Collective vs Individual Salvation

[Matthew J. Tandy]

Mendoza,

Please edit your post to remove the first paragraph. I specifically stated:

Rules:

* Do not turn this thread political. I will ask to have you banned from the thread if you do.

* Do not make this an attack or defense of the commentator whose comments are being considered here.

* You can make reference to a certain person believing a certain way (such as Obama or Beck), but you must be able to do so in context of the topic and with data, not accusation.

Your comments violate two of the guidelines. I am interested in the topic (which the second half was), not if you agree with Beck or anything he says or how he says things.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

BCSpace:

One thing that seems very much like the perverted sense of CS2 to me is the notion that the wayward children of sealed, covenent keeping, and prayerful parents will be saved in the CK. I believe there is actual LDS doctrine for this in an official publication, an Ensign and likely a CR.

I'd have to find the reference again, but if the context is simply that the wayward child is saved in the CK "matter-of-fact", then I disagree with it as a perversion of the gospel for the same reasons as above. If it's in the sense that the righteous parents likely will have an overall positive influence on the child such that they might return, I agree with it. If the influence of righteous parents is an absolute guarentee that the wayward child will be saved, I disagree with it, same reasons as above.

I have to admit, that quote has always bothered me. It seems to, at least at its surface, go against what countless other prophets and the scriptures say. And yet it has been published over and over in the Ensign. I don't know if it was ever meant to imply that in the end, sealing to someone guarantees exaltation. Maybe he was referring to salvation in any kingdom, or perhaps he was referring to progression between kingdoms. Guarantees of salvation, outside of calling and elections made sure, is undocumented in the scriptures. I think its relation to the topic is relevant.

LoaP:

Was JS not being Christian when he dictated this revelation, whether or not we adhere to it today?

Quote

D&C 70:14 Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld.

The section is in regards to the law of consecration and/or united order. It was a binding law of the Kingdom of God upon all members of the Church. Membership in the church is a voluntary choice. Because of corruption and sin, this law (a higher law) was taken and we have been given the law of tithing. In the temple, we still make similar covenants (the higher covenant), but again, this is a "participant by choice", not by force, and is meant for the righteous. My issue with CS2 is that can only be achieved by forcing a group of people into compliance, supposing even one person objects. If CS2 is correct, the only way it could be achieved in the eyes of God properly is by the preaching of the word of God, not one group creating laws while in power to cause another group to obey on the outside and not the inside. So in short, no, Joseph was not being un-Christian, neither was the Lord. I believe an attempt to force the point upon others who never chose to be participants and have no way to elect out (ie, apostasy), is not of God. If a sufficient argument is presented I am more than happy to consider how I should modify my view.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

Ahab:

I can agree that it's a viewpoint held by at least one person, you, of what you believe others believe, and if anyone actually believes it I would like to see them explain what they mean by it.

Fair enough. I feel it's a fairly common viewpoint in my experience. In another thread I would love to analyze what certain people have said, but I do not think that can be done without making the thread similar to a politicized Obama or Beck bashing thread. So for now, we'll just settle with whether CS2 as defined is compatible with the restored Gospel and how or how not.

Do commands from God commanding that we share what we have with other people count as "force" or "legislation" ?

No, not in a worldly political sense. Here is why: It has been exceptionally rare that God has ever given a "do or die" or imprison scenario to anyone in this life. He judges based upon the heart of the individual, and thus my salvation is not tied to yours, except in the aspect I am obligated to clothe you, feed you, succor you, etc should you stand in need. But I am a Son of God who recognizes he is such. Should my atheist neighbor not believe in a similar manner, or perhaps I have a neighbor who believes very much the opposite about God as I do, then God will not force him or her to impart of his substance. Even unto damnation, the choice is always there before him his entire mortal life. If CS2 is sought to implemented by fallen and sinful man by law and force, that choice is removed unless the person moves to a completely different country (or State if it's a state law). Finally, in answer to the question, God is perfect. If all of our politicians had their calling and elections made sure, and I had a guarantee that they would remain in their position forever or that only equally righteous men and women would occupy their positions, as well as those that enforce the laws, and each person had a choice whether to be bound by such laws or to live where he is without molestation, free to act according to his conscience, then I am okay with a CS2 philosophy. But such is not the case, because CS2 requires all or none to be saved, or a the least, saved or damned. Salvation comes from the act of equalization, not belief of God and Christ itself.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

As to the op, I would say that D&C 78:5-7

5 That you may be equal in the bonds of heavenly things, yea, and earthly things also, for the obtaining of heavenly things.

6 For if ye are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things;

7 For if you will that I give unto you a place in the celestial world, you must prepare yourselves by doing the things which I have commanded you and required of you.

could be used as a lead in for CS2...

My reply is verse 8 of the same chapter:

8 And now, verily thus saith the Lord, it is expedient that all things be done unto my glory, by you who are joined together in this order;

as well as the work that we do in the Temples.

No, the temple cannot be used for CS2. As we tell those who oppose ordinances for the deceased, they have the choice in the next life of whether to accept the ordinances or not. If they reject the ordinance, then it is of no salvific validity.

...But at the same time the arguement could just as easily be made that that revelation as well as the work we do in behalf of the dead doesn't mean that absolute equality is needed, only that all will be given an equal chance for salvation!So some of it might be construde either way. Unfortunetly, I'm not competent enough to give a more conscise obvervation then that!

Mike

I think your point on equal chance for salvation is a good one. I do believe though that chance started in the pre-mortal realm and that some have a greater chance here due to their faithfulness there, just as those who gain knowledge and wisdom here will be further advanced in the next life than those who do not.

[juliann]

Let me say that I applaud your efforts here. I was going to try to do a thread on this very topic but was not sure how to do it. I was mainly wanting to talk about liberation theology and Black Libertation Theology, as I find them lacking.

First, kudos to Matthew for allowing a discussion about this topic by eliminating the political posturing.

Liberation theology (the core of which is "social justice") is what is really in play when the term communal salvation is used....unless one is looking at a strand of historical gnosticism. It is a rich topic and it is too bad it is reduced to diatribes about personalities. I do find value in liberation theology because I think a perspective from the usually forgotten poor and oppressed is vital. Liberation theologies are new so they are going to be more radical which is always scary.

[mrmendoza]

My reply is verse 8 of the same chapter:

No, the temple cannot be used for CS2. As we tell those who oppose ordinances for the deceased, they have the choice in the next life of whether to accept the ordinances or not. If they reject the ordinance, then it is of no salvific validity.

I think your point on equal chance for salvation is a good one. I do believe though that chance started in the pre-mortal realm and that some have a greater chance here due to their faithfulness there, just as those who gain knowledge and wisdom here will be further advanced in the next life than those who do not.

I think perhaps that I used the wrong word. Instead of saying chance I think the term oportunity might be more appropiate. As to whether or not someone chance is better depending on what they did in the preexsistence may or not be a real help in this world. Consider Soloman, he obviously was destined to greatness in the preexestence which he did indeed reach, and yet in the long run he failed miserably! consider also Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, and Sidney Rigdon, they all were given great "chances" while others of lesser stature wound up passing them by!

As to the Temple ordenences while it's true that each individual chooses his own path individualy yet in the teachings of Joseph Smith aren't we also told that without that "welding link" between them and us "we cannot be saved without them"? Isn't this a kind of collective salvation, not meaning that absolutly everyone achieves it but by and large we must be welded to those righteous ancesters for us all to obtain the CK?

I don't know all the specific quotes and scriptures relating to this but I'm sure some of our more scholarly brethern and/or sisters can find them for me if anyone is interested enough!

Mike

[Ahab]

Ahab: Do commands from God commanding that we share what we have with other people count as "force" or "legislation" ?

Matthew: No, not in a worldly political sense.

What kind of salvation are we talking about, here ???

God will determine whether or not we'll be saved from our sins, if that's what we're talking about.

Why is your answer focused on what happens in the worldly political sense ???