InCognitus

There may also be other reasons that people wear masks in cars or outdoors where the likelihood of making contact with another person is slim. I sometimes wear a mask when I'm outdoors walking, especially the last couple of weeks when the pollen count was high and there were high wind gusts in Utah (40+ MPH - and you could literally see clouds of pollen poofing out of some of the trees). And I regretted not wearing a mask the one day when I thought the wind wasn't so bad (it was), because I had a rather significant allergy attack that day. So I know it helps on the days when I do wear a mask. ETA: Reducing my allergies also helps me find happiness in the church (just to keep things on topic)

Are these instructions (the 3 grand keys of D&C 129:4-9) true or false? I was talking about the context and purpose for the instructions that were given, which is always important when trying to interpret what is meant by any statement. They are true statements when interpreted in the context for which they were given (assuming we even have all the context since they were instructions that were recorded by different people later on, unlike the revelations).

Early Christian sources back this up (as I'm sure you know, but I'll document part of it here). St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 108 - 140 AD) Epistle to Philadelphians, Chapter. 4 CHAP. IV.--HAVE BUT ONE EUCHARIST, ETC. "Husbands, love your wives, as fellow-servants of God, as your own body, as the partners of your life, and your co-adjutors in the procreation of children. Virgins, have Christ alone before your eyes, and His Father in your prayers, being enlightened by the Spirit. May I have pleasure in your purity, as that of Elijah, or as of Joshua the son of Nun, as of Melchizedek, or as of Elisha, as of Jeremiah, or as of John the Baptist, as of the beloved disciple, as of Timothy, as of Titus, as of Evodius, as of Clement, who departed this life in [perfect] chastity, Not, however, that I blame the other blessed [saints] because they entered into the married state, of which I have just spoken. For I pray that, being found worthy of God, I may be found at their feet in the kingdom, as at the feet of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; as of Joseph, and Isaiah, and the rest of the prophets; as of Peter, and Paul, and the rest of the apostles, that were married men. For they entered into these marriages not for the sake of appetite, but out of regard for the propagation of mankind. Fathers, 'bring up your children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord;' and teach them the holy Scriptures, and also trades, that they may not indulge in idleness. Now [the Scripture] says, 'A righteous father educates [his children] well; his heart shall rejoice in a wise son.'" Clement of Alexandria (c. 155 - c. 220 AD) The Stromata, or Miscellanies Book III, Chapter VI, 52-53 "Peter and Philip had children, and Philip gave his daughters in marriage.... Even Paul did not hesitate in one letter to address his consort. [Philippians 4:3] The only reason why he did not take her about with him was that it would have been an inconvenience for his ministry. Accordingly he says in a letter: 'Have we not a right to take about with us a wife that is a sister like the other apostles?' [1 Corinthians 9:5] But the latter, in accordance with their particular ministry, devoted themselves to preaching without any distraction, and took their wives with them not as women with whom they had marriage relations, but as sisters, that they might be their fellow-ministers in dealing with housewives."

As I said last time, the word "paradise" is not found within section 138 in a way to designate who is in paradise and who is not in paradise. The headings says "President Smith sees the righteous dead assembled in paradise and Christ's ministry among them". That's an editorial comment added by those who prepared the section for publication, not part of the revelation. President Smith saw some of those who are in "paradise" to be sure, but the revelation itself does not define those boundaries. Your claim is that Jesus didn't visit those in the terrestrial realm, but section 138 does not say anything that would exclude Jesus from teaching those in the terrestrial realm. Same answer as the last time you asked the same question: "Sorry, I’m not their judge, and I certainly won’t pass judgement on groups of people with a broad brush. That matter is in God’s hands." I'm familiar with 93:33-34. My references to achieving the fulness of joy were describing the exalted beings, those who met certain conditions I realize you are trying to equate the fulness of joy in section 138 with exalted beings, but section 138 is clearly using the phrase in the same sense as Doctrine and Covenants 93:33-34, since they were spirits separated from their bodies. A fulness of joy cannot be received without a physical body. This passage is for those in paradise, not spirit prison. Based on what, the section heading? And where does it say those in the terrestrial realm are not in paradise? Where does section 138 put limits on what is "paradise"? The section only excludes Jesus from teaching the wicked and ungodly and unrepentant individuals who are in "darkness", it doesn't exclude him from teaching those in the terrestrial realm, and Section 76 says Jesus taught those in the terrestrial realm. No, it says a fulness of joy cannot be received without the resurrection. Its not saying if you are resurrected you will have a fulness of joy, as you are trying to make it say. You have a horrible habit of quoting manual commentary as direct quotes from Joseph Smith. That's not a quote from Joseph Smith. Where does it say those who inherit in the terrestrial kingdom have rejected the atonement of Christ in mortality? Section 76 doesn't say that. It says they are: "also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh; Who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it." (76:73-74) It also says: "These are they who are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus; wherefore, they obtain not the crown over the kingdom of our God." (76:79) There is no rejection of Jesus expressed in any of those verses. They either never received a testimony of Jesus in the flesh or they had received a testimony of Jesus but were not valiant in their testimony of Jesus. Doctrine and Covenants section 76 does not describe them as "wicked" or in "darkness". And certainly, whatever their state it is not enough to exclude them from being in the presence of Jesus in the terrestrial kingdom or during the millennial reign of Christ on the earth (which is paradise), nor are they excluded from Jesus visiting them in section 138. “These are they who receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fulness of the Father.” (D&C 76:77) You mean they will be resurrected at the Second Coming? The dead of the terrestrial world are resurrected in the latter part of the first resurrection right after the Second Coming of Christ, and participate in the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth.

Could you please elaborate on what you mean by the bolded portion above? The goal of such academic studies (in my opinion) should be to foster a greater understanding of history and culture, and at the same time acknowledge the limitations of the available evidence and the diverse interpretations of that evidence. There are always limitations in such studies due to the available evidence, and the same goes for our own interpretation of that evidence as it may or may not apply to "the foundational tenets of the church".

And... "LDS scripture", which of course includes the Bible. And the Bible never defines the "nature" of angels, never says they are in a particular ontological category, but in fact it uses the word in the same sense as you described above for LDS theology.

You're trying to make something out of Doctrine and Covenants Section 129 that it was never intended to depict. In the first place, the section heading makes it clear that this text was NOT given as a revelation, it was "Instructions given by Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, February 9, 1843, making known three grand keys by which the correct nature of ministering angels and spirits may be distinguished". I make this point not to downplay what was said in the section, but to emphasize that there is a big difference between how these things were recorded. Revelations were carefully dictated by the prophet, and during dictation a scribe carefully wrote down what Joseph Smith was saying, and often times the text was reviewed afterwards to make sure the revelation was recorded accurately. But the source of section 129 is much different. Joseph Smith was in a room with a few men and he gave "instructions" to them, and what was said in those instructions was written down later on in the journals of Willard Richards and William Clayton. So the text of what is recorded in Doctrine and Covenants Section 129 depends on those two sources (and not from a carefully dictated revelation), and it is incomplete. But what is important is the context. William Clayton recorded in his journal the following introduction in the notes he made later: "Joseph related some of his history and gave us a key whereby we might know whether any administration was from God." So, the whole point and context of section 129 is not to explain the full scope of every type of heavenly being that is now in heaven or has ever been in heaven, but to give instructions about the types of heavenly beings that administer to people on earth in our day. Obviously premortal spirits would be completely out of the scope of those "instructions", so it's silly to try to grind that idea into this set of instructions. The types of beings that administer on the earth now are different than the types of beings that administered on the earth prior to the resurrection of Jesus. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism article on "Angels" has this to say about the various types of beings that may be angels: So the four types of beings that have been angels mentioned above are: Pre-mortal spirits (non corporeal beings) Translated beings (corporeal beings) The spirits of just men made perfect (non corporeal beings) Resurrected beings (corporeal beings) I would also add that mortal men have also been referred to as "angels" in scripture. For the purposes of Doctrine and Covenants 129, only #3 and #4 apply, because there is no longer a reason for pre-mortal beings to fulfill that calling and the fact that Jesus brought about the resurrection from the dead opens the way for resurrected beings to fulfill that calling when corporeal beings are required. So again, you are trying to apply a purpose to Doctrine and Covenants section 129 that it doesn't claim to be making. It's simply instructions given by Joseph Smith about the types of beings that administer to the earth in our day and time.

The word “paradise” is not found anywhere in section 138. So you are making up your own definition of paradise which has already been pointed out to you is in error. It doesn’t say what you claim. What these verses describe are the people that greeted Jesus when he arrived. But nowhere in section 138 does it exclude the people of the terrestrial realm from Jesus’ visit, and section 76 specifically says Jesus taught the people of the terrestrial realm as well. Again, you are completely misrepresenting the verse. Doctrine and Covenants 93:33–34 teaches: “For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.” This is referring to the resurrection. When spirit and body inseparably connected, the individual will “receive a fulness of joy”. Couple that with Doctrine and Covenants 138:14-17 which is also clearly talking about the resurrection: “All these had departed the mortal life, firm in the hope of a glorious resurrection, through the grace of God the Father and his Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ. I beheld that they were filled with joy and gladness, and were rejoicing together because the day of their deliverance was at hand. They were assembled awaiting the advent of the Son of God into the spirit world, to declare their redemption from the bands of death. Their sleeping dust was to be restored unto its perfect frame, bone to his bone, and the sinews and the flesh upon them, the spirit and the body to be united never again to be divided, that they might receive a fulness of joy.” (Doctrine and Covenants 138:14-17) Furthermore, everyone will be resurrected from the dead (the wicked and the righteous – John 5:29). And those who are resurrected to eternal life will receive a greater “fulness of joy” having the kind of life that God has. Consequently, this verse does nothing to support your idea that the people of the terrestrial realm were not visited by Jesus in the spirit world. As I have already said several times, the main point of the revelation in section 138 is to answer the question stated in verse 28: “how it was possible for [Jesus] to preach to those spirits [in prison] and perform the necessary labor among them in so short a time”? The answer to that question is given in the revelation, so its purpose is to explain that Jesus organized the righteous individuals to preach the gospel to those in “darkness” (those of the telestial realm), and there is no reason to describe anything that happened to the people of the terrestrial realm. Section 76 answer that question and explains that Jesus did teach those in the terrestrial realm. Nowhere in section 138 is the word “paradise” mentioned. Your entire argument rests on a faulty premise and circular reasoning. You are also limiting God's judgment to your binary view of heaven and hell, which clearly is not the case. The presence of the Son is included among the organization structure available to those in the terrestrial kingdom: “These are they who receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fulness of the Father.” (D&C 76:77) They would have received the presence of the Son while also in the spirit world. Those of the terrestrial world will be among those who are on the earth during the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth. There is therefore absolutely no reason to assume that section 138 excludes from the teaching of Jesus to those in the spirit world. I'll add the second paragraph for context. You’re just saying the same thing you said before. This has already been addressed in my prior post. Nothing new here.