Repentance after death

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, Jersey Boy said:

That’s not what these passages say and it’s not at all the way the apostles and prophets have always explained these verses. The word ‘quickened’ in these verses is referring the resurrection of the body into 3 degrees of glory and another state of resurrection of no glory.

You have been on this “everyone receives the celestial glory” hobby horse for years (about 5 or 6 years ago, I encountered you on another discussion board zealously propagating the same ideas) and you seem to love your “all the saved will obtain the same degree of post-resurrection glory” so much that it seems to have become an obsession. 

In some ways you can’t be blamed because you came to correctly realize that no one can be saved without coming unto Christ and receiving a remission of their sins though the atonement (you also correctly realize that no one can be considered to be saved and forgiven and at the same time be eternally consigned to a sort of hell). The problem is that you have gone one or two steps to far by insisting that God’s every mansion of post-resurrection salvation possesses the same degree of heavenly glory and spiritual capacitation — they do not...

109 But behold, and lo, we saw the glory and the inhabitants of the telestial world, that they were as innumerable as the stars in the firmament of heaven, or as the sand upon the seashore;

110 And heard the voice of the Lord saying: These all shall bow the knee, and every tongue shall confess to him who sits upon the throne forever and ever;

111 For they shall be judged according to their works, and every man shall receive according to his own works, his own dominion, in the mansions which are prepared;

112 And they shall be servants of the Most High; but where God and Christ dwell they cannot come, worldswithout end. (D&C 76)

Just because all the saved will be forgiven and bow the knee to the Father and confess that Jesus Christ is their Savior doesn’t mean that all will the saved receive the same degree of glory.

15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.

16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever. (D&C 132)

 

When you compile all the evidence together things dont really add up. The nature in which some of the sections of the D&C were written really tells me that there was a whole "line upon line" doctrine being revealed. For instance, the scriptures you quoted from section 132 state that if a marriage isnt sealed by one who holds the keys of eternity it doesnt matter in the eternity, they will be separate forever and ever. There is no possibility for them to be sealed to each other after they pass away. This of course was given or recorded before vicarious sealings were revealed and became common practice which does make it possible to be sealed after death (given in marriage after death in that sense). So, either these verses dont really mean what they say (they are wrong to a degree), not fully understood, or the vicarious sealings we do in the temple are completely in vain. I tend to believe that the verses in section 132 are missing vital information and that they were written according to mans knowledge he had at that specific time. Whereas it is true that a proper marriage by the one who holds the keys is vital to that marriage extending beyond the grave, the reality is that those blessings of being eternally married are extended after death vicariously.

There are tons of these types of inconsistencies in scripture that are only understood when more knowledge is revealed line upon line.  And so it is with the three kingdoms. At the time they were recorded it was believed they were post resurrection separate worlds for all the saved to go to. But again, you have paramount issues. For instance, in section 76 verse 72 it reads-

"72 Behold, these are they who died without law;"

This is speaking of one type of group found on the terrestrial world. I find it thus interesting that at this time it was believed all those who died without law went to the terrestrial. But the cross reference to this verse in section 137, revealed years later state that those who died without law can be eligable for celestial glory. Many have wrongly assumed that the ones spoken of in section 76 were those who wouldnt have accepted it in mortality and thus why they get terrestrial and not celestial. The problem with this however is that if we believe we are judged by what we actually do and not what might of happened then this is why they cannot be judged by the law and so, those who died without law cannot be judged by the law. This is a different group than those spoken of in verse 73 who died within the law and were delivered to spirit prison (because they had law of knowing right from wrong)where they accepted the gospel there. Two starkly different groups!

It wasnt until years later that the kingdoms and their true meanings were revealed as now part of the temple endowment. In section 76 they indeed saw a vision and recorded what they saw. They just didnt understand at that time what it was exactly they were seeing and how it applied. Just like in section 132 where he believed it was not possible to be sealed to a spouse after death, he recorded what he believed his perception was at the time. Then, later on, with new light and knowledge that doctrine is modified to be more truthful.

 

Edited April 24, 2018 by Rob Osborn

[Jersey Boy]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

When you compile all the evidence together things dont really add up. The nature in which some of the sections of the D&C were written really tells me that there was a whole "line upon line" doctrine being revealed. For instance, the scriptures you quoted from section 132 state that if a marriage isnt sealed by one who holds the keys of eternity it doesnt matter in the eternity, they will be separate forever and ever. There is no possibility for them to be sealed to each other after they pass away. This of course was given or recorded before vicarious sealings were revealed which does make it pissible to be sealed after death. So, either these verses dont really mean what they say (they are wrong to a degree) or the vicarious sealings we do in the temple are completely in vain. I tend to believe that the verses in section 132 are missing vital information and that they were written according to mans knowledge he had at that specific time. Whereas it is true that a proper marriage by the one who holds the keys is vital to that marriage extending beyond the grave, the reality is that those blessings of being eternally married are extended after death vicariously.

There are tons of these types of inconsistencies in scripture that are only understood when more knowledge is revealed line upon line.  And so it is with the three kingdoms. At the time they were recorded it was believed they were post resurrection separate worlds for all the saved to go to. But again, you have paramount issues. For instance, in section 76 verse 72 it reads-

"72 Behold, these are they who died without law;"

This is speaking of one type of group found on the terrestrial world. I find it thus interesting that at this time it was believed all those who died without law went to the terrestrial. But the cross reference to this verse in section 137, revealed years later state that those who died without law can be eligable for celestial glory. Many have wrongly assumed that the ones spoken of in section 76 were those who wouldnt have accepted it in mortality and thus why they get terrestrial and not celestial. The problem with this however is that if we believe we are judged by what we actually do and not what might of happened then this is why they cannot be judged by the law and so, those who died without law cannot be judged by the law. This is a different group than those spoken of in verse 73 who died within the law and were delivered to spirit prison (because they had law of knowing right from wrong)where they accepted the gospel there. Two starkly different groups!

It wasnt until years later that the kingdoms and their true meanings were revealed as now part of the temple endowment. In section 76 they indeed saw a vision and recorded what they saw. They just didnt understand at that time what it was exactly they were seeing and how it applied. Just like in section 132 where he believed it was not possible to be sealed to a spouse after death, he recorded what he believed his perception was at the time. Then, later on, with new light and knowledge that doctrine is modified to be more truthful.

 

The scriptures are consistent and are in accord with one another, and logically build upon one another. Part of the problem I perceive is that you fail to understand that the expression “out of the world” in D&C 132 refers to the resurrected state and not to what occurs while in the world of departed spirits after the body is laid in the grave. You also seem to fail to realize that the human body is not dead in a legal sense in the eyes of God until the saving vicarious work work performed in the temples comes to an end. Until the day temple work comes to an end, the Lord wii continue to accept spirit world conversions as if they really and actually took place while in the flesh.

Your claims that the prophet Joseph Smith didn't understand the things that were revealed to him in “the vision,” even while the eyes of his understanding were opened by the Spirit, is as presumptuous as it is ridiculous. This is what Joseph Smith himself had to say about the degree of spiritual perceptively he enjoyed while receiving the vision recorded in D&C 76:

11 We, Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, being in the Spirit on the sixteenth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two—

12 By the power of the Spirit our eyes were opened and our understandings were enlightened, so as to see and understand the things of God— (D&C 76)

You also have a habit of quoting verses of scripture out of context, as if they stand alone without needing to be clarified by the verses immediately before and after the verse being quoted. What follows is an example of what I mean: You quote the verse that says “these are they that died with out the law,” but then fail to include the clarifying words that immediately follow...

72 Behold, these are they who died without law;

73 And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh;

74 Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it. (D&C 76)

The manner of punctuation strongly suggests that what’s said in verse 74 applies both to those referred to in verses 72 and 73. So the text can be clarified as follows: 

“Behold, these are they who died without law; Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it.”

One of the things  I personally find interesting (you say that a lot) is you appear to acknowledge the standard orthodox LDS interpretations of the scriptures I’ve been quoting were actually correct and doctrinally sound at one time but that they are no longer correct and doctrinally sound. 

Your assertion that the temple ordinances teach there is no post-resurrection telestial kingdom fails to acknowledge that the leaders of the Church have taught there is both a pre-resurrection telestial world (the fallen state) and a post-resurrection telestial world of much greater spiritual glory than the present state of this telestial earth. I noticed that you ignored the quote from Joseph Fielding Smith in which he asserted that there are two different classifications of telestial worlds, one speaking of the fallen state and the other to a heavenly kingdom of salvation and glory. Further, your assertion that a large portion of the scriptures are now inaccurate and no longer doctrinally valid puts you at odds with the leaders of the Church and with the presentation of the gospel that these same leaders currently want taught. 

Another reason why I know you are in error is because if you really have had more advanced gospel doctrines revealed to you you would have kept them to yourself as sacred mysteries meant only for you, instead of battling with those who are not yet prepared to receive the more advanced doctrinal mysteries. Yet for quite some time now you have been battling on this topic, all the while unwisely expecting others to believe gospel mysteries that have been privately revealed to you for your own private enlightenment and edification. The more you violate Alma’s solemn warning, the more suspect your “no degrees of glory” paradigm becomes.

9 And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him. (Alma 12)

Your claim is you have a great understanding of one of the more profound gospel mysteries, but then you totally ignore the most solemn prophetic warnings that it’s not wise to reveal those putatively greater gospel mysteries to those who are not ready to receive them. And even though you appear to acknowledge many of the scriptures in the LDS canon appear to flatly contradict the greater knowledge you claim to possess, yet you put your head down plow forward in a quixotic quest to try to convince some of the saints to disbelieve their own scriptures and the interpretations the living prophets of the Church have placed upon them. Basically, you are beating your head against a brick wall in the vain hope that your logical powers of persuasion and word associations will be able to trump and supplant personal revelation.

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

file

Edited April 24, 2018 by Jersey Boy

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

The scriptures are consistent and are in accord with one another, and logically build upon one another. Part of the problem I perceive is that you fail to understand that the expression “out of the world” in D&C 132 refers to the resurrected state and not to what occurs while in the world of departed spirits after the body is laid in the grave. You also seem to fail to realize that the human body is not dead in a legal sense in the eyes of God until the saving vicarious work work performed in the temples comes to an end. Until the day temple work comes to an end, the Lord wii continue to accept spirit world conversions as if they really and actually took place while in the flesh.

The bottom line here is that it is perceived to be understood that if one died without being eternally married it was too late. Around about this time Joseph Smith was receiving revelation about proxy work but it wasnt understood really well and wasnt in practice yet in temples. I agree fully that vicarious ordinances are acceptable before the Lord as having actually taken place in mortality.

 

2 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

Your claims that the prophet Joseph Smith didn't understand the things that were revealed to him in “the vision,” even while the eyes of his understanding were opened by the Spirit, is as presumptuous as it is ridiculous. This is what Joseph Smith himself had to say about the degree of spiritual perceptively he enjoyed while receiving the vision recorded in D&C 76:

11 We, Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, being in the Spirit on the sixteenth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two—

12 By the power of the Spirit our eyes were opened and our understandings were enlightened, so as to see and understand the things of God— (D&C 76)

You also have a habit of quoting verses of scripture out of context, as if they stand alone without needing to be clarified by the verses immediately before and after the verse being quoted. What follows is an example of what I mean: You quote the verse that says “these are they that died with out the law,” but then fail to include the clarifying words that immediately follow...

72 Behold, these are they who died without law;

73 And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh;

74 Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it. (D&C 76)

The manner of punctuation strongly suggests that what’s said in verse 74 applies both to those referred to in verses 72 and 73. So the text can be clarified as follows: 

“Behold, these are they who died without law; Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it.”

One of the things  I personally find interesting (you say that a lot) is you appear to acknowledge the standard orthodox LDS interpretations of the scriptures I’ve been quoting were actually correct and doctrinally sound at one time but that they are no longer correct and doctrinally sound. 

I question whether Joseph and Sidney really understood what they saw. I have no doubt they had a vision. I question their understanding of what they were seeing because of the paramount contradictions and implications it brings into the picture. Verse 72 and 73 are speaking of two different groups. The first group are those who died without law. Because they died without law they cannot be judged by law. Being condemned or sentenced to spirit prison is a judgment that comes upon one for breaking the law. One cannot be condemned by the law if they are outside the law.

 

2 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

Your assertion that the temple ordinances teach there is no post-resurrection telestial kingdom fails to acknowledge that the leaders of the Church have taught there is both a pre-resurrection telestial world (the fallen state) and a post-resurrection telestial world of much greater spiritual glory than the present state of this telestial earth. I noticed that you ignored the quote from Joseph Fielding Smith in which he asserted that there are two different classifications of telestial worlds, one speaking of the fallen state and the other to a heavenly kingdom of salvation and glory. Further, your assertion that a large portion of the scriptures are now inaccurate and no longer doctrinally valid puts you at odds with the leaders of the Church and with the presentation of the gospel that these same leaders currently want taught.

The temple endowment is the "full" plan of salvation. It is the most current and complete teaching that we have concerning the overall plan of salvation and all its details. It is the only place where we receive the teaching of the plan of salvation in its fullest. That plan is revelation from God to us individually. In the plan of salvation, according to the endowment, there very much is a telestial and terrestrial kingdom. But its not like we commonly thought. The endowment was received as revelation after section 76 was received. Its basically a part two that explains "the vision" now found as section 76. In the temple it is thus explained that the telestial kingdom is actually the world on which we now live. This is why in verse 103 of section 76 that Joseph and Sidney see sons of perdition in the telestial kingdom. It also explains why in verse 72 that those who died without law are found in the terrestrial kingdom. That being that during the millennium those who died without law will be resurrected and dwell with Christ and partake of the ordinances that they were not able to live by in mortality. Thus they are given the same opportunity which will enable them to become spotless and ready for celestial glory. This is why in the temple we progress from the telestial kingdom to the terrestrial kingdom and then finally into the celestial where salvation is granted. The vision as shown to Joseph and Sidney was in answer to John 5:29 which apparently showed a strict dichotomy of heaven and hell. Joseph assumed there had to be a myriad or grades of glory for people to be saved. The angel trys to show Joseph and Sidney that the strict dichotomy very much is a fact. Somehow though that understanding never made it through. So, when the endowment was received the Lord is clarifying the kingdoms and their meanings as spoken of in section 76. The part I find interesting in all of this is we have multiple prophets who have testified that the endowment is the full and complete plan of salvation and yet we have not connected the dots that show specifically that salvation is only granted upon entrance to the celestial kingdomand not before or anywhere else.

 

2 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

Another reason why I know you are in error is because if you really have had more advanced gospel doctrines revealed to you you would have kept them to yourself as sacred mysteries meant only for you, instead of battling with those who are not yet prepared to receive the more advanced doctrinal mysteries. Yet for quite some time now you have been battling on this topic, all the while unwisely expecting others to believe gospel mysteries that have been privately revealed to you for your own private enlightenment and edification. The more you violate Alma’s solemn warning, the more suspect your “no degrees of glory” paradigm becomes.

I dont know where everyone gets this claim about me receiving "revelation"? I have never claimed such a thing. I have put two and two together in my mind. Thats all, nothing more, nothing less. As far as more advanced doctrines go I do have them and keep them mostly to myself because I dont feel people could accept them. I consider this knowledge I possess we are discussing lower level common understanding and logic. It is commonly found amongst teachings of the church. Temple open houses open to everyone before they are dedicated also clearly explain the telestial, terrestrial and celestial and how we progress through them.

 

2 hours ago, Jersey Boy said:

Your claim is you have a great understanding of one of the more profound gospel mysteries, but then you totally ignore the most solemn prophetic warnings that it’s not wise to reveal those putatively greater gospel mysteries to those who are not ready to receive them. And even though you appear to acknowledge many of the scriptures in the LDS canon appear to flatly contradict the greater knowledge you claim to possess, yet you put your head down plow forward in a quixotic quest to try to convince some of the saints to disbelieve their own scriptures and the interpretations the living prophets of the Church have placed upon them. Basically, you are beating your head against a brick wall in the vain hope that your logical powers of persuasion and word associations will be able to trump and supplant personal revelation.

I dont look at it as profound. I dont even really consider it a mystery in the sense that its some "new" understanding. I actually find it more of a mystery as to why we cant embrace and teach what the Lord has actually revealed and been common knowledge for over a hundred and fifty years as found in the temple. Why is it that the endowment explains we are now in the telestial kingdom and no one can believe it for over a century? Thats the mystery. And yet, I take great hope in knowing that at least I stand in company of at least Jefferey R. Holland who acknowledges also that we are in tge telestial kingdom now.

I have my own personal knowledge of gospel mysteries that go far beyond this elementary doctrine. Things I rarely share with anyone including my own wife. We truly are just scratching the surface in regards to the real details of the plan of salvation.

Edited April 24, 2018 by Rob Osborn

[zil]

20 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I dont know where everyone gets this claim about me receiving "revelation"? I have never claimed such a thing.

 

Yes, we all know, you'll explain these away as "not revelation" and/or not about the very narrow definition in your head of whatever topic you think is at issue.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, zil said:

 

Yes, we all know, you'll explain these away as "not revelation" and/or not about the very narrow definition in your head of whatever topic you think is at issue.

Hum...where did I say I received revelation on this particular subject? Yeah, I couldnt see it there either.

[wenglund]

14 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

But the scriptures you post are very black and white.

Wrong. It only appears that way to you because you are incapable of seeing other than black and white. I, and many others on this board, have tried a myriad of times and every which to get you to see colors (metaphorically speaking), but invariably you can't. It is pointless to continue to try. In fact, it would surpass the definition of insanity.

The good news is, that even though you are incapable of seeing other than binary, you are still motivated to repent and follow Christ, which is great. You are still operating under old light and knowledge, which is true.

My only concern, and the possible concern of others on the board, is that you may mislead others. To diminish that risk, I, and possibly others, may respond to your posts, though not with the intent to engage you in discussion--since that would be fruitless, but to offer a different perspective--ii.e. one that is in color as made possible by new light and knowledge. The responses will be to the gentle reader about what you said, and not a response to you. 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Osborn]

20 minutes ago, wenglund said:

Wrong. It only appears that way to you because you are incapable of seeing other than black and white. I, and many others on this board, have tried a myriad of times and every which to get you to see colors (metaphorically speaking), but invariably you can't. It is pointless to continue to try. In fact, it would surpass the definition of insanity.

The good news is, that even though you are incapable of seeing other than binary, you are still motivated to repent and follow Christ, which is great. You are still operating under old light and knowledge, which is true.

My only concern, and the possible concern of others on the board, is that you may mislead others. To diminish that risk, I, and possibly others, may respond to your posts, though not with the intent to engage you in discussion--since that would be fruitless, but to offer a different perspective--ii.e. one that is in color as made possible by new light and knowledge. The responses will be to the gentle reader about what you said, and not a response to you. 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yeah, I may mislead others into truths path, what then? Im not asking others to question me or my beliefs, im asking others to listen to what Christ actually says and not contrive things into what they think Christ really meant. 

[SpiritDragon]

Just a note as to what the Lord says on who has the responsibility and authority to receive revelation on behalf of the church and dispense the light and truth received:

Doctrine and Covenants section 43:

1 O hearken, ye elders of my church, and give ear to the words which I shall speak unto you.

2 For behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, that ye have received a commandment for a law unto my church, through him whom I have appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations from my hand.

3 And this ye shall know assuredly—that there is noneother appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, if he abide in me.

4 But verily, verily, I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him; for if it be taken from him he shall not have power except to appoint another in his stead.

5 And this shall be a law unto you, that ye receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations or commandments;

6 And this I give unto you that you may not be deceived, that you may know they are not of me.

7 For verily I say unto you, that he that is ordained of me shall come in at the gate and be ordained as I have told you before, to teach those revelations which you have received and shall receive through him whom I have appointed.

There are proper channels the Lord has committed to work through to help His sheep avoid deception. Whether the teachings are labeled as revelations, doctrines, logic, enlightenment, superior intellect/perception we are assured that there are authorized channels that important teachings must go through. Random people on the internet are not those who have been authorized to speak the will of the Lord for His people. 

[Rob Osborn]

5 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

Random people on the internet are not those who have been authorized to speak the will of the Lord for His people. 

I completely agree with this.

[The Folk Prophet]

14 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Yeah, I may mislead others into truths path, what then? Im not asking others to question me or my beliefs, im asking others to listen to what Christ actually says and not contrive things into what they think [listen to what the living prophets and apostles teach] Christ really meant. 

You're the only one here who has "contrived" what YOU think.

No one else is "contriving" anything. We trust those who have the authority, and the spiritual purview to teach. We do not trust you and your narrow-minded and yet somehow exceedingly know-it-all, brain-power.

[Jersey Boy]

On 4/24/2018 at 4:41 PM, Rob Osborn said:

Hum...where did I say I received revelation on this particular subject? Yeah, I couldnt see it there either.

So with this you confirm my observation that for you attempts at logic and scriptural word associations appear to trump living prophets and revelation. If you haven’t had your “salvation in the celestial kingdom only” idea confirmed by personal revelation, why do you contend for your position as if you have received such confirming revelation. Yours is a very non-LDS approach.

Edited April 25, 2018 by Jersey Boy

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You're the only one here who has "contrived" what YOU think.

No one else is "contriving" anything. We trust those who have the authority, and the spiritual purview to teach. We do not trust you and your narrow-minded and yet somehow exceedingly know-it-all, brain-power.

So, Wade can state his beliefs that kingdoms of glory within Heavenly Fathers house in heaven is hell? How is that not a contrived paradigm?

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, Jersey Boy said:

So with this you confirm my observation that for you attempts at logic and scriptural word associations appear to trump living prophets and revelation. If you haven’t had your “salvation in the glory of the celestial kingdom only” idea confirmed by personal revelation, why do you contend for your position of you as if you have received such confirming revelation. Yours is a very non-LDS approach.

Its the coupling of logic and intelligence with what prophets, ancient and modern, have already stated. Its understanding the doctrine through properly building a solid foundation based on scriptures and the principles taught therein. Just like this topic- repentance after death, once we properly understand the principles involved we come to know that even when the wicked repent and turn unto Christ they too become born again sons and daughters of God capable of good works.

Its rather apparent when you see Wades paradigm and the many holes in it that one must admit that theres validity to what Im speaking of. In order for Wades ideas to work he has to make a large part of heaven the eternal hell spoken of in scripture where the devil and his angels go. Its thus precisely why one must build off of solid and unchanging principle- get the principle things correct and all the deeper mystery stuff falls right into place. Get it wrong and everything unravels and contradicts itself.

Edited April 25, 2018 by Rob Osborn

[zil]

Hmm.

Quote

Alma 40:15 Now, there are some that have understood that this state of happiness and this state of misery of the soul, before the resurrection, was a first resurrection. Yea, I admit it may be termed a resurrection, the raising of the spirit or the soul and their consignation to happiness or misery, according to the words which have been spoken.

A prophet of God suggesting that the word "resurrection" may be understood in more than one way.  How is it the world hasn't ended?

Quote

Damnation

As used in the KJV this word has a wider meaning than is at once apparent from modern usage. Damnation is the opposite of salvation and exists in varying degrees. All who do not obtain the fulness of celestial exaltation will to some degree be limited in their progress and privileges and hence be damned to that extent. See Matt. 23:14, 33; Mark 3:29; 16:16; John 5:29; Rom. 13:2; 1 Cor. 11:29; 2 Ne. 9:24; 3 Ne. 18:28–29; D&C 58:26–29; 84:74; 112:29; 132:4, 6, 27.

Damnation sounds kinda like hell.  Yet the degrees of glory below the highest still include glory and salvation through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.  Thus, these degrees combine both salvation and damnation to an extent (but no exaltation - that is reserved for the highest glory only - which includes 100% exaltation and 0% damnation).  And none of them are where "the devil and his angels go" - that is outer darkness, a place of no glory, no salvation, 100% damnation.  Thus, Wade never claimed that "a large part of heaven" is "the eternal hell spoken of in scripture where the devil and his angels go".

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, Wade can state his beliefs that kingdoms of glory within Heavenly Fathers house in heaven is hell? How is that not a contrived paradigm?

You're the one forcing limited meaning to every single instance of the words "hell" and "damnation" and the like. Wade is just trying to explain things within that limited understanding you have because he understands how myopic and narrow-minded your view of things are.

[Rob Osborn]

19 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

You're the one forcing limited meaning to every single instance of the words "hell" and "damnation" and the like. Wade is just trying to explain things within that limited understanding you have because he understands how myopic and narrow-minded your view of things are.

Im using it correctly. I can use scripture to show in every instance how damnation, hell, and heaven is  correctly used. Im not the one inventing new definitions.

 

[Rob Osborn]

34 minutes ago, zil said:

Hmm.

A prophet of God suggesting that the word "resurrection" may be understood in more than one way.  How is it the world hasn't ended?

Damnation sounds kinda like hell.  Yet the degrees of glory below the highest still include glory and salvation through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.  Thus, these degrees combine both salvation and damnation to an extent (but no exaltation - that is reserved for the highest glory only - which includes 100% exaltation and 0% damnation).  And none of them are where "the devil and his angels go" - that is outer darkness, a place of no glory, no salvation, 100% damnation.  Thus, Wade never claimed that "a large part of heaven" is "the eternal hell spoken of in scripture where the devil and his angels go".

That all sounds kinda nice until you start actually applying it with actual scripture and truth. It proves my point. One cannot be saved and damned at the same time just as one cannot be in hell and heaven at the same time. This is basic common sense.

[wenglund]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Its the coupling of logic and intelligence with what prophets, ancient and modern, have already stated. Its understanding the doctrine through properly building a solid foundation based on scriptures and the principles taught therein. Just like this topic- repentance after death, once we properly understand the principles involved we come to know that even when the wicked repent and turn unto Christ they too become born again sons and daughters of God capable of good works.

Its rather apparent when you see Wades paradigm and the many holes in it that one must admit that theres validity to what Im speaking of. In order for Wades ideas to work he has to make a large part of heaven the eternal hell spoken of in scripture where the devil and his angels go. Its thus precisely why one must build off of solid and unchanging principle- get the principle things correct and all the deeper mystery stuff falls right into place. Get it wrong and everything unravels and contradicts itself.

Blinding pride is the death of learning and productive discussion, even for good and decent and well-meaning men. It prevents development from binary precept to nuanced precept, from old light to new light.  

Evidently, even eons of time and  extraordinary effort and a mountain of evidence are no match since they will invariably be viewed as confirming one's prideful bias and contrary to opposing views--which is why, in part,  there may be no progression from resurrected kingdom to resurrected kingdom  

If there is any value to be derived from this thread, at the very least we have been given as good an object lesson as any I have witnessed, with the possible exception of decades of interactions with certain fundamentalist Evangelicals,  in support of the precept in the paragraph above.

It is confirming testament to the very essence of damnation, even within the mostly heavenly hearts of men, as surely as this will fall on deaf ears.

(P.S. the quasi-chiastic structure of this post is purely coincidental  )

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Its rather apparent when you see Wades paradigm and the many holes in it that one must admit that theres validity to what Im speaking of. In order for Wades ideas to work he has to make a large part of heaven the eternal hell spoken of in scripture where the devil and his angels go. Its thus precisely why one must build off of solid and unchanging principle- get the principle things correct and all the deeper mystery stuff falls right into place. Get it wrong and everything unravels and contradicts itself.

On the off chance that there is anyone other than Rob reading this thread who agrees with what Rob just said about me, I would be pleased to discuss it with you (it is futile to discuss it with Rob). I am open to the prospect that I may be doing exactly as Rob says, and if I am, it would be beneficial to confirm that and change if needs be, though I currently have good reason to believe otherwise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Osborn]

On 4/22/2018 at 11:41 PM, wenglund said:

That is what I figured, with the highest hell being the Terrestrial kingdom, both overlapping with the two lowest of the three heavens. (2 Cor 12:2).  This reconciles all scriptures (the old light and knowledge consistently with the new light and knowledge), and in a way that reasonably satisfy justice and mercy and the irrevocable law (D&C 130:20). 

 

[Rob Osborn]

48 minutes ago, wenglund said:

Blinding pride is the death of learning and productive discussion, even for good and decent and well-meaning men. It prevents development from binary precept to nuanced precept, from old light to new light.  

Evidently, even eons of time and  extraordinary effort and a mountain of evidence are no match since they will invariably be viewed as confirming one's prideful bias and contrary to opposing views--which is why, in part,  there may be no progression from resurrected kingdom to resurrected kingdom  

If there is any value to be derived from this thread, at the very least we have been given as good an object lesson as any I have witnessed, with the possible exception of decades of interactions with certain fundamentalist Evangelicals,  in support of the precept in the paragraph above.

It is confirming testament to the very essence of damnation, even within the mostly heavenly hearts of men, as surely as this will fall on deaf ears.

(P.S. the quasi-chiastic structure of this post is purely coincidental  )

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Then get off your high horse and dialogue without a condescending nature to me.

[zil]

31 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Then get off your high horse and dialogue without a condescending nature to me.

Jersey Boy claims you spent 5-6 years on another forum doing this.  We know you've spent 1.5 years on this forum doing this.  No one's position has budged an inch.

Exactly what would be the purpose of Wade "dialoging" with you?

Edited April 25, 2018 by zil

[Rob Osborn]

Two principles apply here. This from https://www.lds.org/topics/sin?lang=eng on "Sin"

"To commit sin is to willfully disobey God's commandments or to fail to act righteously despite a knowledge of the truth (see James 4:17).

The Lord has said that He "cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance" (D&C 1:31). Sin results in the withdrawal of the Holy Ghost. It makes the one who sins unable to dwell in the presence of Heavenly Father, for "no unclean thing can dwell with God" (1 Nephi 10:21).

Other than Jesus Christ, each person who has ever lived on earth has broken commandments or failed to act according to knowledge of the truth. The Apostle John taught: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, [Jesus Christ] is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:8-9). Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, each person can repent and be forgiven of these sins."

Wade argues that some of the saved (in fact a large portion of them) will still be sinful and thus  "unclean". This is why he argues for hell being part of heaven in part because they obviously arent the righteous a spotless heirs of salvation but nevertheless didnt committ the unpardonable sin either and will thus find some level, some shade of allowance for their sinful natures in heaven. The broken 1st principle that is broken here is that he supposes Christ can after all allow some degree of sin and still be saved from Satans grasp in the end. The second principle broken is that Christ can save someone still under a bondage of sin. 

What I believe Wade fails to understand is that all of the saved are cleansed from all of their sins and all are spotless, not just a few percentage at the top. He fails to recognize the principle of repentance and forgiveness of "all sins" in order to be saved from Satan. The conclusion he makes is that there will be varying levels of repentance and forgiveness and thus varying levels of filthiness and cleanliness in heaven. He just cant fathom the real truth that Christ cleanses "all" the saved from 100% of their sins and "all" will be spotless.

[Rob Osborn]

3 minutes ago, zil said:

Jersey Boy claims you spent 5-6 years on another forum doing this.  We know you've spent 1.5 years on this forum doing this.  No one's position has budged an inch.

Exactly what would be the purpose of Wade "dialoging" with you?

Doing what? How long have you been on the web dialoguing with folks?

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, zil said:

No one's position has budged an inch.

Change happens very slowly but it does happen. I dont really care if I convince anyone or not on the exact nature of how I view heaven and hell but I do care that we at least understand correct principles and apply them the right way. As I have been discussing with Wade on the principle of repentance its rather apparent that even one simple misunderstanding causes a myriad of contradictions.