TK Smoothies

[wenglund]

On 1/20/2019 at 11:04 AM, mikbone said:

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.

Isn't the supposed "error" dependent upon assuming that JFS was speaking anatomically about males and females rather than functionally?  If he was speaking functionally, which I believe he was, then he isn't at odds with the Proclamation, since it is speaking anatomically, and thus he isn't in error. Right?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by wenglund

[Rob Osborn]

13 minutes ago, wenglund said:

Isn't the supposed "error" dependent upon assuming that JFS was speaking anatomically about males and females rather than functionally?  If he was speaking functionally, which I believe he was, then he isn't at odds with the Proclamation, since it is speaking anatomically, and thus he isn't in error. Right?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

He was in error. The Proclamation makes it clear that gender is an essential characteristic of one's purpose and identity in eternity.

[wenglund]

On 1/20/2019 at 11:04 AM, mikbone said:

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.

While your point is well taken about differentiating between core and non-core doctrines (though the makeup of each set is, itself, open to debate),  it is important to recognize that when it comes to the so-called "esoteric realm," or the non-core doctrines, logically the ground is far more unsteady for the lay conjecturist than it is for authoritative church leaders, particularly when the church authorities are consistent with longstanding and mainstream non-core doctrines and the lay conjecturists are not.

I mention this because several members of the church have used this discussion board to promote their divergent esoteric beliefs, and have attempted to justify their defiant positions by point out supposed errors made by Church authorities --fallaciously assuming that a supposed error on one subject means they are or may be in error on another subject.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

6 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

He was in error. The Proclamation makes it clear that gender is an essential characteristic of one's purpose and identity in eternity.

You obviously didn't comprehend the distinction I made, and so your response is meaningless.

Have a good day.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, wenglund said:

You obviously didn't comprehend the distinction I made, and so your response is meaningless.

Have a good day.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I did notice. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "essential" and how it relates to "purpose" and thus functionality and anatomy together.

[JohnsonJones]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

He was in error. The Proclamation makes it clear that gender is an essential characteristic of one's purpose and identity in eternity.

I see no conflict between what he stated and the Proclamation.

What I DO see is people going by their modern understanding of what sex and gender are rather than what they were understood to be in his time (or more specifically, how he learned it in his youth which looks to have bearing on how he presents it in his writings...rather than what was beginning to be it's common usage at the time his writings came out).  Because of this confusion I think they feel he is stating something that he is NOT stating.

It is the same as demonstrating that children do not procreate.  In this, they are no men and women among them, rather they do (or should not be in their innocence) practicing.  This does NOT preclude them from being boys and girls.

In the Lower Kingdoms, the will still have those who are Men and Woman as this is eternal, but sex will be impossible, it will not exist.  There will be none in that degree, the power and ability to procreate will not be theirs.

In a nutshell, this is basically what Fielding Smith is stating.  He made this clear in other teachings and if you were familiar with what he wrote on this matter elsewhere, you would realize he is NOT stating that they cease to have the appearances of boys and girls, but that the functions of procreation that are held by Men and Woman and some identify as defining what a Man and a Woman are will cease to be and not be possessed by those in the Telestial or Terrestrial (or even in the lower two degrees of the Celestial).

I don't see how this is contrary to the Proclamation in any way.

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

I did notice. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "essential" and how it relates to "purpose" and thus functionality and anatomy together.

I don't think he missed the it. 

I understand WHY you may have problems with the way Joseph Fielding Smith interprets the scriptures.

From what I understand, you feel that this is the Telestial Kingdom and that the Terrestrial Kingdom is what will exist when the Millenium comes.

Joseph Fielding Smith taught something very different and it is important to be able to understand what he believed in order to understand his teaching on this.

From his teachings it seems apparent that Joseph Fielding Smith felt that this was a Telestial World and that as we progressed we could live Terrestrial Lives even while we exist in this world.  This meant that as we received the covenants in the gospel that we would change from being fallen Telestial beings, into the Saints who lived in a way similar to those who were in the Millenium.  Thus, our lives could be in a way, a more Terrestrial light and our homes a more Terrestrial (or higher ) place of learning and growth. 

This Terrestrial way of living would be the same idea as that of the Millennium.  In the Millennium, he was of the opinion that our life would be very much like it is in the Telestial world today...however it would be due to our Righteousness that the adversary would be bound and a more universal following of the Lord's commandments that would bring around a Terrestrial world.  In otherwords, it was the manner that people would live and how righteous they would be that would make the Millennium more of a Terrestrial world rather than some vast transformation of the Earth itself at that point.  This is something that some may agree with in the church while others disagree, but it seems that he was of the opinion that this would bring about a Terrestrial type of society.

In this way, we could also have a more Terrestrial type of home  (or even higher) in THIS life to bring up our children, rather than one that followed the dictates of a fallen world or a fallen Telestial world.

However, this did NOT mean, in his understanding that the world was the Telestial Kingdom or that our homes would be the Terrestrial Kingdom.  It meant that we progressed in this life from understanding to understanding and our lives took on a higher manifestation of these things. 

He still felt that the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms were DIFFERENT than the Telestial world we live on (though it may have been a Telestial glory before the Fall...I do not know) and the Terrestrial way of life of the Millennium and the Millennial reign.

He felt instead that after death there would be the Spirit World and after the Spirit World a judgement.  At this Judgement men would be given a glory depending on what they did and thought in mortality (and to a degree, the spirit world).  This would result in them having an ETERNAL reward in one of the three degrees of glory.  It is in this understanding that he differentiates from your understanding, if I understand your ideas correctly.

Thus, those who went to the Telestial Kingdom would live immortal lives in perfect Telestial Bodies.  They would be as Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden if they had partaken of the Tree of Life prior to partaking of the Tree of Good and Evil.  Thus, they will not procreate.  They will still be identifiable as Men and Women, but without the necessary qualifications to enact such roles in sexuality or marriage in order to procreate.  In this physical essence they will be devoid.

This also applies to those who go to a much greater glory in the Terrestrial Kingdom.  They will also not be able to have any posterity for the rest of eternity.  They are, as inable to have children as your Barbie dolls as the Topic refers to.  They will still be what they were, so that if you were Ken you would still be that individual, and if you were Barbie you would still be that individual.  However, the ability to have children, to participate in such holy matters, and to have an increase of that and thus your own glory will be ended.  You will have a Terrestrial glory and dwell in a Terrestrial Sphere on a Terrestrial World for eternity.  That is the end of your reward.

Only those who went to the Celestial Kingdom, and of those, only those who received Exaltation would receive bodies capable of participating in the highest of the gifts of marriage, that of the ability to have progeny.  Children are a blessing ONLY to those who enter into the Highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom. 

It is this understanding that he had that he is referring to.

Thus, the discrepancy.

I think your ideas are that people progress in this world.  WE start with a Telestial Kingdom where we dwell now.  In the millennium will come the Terrestrial Kingdom.  Obviously we all can have children in both of these.  At the end there will only be two places one can go, either Outer Darkness or the Celestial Kingdom (which is composed of three degrees). 

In this understanding, obviously one would find it obvious that there can still be procreation between those with Telestial and Terrestrial bodies.

However, this is not the approach or teaching the Fielding Smith was talking about.  He would agree that those in this world and in the Millennium obviously can procreate mortal progeny.  His discussion was in regards to what comes AFTER this life, and as his understanding and teachings differ from yours, thus his statements do not go parallel with what you would agree with...

If I"ve understood your ideas on the Telestial, Terrestrial, and Celestial correctly.

Edited January 22, 2019 by JohnsonJones
clarification

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

He also said that Moroni passed through the walls and ceiling. What Joseph describes sounds more like a “dimensional rift” opened around Moroni that carried him out of our “space-time dimension.”

“After this communication, I saw the light in the room begin to gather immediately around the person of him who had been speaking to me, and it continued to do so until the room was again left dark, except just around him; when, instantly I saw, as it were, a conduit open right up into heaven, and he ascended till he entirely disappeared, and the room was left as it had been before this heavenly light had made its appearance.” JSH 1:43

Edited January 22, 2019 by Emmanuel Goldstein

[Rob Osborn]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I see no conflict between what he stated and the Proclamation.

What I DO see is people going by their modern understanding of what sex and gender are rather than what they were understood to be in his time (or more specifically, how he learned it in his youth which looks to have bearing on how he presents it in his writings...rather than what was beginning to be it's common usage at the time his writings came out).  Because of this confusion I think they feel he is stating something that he is NOT stating.

It is the same as demonstrating that children do not procreate.  In this, they are no men and women among them, rather they do (or should not be in their innocence) practicing.  This does NOT preclude them from being boys and girls.

In the Lower Kingdoms, the will still have those who are Men and Woman as this is eternal, but sex will be impossible, it will not exist.  There will be none in that degree, the power and ability to procreate will not be theirs.

In a nutshell, this is basically what Fielding Smith is stating.  He made this clear in other teachings and if you were familiar with what he wrote on this matter elsewhere, you would realize he is NOT stating that they cease to have the appearances of boys and girls, but that the functions of procreation that are held by Men and Woman and some identify as defining what a Man and a Woman are will cease to be and not be possessed by those in the Telestial or Terrestrial (or even in the lower two degrees of the Celestial).

I don't see how this is contrary to the Proclamation in any way.

I don't think he missed the it. 

I understand WHY you may have problems with the way Joseph Fielding Smith interprets the scriptures.

From what I understand, you feel that this is the Telestial Kingdom and that the Terrestrial Kingdom is what will exist when the Millenium comes.

Joseph Fielding Smith taught something very different and it is important to be able to understand what he believed in order to understand his teaching on this.

From his teachings it seems apparent that Joseph Fielding Smith felt that this was a Telestial World and that as we progressed we could live Terrestrial Lives even while we exist in this world.  This meant that as we received the covenants in the gospel that we would change from being fallen Telestial beings, into the Saints who lived in a way similar to those who were in the Millenium.  Thus, our lives could be in a way, a more Terrestrial light and our homes a more Terrestrial (or higher ) place of learning and growth. 

This Terrestrial way of living would be the same idea as that of the Millennium.  In the Millennium, he was of the opinion that our life would be very much like it is in the Telestial world today...however it would be due to our Righteousness that the adversary would be bound and a more universal following of the Lord's commandments that would bring around a Terrestrial world.  In otherwords, it was the manner that people would live and how righteous they would be that would make the Millennium more of a Terrestrial world rather than some vast transformation of the Earth itself at that point.  This is something that some may agree with in the church while others disagree, but it seems that he was of the opinion that this would bring about a Terrestrial type of society.

In this way, we could also have a more Terrestrial type of home  (or even higher) in THIS life to bring up our children, rather than one that followed the dictates of a fallen world or a fallen Telestial world.

However, this did NOT mean, in his understanding that the world was the Telestial Kingdom or that our homes would be the Terrestrial Kingdom.  It meant that we progressed in this life from understanding to understanding and our lives took on a higher manifestation of these things. 

He still felt that the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms were DIFFERENT than the Telestial world we live on (though it may have been a Telestial glory before the Fall...I do not know) and the Terrestrial way of life of the Millennium and the Millennial reign.

He felt instead that after death there would be the Spirit World and after the Spirit World a judgement.  At this Judgement men would be given a glory depending on what they did and thought in mortality (and to a degree, the spirit world).  This would result in them having an ETERNAL reward in one of the three degrees of glory.  It is in this understanding that he differentiates from your understanding, if I understand your ideas correctly.

Thus, those who went to the Telestial Kingdom would live immortal lives in perfect Telestial Bodies.  They would be as Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden if they had partaken of the Tree of Life prior to partaking of the Tree of Good and Evil.  Thus, they will not procreate.  They will still be identifiable as Men and Women, but without the necessary qualifications to enact such roles in sexuality or marriage in order to procreate.  In this physical essence they will be devoid.

This also applies to those who go to a much greater glory in the Terrestrial Kingdom.  They will also not be able to have any posterity for the rest of eternity.  They are, as inable to have children as your Barbie dolls as the Topic refers to.  They will still be what they were, so that if you were Ken you would still be that individual, and if you were Barbie you would still be that individual.  However, the ability to have children, to participate in such holy matters, and to have an increase of that and thus your own glory will be ended.  You will have a Terrestrial glory and dwell in a Terrestrial Sphere on a Terrestrial World for eternity.  That is the end of your reward.

Only those who went to the Celestial Kingdom, and of those, only those who received Exaltation would receive bodies capable of participating in the highest of the gifts of marriage, that of the ability to have progeny.  Children are a blessing ONLY to those who enter into the Highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom. 

It is this understanding that he had that he is referring to.

Thus, the discrepancy.

I think your ideas are that people progress in this world.  WE start with a Telestial Kingdom where we dwell now.  In the millennium will come the Terrestrial Kingdom.  Obviously we all can have children in both of these.  At the end there will only be two places one can go, either Outer Darkness or the Celestial Kingdom (which is composed of three degrees). 

In this understanding, obviously one would find it obvious that there can still be procreation between those with Telestial and Terrestrial bodies.

However, this is not the approach or teaching the Fielding Smith was talking about.  He would agree that those in this world and in the Millennium obviously can procreate mortal progeny.  His discussion was in regards to what comes AFTER this life, and as his understanding and teachings differ from yours, thus his statements do not go parallel with what you would agree with...

If I"ve understood your ideas on the Telestial, Terrestrial, and Celestial correctly.

There is an interesting view going on here. Is this world "a" telestial world, or is it "the" telestial world? And, as such, why do we think it is different that "a" versus "the" would have different laws? My understanding is the same as the temple that we are in "the" telestial world/ kingdom. Bruce R. McConkie taught that telestial law was a carnal law. Not sure how a carnal law sanctifies. He got that wrong. In the endowment we are taught that telestial law consists of the lower portions of the Celestial law which included covenants pertaining to sexual relations with ones spouse. Telestial law regarding spouses states that sexual relations are only to be had between one spouse where they are legally and lawfully married. God not only recognizes marriage in the telestial kingdom but also recognizes and allows for sexual relations between lawfully wedded spouses in the telestial kingdom.

People will say though that this telestial kingdom is not the same telestial kingdom after resurrection and judgment and as such has different laws, abilities, etc. I say, wow, that's strange. That's like saying even though we live in the telestial kingdom we aren't governed by laws of a telestial kingdom. That's an oxymoron.

If one carefully reads the Proclamation they will come across this paragraph-

"In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally."

The family relationship, which includes sexual relationships within legally recognized marriages, are perpeptuated beyond the grave. It's part of what identifies us and within the bonds of marriage sexual relations are a holy thing that has sanctifying powers. We tend to think of sex as a dirty or carnal practice. Or, on the other hand think it can only be utilized by God's themselves as some rite of passage. God sees it differently. He not only recognizes sex as the uniting purpose in man, he commands that man and woman should be joined together in order to fill the measure of their creation. Not only that, he gives this procreative power to man in the lowest portion of the law in the telestial kingdom. It's a recognized practice and law in the telestial kingdom.

 

[Rob Osborn]

I might add one more thing- If marriage is only recognized in the highest degree of glory within the Celestial Kingdom, then we shouldn't be married right now.

[mikbone]

19 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I might add one more thing- If marriage is only recognized in the highest degree of glory within the Celestial Kingdom, then we shouldn't be married right now.

What is your logic there?

And I don’t think of myself as married.  I’m sealed to my wife, and children.

You can get married on the love boat or in a drive thru Elvis chapel in Vegas.

Edited January 22, 2019 by mikbone

[Rob Osborn]

5 minutes ago, mikbone said:

What is your logic there.  

And I don’t think of myself as married.  I’m sealed to my wife, and children.

You can get married on the love boat or in a drive thru Elvis chapel in Vegas.

We can be eternally married now even though we aren't in the Celestial kingdom yet. Eternal marriage is thus prerequsite to entering the highest glory of the Celestial kingdom. Not only that but eternal marriage is allowed now. And we aren't in the Celestial kingdom are we? We are in a lower kingdom right now aren't we? God thus not only recognizes marriage, or "sealings" in lower orders of kingdoms but also provides means for it to happen.

[mikbone]

27 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We can be eternally married now even though we aren't in the Celestial kingdom yet. Eternal marriage is thus prerequsite to entering the highest glory of the Celestial kingdom. Not only that but eternal marriage is allowed now. And we aren't in the Celestial kingdom are we? We are in a lower kingdom right now aren't we? God thus not only recognizes marriage, or "sealings" in lower orders of kingdoms but also provides means for it to happen.

Its actually D&C 132:6-7 that is the prerequisite.  But you knew that already.

[Rob Osborn]

2 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Its actually D&C 132:6-7 that is the prerequisite.  But you knew that already.

I think we say the same thing.

[mikbone]

5 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I think we say the same thing.

[Rob Osborn]

15 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Maybe not? What are you saying then?

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

We can be eternally married now even though we aren't in the Celestial kingdom yet. Eternal marriage is thus prerequsite to entering the highest glory of the Celestial kingdom. Not only that but eternal marriage is allowed now. And we aren't in the Celestial kingdom are we? We are in a lower kingdom right now aren't we? God thus not only recognizes marriage, or "sealings" in lower orders of kingdoms but also provides means for it to happen.

Im sure not being a dirtbag is a prerequisite to entrance to the CK.

So by your logic, I can substitute (not being a dirtbag) in your paragraph above in place of eternal marriage and it should still hold water.

 

Getting a temple marriage is not a rubber stamp guaranteeing exaltation and eternal life. 

D&C 132:6-7 is legalese behind the temple ordinance.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/07/accepted-of-the-lord-the-doctrine-of-making-your-calling-and-election-sure?lang=eng

The above link is the rubber stamp you are looking for.

Edited January 22, 2019 by mikbone

[Rob Osborn]

10 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Im sure not being a dirtbag is a prerequisite to entrance to the CK.

So by your logic, I can substitute (not being a dirtbag) in your paragraph above in place of eternal marriage and it should still hold water.

 

Getting a temple marriage is not a rubber stamp guaranteeing exaltation and eternal life. 

D&C 132:6-7 is legalese behind the temple ordinance.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/07/accepted-of-the-lord-the-doctrine-of-making-your-calling-and-election-sure?lang=eng

The above link is the rubber stamp you are looking for.

No, it's not a rubber stamp. That's not what I am saying. What I am saying is that eternal marriage is an ordinance performed in our kingdom now that enables one, through obedience to God's laws, to advance and be able to receive greater blessings of exaltation.

[mikbone]

41 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

No, it's not a rubber stamp. That's not what I am saying. What I am saying is that eternal marriage is an ordinance performed in our kingdom now that enables one, through obedience to God's laws, to advance and be able to receive greater blessings of exaltation.

so does baptism...

 

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

I might add one more thing- If marriage is only recognized in the highest degree of glory within the Celestial Kingdom, then we shouldn't be married right now.

What was your point with this statement?

You do realize that your statements directly contradict LDS core dictrine?

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

so does baptism...

 

BaptIs is the gate that opens into the path.

[Rob Osborn]

5 minutes ago, mikbone said:

What was your point with this statement?

You do realize that your statements directly contradict LDS core dictrine?

My point is that eternal marriage is given to man in the lower order of kingdoms. Are we not in a lower kingdom than the Celestial right now?

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

I might add one more thing- If marriage is only recognized in the highest degree of glory within the Celestial Kingdom, then we shouldn't be married right now.

One problem with your original statement is that it is way to broad.  If you perhaps have a more narrow point of view I have missed it.

The obvious problem with your statement is that it contradicts the Sealing Ordinance that was returned to the Earth by Elijah to Joseph Smith.  

Some of us devout LDS find such statements offensive.

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, mikbone said:

One problem with your original statement is that it is way to broad.  If you perhaps have a more narrow point of view I have missed it.

The obvious problem with your statement is that it contradicts the Sealing Ordinance that was returned to the Earth by Elijah to Joseph Smith.  

Some of us devout LDS find such statements offensive.

Is it offensive that God gives his ordinances of eternal marriage to man in lower orders of kingdoms such as our we are now in?

[mikbone]

13 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Is it offensive that God gives his ordinances of eternal marriage to man in lower orders of kingdoms such as our we are now in?

I have difficulty following your logic.

I consider myself blessed to have been sealed in the House of the Lord to my family.

If you find it offensive, you should probably have a conversation with your Bishop.

Are you a LDS?  I originally assumed that you were...  

[Rob Osborn]

53 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I have difficulty following your logic.

I consider myself blessed to have been sealed in the House of the Lord to my family.

If you find it offensive, you should probably have a conversation with your Bishop.

Are you a LDS?  I originally assumed that you were...  

I am LDS and endowed and sealed to my wife in the temple. Heres the logic-

We arent in the celestial kingdom physically right now are we?

We are in a lower order of kingdom right now. Still following?

In this lower order of kingdom God gives to us laws to abide by while here. Still following?

These first laws are part of or make up a portion of higher laws. Correct?

In this kingdom we are now in God gives to us law upon law, line upon line. Correct?

One of the laws he has given us in this kingdom is the law of chastity.

God has also given to us in this kingdom the eternal law of marriage of which we are to abide by.

Thus, for every kingdom there are laws and blessings. Activities within kingdoms are governed by eternal laws. We are allowed access to portions of Gods blessings in kingdoms according to laws. This means that as long as we follow the laws within that kingdom our activities within said kingdom are justified according to eternal law.

Still following?

Therefore, eternal marriage, which is a commandment is also both a law and a blessing. Even though our eternal marriage, in its fullest blessings, isn't realized until our glory within the celestial kingdom (a higher order of kingdom than the one we are now in), it is still upheld and recognized by law and as law within this lower kingdom we are now in. 

Thus, do you see this logic as offensive.