Calm

Anyone know what his duties were? How much of a spiritual leader/teacher was he considered as opposed to being involved in more temporal things (overseeing administrative stuff, welfare, etc)…what the Presiding Bishopric is seen as in a lot of ways. Hopefully that question makes sense.

I was going to post this next time I popped into the thread, lol. How can one get back on the path if they are in apostasy? Not only has doctrine been confused, but authority lost and authority matters a great deal in LDS theology. It would be at the very least “blind leading the blind”. At that point to get back to the path, a restoration will need to occur and we would anticipate that as happening outside what would then be viewed as the mainstream church, since it’s apostate and too influenced by falsehoods and likely false traditions.

I have never heard of it as referencing individual churches. I think one would need to hold a worldview or be familiar with one that all Christian churches are part of a greater Church of Christ to register that possibility. I don’t know if that was an idea Joseph Smith was exposed to, though the Book of Mormon referring to only two Churches, one of Christ and one of the Devil could be a reference to that idea, but the numbers of the Church of the Lamb of God are few in contrast to the actual membership of all Christian churches. Most (vast majority) members understand the Church of the Lamb of God in this time period is the Restored Church in my experience and it’s been presented that way in manuals in magazines iirc. My memory is that part of the narrative about his confusion over which church to join was induced because preachers would speak of cooperating together to bring people to Christ, but then conflict would arise because of attempting to draw converts to their own congregations (and the narrative usually implied for less worthy motives which isn’t necessarily accurate imo).

But the Bible is a religious, not a secular text, so shouldn’t religious context be assumed rather than a secular one unless more local context indicates a secular use? Does Biblical Greek (since we aren't talking anbout modern Greek, I am not sure why you mention prefixes) always use prefixes in cases where there would have been ambiguity if the context didn’t make a possible definition clearly the one meant? If I happen to pick up just the word “bread” being used in a conference talk I am listening to but can hardly hear for a moment because of background noise, I am thinking it’s either referring to sacrament bread or a religious symbolic usage such as “I am the bread of life” rather than how my kids would ask me to pick up some bread from market or in a show that’s a period piece, it might be used secularly to refer to money. I wouldn’t assume without the qualifier “sacrament” or a quote using the term symbolically that it was meant to be a secular, generic “bread”.

How much Greek have you learned and from what (online apps, college courses, native speakers, etc) out of curiosity? I may have missed it, but I don’t remember reading your training for reading and translating Greek.

Never mind my question, should have finished reading. Is Bauer’s lexicon viewed as influenced by theology as Strong’s often is iirc?

Where are you getting the meanings from, specifically this one “a delegate specifically an ambassador of the Gospel; officially a commissioner of Christ [“apostle”] (with miraculous powers)”

I don’t understand, how can the “good people of the earth” be described as being “spirits of the wicked” once they die? That implies to me they were wicked on earth, not good. And why would they choose to learn the Gospel when they accepted possession by the spirit of the devil?

Not that familiar with these early writings or development of thought, I need to get past the mental block that sources are hard to access though I would prefer to learn them in a more academic setting rather than just read them to avoid my bias getting in the way as much. Lack of that kind of knowledge means I am approaching it more from a psychological standpoint here. It makes more sense to me (logical and emotional) that all would go to the same place after death and it being their internal state making the difference of how they perceive their existence as paradise or misery. It is a very human scenario. I don’t really see any benefit to dividing people up into bad, better, best and sending them to three different places, especially if all are still at some learning stage in their life with a vast variety of needs (each person would need to experience a different set of opportunities to learn to balance out where they lacked). The most likely thing to permanently change the hearts of the wicked, imo, is to be among the better and the best so they can see for themselves what they are missing and be drawn by any remnant of healthy desires in their hearts towards goodness and love. Fear and pain may open one up to wanting something, anything different, but to change in positive ways, they need to be able to imagine what they want and that may not be something they have truly experienced before and so need to see positive examples of others, most likely in a variety of circumstances until they find something that resonates with them….assuming here that the next life isn’t dramatically different from this one at the beginning and it’s the infinite nature of eternity and perfection that drive the differences, especially the currently incomprehensible ones. But it’s also a very human condition to categorize, even people, so that possibility isn’t illogical to me, especially since scripture is full of language of dividing the sheep from the goats, though that seems more focused on judgment time. The only strong reason I see for division of humanity immediately after death is to protect the better and best people (in terms of righteousness and love) from the corrupt ones who still desire to use others or even hurt them, but it seems likely this could be a simple fix if our spirits are capable of perceiving true thoughts and feelings in others better than in mortality. My guess is masking won’t work in the next life. And the wicked won’t be in positions of power by force at least, if at all. Interesting ideas getting triggered for me by this discussion. And helpful insights…and the always useful reminder to keep a close eye on my assumptions. Thank you, Navidad, for wanting to explore these beliefs in spite of the difficulties you must be going through at the moment.

Do you mean describes or doesn’t describe?

Same here….except for fairly plain. It’s ‘words’ and half of words are the assumptions we attach to them, so not really plain.

That’s why I think it is so helpful to have people talk about the views of ideas even when it’s not their belief. I had been assuming what was a clear division in my eyes actually rests on one word in the description “also” that was ambiguous (could have meant “in addition to…, there is…” or “included with”) and my assumptions of what would ‘naturally’ be required (why would seekers be in hell?”)

You have a literal, concrete mind perhaps? Not a problem, just helps to know for communication. I am more of a metaphoric, symbolic reader, seeing words used as shorthand and placeholder for things we can’t really understand as the beasts on Ezekiel were described as creatures, but were symbols of God’s attributes. If it’s literal, then the manisions exist inside another building (in his father House), so can’t be that big. And remember the word translated as mansion might not actually mean that just as candle wasn’t what Jesus said. He was talking about an oil lamp.

Having gone and read the current and past Church stuff thinking about what assumptions I am bringing to the discussion that may not be accurate (a two part spirit prison, where one part is for those still open to learning even if it’s a struggle and the other for those who have fully rejected the gospel after knowing enough about it, refusing the mercy of Christ which they had to understand before they could reject it), I then went and talked to the young ladies who are here cleaning my house to find out how they have been taught about what happens in the next life and what the implications are in their view. They were more familiar with the idea of the Millennium, how things are taught during that time period. And that got me thinking why wouldn’t it be the same for all since Brigham said the Spirit World was not far from us as well as the same sociability will exist in the next life as here. There are people who describe their lives as hell right now and I think some are justified in doing so, though likely a less intense version if we think of Alma’s experience given they still need to function. Anyway, going to think about what the ladies told me and put it in more sense making form than it is in my head at the moment, but that will have to wait as I need to play executive assistant to my daughter again.

Why not?

I think most of us assume they stay in Spirit School (I prefer this term to Prison since the main purpose is learning) until they accept Christ’s Atonement (which includes accepting his gospel and commandments to receive his ordinances) sufficient for moving on to the next phrase of learning (comprehending all the principles of the Gospel in the way Joseph speaks of) or staying there in Spirit School likely in some sort of learning experience that contributes to Christ’s purifying them until Judgment Day at the end of the Millennium and then they will if they still haven’t accepted God’s All that he ants to give them, they become part of the Terrestrial Kingdom. The above is one section of Spirit Prison, Hell is used only to describe the below group, not the one above. This description below of those on the hell side of rejecting the gospel sounds to me like a full out, turn the back rejection of Christ as Redeemer, etc, not the type of partial rejection that a Christian (LDS included) or anyone else might choose if they only chose to accept those principles of the gospel they had learned in mortality for some reason. Perhaps they can fully get behind loving one’s neighbour and helping the poor, but reject any sense of organization or authority. I doubt God’s chosen teachers would easily give up on anyone, some likely have been at work for a couple of millennia. We are not told of any holding area for those satisfied with where they are. This is more than simple disbelief or Nonacceptance of parts of the Gospel that don’t sound right to them for some reason. This is an active rejection of mercy, they don’t want it even though they know the consequences of accepting it and the consequences of rejection. And they still choose hell. God hasn’t taken the Spirit from them, they made their choice and removed themselves, they refused to repent of their sins.

You can be cynical and still be pro transparency (if you were referring to my reservation about Dehlin and thinking I was wondering about his sincerity as well). I don’t usually hold being cynical against someone unless that means they close their mind, refuse to allow that other perspectives have value and may even be more informed, etc. It’s not much fun to engage with anyone who’s close minded. I like seeing people’s gears in motion.

I never said that. Why did you go there? It just seems common politeness to tell people a little of what they are going to see so they know if they want to or not. I don’t like Ward Radio. I don’t want to watch it. It is their style. I don’t do “loud”. But it’s not an obligation, only a kindness. I have a very easy solution if you don’t want to bother. I won’t click on the link. added: I didn’t register the fact you thought the link was embedded at first. You may be able to see a preview but it’s just a link with numbers, no info on content attached for me.

Why? Don’t you trust AI?

Thought of one myself….This looks like a course correction to me: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/sealing?lang=eng

Amen, amen, amen

Not me, AI

I don’t know about RFM, but I think it’s more accurate to state for Dehlin he claims he supports such a view. Knowing quite a bit of online history of his, I have strong doubts of his actual commitment to transparency, including things to do with the Church. (See, evidence I haven’t forgiven yet) I agree with this. Many who have grown up in the Church are used to strong social connections and these are often in the context of church callings and activities, especially if living in LDS dense areas. Hard to replace for many once one steps away from engagement with the Church community.

Sweet of Thoughful (can’t remember his name). It’s not something I could do yet. It’s easier for me to forgive people who have hurt me than people who have hurt my friends and family, especially if intentional.

Well, you do post Ward Radio videos, correct?