Article On Reincarnation And Mormonism

[erichard]

Thank you for taking a look.

stYro

Hi stYro,

I read this JJ Dewey writing around 1984. And others he wrote on the same subject. Possibly he has refined it since then, but I choose to not re-read it.

I read some of his writings then because he had earlier been associated with the Prophet of the Second Book of Commandments revelations. But because he would not give up his New Age ideas, they separated. If he had fully accepted the 2BC revelations, he would have been in the School of the Prophets when it was organized in March 1982.

JJ strongly promotes the writings of Alice Bailey, who was very influenced by the writings of Madame Blavatsky. You can see that in his freereads link section.

Like many, to me these writings have a vastly different spirit than is found in the scriptures. Apparently, they are full of reincarnation ideas.

This is all the 2BC says about reincarnation. (Notice it mentions Joseph J Dewey)

Behold I say unto you My servant, you have asked Me concerning the doctrine of

reincarnation

, wherein it is claimed that the spirit of man over a period of many years enters into, through the process of birth, many bodies and receives many experiences.

2 Behold I say unto you, that this doctrine

as it is understood by man is not correct

.

3 However, in Mine own due time and through revelation I will reveal the secrets of Heaven in their purity, but not at the present, for this knowledge is not necessary for the salvation of man, but will be revealed to those who are worthy to receive such matters at the time appointed.

4 And concerning the writings that My servant

Joseph

has written; much of what he has written is correct, but some of the things he has written are incorrect.

5 And he has been influenced somewhat by the writings of others and by the thoughts of men and by his own imagination, and therefore it would be wise of him to keep many of these truths in his heart.

6 And at the time appointed, if he is worthy, I will reveal the truth of these matters to him by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Reading this thread brought back some of my thoughts on the matter.

Many people have claimed to remember past lives. Some of the things they have remembered have been proven to be amazingly correct. However, I do not find this a conclusive proof that they were the reincarnation of a previous person. I believe each of us has a unique spirit body, and that both good and evil spirits can come and enter into a person's body. Evil spirits do it by coercion, but good spirits do it by the free will of the person. The memories of past lives logically could also be from such a spirit-- who lived and then came into a person's body and brought these memories with them.

It is taught by JJ and others that it is unfair for an eternal reward to be given us based on just one short mortal life. If we did not have a spirit body, that would make sense. But as spirits how long did we progress? I can believe that almost all of our issues were resolved in the long spirit existence we had, and this short mortal life only resolves certain final issues, and for some they only come here to get a body and then die very young. Our eternal reward will be based on our life as a spirit and our life as a mortal. I can believe we do not need to have many reincarnations for a fair judgment to be made.

In Wilford Woodruff's pioneer journal he quotes President Young teaching that when a child is born stillborn, they will be given another body and birth. President Young many times said he got all his doctrines from the Prophet Joseph. I can believe this kind of reincarnation occurs. Possibly even for others who die before they fulfilled their purpose on earth.

In general, however, I am happy to leave the ideas of reincarnation alone until further Word of the Lord revelation is given on the matter.

Richard

[mfbukowski]

If you or anyone else have an alternative explanation for how the promises made to Joseph Smith in D&C 132:55 can be fulfilled in one mortal lifetime (post #96 above), I'm all ears:

"I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children..."

I don't want to leave this unchallenged, because I think this thread is dying and I don't want you to think that no one could answer it. In my opinion, none of these scriptures say what you think you are saying. I just wanted to say that to definitely let you know that.

I mean are you serious? Polygamy indeed factually would give one a huge family, and houses and lands etc. It was a common practice that each wife would have her own house.

And it says "in this world" which means before death. What is the big mystery? The revelation is about polygamy and it is mysterious that polygamy gives one "an hundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children"??

Throw in the law of consecration, and it becomes crystal clear.

Living this way would be the earthly counterpart of the patriarchal order in which we are all sealed together into a huge family of humanity- where we are all one, and share all things in common- as a huge family.

Pretty clear to me. Honestly, it seems to me that there are many aspects of LDS doctrine you are not familiar with, which perhaps cause you to misunderstand some of these scriptures. Just my opinion.

[mfbukowski]

It is taught by JJ and others that it is unfair for an eternal reward to be given us based on just one short mortal life. If we did not have a spirit body, that would make sense. But as spirits how long did we progress? I can believe that almost all of our issues were resolved in the long spirit existence we had, and this short mortal life only resolves certain final issues, and for some they only come here to get a body and then die very young. Our eternal reward will be based on our life as a spirit and our life as a mortal. I can believe we do not need to have many reincarnations for a fair judgment to be made.

I don't often agree with you, but this is definitely one of the times I do!

[stYro]

Many people have claimed to remember past lives. Some of the things they have remembered have been proven to be amazingly correct. However, I do not find this a conclusive proof that they were the reincarnation of a previous person. I believe each of us has a unique spirit body, and that both good and evil spirits can come and enter into a person's body. Evil spirits do it by coercion, but good spirits do it by the free will of the person. The memories of past lives logically could also be from such a spirit-- who lived and then came into a person's body and brought these memories with them...

In Wilford Woodruff's pioneer journal he quotes President Young teaching that when a child is born stillborn, they will be given another body and birth. President Young many times said he got all his doctrines from the Prophet Joseph. I can believe this kind of reincarnation occurs. Possibly even for others who die before they fulfilled their purpose on earth.

In general, however, I am happy to leave the ideas of reincarnation alone until further Word of the Lord revelation is given on the matter.

Yours is a refreshingly open-minded approach; I appreciate that you're not dismissing it all as something evil. Thank you, erichard.

stYro

[stYro]

I don't often agree with you [erichard], but this is definitely one of the times I do!

Glad I could bring you two together!

[stYro]

I don't want to leave this unchallenged, because I think this thread is dying and I don't want you to think that no one could answer it. In my opinion, none of these scriptures say what you think you are saying. I just wanted to say that to definitely let you know that.

I mean are you serious?

Yes.

Polygamy indeed factually would give one a huge family, and houses and lands etc. It was a common practice that each wife would have her own house.

And it says "in this world" which means before death. What is the big mystery? The revelation is about polygamy and it is mysterious that polygamy gives one "an hundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children"??

Throw in the law of consecration, and it becomes crystal clear.

Living this way would be the earthly counterpart of the patriarchal order in which we are all sealed together into a huge family of humanity- where we are all one, and share all things in common- as a huge family.

Pretty clear to me.

Well, it's pretty clear to me that this passage is a very specific promise to Joseph Smith, to be fulfiled in this world, and is neither a generic description of polygamy nor a description of a patriarchal order that exists in the afterlife rather than here. Please show me where the Lord is making these promises to anyone other than Joseph Smith.

And if you succeed in doing that, then please show me where any polygamist has received a hundredfold fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children in this world (i.e., in a single mortal lifetime).

Here's verse 55 in its entirety, along with the verses immediately before and after, so you can see the context:

"And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord they God, and will destroy her if she abide not my law.

"But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds.

"And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid forgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart rejoice." (emphasis mine)

Honestly, it seems to me that there are many aspects of LDS doctrine you are not familiar with, which perhaps cause you to misunderstand some of these scriptures. Just my opinion.

May I respectfully request you first demonstrate that I have indeed misunderstood this particular passage of scripture before attributing such misunderstanding to any unfamiliarity with LDS doctrine.

stYro

Edited July 11, 2011 by stYro

[Loran Blood]

For serious, faithful LDS, the concept of reincarnation is utterly moot. It is not compatible with the plan of happiness and eternal progression as taught in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

[mfbukowski]

May I respectfully request you first demonstrate that I have indeed misunderstood this particular passage of scripture before attributing such misunderstanding to any unfamiliarity with LDS doctrine.

stYro

OK, well in fairness it does appear to apply to Joseph and Emma, but I think that the general principles of WHY it applies to them is not because anything special about Joseph and Emma per se, but because we are to "liken the scriptures to ourselves- the scriptures ARE scriptures because their message is for everyone. The idea of a personal note from God to one person which is then canonized as scripture is kind of silly. It is canon because it applies to all of us- INCLUDING Joseph and Emma.

Merely saying that it applies to reincarnation when it says that it happens "in this world", and understanding the plan of salvation, is sufficient for me to believe that it is a "misunderstanding or unfamiliarity with LDS doctrine." "In this world" does NOT mean "in successive lives" - it appears that you are interpreting the "hundredfold" idea

I am sticking with my interpretation- which is that it is a spiritual message to all of us about the plan of polygamy, the law of consecration and the patriarchal order. Truly in this life and the world to come, if we were able to live all those principles here, we would be blessed a

So every scripture that says something will be given "in this world"- is a reference to reincarnation? I find that absurd. In fact it seems to me that "in this world" means "in this life" which is the direct OPPOSITE of your interpretation that it means "through successive lifetimes". The phrase "in this world" and "through successive lifetimes" clearly do not mean the same thing!

So why do we do work for the dead if we will all be reincarnated? How many times do ordinances have to be performed for the same spirits? Why are we wasting our time doing it over and over for the same spirits?

Why are we doing it at all, when we can just get our work done in the next lifetime anyway, if we even need it at all, since we are perfected though successive lifetimes?

And why do only humans get reincarnated? Don't other entities have spirits? How are we different?

[mfbukowski]

Glad I could bring you two together!

I always enjoy erichard's posts- I find him consistent and thoughtful.

He just accepts some scriptures I do not.

[stYro]

OK, well in fairness it does appear to apply to Joseph and Emma, but I think that the general principles of WHY it applies to them is not because anything special about Joseph and Emma per se, but because we are to "liken the scriptures to ourselves- the scriptures ARE scriptures because their message is for everyone. The idea of a personal note from God to one person which is then canonized as scripture is kind of silly. It is canon because it applies to all of us- INCLUDING Joseph and Emma.

The promise was clearly directed to Joseph. If you wish to also liken it to yourself, fine. Pleases show me where it was fulfilled in this world for Joseph or any other polygamist.

Merely saying that it applies to reincarnation when it says that it happens "in this world", and understanding the plan of salvation, is sufficient for me to believe that it is a "misunderstanding or unfamiliarity with LDS doctrine." "In this world" does NOT mean "in successive lives" - it appears that you are interpreting the "hundredfold" idea.

I understand the Mormon doctrine about the plan of salvation. I also know what that scripture says. The two are apparently not compatible. If something has to bend, I prefer to bend the doctrine to fit the scriptures, rather than the other way around.

I am sticking with my interpretation- which is that it is a spiritual message to all of us about the plan of polygamy, the law of consecration and the patriarchal order. Truly in this life and the world to come, if we were able to live all those principles here, we would be blessed a

The promise was not about the world to come. The text makes that very clear.

So every scripture that says something will be given "in this world"- is a reference to reincarnation? I find that absurd. In fact it seems to me that "in this world" means "in this life" which is the direct OPPOSITE of your interpretation that it means "through successive lifetimes". The phrase "in this world" and "through successive lifetimes" clearly do not mean the same thing!

You're putting words into my mouth and then arguing against them.

I did not say "in this world = reincarnation". I said, in effect, "in this world + God does not lie + it didn't happen in this world in one lifetime = reincarnation".

So why do we do work for the dead if we will all be reincarnated? How many times do ordinances have to be performed for the same spirits? Why are we wasting our time doing it over and over for the same spirits?

Ordinances only have to be performed once. The LDS church may have a policy that wastes time and energy, but I will say that their intentions are good.

Why are we doing it at all, when we can just get our work done in the next lifetime anyway, if we even need it at all, since we are perfected though successive lifetimes?

Because procrastination is the opposite of progress.

And why do only humans get reincarnated? Don't other entities have spirits? How are we different?

I do not know how far-reaching the principle of eternal progression is, but what we call "instinct" in animals may be carried-forward lessons learned in past lives.

* * * *

Here's another interesting scripture given to Joseph Smith, in the 90th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants. The first several verses are to give you the context, and the interesting part is in the last verse:

12 And now, verily I say unto you, I give unto you a commandment that you continue in the ministry and presidency.

13 And when you have finished the translation of the prophets, you shall from thenceforth preside over the affairs of the church and the school;

14 And from time to time, as shall be manifested by the Comforter, receive revelations to unfold the mysteries of the kingdom;

15 And set in order the churches, and study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues, and people.

16And this shall be your business and mission in all your lives, to preside in council, and set in order all the affairs of this church and kingdom.

This passage is clearly talking to Joseph Smith, and it tells him what his mission shall be in all of his lives. That's pretty straightforward. And lest you think "lives" refers to a future immortal world, it is a real stretch to say that "all the affairs of the church and kingdom" will need to be "set in order" in the Celestial Kingdom.

stYro

Edited July 11, 2011 by stYro

[Kenngo1969]

I thought worrying about how well I'm doing in this lifetime and how well I did in the one before (as a premortal spirit) was bad enough ... Now yer tellin' me I gotta worry about how well I'll do, not only in this lifetime, but the one after that, and the one after that, and the one after that ... ? No, thanks!

[mfbukowski]

Here's another interesting scripture given to Joseph Smith, in the 90th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants. The first several verses are to give you the context, and the interesting part is in the last verse:

12 And now, verily I say unto you, I give unto you a commandment that you continue in the ministry and presidency. 13 And when you have finished the translation of the prophets, you shall from thenceforth preside over the affairs of the church and the school;

14 And from time to time, as shall be manifested by the Comforter, receive revelations to unfold the mysteries of the kingdom;

15 And set in order the churches, and study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues, and people.

16And this shall be your business and mission in all your lives, to preside in council, and set in order all the affairs of this church and kingdom.

This passage is clearly talking to Joseph Smith, and it tells him what his mission shall be in all of his lives. That's pretty straightforward. And lest you think "lives" refers to a future immortal world, it is a real stretch to say that "all the affairs of the church and kingdom" will need to be "set in order" in the Celestial Kingdom.

stYro

Sorry, not even close.

The revelation was given to the first presidency- multiple people, each of whom have a life.

Note the church's introduction to that scripture, starting at verse 12:

12–18, Joseph Smith and his counselors are to set in order the Church;

The Lord was saying that the members of the first presidency should be leaders all their "lives". In the opening verses, each is mentioned by name. The Lord was speaking to the group. It also says "souls" and "houses" and all kinds of plurals and has nothing to do with reincarnation! Click on the link to see the context and read the summary at the top.

Unbelievable. I mean that in itself creates a massive credibility problem.

Edited July 12, 2011 by mfbukowski

[stYro]

Sorry, not even close.

The revelation was given to the first presidency- multiple people, each of whom have a life.

Note the church's introduction to that scripture, starting at verse 12:

The Lord was saying that the members of the first presidency should be leaders all their "lives". In the opening verses, each is mentioned by name. The Lord was speaking to the group. It also says "souls" and "houses" and all kinds of plurals and has nothing to do with reincarnation! Click on the link to see the context and read the summary at the top.

Unbelievable. I mean that in itself creates a massive credibility problem.

The part I quoted was directed at whoever was presiding, whoever was working on "the translation of the prophets", and whoever was supposed to "receive revelations to unfold the mysteries of the Kingdom". I believe those stipulations did not apply to the two counsellors, so I believe the part I quoted was directed to Joseph Smith alone.

Couldn't help but notice you didn't dispute my analysis of D&C 132:54-56 in post #110. If you want to give me 132:54-56, you can have 90:12-16 in return.

Reincarnation offers a way for the words of God to still be true even if they don't happen in a given lifetime. For example, "as ye sow, so shall ye reap" and "he who kills by the sword will be killed by the sword" only come true for some people within a single mortal lifetime. Either God's words are reliable, or they are not.

Edited July 13, 2011 by stYro

[stYro]

For serious, faithful LDS, the concept of reincarnation is utterly moot. It is not compatible with the plan of happiness and eternal progression as taught in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

Is it possible that there are truths which are not currently a part of LDS doctrine?

Consider the possibility that mortality is a lot like school: The main purpose is learning. The purpose isn't to get an honorary degree that is not backed by genuine competence. Jesus told us what manner of men we are to become (just like him), and we simply cannot do that in one mortal lifetime. Nor is he going to do it for us; he can't! He can atone for our sins and transgressions, so that we're not condemned, but he can't learn our lessons and pass our classes for us. We have to do that part for ourselves. So I would argue that reincarnation is acutally more consistent with the concept of eternal progression than is "one-shot-and-that's-it".

Regarding the "plan of happiness", yeah it's a bummer to think that we don't get to enjoy our exaltation after a single mortal lifetime. But by coming back we can do work towards undoing our screw-ups, which is something we would naturally want to do if we embrace the principle of responsibility. Through a life of service we can do a great deal of good, and actually aspire to be useful contributors to Christ's plan, instead of aspiring to an unearned, undeserved eternal freebie.

If you believed you would return to this earth in a future life, what would you want to be different about that future earth, relative to what we have now? How could you work towards making that happen, so that you do come back to a better world? Put yourself in those shoes even if only for a moment, and you'll see that the concept of reincarnation can be a powerul motivator for good.

I don't mean to be picking on you specifically, Loran - just saying things that your reply brings to mind.

stYro

Edited July 13, 2011 by stYro

[Storm Rider]

Is it possible that there are truths which are not currently a part of LDS doctrine?

Consider the possibility that mortality is a lot like school: The main purpose is learning. The purpose isn't to get an honorary degree that is not backed by genuine competence. Jesus told us what manner of men we are to become (just like him), and we simply cannot do that in one mortal lifetime. Nor is he going to do it for us; he can't! He can atone for our sins and transgressions, so that we're not condemned, but he can't learn our lessons and pass our classes for us. We have to do that part for ourselves. So I would argue that reincarnation is acutally more consistent with the concept of eternal progression than is "one-shot-and-that's-it".

Regarding the "plan of happiness", yeah it's a bummer to think that we don't get to enjoy our exaltation after a single mortal lifetime. But by coming back we can do work towards undoing our screw-ups, which is something we would naturally want to do if we embrace the principle of responsibility. Through a life of service we can do a great deal of good, and actually aspire to be useful contributors to Christ's plan, instead of aspiring to an unearned, undeserved eternal freebie.

If you believed you would return to this earth in a future life, what would you want to be different about that future earth, relative to what we have now? How could you work towards making that happen, so that you do come back to a better world? Put yourself in those shoes even if only for a moment, and you'll see that the concept of reincarnation can be a powerul motivator for good.

I don't mean to be picking on you specifically, Loran - just saying things that your reply brings to mind.

stYro

It is entirely possible that there are truths that are not currently part of LDS doctrine. Knowing that God has said there would be additional scripture, etc. to come I cannot see how one can reject that statement. What is not possible is that God will reveal that all he has revealed is wrong. The premise of reincarnation is diametrically opposed to the Plan of Salvation. It is a shadow of truths already known and clarified.

[stYro]

It is entirely possible that there are truths that are not currently part of LDS doctrine. Knowing that God has said there would be additional scripture, etc. to come I cannot see how one can reject that statement. What is not possible is that God will reveal that all he has revealed is wrong. The premise of reincarnation is diametrically opposed to the Plan of Salvation. It is a shadow of truths already known and clarified.

Thank you for conceding there is some merit in at least one of my statements, even if we disagree on the biggies.

May I ask, how would reincarnation imply that "all that [God] has revealed is wrong"?

I think you're exaggerating a bit to make your point more emphatically.

Would you mind describing exactly where or how reincarnation is "diametrically opposed to the Plan of Salvation"? I think this would be getting right to the heart of the matter.

Note that I promote a particular concept of reincarnation, sort of like the Mormons promote a particular concept of Christianity; in other words, not every argument against reincarnation is an argument against something I promote.

So that you won't waste energy arguing against something I'm not proposing, here is what I mean by "reincarnation": We each experience multiple mortal lives on Earth (and/or possibly on other worlds), the purpose being to learn and progress, with the end goal being to become like Christ. I believe in a version of reincarnation that would be compatible with these words of Joseph Smith:

"Here, then, is eternal life — to know the only wise and true god; and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power." - King Follet Discourse

I believe that there are two types of resurrections, and "the resurrection of the dead" in that passage refers to the higher of the two, called in the book of John "the resurrection of life", with Jesus' resurrection being the example. I believe the lesser resurrection, called the "resurrection of judgment", to be what we commonly call "reincarnation".

Thanks.

stYro

Edited July 13, 2011 by stYro

[ERayR]

Thank you for conceding there is some merit in at least one of my statements, even if we disagree on the biggies.

May I ask, how would reincarnation imply that "all that [God] has revealed is wrong"?

I think you're exaggerating a bit to make your point more emphatically.

Would you mind describing exactly where or how reincarnation is "diametrically opposed to the Plan of Salvation"? I think this would be getting right to the heart of the matter.

God has revealed that Jesus Christ took on himself the sins of the world and paid for them. Reincarnation negates that act. It places the sins right back on each individual and requires that they pay for their own sins by living serial lives, each better than the other. Reincarnation requires that each individual atone for their own sins. In the plan of salvation Christ atoned for our sins.

[mfbukowski]

I felt no need to respond to this post, but because you specifically requested that I do so, I will.

The promise was clearly directed to Joseph. If you wish to also liken it to yourself, fine. Pleases show me where it was fulfilled in this world for Joseph or any other polygamist.

There are so many ways to take "in this world" AND the spirit of the wording, I can't see how remotely you could deduce a doctrine so in conflict with other church doctrines from essentially a one liner.

Arguably "this world" includes the celestial kingdom since the ck will be on this world- ie the planet earth. The scripture can be interpreted spiritually, referring to blessings "in this world". The scripture could refer to the patriarchal order, which is capable of being fulfilled "in this world". Also, the blessing is conditional, and the conditions for the blessing to be received WERE NEVER FULFILLED.

Surely polygamists were blessed by huge families- and the scripture does not have to be literal either. Hyperbole is certainly not unknown in scripture.

It is amazing to me that your understanding of scripture is so vague and symbolic in most cases, and yet in this one line you now decide to take it very literally. I find that totally inconsistent. On one hand, reincarnation is supposed to be not directly taught, except symbolically and in parable, yet suddenly in this ONE line "in this world"- THREE WORDS - we are to take literally something which contradicts all the rest of the plan of salvation??

I'm not buying it!

I understand the Mormon doctrine about the plan of salvation. I also know what that scripture says. The two are apparently not compatible. If something has to bend, I prefer to bend the doctrine to fit the scriptures, rather than the other way around.

You know what you think THREE WORDS are saying, taking them literally, in conflict with the rest of your view that reincarnation is taught symbolically and in parable. You are interpreting THREE WORDS of the scriptures in a way which conflicts with all the rest of Mormon doctrine. I will take all the other scriptures AND all of Mormon doctrine over your interpretation of THREE WORDS any day.

The promise was not about the world to come. The text makes that very clear.

No, THREE WORDS, according to your interpretation, make that "clear" to you and no one else, when even that interpretation conflicts with the rest of your symbolic methodology.

You're putting words into my mouth and then arguing against them.

I did not say "in this world = reincarnation". I said, in effect, "in this world + God does not lie + it didn't happen in this world in one lifetime = reincarnation".

God may not lie, but your interpretation can be, and imo, IS wrong.

Ordinances only have to be performed once. The LDS church may have a policy that wastes time and energy, but I will say that their intentions are good.

Here I'm not going to let you get away so easy. This is just pompous arrogance, dismissing all the effort and expense of temple work and the entire doctrine of the redemption of the dead, with a wave of the hand. Incredible! Also the use of the word "their" clearly puts you outside the church- yet you want members of the church to believe YOUR doctrine is somehow "true doctrine". Believe what you want, but don't present YOUR doctrine as if it is LDS doctrine "in parable" or as if it is somehow just for those who "understand what is hidden" when you put yourself in opposition to the church as "they" instead of "we".

I do not know how far-reaching the principle of eternal progression is, but what we call "instinct" in animals may be carried-forward lessons learned in past lives.

This of course does not answer the question I asked, about why it is that only humans are reincarnated.

But now you put your view into science, accounting for instinct as a memory of past lives- so now you imply that every fox was a fox before and so has fox instincts. You are just throwing stuff out there that doesn't make sense and is not in any kind of consistent world view, which takes into account ideas like evolution, etc.

It just does not present a consistent view of anything, least of all the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I wasn't going to come back to all this, but you asked.

Couldn't help but notice you didn't dispute my analysis of D&C 132:54-56 in post #110. If you want to give me 132:54-56, you can have 90:12-16 in return.

OK- now I have. You are wrong in both places.

Reincarnation offers a way for the words of God to still be true even if they don't happen in a given lifetime. For example, "as ye sow, so shall ye reap" and "he who kills by the sword will be killed by the sword" only come true for some people within a single mortal lifetime. Either God's words are reliable, or they are not.

Come on! YOU are the one who is taking everything in parable and symbolically, now you want to go fundamentalist on me? How does a global flood fit with reincarnation, or the garden of Eden then?

It is starting to look as if you are just plain being disingenuous, or grasping at straws at this point. I hope for your sake it is the latter.

Edited July 13, 2011 by mfbukowski

[stYro]

God has revealed that Jesus Christ took on himself the sins of the world and paid for them. Reincarnation negates that act. It places the sins right back on each individual and requires that they pay for their own sins by living serial lives, each better than the other. Reincarnation requires that each individual atone for their own sins. In the plan of salvation Christ atoned for our sins.

Thanks for posting this, because I think now we can home in on the central problem that most Mormons (and most Christians) have with the concept of reincarnation.

Reincarnation does not require that each individual atone for their own sins. Let me explain with a hypothetical situation.

Suppose my life is a mess, things keep going wrong, I make mistakes, and the way I choose to deal with the pressure and stress and guilt is to numb my feelings. Jim Beam and Johnny Walker are my best friends. One night on my way home from the watering hole, I lose control of my vehicle and cross into oncoming traffic, striking a car driven by a young man and killing him.

This young man was on his way home from a date with the girl who is his soul mate. They would have gotten married in the Temple. Now that cannot happen, so the girl is going to marry someone else. In the Temple. Her marriage to this other guy will be okay, not bad enough for a divorce but nothing like it would have been with her soulmate. But because that's who she's now sealed to, that's who she's going to be with for eternity.

I am genuinely sorry for what I did and sincerely do my best to repent. Because of my years of drinking my liver is shot, and three months later I die without having truly demonstrated that I've overcome my addictive and destructive tendencies.

Now, how could I possible atone for taking that young man's life? Will something bad happening to me in future life somehow "make it right"? Of course not. I cannot pay that debt, not in a thousand lifetimes; my only hope is the Atonement.

But there are lessons that I can learn in a future mortal lifetime, important ones that I need if I'm going to make it. First, I can learn not to numb my pain and try to escape, but rather face with my problems responsibly. I can overcome that weakness. Next I can learn how to live my life so that I'm not creating stressful situations needlessly through my own laziness or incompetence or poor choices. I can overcome those weaknesses. And finally, I can learn to help people whose lives are on a destructive course. Thus I can actually become a net benefit to Christ's plan. The fact that I can't consciously remember the things I need to work on doesn't matter; my soul remembers them, and they will show up in my life.

For the young man and his soulmate, a future mortal lifetime would give them a chance to get together and be sealed in the Temple, with the sealing ratified by the Holy Spirit of Promise, so that in the long run they really haven't lost each other.

So we see here that the Atonement is still the only way that some debts can be paid, but multiple mortal lives gives us the chance to learn needed lessons, overcome things we need to overcome, and set our own destinies in order.

stYro

Edited July 13, 2011 by stYro

[shalamabobbi]

For the young man and his soulmate, a future mortal lifetime would give them a chance to get together and be sealed in the Temple, with the sealing ratified by the Holy Spirit of Promise, so that in the long run they really haven't lost each other.

You know there is the millennial period after the return of Christ for this to be worked out, right?

MAL 4:5,6

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

It is not about sealings to soul mates alone. It is about parents to children as well..

The promise of happiness through the sealing ordinances is that I am sealed to my parents whom I love.

Are you saying that would only be significant for a particular set of parents of ALL the parents that I would have in a program of reincarnation?

[mfbukowski]

Are you saying that would only be significant for a particular set of parents of ALL the parents that I would have in a program of reincarnation?

Not to mention the possibility of being your own great- great - great grandfather!

[stYro]

There are so many ways to take "in this world" AND the spirit of the wording, I can't see how remotely you could deduce a doctrine so in conflict with other church doctrines from essentially a one liner.

Arguably "this world" includes the celestial kingdom since the ck will be on this world- ie the planet earth. The scripture can be interpreted spiritually, referring to blessings "in this world". The scripture could refer to the patriarchal order, which is capable of being fulfilled "in this world". Also, the blessing is conditional, and the conditions for the blessing to be received WERE NEVER FULFILLED.

Surely polygamists were blessed by huge families- and the scripture does not have to be literal either. Hyperbole is certainly not unknown in scripture.

"In this world" does not include the Celestial Kingdom. The last phrase of verse 55 lets you know where the Celestial Kingdom comes in. I'm not inclined to call "hyperbole" on the part of God in this case, just because his words don't fit with the current Mormon paradigm.

Also, advanced teachings may well be hidden in a one-liner. If you'd like, I can come up with examples.

It is amazing to me that your understanding of scripture is so vague and symbolic in most cases, and yet in this one line you now decide to take it very literally. I find that totally inconsistent. On one hand, reincarnation is supposed to be not directly taught, except symbolically and in parable, yet suddenly in this ONE line "in this world"- THREE WORDS - we are to take literally something which contradicts all the rest of the plan of salvation??

I'm not buying it!

You know what you think THREE WORDS are saying, taking them literally, in conflict with the rest of your view that reincarnation is taught symbolically and in parable. You are interpreting THREE WORDS of the scriptures in a way which conflicts with all the rest of Mormon doctrine. I will take all the other scriptures AND all of Mormon doctrine over your interpretation of THREE WORDS any day.

Again, it is not unheard of for an advanced teaching to be concealed except for a few verses here and there. Let me know if you need examples of this.

Here I'm not going to let you get away so easy. This is just pompous arrogance, dismissing all the effort and expense of temple work and the entire doctrine of the redemption of the dead, with a wave of the hand. Incredible! Also the use of the word "their" clearly puts you outside the church- yet you want members of the church to believe YOUR doctrine is somehow "true doctrine". Believe what you want, but don't present YOUR doctrine as if it is LDS doctrine "in parable" or as if it is somehow just for those who "understand what is hidden" when you put yourself in opposition to the church as "they" instead of "we".

Maybe I should have put in disclaimers along the way that my intention in this thread is simply to get people to consider something they otherwise would not have considered. I do not expect anyone to be convinced by what I write, but do hope some will open their minds about something they otherwise would not have opened their minds about.

Also, I should have said that some temple work is "duplicated effort" instead of "wasted time and energy", as I'm sure those who do temple work benefit greatly from it. And maybe that in and of itself is a good reason for the way it's being done.

This of course does not answer the question I asked, about why it is that only humans are reincarnated.

But now you put your view into science, accounting for instinct as a memory of past lives- so now you imply that every fox was a fox before and so has fox instincts. You are just throwing stuff out there that doesn't make sense and is not in any kind of consistent world view, which takes into account ideas like evolution, etc.

It sounds like my response offended you. If so, I think you're reading something into it that's not there. Please re-read it.

Come on! YOU are the one who is taking everything in parable and symbolically, now you want to go fundamentalist on me? How does a global flood fit with reincarnation, or the garden of Eden then?

It is starting to look as if you are just plain being disingenuous, or grasping at straws at this point. I hope for your sake it is the latter.

I'm not sure how to respond to your emotions here. You really didn't offer a counter-argument, just an expression of outrage.

A global flood fits in fine with reincarnation. In fact, it gives the spirits who got cheated because of their negative environment a chance to have a decent, normal earth life.

The Garden of Eden fits in fine with reincarnation; it's the same story whether we come back once or many times. Am I missing something?

[stYro]

It is not about sealings to soul mates alone. It is about parents to children as well..

The promise of happiness through the sealing ordinances is that I am sealed to my parents whom I love.

Are you saying that would only be significant for a particular set of parents of ALL the parents that I would have in a program of reincarnation?

Not really; I don't claim to know the inner details.

But if I'm understanding you correctly, your objection is that reincarnation implies we could end up having an hundredfold fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children??

stYro

Edited July 13, 2011 by stYro

[stYro]

Not to mention the possibility of being your own great- great - great grandfather!

Who knows??

... enjoy!

stYro

[Libs]

Oh my! LOL