inquiringmind Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 I've never understood passages that seem to say that some humans woukd be better off if they had never been born.Does that mean that some spirits who chose to come to earth will end up suffering more than the angels who didn't keep their first estates?Some medieval theologians distinguished between the pain of regret and the pain of sense, and when I look at these "better off if they had not been born" statements, I wonder if they could have been right in saying that the resurrection of the body would be more of a curse than a blessing for the damned.Is that what the Book of Mormon is saying?
Deborah Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Where does it talk about being born mean. We were born with choices and some choose evil and some choose good. In pre-mortal life we chose to put our faith in Christ and come under his plan knowing that given mortality and it's limitations we might not choose correctly here, but it was worth the risk. Those who have bodies, even in Perdition will rule over those without. In any case all will have a chance to repent and be redeemed if not in this life then the next. .
webbles Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Does that mean that some spirits who chose to come to earth will end up suffering more than the angels who didn't keep their first estates?There are some on this earth who will be come a Son of Perdition. They will go to the same place of those that didn't keep their first estate. D&C 76: 43-49 is pretty much the only information that we have. Will it be worse? Maybe. Maybe it is because they will know that they had a chance and then threw it away while those who didn't keep their first estate won't have to deal with that guilt.
blackstrap Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 A thought just struck me ( ouch ) . Did every spirit have to choose sides in the pre existance? Could there not have been some that said ,"I have no interest in coming to earth and I am not interested in being forced to join Satan. Let me be as I am." If so,then for some people,it would have been better not to have been born as they messed up so bad that they should have remained a spirit.
inquiringmind Posted September 3, 2012 Author Posted September 3, 2012 A thought just struck me ( ouch ) . Did every spirit have to choose sides in the pre existance? Could there not have been some that said ,"I have no interest in coming to earth and I am not interested in being forced to join Satan. Let me be as I am." If so,then for some people,it would have been better not to have been born as they messed up so bad that they should have remained a spirit.Is that possible????
The Nehor Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Is that possible????Sure. We know next to nothing of premortality.
Stargazer Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Well, to start with, there are LOTS of people who are born mean. 1
Deborah Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 Well, to start with, there are LOTS of people who are born mean.I have a hard time believing any precious new born is born mean. They may have genetic or neo-natal issues that affect their abilities to make choices, but I think meanness comes from what other people do to them.
Stargazer Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 I have a hard time believing any precious new born is born mean. They may have genetic or neo-natal issues that affect their abilities to make choices, but I think meanness comes from what other people do to them.Once again the forces of plainness come out in force to destroy the forces of trying to josh around. Sigh. I was trying to do a little word-play with the OP title. Don't worry, it was a very forced word-play. As was this.
thesometimesaint Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 There were NO fence sitters in the War in Heaven. ALL chose a side. It is like coming to a fork in the road. You can go right or go left, but you must do one or the other.
CV75 Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 I've never understood passages that seem to say that some humans woukd be better off if they had never been born.Does that mean that some spirits who chose to come to earth will end up suffering more than the angels who didn't keep their first estates?Some medieval theologians distinguished between the pain of regret and the pain of sense, and when I look at these "better off if they had not been born" statements, I wonder if they could have been right in saying that the resurrection of the body would be more of a curse than a blessing for the damned.Is that what the Book of Mormon is saying?Of course perdition and glorification can be taken to their extremes (outer darkness and exaltation, respectively), and people can certainly end up in outer darkness. Those spirits who didn’t keep their first estate and sons of perdition are said to occupy a state of outer darkness. To me, one isn’t any better off than the other, unless there are different kinds of outer darkness for each type, one being worse than the other, but I don’t know much about that.I find it hard to accept that the resurrection is not a blessing to every spirit that came into mortality, even for the damned. The curse is in the limitations a person carries with him into the resurrection due to willful disobedience. I know of no instance where the resurrection is denied anyone, taken back from someone, or refused by anyone.So my conclusion is that the Book of Mormon is using “not having been born” in the same sense that Doctrine and Covenants uses “eternal,” which makes it “God’s birth (born again)” instead of “God’s punishment.” In this way the saying is a “mystery” that is used “that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men.” (D&C 19: 4-12).I take "not having been born" as "not having been born again (as in "God's birth")" or "not having been born again, at this time" only to reject the greater light. This still doesn't mean (to me) that, barring the unforgiveable sins, people cannot repent.
CV75 Posted September 3, 2012 Posted September 3, 2012 A thought just struck me ( ouch ) . Did every spirit have to choose sides in the pre existance? Could there not have been some that said ,"I have no interest in coming to earth and I am not interested in being forced to join Satan. Let me be as I am." If so,then for some people,it would have been better not to have been born as they messed up so bad that they should have remained a spirit.My personal opinion is that such spirits were not at a developmental stage to even participate, or to be given the choice, and had to incubate a bit more in God’s light before facing the “incubus” (of sorts) and choosing sides.
blackstrap Posted September 4, 2012 Posted September 4, 2012 (edited) Joseph S describes several types of heavenly beings. One type is an angel/messenger without a body but recognizable as a personage.Who are these beings?A. a spirit who has been on earth and is awaiting the resurrectionB. a spirit who has yet to come to earth and is waiting to be bornC. possibly a spirit who will not be born physically but serves God at His pleasure. ( I think of these as those who are being held back from destroying the earth until the last days. ) Edited September 4, 2012 by blackstrap
CV75 Posted September 4, 2012 Posted September 4, 2012 Joseph S describes several types of heavenly beings. One type is an angel/messenger without a body but recognizable as a personage.Who are these beings?A. a spirit who has been on earth and is awaiting the resurrectionB. a spirit who has yet to come to earth and is waiting to be bornC. possibly a spirit who will not be born physically but serves God at His pleasure. ( I think of these as those who are being held back from destroying the earth until the last days. )I find "C" very interesting--would you provide the citation / link so I can read it? Thank you.
blackstrap Posted September 4, 2012 Posted September 4, 2012 Consider the cherebim guarding the tree of life,or all the cherebim that Elijah saw near the throne of God, or those that surrounded Elisha with firey chariots etc. I am sure that they could be type A or B , but they seem to be of a different nature.
CV75 Posted September 5, 2012 Posted September 5, 2012 Consider the cherebim guarding the tree of life,or all the cherebim that Elijah saw near the throne of God, or those that surrounded Elisha with firey chariots etc. I am sure that they could be type A or B , but they seem to be of a different nature.I find "C" very interesting--would you provide the citation / link so I can read it? I asked yesterday--whaddup dat? CFR -- Thank you!
Carborendum Posted September 5, 2012 Posted September 5, 2012 I think you guys are taking this WAYYY too literally. It's just a figure of speech. The idea is that life is the greatest gift in this world. And such and so is so bad/evil that it completely nullifies all that is good about this life.Even that above description is still a figure of speech. Bottom line= whatever the topic was, it is really bad. That's all it means. I know of none of those statements in all of scriptures that were meant to be taken as a literal theological principle.
Alan Posted September 5, 2012 Posted September 5, 2012 A thought just struck me ( ouch ) . Did every spirit have to choose sides in the pre existance? Could there not have been some that said ,"I have no interest in coming to earth and I am not interested in being forced to join Satan. Let me be as I am." If so,then for some people,it would have been better not to have been born as they messed up so bad that they should have remained a spirit.Absolutely! I have always felt this was so. God is not in the business of forcing anyone to do anything. I believe there were spirits who were content with their lot and wanted to stay as and where they were.Actually, I'm surprised I wasn't one of them!
mrmandias Posted September 5, 2012 Posted September 5, 2012 Is there some reason to believe that these scriptural statements aren't hyperbole?
Maidservant Posted September 6, 2012 Posted September 6, 2012 (edited) I find only two spots where this phrase is used. Mark 14, and at which place it may very well be hyberbole, since it is expressing emotional outrage at betraying Christ (although certainly this could be a wider symbolism).The other is in D & C 76 which is less easy to say is emotionalism, since D & C 76, while very poetic and symbolic, is nevertheless a very careful and thorough catalog of criteria of the different conditions of human beings.However, maybe it simply shows us that we came to earth with the purpose of progressing to greater love of God and knowledge, etc, but if you are going to use your time for perditionary activities, then what's the point of being born? You are going backwards in your progression. Edited September 6, 2012 by Maidservant
Recommended Posts