wasnt so vague in his gospel. We cant just insert whatever word we want saved to mean when discussing the plan of salvation. Thays your own invention and its not correct. It follows absolutely no set of principle or rule. Its basically- you cant get your HD tv to work because you are trying to hook up a coax cable in the hdmi input.

When discussing the plan of salvation and what Christ and the atonement saves us from it exclusively means he saves us from hell. It really is that simple- you plug the coax cable in the coax input and the hdmi cable in the hdmi input. Then, and only then do you get the picture.

Christ himself, as evidenced in both the NT and BoM, spoke in very black and white terms. Why? Because he knows that people will either gravitate to greater light and knowledge or away from it. The plan of salvation is structured in a way that promotes and enables absolute perfection on the one hand or condemnation to hell on the other. Christ didnt speak of having three hands or five hands. He only spoke of two hands- either of salvation unto eternal life on the one hand or eternal damnation in hell on the other hand. 

Certainly you arent accusing Christ of a faulty binary view are you? 

The onus is on you to prove that Christ was wrong when he stated only two outcomes in his parable of the wheat and the tares-

"65 Therefore, I must gather together my people, according to the parable of the wheat and the tares, that the wheat may be secured in the garners to possess eternal life, and be crowned with celestial glory, when I shall come in the kingdom of my Father to reward every man according as his work shall be;
            66 While the tares shall be bound in bundles, and their bands made strong, that they may be burned with unquenchable fire." (D&C 101:65-66)

This section was revealed after both 76 & 88. This thus is the greater light and knowledge. Im curious where you are going to find the multiple views you insist upon in this parable- where are these "others" who you claim are saved but neither in celestial glory or bound in bundles to be burned?

[wenglund]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Christ wasnt so vague in his gospel. We cant just insert whatever word we want saved to mean when discussing the plan of salvation. Thays your own invention and its not correct. It follows absolutely no set of principle or rule. Its basically- you cant get your HD tv to work because you are trying to hook up a coax cable in the hdmi input.

When discussing the plan of salvation and what Christ and the atonement saves us from it exclusively means he saves us from hell. It really is that simple- you plug the coax cable in the coax input and the hdmi cable in the hdmi input. Then, and only then do you get the picture.

Christ himself, as evidenced in both the NT and BoM, spoke in very black and white terms. Why? Because he knows that people will either gravitate to greater light and knowledge or away from it. The plan of salvation is structured in a way that promotes and enables absolute perfection on the one hand or condemnation to hell on the other. Christ didnt speak of having three hands or five hands. He only spoke of two hands- either of salvation unto eternal life on the one hand or eternal damnation in hell on the other hand. 

Certainly you arent accusing Christ of a faulty binary view are you? 

The onus is on you to prove that Christ was wrong when he stated only two outcomes in his parable of the wheat and the tares-

"65 Therefore, I must gather together my people, according to the parable of the wheat and the tares, that the wheat may be secured in the garners to possess eternal life, and be crowned with celestial glory, when I shall come in the kingdom of my Father to reward every man according as his work shall be;
            66 While the tares shall be bound in bundles, and their bands made strong, that they may be burned with unquenchable fire." (D&C 101:65-66)

This section was revealed after both 76 & 88. This thus is the greater light and knowledge. Im curious where you are going to find the multiple views you insist upon in this parable- where are these "others" who you claim are saved but neither in celestial glory or bound in bundles to be burned?

I understand that is how your monochrome receiver will invariably see it.

As I understand it, Christ reveals his light and knowledge to the level we are able to understand it. Unlike you, far be it from me to lock Christ into, and no further, than the old light and knowledge he revealed at a time when it was the most the people in general were capable of receiving.--and even the most that many, including a certain member of the Church, are currently capable of comprehending.

As for those of us who aren't damned in tis particular regard, but are open and able to progress, we are blessed with new and further illuminating light  and knowledge.

To each their own.

Clearly, there is diminishing, if not exhausted value in attempt to get a monochrome receiver to see in HD color.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-, 

[Rob Osborn]

3 minutes ago, wenglund said:

I understand that is how your monochrome receiver will invariably see it.

As I understand it, Christ reveals his light and knowledge to the level we are able to understand it. Unlike you, far be it from me to lock Christ into, and no further, than the old light and knowledge he revealed at a time when it was the most the people in general were capable of receiving.--and even the most that many, including a certain member of the Church, are currently capable of comprehending.

As for those of us who aren't damned in tis particular regard, but are open and able to progress, we are blessed with new and further illuminating light  and knowledge.

To each their own.

Clearly, there is diminishing, if not exhausted value in attempt to get a monochrome receiver to see in HD color.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-, 

So, I see you wont address the parable of the wheat and the tares. Thats okay, most people have an impossible time trying to wrap their minds around the fact that Christ is only saving one singular kingdom in the end and that he truly only has one fold and his sheep hear and obey his voice and all follow him in exactness in the end.

[zil]

25 minutes ago, wenglund said:

As I understand it, Christ reveals his light and knowledge to the level we are able to understand it. Unlike you, far be it from me to lock Christ into, and no further, than the old light and knowledge he revealed at a time when it was the most the people in general were capable of receiving.--and even the most that many, including a certain member of the Church, are currently capable of comprehending.

As for those of us who aren't damned in tis particular regard, but are open and able to progress, we are blessed with new and further illuminating light  and knowledge.

Quote

Alma 29:8 For behold, the Lord doth grant unto all nations, of their own nation and tongue, to teach his word, yea, in wisdom, all that he seeth fit that they should have; therefore we see that the Lord doth counsel in wisdom, according to that which is just and true.

No shortage of implications in that phrase.

[wenglund]

33 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, I see you wont address the parable of the wheat and the tares. Thats okay, most people have an impossible time trying to wrap their minds around the fact that Christ is only saving one singular kingdom in the end and that he truly only has one fold and his sheep hear and obey his voice and all follow him in exactness in the end.

I don't need to address the 1st century parable of the wheat and tares since Christ has already done so himself, and far better than I could, in these latter days via the explication of Jn 5:29  in the visions of D&C 76. Those with eyes enlightened by the new light and knowledge of modern revelation will see, and those  that aren't, won't.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 9, 2018 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

7 minutes ago, wenglund said:

I don't need to address the 1st century parable of the wheat and tares since Christ has already done so himself, and far better than I could, in these latter days via the explication of Jn 5:29  in the visions of D&C 76. Those with eyes enlightened by the new light and knowledge of modern revelation will see, and those  that aren't, won't.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yeah, I see you are steering clear of the continued explanation given in section 101 given after section 76 and 88 were revealed. I wouldnt blame you as it cannot possibly be explained by your interpretation. Perhap it will disappear if you look the other way.

[wenglund]

15 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Yeah, I see you are steering clear of the continued explanation given in section 101 given after section 76 and 88 were revealed. I wouldnt blame you as it cannot possibly be explained by your interpretation. Perhap it will disappear if you look the other way.

No doubt it cannot possibly be explained to the binary mind that has progressed no further than old light and knowledge.

And it would qualify for the definition of insanity (oft mis-attributed to Einstein) were I to continue to try. 

So, I shall leave it at that.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[anatess2]

@Rob Osborn,  I remember asking you this question before.  I don't remember seeing your answer.  Would you be patient enough to explain to me again what your answer is to this question?  Thanks.

Question:  You say you have personal revelation about the truth of what you claim here.  Clearly, this contradicts what is taught by our latter-day prophets.  So, I want to know - when you receive a personal revelation and it contradicts what the prophets teach, how do you resolve the conflict?

[The Folk Prophet]

12 minutes ago, wenglund said:

No doubt it cannot possibly be explained to the binary mind that has progressed no further than old light and knowledge.

And it would qualify for the definition of insanity (oft mis-attributed to Einstein) were I to continue to try. 

So, I shall leave it at that.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

36 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

 

[anatess2]

49 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

 

 

My kid is in the IB program - it claims to teach you how to know what you don't know you didn't know.  Let's see if the claim holds up.  Maybe Rob can attend IB!

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

@Rob Osborn,  I remember asking you this question before.  I don't remember seeing your answer.  Would you be patient enough to explain to me again what your answer is to this question?  Thanks.

Question:  You say you have personal revelation about the truth of what you claim here.  Clearly, this contradicts what is taught by our latter-day prophets.  So, I want to know - when you receive a personal revelation and it contradicts what the prophets teach, how do you resolve the conflict?

I have never said I have received a personal revelation on this. I have used my mind coupled with experiences I have had to come to this conclusion. But, to have it confirmed as truth will require me to go to priesthood leaders. So, theres no conflict.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, wenglund said:

No doubt it cannot possibly be explained to the binary mind that has progressed no further than old light and knowledge.

And it would qualify for the definition of insanity (oft mis-attributed to Einstein) were I to continue to try. 

So, I shall leave it at that.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Im serious- Just give me your opinion of the explanation given in section 101 regarding the parable of the wheat and the tares. Are all the wheat not really going to receive celestial glory? Are some of the saved the tares? I await.

[wenglund]

3 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Im serious- Just give me your opinion of the explanation given in section 101 regarding the parable of the wheat and the tares. Are all the wheat not really going to receive celestial glory? Are some of the saved the tares? I await.

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-