Better Not Born?

[inquiringmind]

In Matt. 26:24, Jesus seems to say that it wouldl have been better for Judas if he had never been born.

In a couple of places in the BOM, He seems to say that it would have been better for those who deny Him (after they've been baptized in water, the Holy Spirit, and fire) if they had never known Him..

Does this mean that those who didn't keep their first estates will be better off than some of those who chose to come here to earth?

Will it be more tolorable for Satan and his angels than for Cain, Judas, and those who deny Christ after being Baptiszed?

Will having a body be a blessing or a curse for those who are cast into outer darkness?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Does this mean that those who didn't keep their first estates will be better off than some of those who chose to come here to earth?

The text says nothing about this. Who knows.

Will it be more tolorable for Satan and his angels than for Cain, Judas, and those who deny Christ after being Baptiszed?

Who knows? The text also does not address this.

Will having a body be a blessing or a curse for those who are cast into outer darkness?

It was my understanding that having a body regardless of what we receive in the next life will be better than not having a body. However I don't think that is scriptural and is just folk doctrine.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[mfbukowski]

Remember that Judas is probably classed as a "son of perdition" because he was closely associated with Jesus personally on a daily basis,and presumably had no doubt that he was the Christ. He was not only baptized and confirmed (ie: Holy Spirit and fire)

One cannot be a son of perdition unless one knows of an absolute certainty that Jesus is the Christ, and THEN denies him. For those, it is said that it would be better if they had not been born.

So for those of us who are lowly members who have not had a vision or some experience showing the absolute certainty of Christ- as the scriptures say "seeing my face, and knowing that I am". we do not even qualify to be a son of perdition- even though we have been baptized and have received the HG.

So being a son of perdition is reserved for very few that we know "for sure" (probably- because we cannot really judge even these) are sons of perdition- Lucifer is one, Cain, Judas is another, the Antichrist will be another, actually at the moment I can't think of any others that we know of- but I am sure there are many others we do not know about.

As far as Satan's punishment vs Judas, I would say that it probably doesn't matter. I think that outer darkness eventually means "second death" which means non-existence or oblivion.

That is why, in my opinion, it would be better had they never been born, or for that matter, existed as spirits. If they had never existed, since their existence was basically futile because it's final result was oblivion, - they would not have had to go through the pains of their punishments nor would they have led others astray. So in the cosmic balance, "good" would have been better off if they never existed

One thinks of the lives of young people who go off and kill people at random, and then end up being killed by police, and it is tempting to think the same of them- all their young lives resulted in was bringing tragedy to others, without any purpose for it. Of course we know that these are not sons of perdition though, since they had no understanding presumably of what Jesus did for them

[CV75]

In Matt. 26:24, Jesus seems to say that it wouldl have been better for Judas if he had never been born.

In a couple of places in the BOM, He seems to say that it would have been better for those who deny Him (after they've been baptized in water, the Holy Spirit, and fire) if they had never known Him..

Does this mean that those who didn't keep their first estates will be better off than some of those who chose to come here to earth?

Will it be more tolorable for Satan and his angels than for Cain, Judas, and those who deny Christ after being Baptiszed?

Will having a body be a blessing or a curse for those who are cast into outer darkness?

It probably means something like, "...it had been good for that man if he had not been born yet or here (see Acts 17.26), but in some other time and place, perhaps even another earth."

[blackstrap]

I must have missed the class in SS where Judas denied Jesus.I recall Peter denied Him thrice.Judas betrayed Him,yes.That may imply that he denied Christ.Why Judas did what he did has been the topic of many discussions over many centuries.

[fatherofone]

I must have missed the class in SS where Judas denied Jesus.I recall Peter denied Him thrice.Judas betrayed Him,yes.That may imply that he denied Christ.Why Judas did what he did has been the topic of many discussions over many centuries.

judas did what he did because it was his calling, if he had not done there would have been no atonement

[Storm Rider]

In Matt. 26:24, Jesus seems to say that it wouldl have been better for Judas if he had never been born.

In a couple of places in the BOM, He seems to say that it would have been better for those who deny Him (after they've been baptized in water, the Holy Spirit, and fire) if they had never known Him..

Does this mean that those who didn't keep their first estates will be better off than some of those who chose to come here to earth?

Will it be more tolorable for Satan and his angels than for Cain, Judas, and those who deny Christ after being Baptiszed?

Will having a body be a blessing or a curse for those who are cast into outer darkness?

When should we interpret the Bible literally? Should we every view versus as metaphor? This is one where I think some poetic license was used.

[inquiringmind]

I think that outer darkness eventually means "second death" which means non-existence or oblivion

That makes sense to me.

But how would you reconcile that belief with 2 Nephi 9::16?

...their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end?

as the scriptures say "seeing my face, and knowing that I am"

Where can I find that scripture (about seeing His face)?

Edited July 15, 2011 by inquiringmind

[mfbukowski]

Inquiring:

I am answering here rather than in the other place in hopes of getting more input for you in this thread.

...their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end?

One of God's titles is "Endless" or "Eternal" so when it refers to Endless or Eternal punishment it is saying "God's punishment"- NOT that the punishment will last forever and ever.

Spirit prison is also known as "h***" and all the other metaphors found in the scriptures for lakes of fire and brimstone - basically h***- is actually spirit prison, which will eventually pass away when all but the sons of perdition will be resurrected.

Those are often seen as spiritual metaphors.

So for us h*** is not forever- and talk about "endless punishment" means "God's punishment", except for those who are sons of perdition- probably I would guess, out of all humanity who ever lived, I would be surprised if there are 100 (excluding the spirits who followed Satan- said to be a third of the host of heaven) who are sons of perdition.

So unless I am mistaken and someone else would like to set me straight, punishment which "has no end" is the same as "Endless punishment" which, again, means "God's punishment".

Also, it is presumed by many that the doctrines in the Book of Mormon should match exactly the doctrines found in the fully developed Restoration, which is not always the case.

It is understandable that the Nephites did not have as full an understanding of the gospel as we do- there are no mentions to my knowledge for example of temple doctrines in the Book of Mormon.

[inquiringmind]

So unless I am mistaken and someone else would like to set me straight, punishment which "has no end" is the same as "Endless punishment" which, again, means "God's punishment".

I don't want to "set you straight."

What you said makes sense to me.

And, "coincidently," I recently heard it suggested by a missionary.

But there are things I don't understand here.

First, if "outer darkness" is only for sons of perdition, and untimately means non-existence, doesn't that imply that they eventually cease to exist?

Second, doesn't the passage from D&C (that speaks of "eternal" being one of God's names) say (in commenting on some other passage somewhere) "it isn't written that their torment has no end, it's written 'eternal torment."

It then goes on to say the "eternal" is one of God's names, but doesn't it also imply that when "no end" is written (as in 2 Nephi 9:16) it means "no end"?

punishment which "has no end" is the same as "Endless punishment" which, again, means "God's punishment".

But I don't understand how that can be (given the passage you alluded to from D&C.)

Could "no end" mean "no end" as long as they exist?

Or could "Forever and ever and has no end" mean "for ages and ages and has no end (for those ages here in view)," or something like that?

P.S. B.Y. agreed with you, what you say makes sense to me, and I've heard one of my missionaries say the same thing.

I want to agree with you, but I'm having trouble understanding this.

Edited July 15, 2011 by inquiringmind

[mfbukowski]

This is my understanding

Sons of perdition have perfect knowledge that Jesus is the Christ in this life. Perhaps an example is Judas, let's presume he is one such person.

The person then dies, and goes to "spirit prison/ h***/ lake of fire and brimstone" where his punishment is "without end" in the D&C sense- ie: God's punishment or Endless Punishment because Endless is one of God's names.

It is His punishment, but that doesn't mean for eternity upon eternity in the LDS sense.

Anyone in such a state would not be "brought forth in the first resurrection"- but in the "last resurrection"- ie at the last possible time that resurrection is possible- after the millenium, but before the earth becomes the celestial kingdom.

All this time, that soul is in h*** / spirit prison/ lake of brimstone- whatever metaphor you like- suffering punishment. Because he did not put the atonement into effect in his life, he gets to suffer for his own sins, which by definition are considerable- or he wouldn't be in such a state in the first place.

But yet the savior's resurrection guarantees him resurrection- he was a human being and we are all to be resurrected. So in a sense, this is where his punishment "ends" because at this point, before the earth becomes the celestial kingdom, spirit prison is done away with.

Now this is where my understanding gets foggy- but it is my belief that soon after the resurrection- he goes to "outer darkness" which is a state devoid of glory- of no light whatsoever, (Christ is the source of light- so this is like the opposite of light- total darkness)

In my personal opinion, I think this is the point where the spirit just ceases to exist- it is extinguished as an intelligence and nothing is left.

"The glory of God is intelligence, namely, light and truth"

No light, no intelligence, no existence.

Could "no end" mean "no end" as long as they exist?

Or could "Forever and ever and has no end" mean "for ages and ages and has no end (for those ages here in view)," or something like that?

(I'm trying to undersand this.)

Yep I think something like that is it- as far as I know.

So their punishment has "no end" FROM THEIR LIMITED PERSPECTIVE because they will not experience eternity. From their perspective it is "endless" but not from an eternal perspective.

To me, this is clear from portions of section 93:

1Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who ^aforsaketh his ^bsins and cometh unto me, and ^ccalleth on my name, and ^dobeyeth my voice, and keepeth my commandments, shall ^esee my ^fface and ^gknow that I am;

2And that I am the true ^alight that lighteth every man that cometh into the world;....

7And he bore record, saying: I saw his glory, that he was in the ^abeginning, before the world was; 8Therefore, in the beginning the ^aWord was, for he was the Word, even the messenger of salvation—

9The ^alight and the Redeemer of the world; the Spirit of truth, who came into the world, because the world was made by him, and in him was the life of men and the light of men.

10The worlds were ^amade by him; men were made by him; all things were made by him, and through him, and of him.

11And I, John, ^abear record that I beheld his ^bglory, as the glory of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, even the Spirit of truth, which came and dwelt in the flesh, and dwelt among us.....

30All truth is independent in that ^asphere in which God has placed it, to ^bact for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence. 31Behold, here is the ^aagency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is ^bplainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.

32And every man whose spirit receiveth not the ^alight is under condemnation....

36The ^aglory of God is ^bintelligence, or, in other words, ^clight and truth. 37Light and truth forsake that ^aevil one.

38Every ^aspirit of man was ^binnocent in the beginning; and God having ^credeemed man from the ^dfall, men became again, in their infant state, ^einnocent before God.

39And that ^awicked one cometh and ^btaketh away light and truth, through ^cdisobedience, from the children of men, and because of the ^dtradition of their fathers.

40But I have commanded you to bring up your ^achildren in ^blight and truth.

So in a sense, I think sons of perdition, having a perfect knowledge of the savior, is to spiritually start out in verse 1- "to see my face and know that I am", and then to progressively deny that light and truth until the light is totally gone- ending up in verse 31 and 32, denying that light through one's own agency.

And you see how throughout the passage the idea of light refers to Christ, and darkness refers to evil.

So that is why it were better if they were never born- because their existence is ultimately futile- a waste, and besides, they have probably affected others and caused them to do evil as well, and so possibly diminished what those others might have been. So indeed it would have better if they had never been born at all!

Edited July 15, 2011 by mfbukowski

[Questing Beast]

In Matt. 26:24, Jesus seems to say that it wouldl have been better for Judas if he had never been born.

In a couple of places in the BOM, He seems to say that it would have been better for those who deny Him (after they've been baptized in water, the Holy Spirit, and fire) if they had never known Him..

Does this mean that those who didn't keep their first estates will be better off than some of those who chose to come here to earth?

The scripture says those who are born in this life are "added upon", that is, their "first estate" is added upon by experiencing this "second estate". There is no indication anywhere I have ever read that anyone coming here will be more disadvantaged in their "next estate", i.e. after resurrection.

Will it be more tolorable for Satan and his angels than for Cain, Judas, and those who deny Christ after being Baptiszed?

No. Satan and company rebelled in the literal presence of God. Rebellion in this world is rebellion against faith, not sure knowledge.

The doctrine is that those whose "calling and election are made sure" are virtually back at the same level of absolute knowledge that they were in the preexistence, i.e. the "first estate". To rebel in that state would be tantamount to joining Satan with the same knowledge that he and his followers had in the preexistence.

Satan and his unembodied followers will forever be limited by what they were in their "first estate". Anyone coming here and experiencing mortality is going to have advantages, greater powers, etc. I believe that what Jesus meant when he said that offenders would be better off if "they had not been born", is that they will be forever miserable knowing what they lost by not being valiant to their "first estate" potential.

Will having a body be a blessing or a curse for those who are cast into outer darkness?

An advantage, let's put it that way. No one in "outer darkness" will be subject to Satan in a minion to master relationship. Satan's power is only in this world. After the resurrection, all physical beings will be more powerful than mere spirit beings....

[thesometimesaint]

mfbukowski:

I don't know. We do have Scriptures that state that the Intelligences are eternal, and can neither be created nor destroyed. I think that total oblivion would negate agency. The SoP choose to remain unatoned for. I don't get it myself how anyone could choose that, but God does give us the intents of our hearts.

[Questing Beast]

... We do have Scriptures that state that the Intelligences are eternal, and can neither be created nor destroyed. I think that total oblivion would negate agency. The SoP choose to remain unatoned for. I don't get it myself how anyone could choose that, but God does give us the intents of our hearts.

B. Young also taught that such beings will one day return to their essence and start over (or words to that effect). Enter, reincarnation or something along those lines.

I believe in it, simply because I would never consign any being to eternal (that is to say infinite and never ending) misery. There must always be a way out, a way to keep learning, and eventually to be joyful. And "God" cannot be less merciful than I am....

[inquiringmind]

To Questing Beast,

Didn't you just cntradict yourself in your last two posts here?

[inquiringmind]

This is my understanding

Sons of perdition have perfect knowledge that Jesus is the Christ in this life. Perhaps an example is Judas, let's presume he is one such person.

The person then dies, and goes to "spirit prison/ h***/ lake of fire and brimstone" where his punishment is "without end" in the D&C sense- ie: God's punishment or Endless Punishment because Endless is one of God's names.

It is His punishment, but that doesn't mean for eternity upon eternity in the LDS sense.

Anyone in such a state would not be "brought forth in the first resurrection"- but in the "last resurrection"- ie at the last possible time that resurrection is possible- after the millenium, but before the earth becomes the celestial kingdom.

All this time, that soul is in h*** / spirit prison/ lake of brimstone- whatever metaphor you like- suffering punishment. Because he did not put the atonement into effect in his life, he gets to suffer for his own sins, which by definition are considerable- or he wouldn't be in such a state in the first place.

But yet the savior's resurrection guarantees him resurrection- he was a human being and we are all to be resurrected. So in a sense, this is where his punishment "ends" because at this point, before the earth becomes the celestial kingdom, spirit prison is done away with.

Now this is where my understanding gets foggy- but it is my belief that soon after the resurrection- he goes to "outer darkness" which is a state devoid of glory- of no light whatsoever, (Christ is the source of light- so this is like the opposite of light- total darkness)

In my personal opinion, I think this is the point where the spirit just ceases to exist- it is extinguished as an intelligence and nothing is left.

"The glory of God is intelligence, namely, light and truth"

No light, no intelligence, no existence.

Yep I think something like that is it- as far as I know.

So their punishment has "no end" FROM THEIR LIMITED PERSPECTIVE because they will not experience eternity. From their perspective it is "endless" but not from an eternal perspective.

To me, this is clear from portions of section 93:

So in a sense, I think sons of perdition, having a perfect knowledge of the savior, is to spiritually start out in verse 1- "to see my face and know that I am", and then to progressively deny that light and truth until the light is totally gone- ending up in verse 31 and 32, denying that light through one's own agency.

And you see how throughout the passage the idea of light refers to Christ, and darkness refers to evil.

So that is why it were better if they were never born- because their existence is ultimately futile- a waste, and besides, they have probably affected others and caused them to do evil as well, and so possibly diminished what those others might have been. So indeed it would have better if they had never been born at all!

Thank you mfbukowski.

[inquiringmind]

mfbukowski:

I don't know. We do have Scriptures that state that the Intelligences are eternal, and can neither be created nor destroyed. I think that total oblivion would negate agency. The SoP choose to remain unatoned for. I don't get it myself how anyone could choose that, but God does give us the intents of our hearts.

Is it "intelligences," or "intelligence, light, and truth"?

[Mark Beesley]

So unless I am mistaken and someone else would like to set me straight, punishment which "has no end" is the same as "Endless punishment" which, again, means "God's punishment".

Verse 6 of D&C 19 says, "Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment."

Which is precisely what 2 Nephi 9:16 says, that the tormenting flame has no end. I don't think "has no end" is one of God's names.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Mark Beesley

[inquiringmind]

Verse 6 of D&C 19 says, "Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment."

Which is precisely what 2 Nephi 9:16 says, that the tormenting flame has no end. I don't think "has no end" is one of God's names.

That was my point.

But I thought mfbukowski answered it, when he wrote:

...their punishment has "no end" FROM THEIR LIMITED PERSPECTIVE because they will not experience eternity. From their perspective it is "endless" but not from an eternal perspective.

Edited July 15, 2011 by inquiringmind

[thesometimesaint]

inquiringmind:

Techically it is intelligence. Common LDS understanding is that each of us was an unique and separate intelligence.

[Ahab]

I think that outer darkness eventually means "second death" which means non-existence or oblivion.

The second death is all about being separated from God yet again after being reconciled to him through Jesus Christ. It's about separation, not annihilation.

That is why, in my opinion, it would be better had they never been born, or for that matter, existed as spirits.

It would have been better had they never been born because then they would have never denied Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost after accepting the plan of our Father in heaven. Remember, all those who have been born as mortals on this Earth had already accepted our Father's plan in heaven, and had they never been born on this Earth while passing through the veil of forgetfulness they would have never changed their direction to a position of actually rejecting our Father in heaven.

Jesus will forgive those who deny him, but our Father and the Holy Ghost won't, because our Father has stipulated that we need to accept Jesus as our Savior to be able to return to our Father's presence, which is also what the Holy Ghost tells us, so by denying Jesus Christ AND the Holy Ghost we're denying (or more like rejecting) the only way there is to return to our Father's presence.

Separated once from our Father's presence, Jesus has come to save us, but separated again from our Father's presence after rejecting the only way to be saved we're then stuck in separation from our Father's presence.

Better to have been separated only once from our Father's presence while still having a way to be saved.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Ahab

[inquiringmind]

inquiringmind:

Techically it is intelligence. Common LDS understanding is that each of us was an unique and separate intelligence.

I've been told that common LDS understanding (past and present) isn't necessarily official LDS doctrine.

(And since I've heard the view expressed by mfbukowskii expressed before, even by my local missionaries, how uncommon can it be?)

Edited July 15, 2011 by inquiringmind

[mfbukowski]

To Questing Beast,

Didn't you just cntradict yourself in your last two posts here?

His position is not the standard LDS one.

[thesometimesaint]

inquiringmind:

TTBOMK there is no official doctrine beyond http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/93.29?lang=eng#28

It is a logical and common extention of doctrine.

[inquiringmind]

DELETED.

Edited July 15, 2011 by inquiringmind