Libs Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 Elf, that's great. Can't wait to hear what you all think about it.
zerinus Posted March 31, 2011 Posted March 31, 2011 What is Hell? Hell is a place where hellish people are. It is the society or presence of hellish people that makes hell. We make our own hell by the kind of people we choose to associate with. The wicked gravitate towards the wicked, and the righteous towards the righteous. The only difference is that in this life these two different societies of people are not separated, but tend to interact; whereas in the next life they are separated into their own respective societies, to live the kinds of lives they prefer to live.
ELF1024 Posted April 18, 2011 Author Posted April 18, 2011 Elf, that's great. Can't wait to hear what you all think about it. I'm surpised at how close Mr. Bell gets to LDS Theology in many places. I am greatly enjoying the book.
BCSpace Posted April 18, 2011 Posted April 18, 2011 I was looking for some information on LDS beliefs about what will happen to the earth. I recall being taught that the earth will be perfected at the time of the 2nd Coming of Christ, but couldn't remember how it would be used after that.It looks like this used to be a part of the Articles of Faith. "10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory."The reference note on "paradisiacal glory" simply says, "i.e. a condition like the Garden of Eden".Not sure where this fits in with the three kingdoms of heaven. This is a description of the earth during Christ's millenial reign. It is not until after that when the earth becomes the abode of those inheriting a Celestial glory.
Libs Posted April 19, 2011 Posted April 19, 2011 I'm surpised at how close Mr. Bell gets to LDS Theology in many places. I am greatly enjoying the book.Yes, it's amazing, isn't it?
David T Posted April 19, 2011 Posted April 19, 2011 Has anyone read the book Love Wins by Rob Bell?It appears that the book is questioning the popular ideas of the Christian Hell. I am wonder how it falls in line with the LDS teachings.I wrote a review from a convert to LDS perspective on my blog here.
mercyngrace Posted April 19, 2011 Posted April 19, 2011 I wrote a review from a convert to LDS perspective on my blog here.Fabulous review, nack.One part that jumped out at me was when you talked about post-mortal progression and Bell's idea that the unforgiveable sin is refusing God's love. I believe it was Brigham Young who said that God will save all who want to be saved. So it is indeed a matter of our desire. IIRC it was Kimball who said that God would forgive all who sought forgiveness.There is a good reason we refer to this unpardonable sin as blasphemy against the Holy Ghost but that's fodder for another thread.
thews Posted April 19, 2011 Posted April 19, 2011 To deny the Holy Ghost is to consent to the murder of Christ.Does this happen after death or before in your opinion?
David T Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Yes and only one person in the history of the earth had innocent blood. I'm pretty sure there have been many innocent children who have been murdered. And many more sinner who had done nothing worthy of having their lives forcefully, brutally, and unlawfully taken from them.To deny the Holy Ghost is to consent to the murder of Christ.Does that include agreeing that the event was good, in the sense that it was an essential part of God's plan? I, for one, am grateful for the Atonement. I recognize that I needed for it to occur. Is that not, in a way, assenting to His Murder?
bluebell Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Does that include agreeing that the event was good, in the sense that it was an essential part of God's plan? I, for one, am grateful for the Atonement. I recognize that I needed for it to occur. Is that not, in a way, assenting to His Murder?I think The Nehor means it in the sense that Elder McKonkie said it-"He thereby commits murder by assenting unto the Lord’s death, that is, having a perfect knowledge of the truth he comes out in open rebellion and places himself in a position wherein he would have crucified Christ knowing perfectly the while that he was the Son of God. Christ is thus crucified afresh and put to open shame."
David T Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Frankly, I think the "In this special context, Murder really means hating Jesus" connection is another special pleading attempt to equate the rather clear, explicit language of D&C 132:19 and especially v. 27 which, expresses that Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost includes and embodies the mindset of consenting to Christ's death.Instead of the present context where they are two conditionals added together (Shed Innocent Blood and Assent to Christ's Death after the New and Everlasting Covenant has been made), McConkie tries to make them mean the same thing. They don't. I think the symbolism is lost when they are conflated.The New and Everlasting Covenant is presented as a covenant of Eternal Lives. The Blasphemy is to "turn altogether therefrom", and in a very real way to choose and demonstrate they they have chosen to champion Eternal Deaths - and all that is in opposition to God's Plan - over Life. Whereas Christ is the Resurrection and the Life - the Blasphemy in this context appears to be to choose to become an AntiChrist, as symbolized by glorifying Death.I think it hearkens back to the JST version of the Cain and Abel story, where Cain is presented as the prototype of Perdition - he loves Satan more than God, enters into Covenant with Satan, and kills Abel - sheds innocent blood - as an anti-Sacrifice, ratifying the Satanic Covenant. It is a perversion and reversal of the Covenant of Eternal Lives, wherein one gives their life rather than takes.
bluebell Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Frankly, I think the "In this special context, Murder really means hating Jesus" connection is another special pleading attempt to harmonize the rather clear, explicit language of D&C 132:19 with the concept expressed elsewhere and in a completely different context that Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is an unpardonable sin.McConkie tries to make them mean the same thing. They don't.I'm not sure i understand what you are saying.D&C 132:27, which says-"27The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death, after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant, saith the Lord God; and he that abideth not this law can in nowise enter into my glory, but shall be damned, saith the Lord."seems to say exactly what McKonkie is saying.I see you edited your post, but it still appears to me that McKonkie is saying exactly what verse 27 is saying, so maybe more clarification is needed.Doesn't the verse essentially say "The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death"? I guess i just really don't understand what you mean.
Nathair/|\ Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Does this happen after death or before in your opinion?Well, the only person identified in scripture as a son of perdition is Cain. It is strongly indicated that he attained that status as part of the events surrounding his murder of his brother. Moses 5:24
David T Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 I see you edited your post, but it still appears to me that McKonkie is saying exactly what verse 27 is saying, so maybe more clarification is needed.Doesn't the verse essentially say "The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death"? Sorry, I was doing a lot of editing, and trying to clarify the way I expressed my thoughts before I even saw you replied. Hopefully my posts as it stands is clearer now.
thews Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Well, the only person identified in scripture as a son of perdition is Cain. It is strongly indicated that he attained that status as part of the events surrounding his murder of his brother. Moses 5:24This is what I was referring to:http://bible.logos.com/passage/NIV/Heb%209.27#ref=Heb%209%3A27%2Chi%3DHeb%209%3A27-Heb%209%3A27&ver=NIV27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
David T Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 In other words, enlightened Murder is presented as an Ordinance or sign of one's Covenant of rebellion. Just like how baptism without intent, repentance and authority isn't viewed as being eternally binding, in this context, Murder that is not combined with complete Eternal Rebellion and not presented as a Sign of the Anti-Covenant is also not considered Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.
Rivers Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 1 John 4:8 states that "God is Love"The belief that God will send everyone who doesn't believe in Him to a place of everlasting torment is a despicable and barbaric doctrine. It is in no way compatible with a loving God,I have not read Bell's book yet but I have heard somewhere that he states that it is illogical for people to be punished infinitely for finite sins.Mr. Deity does an excellent job at pointing out how ridiculous the belief is.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.