tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post4798910501361386688..comments2023-11-02T07:25:45.884-05:00Comments on Mormanity - a blog for those interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Review of Adam S. Miller’s Future MormonJeff Lindsayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-1320915215404478892016-08-08T18:08:07.939-05:002016-08-08T18:08:07.939-05:00Just for the record, the above comment that was de...Just for the record, the above comment that was deleted was not mine. I have been behaving myself. But man...I'd love to have seen it before it was removed.Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-25538065019464346792016-08-08T13:04:00.781-05:002016-08-08T13:04:00.781-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.The Five Darrington'shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06956037289835477321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-30380679514595754492016-08-05T08:39:54.827-05:002016-08-05T08:39:54.827-05:00Moving on...Moving on...Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-74410026311779173822016-08-05T00:15:42.763-05:002016-08-05T00:15:42.763-05:00Everything, your tone and volume have become inapp...Everything, your tone and volume have become inappropriate again. We get it: our beliefs do not comply with your ca. 5th century Neoplatonic metaphysical formulations about God, therefore we are bad people doomed to fail the great metaphysical final exam that will separate the Heavenly Elite Christian Club from the lost souls who are trying to follow Christ with a flawed philosophical framework. Heaven help those poor devils who think they should strive to "keep the commandments" and who don't get that Christ was just being tricky or something when he told people to do that. You have made this point and hurled your invectives from your perch on the tower of condemnation, and done this so long that it is truly wearisome. Let's move on now. Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-38806209860597193122016-08-04T22:07:51.796-05:002016-08-04T22:07:51.796-05:00Haha wow EBU. Showing your true colors there. Gues...Haha wow EBU. Showing your true colors there. Guess your emotions won't let you have a civilized conversation that stays on topic. <br /><br />Never go full antiPiercenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-23750181730063222562016-08-04T21:40:48.208-05:002016-08-04T21:40:48.208-05:00So, using the text you presented as evidence (Roma...So, using the text you presented as evidence (Romans 11), show me how my interpretation is incorrect. I used the text to support my interpretation--you do the same. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-7811358756726960342016-08-04T21:30:06.040-05:002016-08-04T21:30:06.040-05:00I don't know why I continue to bother with thi...I don't know why I continue to bother with this. You guys go on about your merry way so confident in your boy polygamous prophet. Your church is true. That is all you need to know. Of course, none of you can explain exactly what it means to have a church that is "true." Your leaders have been teaching contradictory doctrine since the beginning so surely it can't mean that the doctrine is what is true. You can't agree on your doctrine. God is an eternal being from all eternity to all eternity. But there was a time when God wasn't God, but was sweating it out on an earth trying to obey laws and ordinances. <br /><br />Good luck. You need to clean your house. Figure it all out and come back then. Quit worrying about your wordplay and your clever puns and your Early Modern English. Figure out whether God is really eternal or not. Start there...<br /><br />I find it interesting that you quote Christians to support your Mormon beliefs, but I never once have to refer to a Mormon quote to support my Christian beliefs. Why is that? <br /><br />Think about it...why is that? <br /><br />You are outside the club. You know it. You desperately want to be seen as being inside the club. Your Mormon forefathers would be rolling over in their graves. They wanted nothing to do with the Christian world. They mocked it in the temple ceremony until 1990, showing a Protestant minister in the employ of Satan, and mocking the language of some of the creeds as being nonsense. They lambasted it, calling it the whore, the Devil, etc. They told people that the fast track to Hell is to receive an ordinance from the hands of the apostate ministers. <br /><br />These early Mormon leaders...they'd want nothing to do with your ecumenism. Stop coming cap-in-hand to the Christian world, hoping to be let in. Your faith began with a single statement that called our creeds corrupt and our pastors an abomination. Stand by that statement. Be true to yourselves. I will actually like it better that way. I will certainly have more respect for you. Seriously. Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-29371382669333578422016-08-04T21:18:32.320-05:002016-08-04T21:18:32.320-05:00God has preserved a remnant according to his GRACI...God has preserved a remnant according to his GRACIOUS choice. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works....It is no longer on the basis of works. Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-46729940693855053172016-08-04T21:16:44.143-05:002016-08-04T21:16:44.143-05:00Anon...yes, I know the context of the passage I pr...Anon...yes, I know the context of the passage I presented. I presented it because it gives us insight into what Paul means when he uses the word "grace." <br /><br />And frankly, you have so totally botched it and twisted it to mean the complete opposite of what it is saying, it actually makes me sick. <br /><br />I didn't quote the full passage. It really says this, "But if it is by grace, it is <i>no longer on the basis of works,</i> otherwise grace is no longer grace."<br /><br />Under what conditions is grace no longer grace? Under the condition of works getting involved. <br /><br />Grace is not grace if works are involved. I'll repeat that...grace is no longer grace if works are involved. <br /><br />That you can read this and see just the opposite scares me. It really does. <br /><br />The point of Romans 11 is to tell the Gentiles that they had better not look down up on the Jews. <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-91161231937869688622016-08-04T20:43:55.965-05:002016-08-04T20:43:55.965-05:00"You still have to deal with this, though...&..."You still have to deal with this, though...'if by grace, it is no longer by works...if by works, it is no longer by grace.'" <br /><br />Taken by itself, this is a great illustration that salvation cannot come by one aspect alone. It is a <i>combination</i> of grace and works (a buttercup).<br /><br />Your quote was provided without any context. It is part of Paul's explanation to the Romans why Gentiles and Israelites can both qualify for salvation. Actually, it illustrates that salvation has come to the Gentiles as a result of a failing in the house of Israel. Their belief was that salvation was a birthright, but Paul was arguing that the birthright (works) can only take you so far. Belief is required as well. He doesn't ever argue, however that the birthright (works) isn't important. He emphasizes that the Gentiles must be grafted into the tree of the birthright to achieve it. Jews can't be saved by birthright alone; and Gentiles can't be saved by belief alone.<br /><br />Your deal. . .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-34872571981227781912016-08-04T20:33:07.481-05:002016-08-04T20:33:07.481-05:00Hm, I don't remember making any such covenants...<i>Hm, I don't remember making any such covenants regarding having more than one wife. And there is no marriage IN heaven. But if you say so, I should probably let my wife know.</i><br /><br />I think you need to have a good sit-down with D&C 132. And I think you should also figure out what could possibly be implied in the fact that you were never sealed to your wife, but she was sealed to you. She gave herself. You received her. This exchange did not operate in both directions.<br /><br />And just to strengthen the argument, consider that during the Temple Lot Case Lorenzo Snow was adamant to the point of holding up the questioning until it was very clear that men were NOT sealed to women, but that women were sealed to the men. <br /><br />It is a common misconception that sealing goes both ways. It doesn't. The woman gives herself to the man. The man receives her to himself. Not the other way around. <br /><br />Here is the transcript: <br /><br />218 Q:-You state now that Joseph Smith was sealed or married to your sister in April 1843, and this so-called revelation was given in July of 1843? <br />A:-No Sir.<br />219 Q:-What do you mean by that answer? <br />A:-I mean sir tha[t] I did not make any such statement.<br />220 Q:-What time did you say it was? <br />A:-Well the time I said it was was all right.<br />221 Q:-At the time that he said he was sealed to your sister you were abroad preaching? <br />A:-I never said anything of the kind.<br />222 Q:-And you said did you not, that you came back in the month of April 1843 from your European mission, and on your return, or a few days after your return he took you aside and told you of of this alleged revelation and at the same time told you that he was sealed to your sister? <br />A:-I never said he was sealed to my sister,-you were mistaken if you understood me to say that.<br />223 Q:-Well you that he told you that he had taken your sister? <br />A:-Yes sir.<br />224 Q:-Yes sir, and that is what you said he told you? <br />A:-Yes sir, and that is what he did tell me.<br />225 Q:-That he had taken your sister? <br />A:-Yes sir.<br />226 Q:-And she was sealed to him? <br />A:-Yes sir, that is it exactly. Now you have got it,-she was sealed to him.<br />227 Q:-Now then according to your understanding of this new covenant the woman is sealed to the man, and not the man to the woman? <br />A:-Yes sir, you are right now, and I am very happy that you have got right for once. <br /><br />What do you think, Pierce? You were not sealed to your wife. How do you feel about that? How will she feel about that when you explain this to her? Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-21605001659905525052016-08-04T20:22:46.756-05:002016-08-04T20:22:46.756-05:00Two can play that game:
Ye see then how that by w...Two can play that game:<br /><br />Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-20625593129463484432016-08-04T20:11:37.711-05:002016-08-04T20:11:37.711-05:00I like to think of it as chocolate=works and grace...<i>I like to think of it as chocolate=works and grace=peanut butter. They're both good by themselves, but dip one into another and you've got one delicious (heavenly) buttercup.</i><br /><br />Okay...fine. That's cute. But do you get to boast about how great your chocolate is? If not, why not? You made it, didn't you? <br /><br />You still have to deal with this, though..."if by grace, it is no longer by works...if by works, it is no longer by grace." <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-43505920140458368522016-08-04T19:49:00.039-05:002016-08-04T19:49:00.039-05:00"You don't believe Christians, nor their ..."You don't believe Christians, nor their doctrine. Stop using it to support Mormonism."<br /><br />I will quote whomever I please to illustrate my ideas, and that includes a church Father. If I'm talking with a Muslim, youbetter believe I'm quoting Mohammed and their califs.<br /><br />That whole response was ad hominem and strawman beating. Did you run out of things to say?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-87656022395047918752016-08-04T19:42:06.013-05:002016-08-04T19:42:06.013-05:00"The good Christian works I perform, the love...<i>"The good Christian works I perform, the love I share, is returned to me at the end of my life. These will be my rewards"</i><br /><br />Sorry, I'm not understanding what you're saying here. Sounds more like karma. But my question is, if someone who is merely justified, but didn't live a Christian life, receives of the same fulness of God that you do, what more can you possibly gain? I know you acknowledged that you don't really know what this means, but you've either received a fullness or you haven't. And if you truly don't know what rewards mean, then isn't it possible that Joseph and others before him might be correct about doctrines like theosis? The scriptures seem to point that way, if nothing else (I would even argue that they outright teach it, but I'm willing to meet half way for the sake of argument).<br /><br /><i>If I have stored up more treasure in Heaven then Jim or Tom, I will be more richly rewarded then Jim or Tom. But Jim and Tom are still saved. They have eternal life. They are brought back into the full presence of God, just like I am, to enjoy life, community, relationship, love, peace, etc forever in the presence of the Father </i><br /><br />I suppose this goes back to the question of what salvation really means, and how it is obtained. A person who accepts Jesus as savior, but who willingly rebels against him anyway, CANNOT fully enjoy life, community, relationship, love, peace, or be in the presence of the Father because "where their treasure is, there will their hearts be also." They have used their agency to embrace the things of the world. But if they truly want God help them change their nature and embrace the things of God and atone for their sins, then it will happen. Mormonism believes in a post-mortal world where that is possible. How many times did Christ warn people to change their nature, such as the young rich man who asked what he should do to inherit life, but was disappointed that it required him to give up the things of the world and follow Christ? I don't really see what you're describing taught consistently in the Gospels.<br /><br /><i>There is no hierarchically-structured afterlife where exalted human beings are served by ministering angels who were not worthy of a full-weight of glory. There is no afterlife where men and women are rewarded with thrones and powers...</i><br /><br />You seem to know a lot about the afterlife. Have you been having visions??<br /><br />2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?<br />3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?<br />-1 Cor 6<br /><br /> 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.<br />-Revelation 20<br /><br />21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.<br />-Revelation 3<br /><br />That last one is a bit of a doozy, it even talks about overcoming things similar to what Christ had to overcome. It sounds like *gasp* a struggle! I don't know EBU, I see thrones, I see a hierarchy over angels, I see overcoming. Sure, people can interpret these things differently, but within the framework of modern revelation, there is a harmony.<br /><br /><i>You can't do your own view justice unless you are willing to be honest, and admit that exaltation IS plural marriage </i><br /><br />Hm, I don't remember making any such covenants regarding having more than one wife. And there is no marriage IN heaven. But if you say so, I should probably let my wife know. <br />Piercenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-69600680700006520582016-08-04T19:37:36.226-05:002016-08-04T19:37:36.226-05:00"Work out" doesn't mean "work f...<br />"Work out" doesn't mean "work for." <br /><br />When you "work out" the day, you are not "working for" the day. See what I mean? <br /><br />Notice the possessive. "Your salvation." <br /><br />1) Salvation is an individual thing--I'm the only one responsible for my salvation (with Christ's help, of course). Ergo the possessive "Your salvation."<br /><br />2) If "work out" = review, as you imply, why would they need to do it with "fear and trembling"? If they're already saved, wouldn't it be a joyful thing to work out?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-71522368409912492032016-08-04T19:31:06.383-05:002016-08-04T19:31:06.383-05:00@ EBU,
"Take your pick. Works or grace. You ...@ EBU,<br /><br />"Take your pick. Works or grace. You are at a buffet. You have two options, but one spoon. And you can't dip the same spoon into both entrees."<br /><br />I'm not sure why I have to live by your rules? Luckily, there are a plethora of buffets. If yours doens't allow me to sample both, I can choose one that does. :^) <br /><br />I like to think of it as chocolate=works and grace=peanut butter. They're both good by themselves, but dip one into another and you've got one delicious (heavenly) buttercup.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-70788557187093743732016-08-04T19:27:53.761-05:002016-08-04T19:27:53.761-05:00"Work out" doesn't mean "work f..."Work out" doesn't mean "work for." <br /><br />When you "work out" the day, you are not "working for" the day. See what I mean? <br /><br />Notice the possessive. "Your salvation." The Philippians already possessed salvation. But they weren't dead yet.<br /><br />Paul did not believe in "once saved, always saved." Nor do I. I do believe in such a thing as a "fall from grace." There is a point in which one can slip from the salvation so freely granted. This is called the unpardonable sin. Paul talks about it. Peter suggests the same. <br /><br />But that is between God and the individual. Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-5556974208614298912016-08-04T19:23:20.851-05:002016-08-04T19:23:20.851-05:00How funny it is that you are quoting a self-profes...How funny it is that you are quoting a self-professed Trinitarian who was unabashed in his membership in the Church of England, (which teaches salvation by grace through faith alone) and an early Christian Father who taught that God was uncreated, uncontained, and invisible, to try to prove to me the Mormon doctrine of eternal progression, in which we learn that God was once a man who achieved Godhood by obedience to laws and ordinances, and now he has a body of flesh and bone and can (and has) been seen. That is really sad. <br /><br />By the way, when Paul talks about the "sons of God," he is referring to the doctrine of Adoption. In Romans and Galatians both, he makes it very clear that the "sons of God" are ADOPTED into the family through belief in Christ. Human beings are not natural or biological sons of God, as Mormons profess. Only Jesus Christ is the natural or biological son of God. That is why he is called the Only Begotten. The rest of us are part of God's creation. Jesus, the Word who WAS God, took upon himself human nature (he was not naturally human to begin with. God and humans are not of the same species) in order that we as humans could partake of God's nature, which is Holiness. <br /><br />You don't believe Christians, nor their doctrine. Stop using it to support Mormonism. Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-78513562609161409812016-08-04T19:20:42.299-05:002016-08-04T19:20:42.299-05:00@ EBU 9:11 AM,
"To accept Christ is to give...@ EBU 9:11 AM, <br /><br />"To accept Christ is to give up the struggle, to stop trying to do something to earn it yourself." This statement is contrary to what Paul taught:<br /><br />Philippians 2:12<br /><i>12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.</i><br /><br />This is a letter to the saints in Phillipi. They were already converted. In the evangelical view, they should have already been saved by grace. What need then to continue to "work out [their] own salvation" in his absence?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-72096055390495959082016-08-04T18:14:43.093-05:002016-08-04T18:14:43.093-05:00This is Mormon-speak. It is Brad Wilcox 101
“Ever...<i>This is Mormon-speak. It is Brad Wilcox 101</i><br /><br />“Every time you make a choice you are turning the central part of you, the part of you that chooses, into something a little different than it was before. And taking your life as a whole, with all your innumerable choices, all your life long you are slowly turning this central thing into a heavenly creature or a hellish creature: either into a creature that is in harmony with God, and with other creatures, and with itself, or else into one that is in a state of war and hatred with God, and with its fellow creatures, and with itself. To be the one kind of creature is heaven: that is, it is joy and peace and knowledge and power. To be the other means madness, horror, idiocy, rage, impotence, and eternal loneliness. Each of us at each moment is progressing to the one state of the other.”<br /><br />-C.S. Lewis<br /><br />"Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, of his boundless love, became what we are that he might make us what he himself is."<br /><br />-Irenaeus, Against Heresies<br /><br />"16 It is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ — if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him. I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory about to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God; 20 for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God."<br />-Paul<br /><br /><i>How, precisely, does the Atonement of Christ exalt you, and what role is grace playing in that process?</i><br /><br />Perhaps you view a full transformation as something that God's power cannot accomplish, or that He willingly withholds it, or that it somehow is of no benefit to humans. I believe differently. "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." <br /><br /><i>And how would you reconcile any of this with Romans, that says that we won't be released from this body of sin and death until we die, that we will continue to sin even though we know it is wrong, but that there is no condemnation for those who are alive in Christ?</i><br /><br />It is your own willful misconception that Mormons believe that we will achieve some sort of perfection and sinlessness in this life.<br />Piercenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-60149210403881656162016-08-04T14:43:15.282-05:002016-08-04T14:43:15.282-05:00you're participating in your own transformatio...<i>you're participating in your own transformation by exercising agency</i><br /><br />This is Mormon-speak. It is Brad Wilcox 101. <br /><br />When does this transformative process end? At what point have you finally succeeded in being fully and completely obedient? Will you achieve this in this lifetime? Will you achieve it in the next life? And what role does the Blood of the Lamb play in this process? <br /><br />If there were no Blood, your first sin would eternally damn you to Hell. But now, we have this cleansing Blood, and it simply provides a safety net. It keeps you out of Hell so that you can repent and change course. But how does the Blood help you change course? How does the Blood of the Lamb exalt you? <br /><br />I don't think that it does, other than provide that safety net, like I said. How does the Blood of the Lamb stop you from fornicating again after you repented of it once? How does it keep you from disrespecting your wife for the 115th time? How did it stop my atheistic father-in-law from smoking, when my atheist father-in-law would come near to spitting on a cross? (My point being that I see a lot of non-believers succeeding in overcoming addictions without Christ when believers struggle day after day to do so with Christ). <br /><br />I don't see any answers for this in Mormonism. But Mormonism needs to answer this question, because Mormons believe that they are exalted through Christ. How, then? <br /><br />How, precisely, does the Atonement of Christ exalt you, and what role is grace playing in that process? <br /><br />And how would you reconcile any of this with Romans, that says that we won't be released from this body of sin and death until we die, that we will continue to sin even though we know it is wrong, but that there is no condemnation for those who are alive in Christ? <br /><br /><br /><br /> Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-56763382374122293282016-08-04T12:43:59.272-05:002016-08-04T12:43:59.272-05:00EBU, I'll get back to your response when I hav...EBU, I'll get back to your response when I have enough time. But you said:<br /><br />"To accept Christ is to give up the struggle, to stop trying to do something to earn it yourself. If you have to do something to be justified, it is no longer grace you are seeking, but you are seeking justification through your own works."<br /><br />No, you're not. Not as a Christian, anyway. You're doing what Christ told you to do as his disciple and you're participating in your own transformation by exercising agency--a transformation that cannot be done without Christ, from rescuing you from original sin to helping you make better choices. You've gotten so hung up on a few of Paul's letters in which he was explicitly writing to some of the struggling branches of the church--where the message of Christ was in its infancy--that you all but make the majority of the teachings in the 4 gospels irrelevant. Christ is the one who described discipleship and salvation as a struggle, comparing it to a cross. He compared it to the eye of the needle. He talked about sheep and goats, righteousness and wickedness, rewards and punishments, the consequences of our choices. He described, in detail, what a man must do to enter life. And he never, not once, described an "exemption" for those who professed and are "justified." He was speaking directly to his followers. You and I are not greater than they.<br /><br />Your simplistic claim that the idea of grace and works are so mutually exclusive that they are "in opposition to each other" is actually the opposite message that Jesus taught, and quite frankly is the opposite of what Paul taught when you stop isolating pet "grace" verses. Taken as a whole, the New Testament is a guidebook on how these concepts fit together and are a part of our salvation. It may not, however, fit with some modern interpretations.Piercenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-57671803954104658092016-08-04T10:31:09.245-05:002016-08-04T10:31:09.245-05:003) "In true Christianity, the prerequisite fo...<i>3) "In true Christianity, the prerequisite for grace is to stop trying to do something to earn it." This isn't true. The evangelical prerequisite is to accept Christ as your Savior. Not everyone earns grace in your concept either.</i><br /><br />I was speaking poetically. Yes...one must accept Christ as the Savior. But what does that look like? Reading a statement of belief off the back of a Chick Tract? Not necessarily. <br /><br />To accept Christ is to give up the struggle, to stop trying to do something to earn it yourself. If you have to do something to be justified, it is no longer grace you are seeking, but you are seeking justification through your own works. <br /><br />It can't be a combo. It can't. The two concepts are so fundamentally in opposition to each other, that to try to combine them, you nullifying both of them...and you are damned. <br /><br />Take your pick. Works or grace. You are at a buffet. You have two options, but one spoon. And you can't dip the same spoon into both entrees. <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-77562621971954556802016-08-04T09:11:04.269-05:002016-08-04T09:11:04.269-05:00Okay...I was unsure of where we were going, but yo...Okay...I was unsure of where we were going, but you clarified.<br /><br />No...I haven't acknowledged 2 different aspects of salvation. I've acknowledged one. Salvation is eternal life. Eternal life is salvation. But once saved, we are then rewarded for our labors. <br /><br />Christians do not busy themselves trying to define these rewards, but that is what Joseph Smith did. Actually, he only managed to define one of these rewards. He gave us a fairly fleshed-out description of exaltation in D&C 76 and 132, but he really did absolutely nothing to describe anything other than exaltation. What are we going to be doing in the Terrestrial Kingdom? No one knows, except that we will be ministering angels. <br /><br />What are we going to be doing in the Celestial Kingdom as exalted beings? Now...that is what Joseph Smith and others spent so much of their time explaining, didn't they? Yes...and their view of it is firmly rooted in the practice of polygamy. I am convinced that if there had been no Fanny Alger there would have been no eternal family doctrine. <br /><br />But back to the main point: Salvation/eternal life is simple, at least in explanation. Being saved...inheriting eternal life...justification...these are all referring to the same thing. This is coming into a relationship with the living Christ. In other words, believing in him.<br /><br />After one is brought into a right relationship with God/Christ, the Holy Spirit can begin the work of sanctifying that person. This is where works come into play. I am not sanctified by sitting on my duff. I am sanctified by going out into the world as a believer and living a Christian life. The good Christian works I perform, the love I share, is returned to me at the end of my life. These will be my rewards. I lay up my treasures in Heaven. If I have stored up more treasure in Heaven then Jim or Tom, I will be more richly rewarded then Jim or Tom. But Jim and Tom are still saved. They have eternal life. They are brought back into the full presence of God, just like I am, to enjoy life, community, relationship, love, peace, etc forever in the presence of the Father. <br /><br />There is no hierarchically-structured afterlife where exalted human beings are served by ministering angels who were not worthy of a full-weight of glory. There is no afterlife where men and women are rewarded with thrones and powers, and where worthy men snatch up the wives of the less-worthy, which is what Brigham Young envisioned. <br /><br />I must remind you...the afterlife you may try to describe to me is a Post-Manifesto construction that has been sanitized, washed, scrubbed-clean in order to have more appeal to a Christian audience. Be honest with me here. <br /><br />You know that current sealing policy still has embedded in it the reality of a polygamous afterlife. You know that there are Mormon men who are still sealed to two living women. (Civilly divorced from first marriage, but still sealed, and remarried/sealed to a second wife.) <br /><br />You know that the sealing ceremony gives the woman to the man, but does not give the man to the woman. <br /><br />You know that a few of your leaders are essentially polygamists, being sealed to two women. <br /><br />And you also know from reading 132 that the defining characteristic of the life of the exalted is plural marriage. <br /><br />Do you really want to venture into a conversation where we describe for each other what our respective afterlives will be like? You can't do your own view justice unless you are willing to be honest, and admit that exaltation IS plural marriage.<br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.com