Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Inheritors Of The Telestial Kingdom


Recommended Posts

"Words of the Prophets," p. 24, Franklin D. Richards. Now that you ask the question, I have to admit I have never seen the book. Now I want to see it. I looked for publications which have quoted from it and found one authoritative citation from a document hosted at BYU Idaho. The link is http://emp.byui.edu/...sPriesthood.pdf . Judge for yourself.

Incidentally...my stored summary of page 24 is 1. Franklin D. Richards, "Words of the Prophets," p. 24, Church Historians Office. (This is a small booklet kept by Brother Richards of the statements made by Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith.) "Hiram [smith] said Aug 1st. Those of the Terrestrial Glory either advance to the Celestial or recede to the Telestial or else the moon would not be a type, [because] it 'waxes & wanes.'"

Thank you--do you have any reply for the rest of post #79 (or #94?). I read the link and don't see Hyrum's quote about waxing and waning (I've already asessed and commented on the limited phrase provided)... is it the link you intended? That wasn't the most important point of discussion in these posts anyway, so if you don't have it, that is OK.

Link to comment

In the end there will only be two places for man to dwell. It will be either the Celestial kingdom here on this earth or it will be in hell with the devil and his angels.

My theory of section 76 is that the two lower kingdoms (the telestial and terrestrial) are just stages of our earth from one glory to the next. We right now are the very telestial kingdom spoken of in this section. During the millennium we will be the terrestrial kingdom which is also mentioned in this section.

I think you are correct about this earth being the telestial kingdom, as well as about the end result, and that the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are stages in our homeward journey. I really like your analysis of section 76 a few posts earlier. This isn't scriptural, but ever since having children of my own, I can't imagine myself ever saying to them, "sorry but you broke the house rules a long time ago and no matter what you do to try to make things right, I never want to see you again."

Here's something that is scriptural:

"...spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy" (D&3 93:33)

The lower two kingdoms are not characterized by "a fulness of joy". The only ways that scripture could be true are if our resurrection into those lower kingdoms is only temporary (no inseparable connection of spirit and element), OR if we would still continue to progress until we do indeed "receive a fulness of joy". I think either way would be consistent with your theory.

How did you come up with that theory?

Link to comment

Innocent question (please don't hurt me!):

How is the concept of resurrection through literal rebirth of the body in order to move "up" in exaltation depending upon our actions different from the Hindu concept of re-incarnation (sans the animal components)?

I think the basic concept is similar, sans the animal components. I recall coming across a statement by Heber C. Kimball that implied we would come back and continue our work if we didn't finish it this go-round. Jesus spoke of two resurrections, the "resurrection of the just" and the "resurrection of judgment", and I've heard it argued that maybe the latter is what we call "reincarnation".

But I'm no expert, so here's a link to an interesting series of articles on the subject which brings up some possible evidences from the scriptures that I wouldn't have thought of:

http://www.freeread.com/archives/2286

Link to comment

I think you are correct about this earth being the telestial kingdom, as well as about the end result, and that the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are stages in our homeward journey. I really like your analysis of section 76 a few posts earlier. This isn't scriptural, but ever since having children of my own, I can't imagine myself ever saying to them, "sorry but you broke the house rules a long time ago and no matter what you do to try to make things right, I never want to see you again."

Here's something that is scriptural:

"...spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy" (D&3 93:33)

The lower two kingdoms are not characterized by "a fulness of joy". The only ways that scripture could be true are if our resurrection into those lower kingdoms is only temporary (no inseparable connection of spirit and element), OR if we would still continue to progress until we do indeed "receive a fulness of joy". I think either way would be consistent with your theory.

How did you come up with that theory?

It's like putting together a gigantic puzzle, sometimes you try to make the wrong piece fit and realize it doesn't and only then you see where it fits. It all started with a realization decades ago that brought me to realize that if this life really was the big test, why such a massive failure amongst God's children? It' God's work and glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. But is it a cataclysmic failure? That question was brought up years ago and it was there that I saw the corner puzzle piece fall into place. Here, let me explain. This life is really short- far too short for us to achieve the perfection required to merit eternal life. And for the vast myriad of souls who have come and gone, the extraordinary small number of saints just doesn't add up to the efficiency of God's work. This got me to thinking about the basic simple logic of it all.

Picture a set of stairs, or even a ladder in your mind. Each one of those steps or rungs represent a law with each one leading to the next. Obedience to one naturally is the framework for the next and so on and so forth. But as logic has it, we know that the steps themselves are not the destination but merely the journey, or the means to reach the destination at the end of the stairs or rungs. Now, also realize this- God gives no law to man that doesn't lead, as steps, to him. Every law God gives us is the very means that enables us to become more like him. Logic states that it would be contrary for God to establish law where obedience to it would not lead to him. With that logic and understanding, I was able to put the border pieces of the puzzle into place. So, we know we have laws, or "steps" so to speak for us to abide by to learn how to become like God. But these aren't just steps for us to find placement in eternity somewhere where will be most comfortable, that is where people are always trying to make the wrong piece fit. These steps, or laws or even kingdoms are not the destination but rather the means for us to become like God himself.

We know we have thus differing levels or steps in laws with each lower step, or lower order of law supporting the one above it. Its pointless to plateau at any of those steps (kingdoms set up as a series of laws) because they only provide the framework for the next step in the journey. We sometimes hear that "telestial law" is worldliness or carnality, worldly lusts, etc. But, again- wrong piece of the puzzle, God doesn't make laws of carnality or worldliness and as such there is no such thing as obedience to wickedness. What we do know is that there is no space where there is no kingdom (think laws here). The temple informs us two very basic points of logic. They are- we live in the telestial kingdom and- we have been given laws to abide by here in this kingdom. These stps we have been given are holy in nature and lead naturally to the next set of steps (think kingdom progressing here). As such, obedience to the steps allows us entrance to the next set of steps or the next higher kingdom. Its no wonder then that the endowment shows us all the steps, progressing from the telestial kingdom and its laws to the next higher set of laws in the terrestrial kingdom and from there into the celestial kingdom.

What I missed for so many years was finding the right pieces for e purpose of the millennium. It took me a long time to figure out that no one besides Christ is perfect at death. But, our qualifications to return to Father in heaven required just that- perfection! None of us go around living our mortal lives in perfect obedience to celestial law. The millennium is the period where we learn or take the steps to become perfect. Everyone gets so consumed with the idea that the millennium is just for temple work. Thats why it took so long for me to stumble onto the truth. The purpose of the millennium is to live alongside our master and perfect our lives into accordance with God's will.

It was at this point, every other piece began to just fall into place. We know that everyone who Christ saves will be on the earth during the millennium. Everyone who accepts Christ and his gospel, whether they accepted in mortality or in the spirit world (paradise and hell), will live on the earth during the millennium. This is where Christ has his go, where he fulfills Gods work and glory. All of the saved will become cleansed from all sin through obedience to his steps. Christ will continue his work 8n the millennium until every last soul who has accepted him is washed from his sins and has learned the necessary steps to be saved. None of the saved, at that point will be judged by what mistakes they made but rather by what steps they made. Of course, all of the saved will be perfected and thus qualified to live again with God in his kingdom becoming again- his sons and daughters. The truth test- What son or daughter of God lives outside of his kingdom? NONE!

Link to comment

Whenever I read your explanation of how you view the Plan of Salvation, Rob, it always strikes me as removing the consequences.

God's plan of salvation is not a cataclysmic failure because a majority of His children will not make the choices necessary to qualify to inherit eternal life. It is a resounding success because He respected the choices His children made (as well as providing for the happiness of each one of them), and the people they became because of those choices (which people cannot inherit eternal life, because of who they have become).

Just my thoughts. I admit, it's a wonderful thought...that eventually almost everyone, save those called perdition, will inherit all that He has.

What parent would ever want to think about the choices their little ones have made which could potentially keep them from being part of the eternal family in the highest degree of Celestial glory? I don't claim to have a perfect understanding of the innermost workings of the Plan, but it seems to me an extremely basic idea: the eternal consequences of our actions.

I believe that you've said before (correct me if I'm wrong), that the gist of your thinking is this: when someone inherits a degree of glory below the highest one within the Celestial kingdom, you expect that an eternity of time spent there would essentially force them to change their point of view on their actions, and attempt repentance and thus gain progression. That God, in His mercy, would not require His children to be accountable for the choices made in their short mortal lifespan on earth. Rather, barring the unpardonable sin, He permits everyone, no matter what they've done or who've they've become because of their choices, will eventually inherit eternal life.

I can appreciate that such perspective could bring some form of peace...although I believe it to be a kind of carnal security. In that perspective, whether one makes the right choice now, or after death, is irrelevant. I can just wait until I've entered the spirit world, and simply repent, and after a few billion years, I'll enter my exaltation.

Edited by Gillebre
Link to comment

Even if someone was willing to repent, I can still see some choosing to remain in the lesser kingdoms simply because they don't desire what exists in the higher ones, including the responsibility, so they have no motivation to make the effort.

Link to comment

The view that everyone is destined for the celestial kingdom in the end save a few sons of perdition has two basic problems in my mind: (1) it is not scriptural, in fact is pretty plainly contrary to what is taught in the scriptures...not to mention statements by modern prophets and apostles which preclude the doctrine; and (2), it assumes everyone wants the celestial kingdom and to be where God is. Light cleaveth unto light, righteousness unto righteousness, etc. Judgement, or the judgement, is all about affinity--in the end it is a question of affinity, not a careful accounting of what one did or didn't do.

The doctrine of MP, progression between kingdoms until virtually all achieve the celestial glory is all very feel good, very new-agey, very much in vogue and in line with recents books like the "Celestine Prophecy" and "Conversations With God", also "The Book Or Miracles". But it is frankly incompatible not only with basic Christian theology, it is incompatible with the far more enlightened and evolved LDS theology which is based on modern and ancient scripture, also on the words of modern prophets and apostles who are going off what is in these scriptures. Only if you are prepared to dispense with these scriptures and) the words of modern prophets does the doctrine of MP, etc., etc. make any sense.

Link to comment

It's like putting together a gigantic puzzle

I think the shortness of the time that we have to do our work is supported by the logic in such doctrines as: 1) this life or “today” is the time to repent; 2) grace is vital; and 3) the redemption of the dead in the post-mortal spirit world.

The interlinked and progressive nature of the laws of God indeed makes failure impossible. The temple symbolism of the three kingdoms is used to teach us to receive grace for grace in this life (“this life”, to me, meaning mortality and post-mortal spirit world but not after the resurrection). However, God gave us agency that is completely ours so that there is no law but ourselves that governs and directs our agency unto salvation.

The laws of the lesser kingdoms are certainly righteous, but individual agency limits souls to the bounds of those laws, and one’s agency is the currency he uses when he pays for his own sins in the resurrection, and once he pays it out, he cannot get it back. The Lord’s payment was rejected and is not going back to the unrepentant sinner. So while it may seem pointless to plateau at any level of righteousness, when people reject the mercy of the Atonement that is extended them in the Lord’s due time, they suffer for their own sins and can no longer progress.

I think the “missing piece” for some is that while God has done everything we could possibly hope for to guarantee the exaltation of every child, that included giving us agency, and many exercise the option to knowingly and willingly misuse that agency. I think it boils down to pride and stubbornly taking care of one’s own failings.

Link to comment

Several years ago I was sitting in Gospel Doctrine class and I noticed the woman next to me had a book in her lap that wasn't the scriptures, it was something else. Since I'm a curious guy I politely asked what it was and she handed it to me to look at. It was "The Book Of Miracles", a supposed revelation of Jesus Christ. Only problem is, there is nothing in it remotely consistent with the teachings of Jesus either in the New Testament or LDS scriptures. After reading "The Book Of Miracles" I read "The Celestine Prophecy", also "Conversations With God". "Conversations" is another supposed revelation, where the author wrote questions and God answers them. In "Conversations" God comes across as a chummy sort of guy. He tosses of jokes, is often irreverent, and in all comes across as the sorta' guy who would be comfortable going on Johnny Carson. The basic doctrine of all of these books is that in the end all are saved, all achieve exaltation, also that evil is a phantom, an invention, and there is no Devil.

LDS multiple-probationers progression-between kingdoms etc. etc. take offense at being compared to such books or thinking, but in the end their thinking is the same: all our saved in the save a tiny few.

Link to comment

Whenever I read your explanation of how you view the Plan of Salvation, Rob, it always strikes me as removing the consequences.

God's plan of salvation is not a cataclysmic failure because a majority of His children will not make the choices necessary to qualify to inherit eternal life. It is a resounding success because He respected the choices His children made (as well as providing for the happiness of each one of them), and the people they became because of those choices (which people cannot inherit eternal life, because of who they have become).

Just my thoughts. I admit, it's a wonderful thought...that eventually almost everyone, save those called perdition, will inherit all that He has.

What parent would ever want to think about the choices their little ones have made which could potentially keep them from being part of the eternal family in the highest degree of Celestial glory? I don't claim to have a perfect understanding of the innermost workings of the Plan, but it seems to me an extremely basic idea: the eternal consequences of our actions.

I believe that you've said before (correct me if I'm wrong), that the gist of your thinking is this: when someone inherits a degree of glory below the highest one within the Celestial kingdom, you expect that an eternity of time spent there would essentially force them to change their point of view on their actions, and attempt repentance and thus gain progression. That God, in His mercy, would not require His children to be accountable for the choices made in their short mortal lifespan on earth. Rather, barring the unpardonable sin, He permits everyone, no matter what they've done or who've they've become because of their choices, will eventually inherit eternal life.

I can appreciate that such perspective could bring some form of peace...although I believe it to be a kind of carnal security. In that perspective, whether one makes the right choice now, or after death, is irrelevant. I can just wait until I've entered the spirit world, and simply repent, and after a few billion years, I'll enter my exaltation.

Consequence for sin is never removed. Justice and mercy are always meted out. We must remove this belief however that "only this lifes choices" determine how we spend the rest of eternity. If that were really true, no one would make the celestial kingdom because all sin and come short of that glory. Why? Because it would require everyone bound for celestial glory to be perfect at death. In truth, our current model makes it harder to see or achieve celestial glory. Many who by nature sin, just end up settling or wanting to plateau thinking that is the best they can ever achieve not understanding how God's plans really work. Wickedness is not happiness. Someone who thus delays his progress by sinning is only hurting himself but perhaps even jeopardising himself into losing all his reward.

Let me ask you this- Where do you think the vast majority of souls who have lived/are living on this earth will end up?

Link to comment

An earlier poster referenced a link to "free read" where the doctrine of multiple probations is discussed at length, also certain "revelations" of a JJ Dewey are quoted. I am not well versed in JJ Dewey's revelations (I frankly find them unreadable) but he is part of a group of LDS free-thinkers like Sterling Allan (Allen?). Also the Manti Mormons, the breakaway LDS group in Manti, are big on multiple probations, progression between kingdoms, etc. In fact Jim Harmston, leader of the group (former?) opined that Gordon B. Hinckley would be re-born as a black man as punishment for his gross sins and apostasy, etc., etc.

Sorry if all of this comes across as offensive to my friends who believe in MP (and I have a few of them). In some ways I find the doctrine comforting myself, but I search in vain for any scriptural support, and then the fact that it seems to attract people like Jim Harmston and JJ Dewey give me further pause, not to mention nonsense like "Conversations With God" (20th century pop psychology masquerading as revelation from God).

Link to comment

Several years ago I was sitting in Gospel Doctrine class and I noticed the woman next to me had a book in her lap that wasn't the scriptures, it was something else. Since I'm a curious guy I politely asked what it was and she handed it to me to look at. It was "The Book Of Miracles", a supposed revelation of Jesus Christ. Only problem is, there is nothing in it remotely consistent with the teachings of Jesus either in the New Testament or LDS scriptures. After reading "The Book Of Miracles" I read "The Celestine Prophecy", also "Conversations With God". "Conversations" is another supposed revelation, where the author wrote questions and God answers them. In "Conversations" God comes across as a chummy sort of guy. He tosses of jokes, is often irreverent, and in all comes across as the sorta' guy who would be comfortable going on Johnny Carson. The basic doctrine of all of these books is that in the end all are saved, all achieve exaltation, also that evil is a phantom, an invention, and there is no Devil.

LDS multiple-probationers progression-between kingdoms etc. etc. take offense at being compared to such books or thinking, but in the end their thinking is the same: all our saved in the save a tiny few.

Chew on this scripture for a bit-

25 And I would that all men might be saved. But we read that in the great and last day there are some who shall be cast out, yea, who shall be cast off from the presence of the Lord;

26 Yea, who shall be consigned to a state of endless misery, fulfilling the words which say: They that have done good shall have everlasting life; and they that have done evil shall have everlasting damnation. And thus it is. Amen. (Helaman 12:25-26)

Link to comment

I think the shortness of the time that we have to do our work is supported by the logic in such doctrines as: 1) this life or “today” is the time to repent; 2) grace is vital; and 3) the redemption of the dead in the post-mortal spirit world.

The interlinked and progressive nature of the laws of God indeed makes failure impossible. The temple symbolism of the three kingdoms is used to teach us to receive grace for grace in this life (“this life”, to me, meaning mortality and post-mortal spirit world but not after the resurrection). However, God gave us agency that is completely ours so that there is no law but ourselves that governs and directs our agency unto salvation.

The laws of the lesser kingdoms are certainly righteous, but individual agency limits souls to the bounds of those laws, and one’s agency is the currency he uses when he pays for his own sins in the resurrection, and once he pays it out, he cannot get it back. The Lord’s payment was rejected and is not going back to the unrepentant sinner. So while it may seem pointless to plateau at any level of righteousness, when people reject the mercy of the Atonement that is extended them in the Lord’s due time, they suffer for their own sins and can no longer progress.

I think the “missing piece” for some is that while God has done everything we could possibly hope for to guarantee the exaltation of every child, that included giving us agency, and many exercise the option to knowingly and willingly misuse that agency. I think it boils down to pride and stubbornly taking care of one’s own failings.

As long as we realize the arm of his mercy is extended into the spirit world. People in the spirit world, even for those who rejected the gospel in mortality, are still extended that arm of mercy to accept Christ and show obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. Thus, they can progress.

Link to comment

I read Helaman...thanks Bro. Osborne. Here is one from 2 Ne. 28:

Yea, and there shall be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die; and it shall be well with us.

8 And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little dsin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.

9 Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish cdoctrines....

Our freedom here is meaningless unless it comes with real risks. It has to be absolute, and if it is absolute it must necessarily involve real danger.

Link to comment

There is an apocryphal account somewhere that I read in one of Bro. Nibley's essays about the pre-mortal council in heaven, and how some of the faithful expressed reservations about the plan, they weren't sure about it. It was too risky, they said; some would not make it. Note that the ones who said this, or who had the reservations, were among the faithful.

Freedom is risky. Remember playing marbles in kindergarten? Well, here we play for keeps. It's part of the bargain, and it is risky.

Having said that, I think I was probably one of those people in the pre-existence who expressed reservations about the plan being too risky for some, fraught with too much danger. It has seemed to me and does now that my life has demonstrated such risk, such danger.

Link to comment

I read Helaman...thanks Bro. Osborne. Here is one from 2 Ne. 28:

Yea, and there shall be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die; and it shall be well with us.

8 And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little dsin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.

9 Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish cdoctrines....

Our freedom here is meaningless unless it comes with real risks. It has to be absolute, and if it is absolute it must necessarily involve real danger.

I agree that we can't just do as we please and then in the end we will be saved. That is a doctrine of the devil. We cannot remove justice or consequence from our actions. All who sin must pay some penalty for that disobedience to satisfy justice. All I am saying is that God has provided a series of steps for us so that we can return to him by showing diligence to each of those progressive steps.

Why do you suppose that the endowment ceremony is centered around the teaching of not only learning one law before the next higher one but also progressing from lower kingdoms to get to the celestial?

Link to comment

As long as we realize the arm of his mercy is extended into the spirit world. People in the spirit world, even for those who rejected the gospel in mortality, are still extended that arm of mercy to accept Christ and show obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. Thus, they can progress.

I think that is a general LDS realization--that people can accept the gospel and progress onward unto their exaltation in the spirit world.

Extending that principle to apply to an unrepentant person progressing unto exaltation after resurrection by suffering for his own sins and after their final judgment has not been well supported by any of the posts i've seen. Extending that principle to apply to learning true principles after a lesser resurrection and judgement, when the undelying and overarching truth of all Gospel principles is that Christ atoned so that no one should suffer for his own sins (and yet they have so chosen) is almost blasphemous.

I haven't seen how putting the setting of this progressive advancement in glory for resurrected people in the "Terrrestrial Millenium" helps the philosophy any.

Link to comment

Why do you suppose that the endowment ceremony is centered around the teaching of not only learning one law before the next higher one but also progressing from lower kingdoms to get to the celestial?

I think it is because it is symbolic and not literal, and also largely speaks to types of covenants we are invited to keep in this life. While D&C 76 is somewhat symbolic, it is also a more literal a description of post-ressurection life and the kind of life led in this life.

Link to comment

Bro. Osborn....

I am sorry if I come across as harsh. I think this is partly because I am sympathetic to your ideas. I said in an earlier post that I thought I was probably one of the people in the council in heaven (if I was there) who expressed reservation about The Plan due to the risk, the very real danger it would pose for certain of us. I'm a father of four children, three of whom--so far, anyway--have shown no abiding interest in the Gospel (they all went to church growing up, attended seminary, etc). They are all good kids, two of them are married and raising families, one is in grad school, and the youngest is still in HS (this is the one who is interested). They are not opposed to Mormonism, i.e., they are not in any way anti-Mormon, they are simply indifferent, all while affirming a general belief in a supreme being and the existence of right and wrong.

What does the future--i.e., their Gospel future--hold for them? I don't know. But I do believe that God is, in a literal sense, our father, and will exercise a father's mercy. But I also believe that He, like us, is bound by law.

Link to comment

I think that is a general LDS realization--that people can accept the gospel and progress onward unto their exaltation in the spirit world.

Extending that principle to apply to an unrepentant person progressing unto exaltation after resurrection by suffering for his own sins and after their final judgment has not been well supported by any of the posts i've seen. Extending that principle to apply to learning true principles after a lesser resurrection and judgement, when the undelying and overarching truth of all Gospel principles is that Christ atoned so that no one should suffer for his own sins (and yet they have so chosen) is almost blasphemous.

I haven't seen how putting the setting of this progressive advancement in glory for resurrected people in the "Terrrestrial Millenium" helps the philosophy any.

Who says anything about the unrepentant? The unrepentant suffer with the devil and his angels after resurrection and judgment.

Link to comment

“Poof” could make sense to someone who was suddenly healed of an affliction, or who suddenly saw the light, had an epiphany, or changed their character as the result of a spiritual experience. I felt like “poof"--a new man!--upon my conversion over 40 years ago, and I've had similar advances intermittenty ever since, as most progress is barely perceptible. But I wouldn’t be surprised if our resurrection involved our element and spirit being somehow re-formed through the stages of human development and even a physical birth process of sorts, just not more than once. Then again, the “twinkling of an eye” kind of resurrection cannot be discounted either.

I think your comment about "Poof" is appropriate and insightful. "Poof" is the work of the atonement when applied for correctly by the plaintiff. "Poof" also works in context of our brief womb-to-grave lives when juxtaposed against eternity. If I am resurrected by poof or by the womb it is the same short blip of time.

Would you mind providing a link to Hyrum Smith’s “waxes and wanes” quote and the entire talk if possible—all I can find online are snippets to from sources that don’t seem very trustworthy. On the surface, it seems to me to convey that the terrestrial type of person can be inclined more toward righteousness (a celestial type) or toward iniquity (a telestial type), and that there are innumerable degrees of righteousness just as there are innumerable degrees of waxing and waning. Also, during our mortal probation, we may take three steps forward and two back, etc. I think progress between these kingdoms is a function of mortality (which includes our time before resurrection).

Almost anything Nauvoo period can be suspect because their technologies for exactness were so sparse and expensive (spending time copying, reviewing, editing and rewriting is very expensive). As I admitted in an earlier post, my adoption of the Hyrum Smith quote is from a source I have never witnessed, but I want to get it.

I’m also wondering if Hyrum pointed out that there is variation among the brightness of the stars as well (D&C 76:81, 98), representing various degrees within the telestial kingdom, or various degrees of telestial personality. D&C 131:1 of course teaches of three levels within the celestial kingdom. The more I think of it, Hyrum was probably explaining the levels or degrees within the terrestrial experience. A full reading of his full speech might help address that.

Waxing and waning like the moon for me suggests a schedule of growth and decline and growth again. Enrollment in that kingdom works better than degrees of glory. If we are always, always only allowed forward as we are able to move with plenty of repentance available, a waxing and waning enrollment to the Millennial school is conceivable...

Like you, I would have used D&C 76:98 for the differing star brightness variations. I also am interested in Abraham 3:18-19 for that purpose of delineating between the brightness of intelligences. For me, the stars of the Telestial order R Us and they symbolize us now. In this Telestial world there are certainly a wide variation between the worst of us here and the very most just. -- I am not able to supply Hryum's full speech.

As has been pointed out, the imagery of telestial-terrestrial-celestial can be used in any number of teaching and testifying settings in addition to any literal applications. So yes, we progress all along the spectrum of the plan of salvation and can use these terms to describe various aspects and methods of progress.

We agree here

But it is conceivable that there is a time between resurrection and judgment, and to wonder what the glory of the resurrected body might enjoy during the pre-judgment period. Perhaps those who are resurrected early might be granted time to become more perfect and avoid suffering for their own sins, receive the grace of Christ and in due time be judged worthy of exaltation. Those who have to wait until the last resurrection have less time granted and so are destined to suffer, miss out on grace and be denied exaltation. Or maybe in their long wait for resurrection have repented sufficiently to require less post-resurrection perfection activity. This seems to over-emphasize the principle of earning our salvation. Or are you saying all resurrected beings have all the time they need to become perfect before they are judged (which seems to over-emphasize the principle of grace in our salvation)?

I like the concept of suffering less the more we are perfected. In this Telestial World we all suffer for our sins to one degree or another until we have sense enough to apply the atonement. If I choose only good I have no reason to suffer. The more perfected I am, the more good I have chosen and all the less to suffer.

Missing out on grace and thus missing out on exaltation is where I get stuck. I assume perfection is a very LONG process and not something we can understand very well from this vantage point.

I’m sure those of the first resurrection are laboring as one with the Lord and serving those in need throughout the Millennium. If they haven’t yet been judged, I’m sure this contributes toward their perfection and a favorable outcome at the judgment bar. If those of the first resurrection include those of a terrestrial nature, then the waxing and waning imagery could certainly apply—but I don’t think they are included, according to D&C 76: 64. And I don’t think we get another go at mortality, but you never really know—I just don’t have any basis for faith in that principle.

As I stated, I am exploring the idea of "eternal" eternal progression which could include another go at mortality. Some have thoughtfully expressed that there is no obvious scriptural basis for it, and I probably agree (although I looking for something obvious). I am, however, searching for contradictions in scripture. To have another go at mortality, we must learn more about resurrection, probations and family ties. We must learn more about our co-eternal natures with God.

"We say that God Himself is a self-existent God. Who told you so? It's correct enough, but how did it get into your heads? Who told you that man did not exist in like manner upon the same principle? [He refers to the Bible.] How does it read in the Hebrew? It doesn't say so in the old Hebrew. God made the tabernacle of man out of the earth and put into him Adam's spirit (which was created before), and then it became a living body or human soul. Man existed in spirit; the mind of man--the intelligent part -- is as immortal as, and is coequal with, God Himself. I know that my testimony is true." -- The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text, BYU Studies copyright 1978, Stan Larsen

If God didn't create our intelligent spirit then he can't block us from progression to a state like himself. He has no right to do it. We are free and sovereign intelligent beings which are co-equal to God eternally. We grant him authority over us by our consent. Our mortal bodies are part of the contract with Him and there are consequences for disobedience in his family. The ultimate disobedience is denying the Holy Ghost.

"All sin shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost, for Jesus Christ will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He has got to deny the plan of salvation; he has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it with his eyes open; he has got to receive the Holy Ghost, deny Jesus Christ when the heavens are open to him, know God, and then sin against Him. After a man has sinned the sin against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him." -- The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text, BYU Studies copyright 1978, Stan Larsen

I can equate the idea of “endless progress” with “endless probation” in that it must be very trying at times for God to continue His eternal round. Not because He isn’t perfectly perfect, but because He perfectly empathizes with each and every one of us in our struggles. He likewise has plenty of opportunity to rejoice, and not only empathize with our exaltation but have the perfect satisfaction of saying “I told you so!” So this to me is the nature of no beginning and no end.

One Eternal Round is, of course, one of those intriguing titles for God which makes me want to learn more and more about progression.

I do not think that Jesus had to become immortal as God in order to condescend to be born of Mary. I think Jesus was Spirit as God (D&C 93:9) and then condescended (humbly and lovingly conformed to the Father’s will) to be born of Mary and carry on His mission. I think that Christ's time on earth was a probation for Him notwithstanding He was already perfected as a Spirit God. My understanding is that He was tried according to His level of development (Mosiah 3:7) and that He received grace for grace (D&C 93:12). His probation was different in that it was the probation of a God, but it had all the same elements we face (Matthew 4:1-11), and He certainly suffered for all our sins and failed probations. I believe He became a higher order being” through his obedience in the premortal life, just as are higher order beings in a relative sense (Abraham 3:18-19).

I think you make great points which may very well be truer than my understandings of the Savior.

To condescend is to be humble and submissive. If he is truly in our same generation of spirit children, he would not have experienced mortality yet any more than we did. He would have had to complete the step and thus he wouldn't have been of a higher rank than Mary unless he had already done it and attained Godhood.

"The first principle of truth and of the Gospel is to know for a certainty the character of God, and that we may converse with Him the same as one man with another, and He once was a man like one of us and that God Himself, the Father of us all, once dwelled on an earth the same as Jesus Christ himself did in the flesh and like us." -- The King Follett Discourse: A Newly Amalgamated Text, BYU Studies copyright 1978, Stan Larsen

I agree that President Hinckley compared to me is a good example of a “higher order being” and I’m sure even he would assert that he yet had a long way to go. And I think “progression” takes on different meanings the further along we go.

Agreed

Link to comment
So this leads me to my topic question: Speaking hypothetically, if you were engaged in a gospel discussion on the plan of salvation with a sincere non-member and you didn't have the scriptures at hand, and if he or she were to ask you what the Lord's qualifications are that have to be met in order for an individual to inherit the Telestial Kingdom of glory -- how would you answer their question?

I would state that only LDS or ancient equivalent can inherit the Celestial or Terrestrial. The Telestial glory is for those who don't join the Church in this life or the next and the wicked who spend a stint suffering in hell between death and the resurrection.

Of course if I had my scriptures, I would begin by showing D&C 76:99-101 wherein we see good Christians and those of other religions inhabiting the Telestial. Receiving the testimony of Jesus, a requirement for the higher two, cannot be done without joining the Church.

Edited by BCSpace
Link to comment

This is where the theory seems to break apart for me. D&C 76 is all about what happens in the resurrection (verses 16, 17). The first resurrection, which describes both timing (Alma 40:8, 16, 19) and righteousness (D&C 76:50-70) is of superior glory to the last resurrection (verses 81-86). The resurrection is the point at which celestial spirits and correspondingly quickened element align (D&C 88:28).

Now if you are saying that celestial “resurrectoids” are physically living in the same spatial coordinates as planet Earth but hidden from our perception, perhaps due to differentiations between glories, then I can see how they could inhabit the same cosmic locale, except in a celestial and not telestial dimension. Only when someone of a lesser glory is quickened to see someone of a higher glory, or of spirit element only, could they be perceived. This is consistent with some observations that the post-mortal spirit world is also on Earth.

This would also mean, however, that there is only one, and not two, places the resurrected dead can go. The second death or spiritual death is covered in verses 32-49 (immortal life in a kingdom without glory, or without the ministrations of any agent of God, even of the Holy Ghost--compare with D&C 19:20). But extending your theory, there is no reason for outer darkness to not also be collocated with this planet as one of many glories or levels of existence that may be manifest to the quickened eye of the beholder--the sons of perdition are just so spiritually dark they can perceive no glory.

Also, as Earth realizes its Millenial then Celestial glory, where do those that cannot abide these glories go? Do they remain in the same coordinates but in a lesser dimension that cannot access greater light, but is still protected from the influence of lesser light?

At any rate, for these reasons the argument for "two places/conditions/kingdoms only" just doesn’t seem to hang together.

To me, Rob Osborn is saying "Right track" or "Wrong track." Either we are eligible to progress or we are not. Inheritors of the Telestial are at the lowest rung of the "Right track" group whereas wrong trackers are all Sons of Perdition. The doctrine feels good and offers hope to all.

Link to comment

Maybe this is too fine a point, but to "suffer for their own sins in hell until after the Millennium, when they will be resurrected" may be correct in that they suffer the consequenes of a sinfful life in the spirit world/prison until they repent, with some suffering in hell longer than others, with the worst not repenting at all and being delayed from resurection until the very last. Now that I think of it, this may actually be merciful, allowing them as much opportunity as possible to repent prior to resurrection.

I'm trying to issue a call to logic here. When the Lord says that the unrepentant must suffer "even as I", then how can they so suffer if they are not in a physical body, like Christ was at that time? Whatever suffering goes on in the Spirit Prison cannot possibly be the suffering "even as I". That must necessarily wait for the resurrection.

But I repeat myself.

Link to comment

Whenever I read your explanation of how you view the Plan of Salvation, Rob, it always strikes me as removing the consequences.

God's plan of salvation is not a cataclysmic failure because a majority of His children will not make the choices necessary to qualify to inherit eternal life. It is a resounding success because He respected the choices His children made (as well as providing for the happiness of each one of them), and the people they became because of those choices (which people cannot inherit eternal life, because of who they have become).

Just my thoughts. I admit, it's a wonderful thought...that eventually almost everyone, save those called perdition, will inherit all that He has.

What parent would ever want to think about the choices their little ones have made which could potentially keep them from being part of the eternal family in the highest degree of Celestial glory? I don't claim to have a perfect understanding of the innermost workings of the Plan, but it seems to me an extremely basic idea: the eternal consequences of our actions.

I believe that you've said before (correct me if I'm wrong), that the gist of your thinking is this: when someone inherits a degree of glory below the highest one within the Celestial kingdom, you expect that an eternity of time spent there would essentially force them to change their point of view on their actions, and attempt repentance and thus gain progression. That God, in His mercy, would not require His children to be accountable for the choices made in their short mortal lifespan on earth. Rather, barring the unpardonable sin, He permits everyone, no matter what they've done or who've they've become because of their choices, will eventually inherit eternal life.

I can appreciate that such perspective could bring some form of peace...although I believe it to be a kind of carnal security. In that perspective, whether one makes the right choice now, or after death, is irrelevant. I can just wait until I've entered the spirit world, and simply repent, and after a few billion years, I'll enter my exaltation.

Without plural mortal expiations (atonements) there are no consequences. Being allowed to move forward only when one is ready makes sense. Coming to a Telestial resurrection by way of the womb without a memory of past experiences and then only having our pre-existant natures come through, makes it work. Every parent knows their child has a pre-formed personality which can only be shaped a little.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...