TK Smoothies


mikbone
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

'He/She' pronouns banned during hearings - California LGBT activism.

The above nonsense reminded me of a teaching found in Doctrine of salvation.  Serves them right!

Image result for tk smoothie

 

But then the question arises, is gender eternal? 

Joseph Fielding Smith was wrong, plain and simple. The Proclamation teaches otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Joseph Fielding Smith was wrong, plain and simple. The Proclamation teaches otherwise.

Is that a real quote from Joseph Fielding Smith?  I wonder if that was the Church's general understanding of how we are and aren't identified by gender in the life hereafter.  But it does make you question, if no procreation is going on in the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms and that's where you end up, what's the point of being male and female?

Edited by clbent04
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

Is that a real quote from Joseph Fielding Smith?  I wonder if that was the Church's general understanding of how we are and aren't identified by gender in the life hereafter.  But it does make you question, if no procreation is going on in the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms, what's the point of being male and female?

Well, we are procreating away, lots and lots, here in the telestial kingdom right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, we are procreating away, lots and lots, here in the telestial kingdom right now.

I was referring to how are existence will be after being judged and resurrected.  We are told only those in the Celestial Kingdom will continue to procreate in the life hereafter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

Is that a real quote from Joseph Fielding Smith?  I wonder if that was the Church's general understanding of how we are and aren't identified by gender in the life hereafter.  But it does make you question, if no procreation is going on in the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms and that's where you end up, what's the point of being male and female?

Yes Doctrines of Salvation Vol 2, 287-288

But it is no longer in print.  Just like Mormon Doctrine

9018EEB8-A57D-4710-B52F-573708D7D8DC.thumb.jpeg.16b307e27bc9043bd1580e781158f603.jpeg

BA771A72-04C7-412D-88E9-9DC617449C96.thumb.jpeg.0c665e611cfd58b1fc2131e402b86d89.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, in context JFS alluded to a conventional Christian idea of no-gender-in-heaven, and was riffing on that in a way that could be seen as facetious (though I acknowledge that lots of Church members have taken his speculation as gospel).  

I agree that the idea is incompatible with the Proclamation on the Family.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

My personal opinion, we all will pair up eventually in eternity and fill the measure of our creation.

My opinion is if we don't hold sacred the powers of procreation in this life, we are deemed too reckless to be entrusted with such powers in the life hereafter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

He/She' pronouns banned during hearings - California LGBT activism.

I think that any committee or organisation that has as one of its key functions the gathering of evidence and information needs to be extremely careful about making rules about how that information or evidence will be provided. Once you start making rules about how evidence must be provided, you start to limit the quality and clarity of the evidence you will receive. Evidence givers should be allowed to give their evidence in a manner that best reflects what they are comfortable with. It seems strange to me that an evidence gathering committee, that relies on the good will of people to give evidence to it, would set up a rule saying you can only give evidence to us in this particular manner and in the manner that we want to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

This goes back to your thinking that 99 percent of us are going to the Celestial Kingdom, doesn’t it? In which case, I have to respectfully disagree 

Without bringing that  into the equation, all those Christ saves are cleansed and pure. Do you think Christ will save the unrighteous?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, mikbone said:

'He/She' pronouns banned during hearings - California LGBT activism.

The above nonsense reminded me of a teaching found in Doctrine of salvation.  Serves them right!

Image result for tk smoothie

 

But then the question arises, is gender eternal? 

Yes, but perhaps not necessarily sex...as in whatever sex you are...

Our Sex (or the sex that we are in regards to our gonads) may not necessarily continue with us (and in fact, in some way MUST NOT continue with us if we believe that ONLY those that receive exaltation will be able to continue to have progeny).

This means that you may have certain genitalia in a perfected Telestial or Terrestrial body, but it will lack the ability to have posterity.  It will not exist, therefore, you will not be able to act as a man or woman in that aspect as this function of the body will not exist in these.

That is my reading and understanding, and to my thoughts, the ONLY understanding in regards to procreation and Telestial, Terrestrial, and Celestial Bodies that one can leap to if one believes that in Exaltation we can continue to have children, but every other degree of glory (including the other 2 lower Celestial degrees) will not be able to possess.

 

PS: In response to some of the other replies, there is a difference between sex and gender.  You can have male and female pronouns and as such you can also be male or female in eternity.   This difference has become somewhat of a hot topic these days as some believe that you may be one gender but another sex, or one sex but another gender and thus we have variations on such degrees where a small minority feel they are a man in a woman's body, or vice versa.  These have become central in some arguments of governance and rights as they point out that though this difference was obvious (especially to those of romance languages and other areas of culture) thoughout the centuries prior to now, English started to meld the two into one single element during the 20th century to the point that we now think of them as congruous, when that is not necessarily so.

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to propose an analogy. Think of marriage like a college degree. There are lots of people who have college degrees. Certain jobs require this degree but one can still have the degree without having the job. Just because one has a degree doesn't necessarily mean he has the certain job which requires it. So too it is in the eternities. The highest degree of the Celestial kingdom requires marriage. But, just because one is married doesn't necessarily mean they are in the highest degree.

Who isn't to say God allows his children to be married in all of the degrees in his mansions? Certainly there is no scripture that states otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I would like to propose an analogy. Think of marriage like a college degree. There are lots of people who have college degrees. Certain jobs require this degree but one can still have the degree without having the job. Just because one has a degree doesn't necessarily mean he has the certain job which requires it. So too it is in the eternities. The highest degree of the Celestial kingdom requires marriage. But, just because one is married doesn't necessarily mean they are in the highest degree.

Who isn't to say God allows his children to be married in all of the degrees in his mansions? Certainly there is no scripture that states otherwise.

Well, we’re assuming here that the lesser “degrees” represent final, rather than a transitory states.  Which I am inclined to believe; though my understanding was that you believed the opposite.  :D

But assuming arguendo that the Church is right about that: what does it mean to “be married”?  What makes the difference between a man and a woman who are in the permanent friend zone, versus a man and a woman who consider themselves—and whom God considers—“married”?  

The only defining characteristic of exaltation that I am aware of, is continuation of seed; and if a man and a woman don’t have that, does it really matter what they choose to call their relationship?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Well, we’re assuming here that the lesser “degrees” represent final, rather than a transitory states.  Which I am inclined to believe; though my understanding was that you believed the opposite.  :D

But assuming arguendo that the Church is right about that: what does it mean to “be married”?  What makes the difference between a man and a woman who are in the permanent friend zone, versus a man and a woman who consider themselves—and whom God considers—“married”?  

The only defining characteristic of exaltation that I am aware of, is continuation of seed; and if a man and a woman don’t have that, does it really matter what they choose to call their relationship?

All who follow Christ (all of the saved) and who wish to be eternally married will be granted that blessing in eternity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted this topic to illustrate that sometimes General Authorities do make mistakes on points of doctrine.  

And it is important that we make this recognition.

There are different types of doctrine.  I love this BYU academic paper for its excellent description and categorization of doctrine.  

Core or Eternal doctrine is eloquently explained by Jesus Christ in his visits to the Nephites as found in 3 Ne 11:22-41.

Whenever we get off into the esoteric realm (even if it be an apostle, or president of the church) we are on unsteady ground.

And it is obvious that Joseph Fielding Smith was making a supposition statement about the "TK Smothies' because he said, "I take it that men and women will, in these kingdoms, be just what the so-called Christian world expects us all to be—neither man nor woman, merely immortal beings having received the resurrection."

The Family: A Proclamation to the World is revelation that trumps, Joseph Fielding Smith's musings.

Joseph Fielding Smith in that same book wrote a section strenuously condemning Birth Control.  As I have eleven children I obviously have taken his council on this point.  But, I know that the Church has greatly toned down its stance on BC...

McConkie make all kinds of statements about African heritage and priesthood that were just plain wrong.  And he made apologies.  And most people don't know that McConkie actually penned the OFFICIAL DECLARATION -2.

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/bruce-r-mcconkie_alike-unto-god-2/

https://gospeltangents.com/2018/06/bruce-r-mcconkie-wrote-official-declaration-2/

But no one in the Church should ever make mistakes on Core Doctrine.  We should be very familiar with Core Doctrine

I was so happy to hear Dallin H. Oaks last conference talk, it is a perfect example of Core or Eternal Doctrine.  You have likely noticed that the General Authorities have stopped trifling with esoteric doctrine in general conference.   Truth and the Plan

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also note, @mikbone, that certain specific counsel may be wholly appropriate in some contexts, but less so others.  Take your example of birth control:  the doctrine, that children are an heritage from the Lord and that we need to provide tabernacles for as many spirits as we can, is unchanged; but there are social reasons why the Church can’t demand as stringent compliance to this principle as it once did. That doesn’t mean that JFS was wrong to say what he did at the time that he did to the audience that heard him say it, or that there is necessarily no value from continuing to abide by that counsel in the here-and-now.  (Anecdotally, due to the medical side effects of nominally “safe” birth control methods, my family has suffered quite a lot for failing to take his counsel more seriously.)

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share