GoCeltics

There, fixed it for you, you picked the wrong word to change. @bluebell “Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” Jesus’ audience is focused on “works,” and Jesus redirects their attention to what true “work” really means. An article from Ensign qualifies grace and salvation. “But, if we wish to overcome spiritual death and enter back into God's presence, we must be obedient to laws and principles. This is exaltation by works. Thus, according to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works.”

Who are the righteous that have life eternal in Matthew 25:46?

Satisfy several conditions [C] and then grace is sufficient. The sufficiency of grace brings results [R]. “Yea, [C1] come unto Christ, [C2] and be perfected in him, [C3] and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, [C4] and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, [R1] that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, [R2] ye can in nowise deny the power of God.”

Are individuals who do not meet the minimum requirements you mentioned still considered saved? Does “receiving Christ”, to be saved, means accepting all of the ordinances? In Alma 24, salvation is portrayed as exaltation (see verses 16 and 22), and this understanding is reflected in other passages as well. Alma 7:16 "And whosoever doeth this, and keepeth the commandments of God from thenceforth, the same will remember that I say unto him, yea, he will remember that I have said unto him, he shall have eternal life, according to the testimony of the Holy Spirit, which testifieth in me." Alma 11:40 "And he shall come into the world to redeem his people; and he shall take upon him the transgressions of those who believe on his name; and these are they that shall have eternal life, and salvation cometh to none else. 3 Nephi 9:22 "Therefore, whoso repenteth and cometh unto me as a little child, him will I receive, for of such is the kingdom of God. Behold, for such I have laid down my life, and have taken it up again; therefore repent, and come unto me ye ends of the earth, and be saved." Is this the sense in which you interpret “saved” in 2 Nephi 25:23?

“For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.” The parable doesn’t suggest that there was almost no work left to be done at the end. How is “receiving the same payment” meant to function as an analogy for the kingdom of heaven in light of the various kingdoms of glory in your church's theology? Does grace operate only in relation to a person’s salvation—as described in 2 Nephi 31:16–20, where salvation is understood as exaltation? Why is Christ’s grace “sufficient” only after the conditions outlined in Moroni 10:32 are met?

What would 2 Nephi 25:23 mean if it was changed to “... for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, before all we can do?”

The same for Jesus and the Holy Ghost?

If there is a heavenly mother and father then the offspring of a human male (a God) and human female (a God) is a God. There is ample support for spirits being created. “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7). What “returns” to God must have come from God. An eternal spirit does not exist outside of God. Therefore, the spirit has its origin in God Himself. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis 2:7). Adam’s spirit is directly received from God. “The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him” (Zechariah 12:1). The spirit originates from God’s creative will. “Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?” (Hebrews 12:9). God as Father of Israel (Deuteronomy 32:6) means He brought the nation into existence. God as Father of lights (James 1:17) implies He created the heavenly lights. For God to be “Father of spirits” means He is the source from which spirits proceed, not merely the ruler over them. “For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well” (Psalm 139:13–14). God forms the inner person, not merely the outer body. This includes the conscience, mind, or soul/spirit. Then we have angels (spirits) that are a separate creation from humans. “Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire” (Psalm 104:4, Hebrews 1:14). Jesus makes a distinction between flesh-and-bone humans and angels in Luke 24:39. “Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts. Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light. Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the Lord: for he commanded, and they were created” (Psalm 148:2-5). “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him” (Colossians 1:16). Jesus created Lucifer too. Human spirits are redeemed by Christ who became human. Angels are not redeemed by Christ’s incarnation (Hebrew 2:14–17).

No created spirit is a God or god. Except for God, I don't believe spirits are eternal. I would define God as the one, eternal, uncreated, supreme being. By a new creature, it’s a change in mind and heart. Some day it will involve a resurrected body. Would you fill in the blanks?: God is a ---? The offspring of a --- is by nature a --- ?

Those in the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms won't have spirit children but there's nothing to indicate they are resurrected with fewer organs.

So you take it Paul was teaching when we were born as spirits, we were gods too; the same type of being God is – a god. Is it accurate?

Mosiah portrays Jesus as a Heavenly Father. “And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters”. Does this imply he is married or that we need to be nurtured by his wife?

@Calm My statement about you (InCognitus) making a case for no need of a heavenly mother was based on what you said previously - “Unless, of course, being the offspring of God (making humans the same kind of being as God, as the Bible teaches) has nothing to do with God begetting us through physical functions as you suppose”. If one believes she is required, then how is a heavenly mother involved in spirits being begotten and born? Does she need to have physical functions in the body as Joseph Fielding Smith appeared to conclude?

Assuming pre-existing intelligence does not possess gender.

That presents a good case against the need for a heavenly mother.

Don't view sex (procreation) as a bad thing when done in the confines of matrimony. He created it for us.

Joseph Fielding Smith might have concluded procreative functions of the mortal body continue with resurrection into a celestial body. I don't know why resurrected bodies (physical) of flesh and bones (Heavenly Father and Mother) had children with spirit bodies.

Drawing upon the terminology Joseph Fielding Smith used and within LDS thinking, what functions of the celestial body enable the power of procreation for Heavenly Father and Mother?

Is gender eternal or gained in the pre-mortal world when as is taught, people are begotten and born of heavenly parents before coming to earth?

Thanks if you could provide a few.

Could someone explain this teaching from Doctrines of Salvation. PROCREATION LIMITED TO CELESTIAL BODIES. Some will gain celestial bodies with all the powers of exaltation and eternal increase. These bodies will shine like the sun as our Savior's does, as described by John. Those who enter the terrestrial kingdom will have terrestrial bodies, and they will not shine like the sun, but they will be more glorious than the bodies of those who receive the telestial glory. In both of these kingdoms there will be changes in the bodies and limitations. They will not have the power of increase, neither the power or nature to live as husbands and wives, for this will be denied them and they cannot increase. Those who receive the exaltation in the celestial kingdom will have the “continuation of the seeds forever.” They will live in the family relationship. In the terrestrial and in the telestial kingdoms there will be no marriage. Those who enter there will remain “separately and singly” forever. Some of the functions in the celestial body will not appear in the terrestrial body, neither in the telestial body, and the power of procreation will be removed. 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. Matthew 22:30 says “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” Joseph Fielding Smith appears to suggest the “so-called Christian world” believed individuals who do not bear children after the Resurrection would cease to be regarded as male or female. Which, if any, Christian theologians or traditions have actually taught such an interpretation? Are angels understood to be without sexual orientation?

“And of Zebulun he said, Rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out; and, Issachar, in thy tents. They shall call the people unto the mountain; there they shall offer sacrifices of righteousness: for they shall suck of the abundance of the seas, and of treasures hid in the sand.” This celebrates how Zebulun and Issachar will enjoy material blessings from the sea and land, worship God rightly, and draw other peoples to God through their faithfulness and prosperity. Where you put that mountain, seas, and sand is up to you.

"and his border shall be unto Zidon" doesn't seem far beyond. Maybe you're thinking about Sidon in the Book of Mormon or that Zebulun will inherit all coastlines which can serve as havens for ships.

The words spoken about Zebulun appear to have some future fulfillment (after this blessing or yet future from us) otherwise the blessing would not make sense. The kingship fell upon Judah, the context being Israel of course (Genesis 49:10). The blessing upon Jacob which prevailed over his progenitors (Genesis 49:26) did not include a priesthood or land in the United States. "Have prevailed" is denoting what Jacob had then, not land he would not have in the future. Everlasting hills, if you want to move it from geographical locations outside Israel to the United States, could also be other lands that have high mountains or ranges of hills. You might also want to consider Ezekiel chapters 47 and 48.

“Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea; and he shall be for an haven of ships; and his border shall be unto Zidon.” This blessing suggests that Zebulun’s descendants would live near the sea (Mediterranean) and be involved in maritime activities. The reference to Zidon (or Sidon) indicates that their territory would extend toward this ancient Phoenician city, known for its trade and seafaring. The phrase “utmost bound of the everlasting hills” in Genesis 49:26 (for Joseph) is a poetic expression and isn’t specifically referring to a geographical location like the United States. It’s more about conveying the idea of vastness and enduring blessings. You see a similar structure for the blessings upon Issachar, Dan, and Benjamin. I think some interpretations and teachings within the Latter-day Saint tradition may have connected this phrase to the Americas.