Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

theplains

Members
  • Posts

    2,928
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by theplains

  1. God is God before anyone worships Him and before He creates anything.
  2. A God whom you don't worship.
  3. Yes, as an eternal uncreated intelligence. He has a beginning as God when he becomes God, after he is born to his heavenly parents (Christ's grandparents) and then progressed to Godhood.
  4. Where do you come up with a "select few" from the "many" that were mentioned in Matthew 27:51-53, 3 Nephi 23:9-10, and supposedly among all the scattered tribes (3 Nephi 16:1-3) at the time of the earthquake around Christ's death. What did they do in their lifetime until 1830? You seem to think they were all taken back to heaven but you didn't provide a scripture or church teaching. The earth is terrestrial. In the earth, there are plants, animals, and humans. Their glories are different but they are still all terrestrial. Likewise for the Sun, moon, and stars. They are celestial objects. The planets are celestial objects. Some planets even have their own moons. The Sun is one of the smallest stars as our telescopes show. Betelgeuse and Antares are hundreds of times larger than the Sun. All the celestial objects have a celestial glory even though there are billions+ more of them. What kind of body do pre-mortal spirits have? That scripture (first natural, then spiritual) is a reference to the beings created by God on earth. The idea that we lived with our heavenly parents in some celestial home after intelligences somehow became children of at least one heavenly mother is peculiar to the LDS faith. Funny. You have no problem assigning firstborn to all worthy males in Ephraim's lineage and associating the priesthood with all of them. You never did explain which of #1, #2, or #3 of the LDS Church's definitions of firstfruits applies to terrestrial inhabitants. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/firstfruits?lang=eng Based on what I provided earlier of the LDS Church's definition of firstfruits, Doctrine and Covenants 88:98 is not pointing to the terrestrials. As mentioned earlier, the LDS Church's use of Doctrine and Covenants 88:98 to define firstfruits does not match the qualifications of the terrestrials. They had not endured to the end. Verse 98 is not even speaking of them. You can point to previous teachings of Elder McConkie and agree with them and then seemingly reject or disavow those from other leaders you don't agree with. I'll provide a lot more when I reply to your parts 1 and 2 from our much larger topic of "Ephraim, the birthright, and the gathering". Chapter 32 of "Doctrines of the Gospel, Teacher's Manual" quotes a teaching by Joseph Fielding Smith in PreTest Answer #3 and mentions one of his compositions, "Doctrines of Salvation". You should read the 3-volume set. I wonder how much of it you would view as false and misleading or true and edifying. https://ia801806.us.archive.org/8/items/JFSDoctrinesOfSalvation/JFSDoctrinesofSalvationv1-3.pdf The Way to Perfection is another great resource for the theology of the early LDS Church. https://dn720005.ca.archive.org/0/items/waytoperfections00smit/waytoperfections00smit.pdf There is no morning and afternoon of the first resurrection in scripture. By the way, all those in the first resurrection are priests and kings unto God (Revelation 20:6) but you want to lump terrestrials among those in the first resurrection. Don't forget that for many a resurrection of life will also be a resurrection of damnation - for all those who fail to return to live with Heavenly Father. Mosiah 26:25-27 is speaking of the second trump. "And it shall come to pass that when the second trump shall sound then shall they that never knew me come forth and shall stand before me. And then shall they know that I am the Lord their God, that I am their Redeemer; but they would not be redeemed. And then I will confess unto them that I never knew them; and they shall depart into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels". Maybe you can elaborate which of the first, second, and third trumps (of Doctrine and Covenants 88:98-100) correspond to the celestials, terrestrials, and telestials and identify those who, as you said, "come forth in the end". Please explain the context of the second trump of Mosiah 26 and how it is different from the three trumps of Doctrine and Covenants 88. The non-covenant sons have no inheritance. Ok. So your terrestrials and telestials are sent somewhere else, not to any other earth where the covenant sons are inheriting in their respective sphere. Maybe they are sent to the moons of planets. I'll let God be the judge. Non-covenant sons are not of Christ. They are not the heirs. This reminds me of a Star Trek movie. The younger Spock calls "Father" as he faces the back of the older Spock. The older Spock responds by saying, "I am not our Father". Jesus is not our Heavenly Father but I understand this is what Mosiah teaches "And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son—The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son". Jesus is not the Son because of the flesh; he is the Son before the incarnation. Jesus is not the Father because he was conceived by Heavenly Father or a heavenly mother. In that prayer "Our Father …", Jesus is not referring to himself. "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God" (John 20:17). I didn't have anything else to offer beside what I wrote earlier. Same comment as above. But they did not understand Paul as teaching there was one or more heavenly mothers. Unless you believe Heavenly Mother is really the Queen of Heaven of the Old Testament. I think it means Seth was more like Adam than any of Adam's sons. In similar fashion, Adam and Eve were more like God than their descendants. Only eight were saved. The others were unsaved (not saved). This is because the world was corrupt and filled with violence. It seems you exclude violent and corrupt people from those verses in 1 Peter 3 and only focus on the "disobedience" part. But that qualifier is found in Doctrine and Covenants 138:28 ("And as I wondered, my eyes were opened, and my understanding quickened, and I perceived that the Lord went not in person among the wicked and the disobedient who had rejected the truth, to teach them"). According to this D&C passage, Jesus did not go to the wicked AND to the disobedient. But 1 Peter 3:18-20 says he did go to the disobedient. I'm not sure why Doctrine and Covenants 138 would differentiate between wicked and disobedient. The disobedient are viewed as wicked when you really think about it. Wickedness is corruptness. They are the opposite of holiness. Maybe you want to try and rationalize Doctrine and Covenants 138:28 and believe those who perished in the flood were disobedient but not wicked or not corrupt.
  5. The original reply from @InCognitus is found here. I branched into a new thread in hopes of making it easier to follow. There are two gatherings spoken of in the scriptures. One is of a spiritual nature – where Israelites were joined to the church of Christ in the ministry of Christ and subsequent evangelism to them and the Gentiles who would join the body of Christ. The other is a physical gathering of the Israelites to their land of inheritance in Israel, not America. I don’t believe all the members of the early church were only from the tribe of Judah and Benjamin. The idea that there were no Israelites from the other ten tribes who had not migrated from the north to the south prior to the Assyrian captivity is an urban legend. It is also an urban legend that there were no people of the ten tribes who went into Babylonian captivity who never returned to Israel after 70 years. I found this web site that has some ideas of the tribes that the 12 apostles came from. https://www.abrahamsdescendants.com/uploads/8/1/0/5/8105580/1270.910.pdf I saw some commentary by John Darby. I’ll quote some of what he said. Consequently we have, in chapters 11, 12, the Messiah and His reign, the source of the millennial blessing of the people of God. The first verses of chapter 11 (1-5) give his character; afterwards it is the effect of His reign. The heading in the ESV of the Bible has for Isaiah 11 “The Righteous Reign of the Branch”. From my reading of Doctrine and Covenants 113, it tries to identify the rod and the root but is not quite clear who these people are. Who do you believe they represent? Verses 3-4 – “What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse? Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power. Verses 5-6 – “What is the root of Jesse spoken of in the 10th verse of the 11th chapter? Behold, thus saith the Lord, it is a descendant of Jesse, as well as of Joseph, unto whom rightly belongs the priesthood, and the keys of the kingdom, for an ensign, and for the gathering of my people in the last days”. I don’t know the way that Christ will continue to bring the Israelites back to their own land of Israel in the future in the way Isaiah 11 describes, but we saw a glimpse of this in the events that led to the founding of the nation of Israel in 1948. I don’t believe in the theory of British-Israelism or that one or more tribes will inherit the land of America (or specifically the United States) in the future. By spiritual Israel, I mean those who become members of the church of Christ (whether they are literal Israelites or Gentiles). When I read page 57 of the Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, it appears the literal blood of a Gentile changes into the literal blood that coursed in Abraham's veins. “... while the effect of the Holy Ghost upon a Gentile, is to purge out the old blood, and make him actually of the seed of Abraham. That man that has none of the blood of Abraham (naturally) must have a new creation by the Holy Ghost". The New Era article in 2005 (“Your Patriarchal Blessing”) speaks more of this literal blood issue. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/2005/11/your-patriarchal-blessing?lang=eng Thank you for that lineage chart of Abraham where you highlight the sceptre promises of Judah and the birthright promises of Ephraim plus Manasseh (or maybe you just meant Ephraim). The firstborn in Israel’s family was transferred from Reuben to Joseph. I would say the birthright (the right of the first born) passed to Manasseh since he was born first but Jacob gave precedent on Ephraim over him. But each family of all the subsequent sons of Jacob had their own first born in their respective families that had the birthright. But let’s focus on Ephraim for a moment. Numbers 26 lists three sons of his sons. 1 Chronicles lists eight sons (if I count right). Which of Ephraim’s eight sons had the birthright blessing (the blessing given to the first born)? I would say Jacob’s immediate family, not the families that would come from all the other 11 tribes. See my comment above. Going back to the diagram you provided about the lineage of Abraham. You highlighted the sceptre promises of Judah and the birthright promises of Ephraim. The sceptre promises of Judah as King of Israel did not apply to all individuals in Judah’s lineage. It was only to one reigning king, in whom Christ is the ultimate fulfillment as the King of Israel. Seeing that Ephraim did not hold the priesthood in the Old Testament and in the New Testament church, on what basis do you assume that Jacob passed onto him any priesthood role in the birthright blessing? This is an approximate map of the land inheritance allotted to the twelve tribes. Ephraim is not given a greater land inheritance. Even Manasseh exceeds that tribe. What exactly do you believe is the land inheritance of Ephraim and Manasseh and what in scripture indicates this greater land inheritance blessing that you mention? I am aware of several teachings in the church’s seminary manual about the unique role of Ephraim and the blessings. Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual I’ll quote a few of them for reference. I don’t think I have a question about it but I just observe that it does not mention a gathering of Gentiles. It focuses primarily on the gathering of Israel. On page 58: “The great majority of those who become members of the Church are literal descendants of Abraham through Ephraim, son of Joseph. Those who are not literal descendants of Abraham and Israel must become such, and when they are baptized and confirmed they are grafted into the tree and are entitled to all the rights and privileges as heirs” (Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:245–46)”. On page 64: B1. The gathering of scattered Israel is a result both of God’s mercy and also of Israel’s repentance (see Isaiah 54:7; Ezekiel 11:17; Jeremiah 50:4–5; 2 Nephi 10:7; 30:7). B3. The raising of an ensign to the nations is the signal for Israel to be gathered home in the latter days (see Isaiah 5:26; 11:12). B6. Of the twelve tribes, the tribes of Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, will be gathered first and then direct the other tribes in their gathering (see JST, Genesis 48:5–11; Deuteronomy 33:16–17; D&C 133:30–39). On page 65: As complete as was the scattering, so shall be the gathering of Israel” (Talmage, Articles of Faith, 328–29). On page 66: ‘We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; “Now, the gathering of Israel consists of joining the true church and their coming to a knowledge of the true God. “By and by the Jews will be gathered to the land of their fathers, and the ten tribes, who wandered into the north, will be gathered home. “It is essential in this dispensation that Ephraim stand in his place at the head, exercising the birthright in Israel which was given to him by direct revelation. Therefore, Ephraim must be gathered first to prepare the way, through the gospel and the priesthood, for the rest of the tribes of Israel when the time comes for them to be gathered to Zion. The great majority of those who have come into the Church are Ephraimites. It is the exception to find one of any other tribe, unless it is of Manasseh. “It is Ephraim, today, who holds the priesthood. It is with Ephraim that the Lord has made covenant and has revealed the fulness of the everlasting gospel. It is Ephraim who is building temples and performing the ordinances in them for both the living and for the dead. When the ‘lost tribes’ come—and it will be a most wonderful sight and a marvelous thing when they do come to Zion—in fulfilment of the promises made through Isaiah and Jeremiah, they will have to receive the crowning blessings from their brother Ephraim, the ‘firstborn’ in Israel” (Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:252–53). Page 94: A3. Scattered Israel would be gathered home (see Articles of Faith 1:10; Jeremiah 16:14–16; Amos 9:8–15; 2 Nephi 25:15–17; Jeremiah 31:6–14; 1 Nephi 22:11–12). Page 95: Israel has been and is being gathered to the land of Zion. The Jews are returning to Jerusalem. What gathering and to where do you believe Jeremiah 31:1-17 refers to? I included that reference to the seminary manual because it doesn’t teach Joseph Smith is in Isaiah 40-48, but rather it is Christ. It says “Isaiah 40–48 - Isaiah writes about Jesus Christ, who will act as a shepherd to Israel and a light to the Gentiles”. The seminary’s manual mention of Isaiah 49 also doesn’t refer to Joseph Smith. Isaiah 49:5-6 – “And now the LORD says, he who formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob back to him; and that Israel might be gathered to him— for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD, and my God has become my strength—It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to bring back the preserved of Israel; I will make you as a light for the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.” Act 13:46 - Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. Act 13:47 - For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. In these verses, I believe Paul and Barnabas are representing the light but they themselves are not the light. Yes. Christ’s earthly mission was initially to the “circumcision” (Romans 15:8). Paul says a similar thing of himself in Galatians 2:7-8 (“But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles”). Jesus gave us a foreshadow of his calling to the Gentiles in John 10:16 (“And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd"). I think there is plenty in Romans 15 where Paul identifies Christ and ties this with his quote of Isaiah 11:10. The heading in the ESV Bible is “Christ the Hope of Jews and Gentiles”. I will highlight all the places Christ is referenced: Romans 15:8 - For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God's truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs, Romans 15:9 - and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. As it is written, “Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles, and sing to your name.” Romans 15:10 - And again it is said, “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with his people.” Romans 15:11 - And again, “Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles, and let all the peoples extol him.” Romans 15:12 - And again Isaiah says, “The root of Jesse will come, even he who arises to rule the Gentiles; in him will the Gentiles hope.” I believe the jealousy came about because God only recognized the temple in Jerusalem. With all that was going on in the original thread, I may have missed directly answering some of your questions. Please feel free to restate them if my answers in this thread did not. Thank you.
  6. President Russell M. Nelson said in the April 2020 General Conference Now, my dear brothers and sisters, consider the fact that in these three instances just mentioned, just before the Father introduced the Son, the people involved were in a state of fear and, to some degree, desperation. The Apostles were afraid when they saw Jesus Christ encircled by a cloud on the Mount of Transfiguration. I see it portrayed another way when I look at the account as recorded in scripture, Matthew 17:5-6 - And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. And Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah." He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him." When the disciples heard this, they fell on their faces and were terrified. The fear was not in seeing the cloud. It was in hearing the voice of the Father. Was Jesus encircled by a cloud or did the cloud actually overshadow (not encircle) all those present?
×
×
  • Create New...