The Vision of the Redemption of the Dead

[Calm]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Physical addictions get stronger when the physical body is gone? I know where this comes from but it is just not very logical. It is just apostolic rationalizing without any revelation or scripture backing it up.

Plus it is almost always about addictions. We have to make all of these moral failings instead of medical problems and then wonder why they keep happening. Le sigh.

It does make more sense to me it’s emotional and mental habits that we will struggle with rather than physical because the physical triggers will be gone, but I also wonder how much of those will continue because emotion is very tied to physical state (my blood sugars are much more stable recently due to medication and my anxiety has plummeted down to almost nonexistent at times, which is something I haven’t experienced in decades and possibly since puberty hit, lol) and repeated thoughts create neural pathways that are strengthened the more they are repeated…so remove that pull towards habitual thought and what happens?

I think the question (which can’t be answered at this time though some point to NDEs as evidence) is how much the spiritual body mirrors the physical.  Seems like given the spiritual body is massively older and likely more developed than the physical body, which is less than a century old for most, the influence would tend to be more the other way.

I am looking forward to when a clearer understanding of what addictions are and what causes them and keeps them going seeps into our community consciousness.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

The movie Ghost? 

I am pretty sure it was around long before that. Iirc Embraced By the Light by Eadie mentioned it (NDE that most likely was highly embellished to sell, was inconsistent in how she presented stuff, iirc).

Not saying Eadie started it, I just think she contributed greatly to its popularity as I remember seeing it a lot more afterwards, especially with those who were into energy work as they expanded it to spirits attaching themselves on to people to try and get their addictions fed.  But that could have been me just being more aware of that church hobby/obsession.

Edited December 5, 2025 by Calm

[telnetd]

On 12/5/2025 at 1:48 PM, InCognitus said:

You are so concerned about inclusion or exclusion of women, yet you reject the doctrine of a heavenly mother.  Why?

I don't believe she exists.  When did Heavenly Mother become a doctrine?

But are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be the "spirits of the prophets" 
organized and commissioned to preach the gospel in the spirit world between Christ's
death and resurrection?

[InCognitus]

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

I don't believe she exists.

Why not?  You believe that's what Paul was teaching the Athenians when he said we are all the offspring of God, right?  If you believe that Paul was teaching that to them, why don't you believe Paul?

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

When did Heavenly Mother become a doctrine?

I believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.  And, the way the "Primitive Church" (the New Testament Christian church) settled doctrinal questions or to determine doctrine that is not directly found in scripture was to form a council of the apostles, as was done in Acts chapter 15.  Consequently, the "when" this became doctrine is determined by when it was taught by the First Presidency of the Church and the apostles, as it is defined in the article, Approaching Latter-day Saint Doctrine, as follows:

"Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted."

Consequently, the official declaration of the First Presidency issued in November 1909 seems to be one of the first places where the doctrine of a Heavenly Mother is affirmed, when it says:  "All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother".  It has subsequently been inferred in the Family Proclamation.

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

But are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be the "spirits of the prophets" 
organized and commissioned to preach the gospel in the spirit world between Christ's
death and resurrection?

Yes.  Why not?

[ZealouslyStriving]

7 hours ago, telnetd said:

are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be the "spirits of the prophets" 
organized and commissioned to preach the gospel in the spirit world between Christ's
death and resurrection?

There are 3 groups sent to preach:

1) Doctrine and Covenants 138:57

I beheld that the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead.

2) Doctrine and Covenants 138:6-7

our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the flesh;

That they might carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his words.

3) Doctrine and Covenants 138:30

from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead.

 

*** I believe that faithful sisters fit into category #3 ***

[telnetd]

On 12/8/2025 at 8:19 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

There are 3 groups sent to preach:

1) Doctrine and Covenants 138:57

I beheld that the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead.

2) Doctrine and Covenants 138:6-7

our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the flesh;

That they might carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his words.

3) Doctrine and Covenants 138:30

from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead.

 

*** I believe that faithful sisters fit into category #3 ***

Don't #2 and #3 refer to the same time period?

[ZealouslyStriving]

7 minutes ago, telnetd said:

Don't #2 and #3 refer to the same time period?

What would the time period have to do with the question at hand?

[telnetd]

On 12/8/2025 at 5:56 PM, InCognitus said:

Why not?  You believe that's what Paul was teaching the Athenians when he said we are all the offspring of God, right? 

No particular reason. I just don't interpret offspring in the same way you do. God 
created Adam in the garden of Eden without her involvement. 

Which of the gods of the Athenians was Heavenly Mother?

 

On 12/8/2025 at 5:56 PM, InCognitus said:

Consequently, the official declaration of the First Presidency issued in November 1909 seems to be one of the first places where the doctrine of a Heavenly Mother is affirmed, when it says:  "All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother".  It has subsequently been inferred in the Family Proclamation.

Why wouldn't the church use Paul's mention of "offspring" in Acts 17 to make an earlier
issuance? What led to her existence being affirmed? Some other revelation possibly?

 

On 12/8/2025 at 5:56 PM, InCognitus said:

Asked by me,Gale not InCognitus  But are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be the "spirits of the prophets" 
organized and commissioned to preach the gospel in the spirit world between Christ's
death and resurrection?

On 12/8/2025 at 5:56 PM, InCognitus said:

Yes.  Why not?

Do you also consider current faithful Latter-day Saint sisters as prophets too or was
this prophethood for only Old Testament women and a few in the New Testament?

Edited December 11, 2025 by telnetd

[InCognitus]

5 hours ago, telnetd said:

On 12/8/2025 at 3:56 PM, InCognitus said:

Why not?  You believe that's what Paul was teaching the Athenians when he said we are all the offspring of God, right? 

No particular reason. I just don't interpret offspring in the same way you do.

How you interpret what Paul was teaching is not important to how Paul meant it and how his listeners would understand him.  Paul wasn't trying to trick them into converting to Christianity, he was teaching them about the true God of the Bible.  What did Paul really mean when he used the Greek word génos, what does that word really mean and how would his listeners understand it?  

You keep trying to change the meaning of the word génos into something that fits with the modern Christian view of man's relationship to God (in a way that doesn't work with Paul's overall argument) and aren't looking at it from Paul's perspective and the perspective of his Greek audience.  Why not just go with what the Bible says?

5 hours ago, telnetd said:

God 
created Adam in the garden of Eden without her involvement. 

Are you sure about that?  Scripture says, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:26-27). 

5 hours ago, telnetd said:

Which of the gods of the Athenians was Heavenly Mother?

Paul was teaching them about the true God of the Bible, not about any Athenian gods.  You know that.  So quit trying to make Paul teach Greek mythology.

5 hours ago, telnetd said:

Why wouldn't the church use Paul's mention of "offspring" in Acts 17 to make an earlier
issuance? What led to her existence being affirmed? Some other revelation possibly?

Why wouldn't all Christians interpret "offspring" in Acts 17 that way?

5 hours ago, telnetd said:

Do you also consider current faithful Latter-day Saint sisters as prophets too or was
this prophethood for only Old Testament women and a few in the New Testament?

To "prophecy" is a gift of the spirit.  God doesn't limit that to men (as you know from the Old Testament usage).  But be a "prophet" to Israel or as an office in the New Testament Christian church is a different matter.

Edited December 11, 2025 by InCognitus

[telnetd]

On 12/11/2025 at 12:38 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

What would the time period have to do with the question at hand?

#2 (Doctrine and Covenants 138:6-7) and #3 (Doctrine and Covenants 138:30) looks to me
like the period between his death and resurrection.

Why do you exclude faithful sisters from category #2 and only put them in #3 as you said
before?

[telnetd]

On 12/11/2025 at 4:31 PM, InCognitus said:

How you interpret what Paul was teaching is not important to how Paul meant it and how his listeners would understand him.  Paul wasn't trying to trick them into converting to Christianity, he was teaching them about the true God of the Bible.

I believe the part about being offspring is about our being created by God, without
a heavenly mother.  We live, move, and have our being through Him.

"For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets 
have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of 
God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, 
graven by art and man's device".

The Greeks depicted their gods (in a hierarchy) as humanlike but idealized.

This is how they depicted their gods:

• Gods looked like people.
• They were shown as physically perfect—strong and youthful.
• Each god had symbols to identify them (e.g., Athena with a helmet and spear, Zeus with a thunderbolt).
• Though human in form, they were often portrayed as taller than mortals.

Paul subtly denounced their pantheon and did not promote the idea of a heavenly
mother. There was a queen in heaven in Jewish theology. I think she was called
Ashtoreth.

Jesus said "And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: 
for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto 
Abraham".

These offspring would be created without a heavenly mother.

 

On 12/11/2025 at 4:31 PM, InCognitus said:

 Are you sure about that?  Scripture says, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:26-27). 

God doesn't need to be a female to create a human female.

Let me know how you feel heavenly mother was involved to create Eve.

 

On 12/11/2025 at 4:31 PM, InCognitus said:

To "prophecy" is a gift of the spirit.  God doesn't limit that to men (as you know from the Old Testament usage).  But be a "prophet" to Israel or as an office in the New Testament Christian church is a different matter.

Did the spirits of the prophets in Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 (I believe you
also counted women among that group here on Dec 8) have an office in the Old
Testament?

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

#2 (Doctrine and Covenants 138:6-7) and #3 (Doctrine and Covenants 138:30) looks to me
like the period between his death and resurrection.

You are not making sense.

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

Why do you exclude faithful sisters from category #2 and only put them in #3 as you said
before?

Because I personally believe that category #2 refers to men called as prophets among the nations prior to the coming of Christ- and category #3 refers to all righteous Saints from all dispensations.

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

I believe the part about being offspring is about our being created by God, without
a heavenly mother.  We live, move, and have our being through Him.

"For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets 
have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of 
God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, 
graven by art and man's device".

The quote, "For in him we live, and move, and have our being" is Paul making a direct quote from Epimenides, another Greek poet writing about the Greek god Zeus.  It's the same source from which Paul gets his quote, "The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies" in Titus 1:12.  

As the Wikipedia source shows, in the poem, Minos addresses Zeus thus:

They fashioned a tomb for you, holy and high one,
Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies.
But you are not dead: you live and abide forever,
For in you we live and move and have our being.

As for Paul's other quote from Aratus (another Greek poet) where he taught that we are all the "offspring of God", the Greek word génos that he uses simply can’t mean “creation”.  The word means “kind” of being.  The Latin Vulgate Bible translates the verse to say that humans are the “genus” of God, the same word which is used in modern times to define the binomial species of a living organism.  The Bible is plainly teaching that humans are the same kind of being as God!

And making that word mean "creation" totally destroys Paul's argument.  But you already know this, because we have discussed it.  Paul’s argument to the Athenians can’t possibly work if Paul really meant we are merely God’s creations.  It only works if Paul means that we are the same kind of being as God. 

Paul says, “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God [the same kind of being as God], we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.”

If Paul really meant that God created us (instead of what the Bible is actually teaching there), then his argument is meaningless.  God created gold, silver, and stone.  God created us.  Since humans and gold, silver, and stone are all creations, and God created gold, silver, and stone, then why couldn’t divinity be “gold, or silver, or stone”?  There is no relationship except that we share a common creation.

And why didn't Paul just say we are creations of God instead of saying we are the génos of God, the very same kind of being as God?  Why make it confusing for his pagan audience?  You are wresting the Bible to try to make it fit your theology instead of relying on the Bible to define your theology.

And as you said, “The pagans understood ‘offspring’ in the sexual case of literal reproduction for the Greek gods; like that which occurs between male and female.”  If Paul’s audience understood him that way, then why why why did Paul lie to them if he really meant that we are only creations of God?   

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

The Greeks depicted their gods (in a hierarchy) as humanlike but idealized.

This is how they depicted their gods:

• Gods looked like people.
• They were shown as physically perfect—strong and youthful.
• Each god had symbols to identify them (e.g., Athena with a helmet and spear, Zeus with a thunderbolt).
• Though human in form, they were often portrayed as taller than mortals.

Paul subtly denounced their pantheon and did not promote the idea of a heavenly
mother. There was a queen in heaven in Jewish theology. I think she was called
Ashtoreth.

Paul was very well informed in Jewish theology.  So why do you think Paul taught the Athenians that we are the offspring of God instead of saying we were created by God?

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

Jesus said "And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: 
for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto 
Abraham".

These offspring would be created without a heavenly mother.

You said exactly the same thing when posting as theplains:

On 11/24/2025 at 2:44 PM, theplains said:

Yes. Paul was trying to move the Corinthians away from their pagan views of heavenly gods and 
goddesses.

He was not replacing the highest Greek god with Heavenly Father or Hera as Heavenly Mother. 
Likewise for Paul preaching on Mars Hill. He did not focus on one of the false deities they were 
worshipping and re-identified that deity as Heavenly Father. While he does mention "offspring of 
God", he does not teach we are "offspring of heavenly parents".

God is able to raise up children from stones for Abraham (Matthew 3:9).  The involvement of a 
heavenly spouse is not required.

It looks like you are getting your user names mixed up.

Since I have prepared a full response to that post (I've been holding off on posting it to see how things went this week), I will say the same thing here:

Matthew 3:9 is referring to a physical creation of the body (God is able to raise up children from stones, the physical), not their eternal spirits that come from the presence of God (the same kind of being as God).  And remember, God is the “Father of spirits”.

And why are you so determined to eliminate women from the creation process? 

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

On 12/11/2025 at 2:31 PM, InCognitus said:

 Are you sure about that?  Scripture says, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:26-27). 

God doesn't need to be a female to create a human female.

Let me know how you feel heavenly mother was involved to create Eve.

But the text has God speaking in the plural, "Let US make man in OUR image after OUR likeness", to look like them, and they were created "male and female".

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

On 12/11/2025 at 2:31 PM, InCognitus said:

To "prophecy" is a gift of the spirit.  God doesn't limit that to men (as you know from the Old Testament usage).  But be a "prophet" to Israel or as an office in the New Testament Christian church is a different matter.

Did the spirits of the prophets in Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 (I believe you
also counted women among that group here on Dec 8) have an office in the Old
Testament?

As pointed out before, the line of thought started in Doctrine and Covenants 138:36 continues through verse 57, and many individuals (named and unnamed) are included in the work, including "Mother Eve, with many of her faithful daughters who had lived through the ages and worshiped the true and living God" (verse 39).

I think it's rather ironic that you (telnetd, AKA theplains, AKA marineland, AKA GotCeltics) continue to bring up the need to include of women, but deny that women have any part in the works of God in heaven.  Something is wrong with this picture.

Edited December 14, 2025 by InCognitus

[Navidad]

On 12/3/2025 at 9:52 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

I don't get why people prefer a god that created a scenario were the vast majority is sentenced to eternal torment for simply not having the opportunity to hear their gospel.

I think this might be what is called a "strawman" fallacy. I grew up smack dab in the middle of mainstream non-LDS Evangelical and to some degree, Fundamentalist Christianity. I then went to an Evangelical college, seminary, and graduate school. I don't remember ever hearing anyone in any of that teach that humans will be "sentenced to eternal torment for simply not having the opportunity to hear their gospel." I certainly have never taught that. Your claim seems to me to be like the claim that some of my LDS friends love to postulate that most Protestant Christians are creedal as a means to dismiss "their gospel" as well. You may be generalizing the views of the most right-wing minority of non-LDS Protestant Christians to be the norm. Even those in the reformed movement within Evangelicalism most often see a different judgment for those who never heard but may be among the "elect" that God has chosen to be His own. No one knows the breadth of that belief. I don't believe in election, but I know many who do and they believe in a great wideness in God's mercy because of the power of grace. I think many of my LDS friends do not understand the depth, power, and width of grace in the doctrines of the Protestant non-LDS Christians because grace has historically not been a focal point of LDS teachings. Best wishes. 

[ZealouslyStriving]

7 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I think this might be what is called a "strawman" fallacy. I grew up smack dab in the middle of mainstream non-LDS Evangelical and to some degree, Fundamentalist Christianity. I then went to an Evangelical college, seminary, and graduate school. I don't remember ever hearing anyone in any of that teach that humans will be "sentenced to eternal torment for simply not having the opportunity to hear their gospel." I certainly have never taught that. Your claim seems to me to be like the claim that some of my LDS friends love to postulate that most Protestant Christians are creedal as a means to dismiss "their gospel" as well. You may be generalizing the views of the most right-wing minority of non-LDS Protestant Christians to be the norm. Even those in the reformed movement within Evangelicalism most often see a different judgment for those who never heard but may be among the "elect" that God has chosen to be His own. No one knows the breadth of that belief. I don't believe in election, but I know many who do and they believe in a great wideness in God's mercy because of the power of grace. I think many of my LDS friends do not understand the depth, power, and width of grace in the doctrines of the Protestant non-LDS Christians because grace has historically not been a focal point of LDS teachings. Best wishes. 

AI Overview

 

 

 

+8

In traditional Protestant theology, views vary, but the dominant perspective (Restrictivism) holds that those who die without hearing the Gospel face condemnation because all humanity is inherently sinful and needs Christ, though some Evangelical views (Inclusivism/Universalism) suggest God's mercy offers salvation through conscience or a final chance at death for the unevangelized, while some believe everyone knows God through nature and rejects Him, making them accountable regardless. Key verses often cited are Romans 10:14 ("faith comes from hearing") and Romans 1:20 (God's invisible attributes known through creation). 

Dominant View (Restrictivism)

No Innocence: People aren't innocent; they know God exists through creation but suppress that truth, leading them to reject Him and need salvation through Jesus.

Condemnation: Since faith comes through hearing the Word (Romans 10:14), those who never hear are considered lost. 

Alternative/Nuanced Views

Inclusivism: God's grace extends to those who haven't heard, potentially through a general revelation or a post-mortem opportunity, where their conscience judges them.

Universal Opportunity: Some believe everyone gets a chance to respond to Christ at the moment of death.

Old Testament Saints: Some traditions hold that people before Christ (like Old Testament figures) were saved by faith in God's revealed promises, awaiting the Messiah in a temporary holding place (Hades/Limbo). 

Key Scriptural Basis

Romans 1:20: All people know God through creation but exchange His glory for idols.

Romans 10:14-15: "How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?". 

Ultimately, most Protestants agree people need Jesus, but differ on whether hearing the specific Gospel message is an absolute prerequisite for salvation, or if God's mercy covers those genuinely seeking Him without ever hearing the explicit message. 

[Navidad]

11 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

AI Overview

 

 

 

+8

In traditional Protestant theology, views vary, but the dominant perspective (Restrictivism) holds that those who die without hearing the Gospel face condemnation because all humanity is inherently sinful and needs Christ, though some Evangelical views (Inclusivism/Universalism) suggest God's mercy offers salvation through conscience or a final chance at death for the unevangelized, while some believe everyone knows God through nature and rejects Him, making them accountable regardless. Key verses often cited are Romans 10:14 ("faith comes from hearing") and Romans 1:20 (God's invisible attributes known through creation). 

Dominant View (Restrictivism)

No Innocence: People aren't innocent; they know God exists through creation but suppress that truth, leading them to reject Him and need salvation through Jesus.

Condemnation: Since faith comes through hearing the Word (Romans 10:14), those who never hear are considered lost. 

Alternative/Nuanced Views

Inclusivism: God's grace extends to those who haven't heard, potentially through a general revelation or a post-mortem opportunity, where their conscience judges them.

Universal Opportunity: Some believe everyone gets a chance to respond to Christ at the moment of death.

Old Testament Saints: Some traditions hold that people before Christ (like Old Testament figures) were saved by faith in God's revealed promises, awaiting the Messiah in a temporary holding place (Hades/Limbo). 

Key Scriptural Basis

Romans 1:20: All people know God through creation but exchange His glory for idols.

Romans 10:14-15: "How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?". 

Ultimately, most Protestants agree people need Jesus, but differ on whether hearing the specific Gospel message is an absolute prerequisite for salvation, or if God's mercy covers those genuinely seeking Him without ever hearing the explicit message. 

Wow! I wonder who programmed this particular AI conclusion? Well, I guess that settles it. AI says that restrictivism is the dominant view of "traditional Protestant theology." As of when? How does AI define "traditional Protestant theology"? Can I rely on AI to provide me accurate doctrinal information on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Hold on and let me ask AI about the LDS traditional dominant view of its own restrictivism? I acknowledge I am having fun at AI's expense. You gave it a good shot, but I am not buying it! What you just quoted just reinforces the concept of artificial intelligence! Ha! Oh, and I just asked AI if the LDS church is a restrictivist group - Here is its summary conclusion: 

"Conclusion

While the LDS Church has had restrictive practices in its history, particularly regarding race and moral conduct, it has made significant changes over time. The church emphasizes a commitment to its doctrines and community standards, which some may view as restrictive."  I am not sure if that is an answer or not! Best wishes. 

[Calm]

37 minutes ago, Navidad said:

think many of my LDS friends do not understand the depth, power, and width of grace in the doctrines of the Protestant non-LDS Christians because grace has historically not been a focal point of LDS teachings.

I think it’s most likely because we don’t typically study other faiths at all except as a framework for what we have that they don’t, which descriptions tend to be in very simplistic and often derogatory throw away lines.  This method unsurprisingly gives us strawmen rather than educates us in others’ doctrine, pretty much how much of antimormon tactics misrepresent our doctrine and history. 

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

I think this might be what is called a "strawman" fallacy. I grew up smack dab in the middle of mainstream non-LDS Evangelical and to some degree, Fundamentalist Christianity. I then went to an Evangelical college, seminary, and graduate school. I don't remember ever hearing anyone in any of that teach that humans will be "sentenced to eternal torment for simply not having the opportunity to hear their gospel." I certainly have never taught that. Your claim seems to me to be like the claim that some of my LDS friends love to postulate that most Protestant Christians are creedal as a means to dismiss "their gospel" as well. You may be generalizing the views of the most right-wing minority of non-LDS Protestant Christians to be the norm. Even those in the reformed movement within Evangelicalism most often see a different judgment for those who never heard but may be among the "elect" that God has chosen to be His own. No one knows the breadth of that belief. I don't believe in election, but I know many who do and they believe in a great wideness in God's mercy because of the power of grace. I think many of my LDS friends do not understand the depth, power, and width of grace in the doctrines of the Protestant non-LDS Christians because grace has historically not been a focal point of LDS teachings. Best wishes. 

I get your viewpoint, and I definitely agree with you that not all Evangelicals I've encountered think the same way that it is portrayed in the "AI overview", but I think a lot of LDS members have encountered that point of view.  And perhaps they are also influenced by the experience of Joseph Smith regarding the death of his brother Alvin, where at his funeral the preacher "all but said Alvin had gone to hell, using his death to warn others of what would happen unless God intervened to save them" (Saints, Volume 1, Chapter 3).

We discussed this topic in our Gospel Doctrine class last week while studying Doctrine and Covenants section 137, which was Joseph Smith's vision where he saw Alvin in the Celestial Kingdom of God. 

The Come Follow Me lesson for that section says the following about the events related to Alvin's death, "Alvin Smith, the Prophet Joseph’s beloved brother, passed away six years before God restored the authority to baptize. The common understanding among some Christians in 1836 was that if a person died without being baptized, that person could not go to heaven."

When we discussed that part of the lesson last week, one person in the class commented about attending a funeral for a relative who had a wife that was a member of another Christian denomination (she mentioned the denomination, but I forget what it was), and said that the minister of that denomination that was overseeing the funeral said something very similar about the death of their relative. 

So that "strawman" point of view is a real thing, but it certainly can't be painted with a broad brush across all Evangelical Christianity. 

Edited December 14, 2025 by InCognitus

[telnetd]

On 12/14/2025 at 2:29 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Because I personally believe that category #2 refers to men called as prophets among the nations prior to the coming of Christ- and category #3 refers to all righteous Saints from all dispensations.

Clarification...

2) Time frame in Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37

"Our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing 
and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the 
flesh;

That they might carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could 
not go personally, because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through 
the ministration of his servants might also hear his words".

3) Time from in Doctrine and Covenants 138:30

"From among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed 
with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of 
the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus 
was the gospel preached to the dead.

#2 and #3 refers to the time Christ spent in the spirit world between his death and 
resurrection.

4) Time frame in Doctrine and Covenants 138:57

This does not refer to the time period of #2 and #3:

"I beheld that the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal 
life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, 
through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness 
and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead".

If #3 includes women, so does #2.  

#4 doesn't appear to imply for women as they are not elders in this dispensation.

[telnetd]

On 12/14/2025 at 2:31 PM, InCognitus said:

Matthew 3:9 is referring to a physical creation of the body (God is able to raise up children from stones, the physical), not their eternal spirits that come from the presence of God (the same kind of being as God).  And remember, God is the “Father of spirits”.

And why are you so determined to eliminate women from the creation process? 

On 12/11/2025 at 4:31 PM, InCognitus said:

On 12/11/2025 at 12:47 PM, telnetd said:

God 
created Adam in the garden of Eden without her [Heavenly Mother's] involvement. 

Are you sure about that?  Scripture says, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:26-27). 

I know how human males and females are involved in the creation process. But neither
the husband or wife say "This child will be a son / This child will be a daughter / so let
me create his/her body in my image".

So I'm trying to understand if and how you believe a heavenly mother was involved to 
create the spirit body of Eve and other daughters in Her image?

Edited December 17, 2025 by telnetd

[ZealouslyStriving]

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

Clarification...

2) Time frame in Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37

"Our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing 
and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the 
flesh;

That they might carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could 
not go personally, because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through 
the ministration of his servants might also hear his words".

3) Time from in Doctrine and Covenants 138:30

"From among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed 
with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of 
the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus 
was the gospel preached to the dead.

#2 and #3 refers to the time Christ spent in the spirit world between his death and 
resurrection.

4) Time frame in Doctrine and Covenants 138:57

This does not refer to the time period of #2 and #3:

"I beheld that the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal 
life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, 
through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness 
and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead".

If #3 includes women, so does #2.  

#4 doesn't appear to imply for women as they are not elders in this dispensation.

I believe you are overthinking things.

Edited December 17, 2025 by ZealouslyStriving

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

I know how human males and females are involved in the creation process. But neither
the husband or wife say "This child will be a son / This child will be a daughter / so let
me create his/her body in my image".

So I'm trying to understand if and how you believe a heavenly mother was involved to 
create the spirit body of Eve and other daughters in Her image?

Spirits are eternal, they aren't created. They are the same "kind" of being as God, as the Bible says.  So that part is a given.  But how exactly we become spirit children of God is also not defined.  We just know that God is the "Father of spirits" (as the Bible teaches as well).  Whatever that process is, we have "heavenly parents" and we have submitted ourselves to and covenanted with them.

I don't know for sure if heavenly mother was involved in the physical creation process.  I only know that scripture says that they created in their image and likeness both "male" and "female".

Edited December 17, 2025 by InCognitus

[Clear]

Telnetd said:

“Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 says "Thus was it made known that our Redeemer spent 
his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the 
faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the flesh. That they might 
carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, 
because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through the ministration of his 
servants might also hear his words".

Out of all the faithful men and women in the spirit world where Jesus went after he 
died, why were only prophets commissioned to preach to those in darkness?

Why couldn't Jesus personally go and preach to them when he already preached to the 
living who were in rebellion and transgression during his three-year ministry? “

 

The thought that immediately comes to mind is that, though all others in the spirit world are able to instruct each other just as varying Christians belonging to varying movements nowadays speak and debate their beliefs, most all of their discussion relates to what the ancient prophets and apostles themselves said (i.e. we tend to quote scriptures written by prophets and apostles).

Thus, though the text does not tell us it is ONLY the prophets and apostles who teach, it is THEIR message which most of us value and use as a basis for polimic discussions and thus, even in the world of spirits, their utterances and explanations and clarifications and teachings would still be most valuable and most credible and thus, carry the greatest influence in the world of spirits, just as they do in their writings do now.

Thus, in early decensus literature such as The Gospel of Nicodemus, that describes the ancient Christian traditions of Jesus descending into the world of spirits, it is John the Baptist who is first mentioned to be the one teaching at the entrance of Jesus into Hades to honor his promise to resurrect Adam and others.   However the ancient text mentions others such as Isaiah and Seth, etc.

For example, the two sons of Simeon who had died and were among those resurrected at the resurrection of Christ (described in Matt 27:52) describe the world of spirits they experienced to the church leaders.

Joseph of Erimathaea tells the church leaders:  "And if you do not know the others [who were resurrected], Symeon at least, who received Jesus, and his two sons whom He has raised up-them at least you know. For we buried them not long ago; but now their tombs are seen open and empty, and they are alive, and dwelling in Arimathaea…Let us go to Arimathaea and find them.

After finding the two resurrected sons of Simeon, the sons describe the world of spirits and the entry of the Messiah into Hades saying:

“And straightway our father Abraham was united with the patriarchs and the prophets, and at the same time they were filled with joy, and said to each other: This light is from a great source of light. The prophet Isaiah, who was there present, said: This light is from the Father, and from the Son, and from the Holy Spirit; about whom I prophesied when yet alive, saying, The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, the people that sat in darkness, have seen a great light.

Then there came into the midst another, an ascetic from the desert; and the patriarchs said to him: Who art thou? And he said: I am John…”

The ancient text narrates that: “While John, therefore, was thus teaching those in Hades, the first created and forefather Adam heard, and said to his son Seth: My son, I wish thee to tell the forefathers of the race of men and the prophets where I sent thee, when it fell to my lot to die…”

The point here is that all the Patriarchs, the prophets, and also apostles were in hades and, in this case, John is teaching other spirits at the descent of Jesus into the world of spirits to resurrect them as he had promised Adam and the others in so many of the early Judeo-Christian texts.

Describing the resurrect of Adam and others, the text specifically says: “And setting out to paradise, He took hold of our forefather Adam by the hand, and delivered him, and all the just, to the archangel Michael.”

Thus, the promise to resurrect Adam and others was honored.

I do not think such ancient Judeo-Christian texts, nor more modern revelations excluded others from teaching, merely that they were mentioned because they were the most credible witnesses to what they, themselves had said during their life times.

[telnetd]

On 12/17/2025 at 2:15 PM, InCognitus said:

I don't know for sure if heavenly mother was involved in the physical creation process.

<Deleted my initial reply. You may have also answered a question about the spiritual
creation process>

Edited December 20, 2025 by telnetd

[telnetd]

On 12/17/2025 at 12:57 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

I believe you are overthinking things.

You seem to think they portray different time periods but you don't explain why.