What's This Stuff About Getting My Own Planet?

[mormonnewb]

Completely disagree (surprise, surprise). It's as plain as day if you read the scriptures.

Scriptures quite clearly teach that:

1. Before we came to earth we watched Heavenly Father creating this earth. (We watched the father of our spirits create an earth & we will have spirit children).

2. We will become like Heavenly Father one day. (So we will do the same things he does right?)

3. We will be called Gods. (We will be without end so we have to have some purpose of existence)

4. We will have eternal increase. (What will happen to our spirit children)

5. We will inherit all that God has. (This includes power, dominion etc).

6. We will dwell as resurrected beings on this resurrected Earth.

7. God's entire work and glory is to make his children like he is. (Once we are like he is what will our work and glory be.)

8. There are higher kingdoms than Celestial.

Seriously, none of this is speculation. (The speculative questions that just require a bit of simple reasoning are in parentheses). It's all straight out of the scriptures with no interpretation or bending necessary. Why is this even up for debate?

So what's the deal with the Mormon Newsroom site? Is it wrong?

[Brian 2.0]

Completely disagree (surprise, surprise).  It's as plain as day if you read the scriptures.

 

Scriptures quite clearly teach that:

1. Before we came to earth we watched Heavenly Father creating this earth. (We watched the father of our spirits create an earth & we will have spirit children).

2. We will become like Heavenly Father one day. (So we will do the same things he does right?)

3. We will be called Gods.  (We will be without end so we have to have some purpose of existence)

4. We will have eternal increase. (What will happen to our spirit children)

5. We will inherit all that God has.  (This includes power, dominion etc).

6. We will dwell as resurrected beings on this resurrected Earth.

7. God's entire work and glory is to make his children like he is.  (Once we are like he is what will our work and glory be.)

8. There are higher kingdoms than Celestial.

 

Seriously, none of this is speculation.  (The speculative questions that just require a bit of simple reasoning are in parentheses).  It's all straight out of the scriptures with no interpretation or bending necessary.  Why is this even up for debate?

 

I think the "get their own planet" is being dismissed due to it seeming like a prize.  Like if we do what's right God will give us a planet of our own as a reward.  Whereas the more correct way is to say we will be like God (a creator) and we will create planets for our own spirit children to dwell on.  But even us creating planets is an assumption... an easy one... but still an assumption.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Brian 2.0

[mfbukowski]

You already have your own planet.

 

It is your personal understanding of this place we communally call "earth".

[Sanpitch]

Really, Sanpitch? You want to start another Doctrine vs. The Opinion of Men/Websites debate on here? On the Sabbath at that?

Instead, perhaps we can just establish a general order of priority. For example,

1. Scripture

2. Over the pulpit at GC

3. In an Ensign article

4. In an interview with Larry King

5. In a People magazine article discussing an Osmond, Gladys Knight or Steve Young

6. On an episode of Mormon Stories

OK then, we just ignore information that comes from the LDS dot org right? They don't know anything, we just rely on the scriptures.

[webbles]

Let me translate the new chruch PR speak to make it clearer.

 

Do Latter-day Saints believe they can become “gods”?  Yes.

I'd actually say that the PR answer is pretty clear.  The first sentence is the answer.  All the rest is trying to downplay the caricatures by showing that the belief is biblical.

[The Nehor]

Ask him why he thinks you are only going to have ONE lousy planet? Has he no ambition?

 

Saying it is unscriptural is accurate. Lorenzo Snow taught it repeatedly though and he was taught it by Joseph Smith. Could he have gotten it wrong? Sure. Likely? I don't think so.

Edited December 16, 2013 by The Nehor

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Upon hearing about my conversion to Mormonism, a Protestant friend skeptically asked me, "So have you picked out your own planet yet?" I jokingly told him that my planet was being custom-built on a lot in the Delta Quadrant but I was still waiting for a couple of inspector approvals before it could be completed.

When he pressed me to explain about exaltation, I had to admit that I really knew very little about it. In fact, what little I know about it, I've learned on the Bloggernacle. It certainly isn't something that I've heard an apostle speak about in GC over the last three years.

Is exaltation still an important part of our theology? If so, is it only taught in seminary or primary or the days I miss Sunday school? It seems that I've missed a major part of the Gospel. Have I not been paying attention or does this fall in the "milk before meat category"? And if the latter, who do I show that my back molars have come in and that I'm ready for solid food?

Much of this comes from a funeral sermon given by Joseph Smith, which is not canon now ever will be. Sadly the sermon has lead to such speculation that some go too far. The thing we need to know is the Bible tells that we are "joint heirs with Christ"...Christ has all that the Father has..But it is this earth will be Celestialized. So this is what Joseph is teaching. I once had someone talk about having our own planet in Sunday School, afterwards I told him to never do that again.

[Storm Rider]

Upon hearing about my conversion to Mormonism, a Protestant friend skeptically asked me, "So have you picked out your own planet yet?" I jokingly told him that my planet was being custom-built on a lot in the Delta Quadrant but I was still waiting for a couple of inspector approvals before it could be completed.

When he pressed me to explain about exaltation, I had to admit that I really knew very little about it. In fact, what little I know about it, I've learned on the Bloggernacle. It certainly isn't something that I've heard an apostle speak about in GC over the last three years.

Is exaltation still an important part of our theology? If so, is it only taught in seminary or primary or the days I miss Sunday school? It seems that I've missed a major part of the Gospel. Have I not been paying attention or does this fall in the "milk before meat category"? And if the latter, who do I show that my back molars have come in and that I'm ready for solid food?

 

This is a topic that gets a lot of attention from critics. It also has been a topic among many LDS who believe in it fervently. For the most part I think it is a type of summary for Exaltation, which is a fundamental reason for the Plan of Salvation - God created us so that he could make us like him; he offers us all that he has if we are but willing to choose to glorify him.

 

The problem is that this is code for a great many things also. Exaltation is a communal event; we are not saved alone. Another purpose of mortality is to bind our families together. I think this extends to our community, our people, all humanity. I believe that we really don't know what Exaltation will look like. All creation is not a process of one, but it is a process that involves man. If anything, I think Exaltation is being in perfect union with our Father as well as each other. 

 

I personally don't like the phrase and don't use it because it limits what our Father has planned for each of his children. 

[The Nehor]

Much of this comes from a funeral sermon given by Joseph Smith, which is not canon now ever will be. Sadly the sermon has lead to such speculation that some go too far. The thing we need to know is the Bible tells that we are "joint heirs with Christ"...Christ has all that the Father has..But it is this earth will be Celestialized. So this is what Joseph is teaching. I once had someone talk about having our own planet in Sunday School, afterwards I told him to never do that again.

 

Lorenzo Snow regularly taught that we would create planets. Once while watching children playing with clay he commented that if these children lived up to their covenants they would one day form worlds instead of mudballs.

[Sanpitch]

I come from a almost 100% devoted Mormon family however I have close family members who are JWs. They tell me that when going door to door in Utah to Mormon households they often hear, "No thanks, I have my own religion." This thread rather affirms that. Everyone has their own beliefs that doesn't necessarily agree with what is currently believed by others of the same religion.

Where do you go to get correct answers?

[JAHS]

The "get your own planet" statement is wrong because we will not just get our own planet; we will create our own universe and populate it's planets with our eternal increase of spirit children. This is how I always understood it. Therefore the statement made by the church is correct. They are also correct in saying that we really don't know enough about our eternal future to declare this as "official" church doctrine to the world.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Lorenzo Snow regularly taught that we would create planets. Once while watching children playing with clay he commented that if these children lived up to their covenants they would one day form worlds instead of mudballs.

President Snow could have hand canonized, yes we will become like God as promised in all scriptures. But this I know, if anyone is a member just to fulfill such ambition, rather than to love God with all the might, mind and strength and filled with Charity towards all...they will never know what it is like.

[Stone holm]

Whoa! Is this an official church site? If so, has everyone been told this? I know some older saints who have already filled out change of address forms?

Seriously, if we know longer believe in getting our own planets, what do we believe? What will exaltation be like? And if we don't know, why is it something we strive for?

Thanks to you, Sanpitch, I'm more confused than before.

Another partial truth, really get sick of the partial truth explanations. No, we don't get our own planet, the Earth will become our Celestial home if we reach Exaltation, but yes we will be organizing planets for our Spirit Children, so in a sense we will have planets of our own. We still believe in the Snow Couplet, See teaching of Pres Lorenzo Snow. And that pretty much concisely sums it up.

[The Nehor]

Where do you go to get correct answers?

 

I go to God. I find the endless threads about what is and is not official both amusing and a little bit depressing.

[mormonnewb]

The "get your own planet" statement is wrong because we will not just get our own planet; we will create our own universe and populate it's planets with our eternal increase of spirit children. This is how I always understood it. Therefore the statement made by the church is correct. They are also correct in saying that we really don't know enough about our eternal future to declare this as "official" church doctrine to the world.

I hope that this is not true because it makes the website statement dishonest to the extreme. It is a denial of getting our own planet because, in fact, we get our own universe. That's like a little boy denying that he stole a cookie when, in fact, he stole the whole cookie jar. Semantic hair-splitting is beneath a church this wonderful.

In fact, this is one of the things I struggled most with in finally coming to this church -- the OCCASIONAL tendency to use semantics to the hide the truth (e.g. "I'm not sure we emphasize that anymore", "our garments are sacred not secret", etc.).

If we can't own up to our own beliefs for fear of being made fun of, then we need to change them (hint-hint: continuing revelation). Otherwise, we need to put on our big-boy garments and man up. But this obfuscation-by-word smithing is maddening!

[The Nehor]

President Snow could have hand canonized, yes we will become like God as promised in all scriptures. But this I know, if anyone is a member just to fulfill such ambition, rather than to love God with all the might, mind and strength and filled with Charity towards all...they will never know what it is like.

 

I intend to have both the ambition and the love.

[Stone holm]

I hope that this is not true because it makes the website statement dishonest to the extreme. It is a denial of getting our own planet because, in fact, we get our own universe. That's like a little boy denying that he stole a cookie when, in fact, he stole the whole cookie jar. Semantic hair-splitting is beneath a church this wonderful.

In fact, this is one of the things I struggled most with in finally coming to this church -- the OCCASIONAL tendency to use semantics to the hide the truth (e.g. "I'm not sure we emphasize that anymore", "our garments are sacred not secret", etc.).

If we can't own up to our own beliefs for fear of being made fun of, then we need to change them (hint-hint: continuing revelation). Otherwise, we need to put on our big-boy garments and man up. But this obfuscation-by-word smithing is maddening!

Welcome to the wonders of Correlation and Elder News Release. Yeah, well he hadn't read the Lorenzo Snow manual and he was playing coy with Larry King, such is life.

[Calm]

 For the most part I think it is a type of summary for Exaltation, which is a fundamental reason for the Plan of Salvation 

LDS tend to be people of action to a great extent.  They, in my experience, are more likely to define things by what is being done rather than some abstract concept attached to it.

[Calm]

I hope that this is not true because it makes the website statement dishonest to the extreme. 

My opinion, the newsroom is simply stating what has been revealed and defined as official doctrine and not including the 'decorations' that have attached themselves to the revelation, thus it does not include speculation....even if such speculation is the result of decent logic and very widespread in use...to define church doctrine.

 

I would suggest studying what has and has not been said from the original and complete context over the decades before taking anyone's opinion as fact that anyone has been dishonest or coy or whatever.  Decide for yourself.

Edited December 16, 2013 by calmoriah

[Coreyb]

If I become a god I expect more than just one planet

[mfbukowski]

I come from a almost 100% devoted Mormon family however I have close family members who are JWs. They tell me that when going door to door in Utah to Mormon households they often hear, "No thanks, I have my own religion." This thread rather affirms that. Everyone has their own beliefs that doesn't necessarily agree with what is currently believed by others of the same religion.

Where do you go to get correct answers?

The Spirit.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I intend to have both the ambition and the love.

Or ambition to love, would be a better way to put it.

[mormonnewb]

My opinion, the newsroom is simply stating what has been revealed and defined as official doctrine and not including the 'decorations' that have attached themselves to the revelation, thus it does not include speculation....even if such speculation is the result of decent logic and very widespread in use...to define church doctrine.

I would suggest studying what has and has not been said from the original and complete context over the decades before taking anyone's opinion as fact that anyone has been dishonest or coy or whatever. Decide for yourself.

You're quite right. I was really hoping that JAHS was just expressing one possible interpretation of the newsroom statement and not the "true" interpretation. And as if it really matters, I like yours better. However, I hope you will agree that the website explanation could have been clearer.

"The Church does not and has never purported to fully understand the specifics of Christ’s statement that “in my Father’s house are many mansions” (John 14:2)."

This might be technically true in regards to John 14:2 but is somewhat misleading in the context of whether saints believe they will get their own planet. Some apostles and prophets HAVE taught quite explicitly about what exaltation means in this regard. Yet, this statement seems to imply that the church has always had a "neutral" stance and wayward members have gotten carried away from time to time. The truth is that they were carried away by speculation from church LEADERS.

Of course, you might read this differently, which seems to be a trend around here. There are a half dozen threads discussing the recent priesthood ban statement. In each thread, intelligent people with Ph.Ds, M.Ds, J.Ds and the occasional fake ID are arguing over whether the ban was instituted by God or not. This leaves me to conclude that either the Church did not want to answer the question explicitly or hired the wrong PR firm to draft the release.

And I'm not saying that there aren't reasons for ambiguity in some cases. However, it does make it difficult for investigators and those of us who are new to the faith to sift the wheat from the chaff.

[teddyaware]

I find it interesting that non-LDS Christians believe God created this planet, was born a helpless baby on this planet,  grew to manhood on this planet, died on this planet, was raised from the dead on this planet, and will one day reign personally as king of this planet -- yet for some reason they seem to find it goofy to believe other planets will be populated and ruled over by heavenly beings who are joint heirs with Christ, crowned as kings, and seated with Him on thrones of eternal power.

Edited December 16, 2013 by teddyaware

[halconero]

I find it interesting that non-LDS Christians believe God created this planet, was born a helpless baby on this planet,  grew to manhood on this planet, died on this planet, was raised from the dead on this planet, and will one day reign personally as king of this planet -- yet for some reason they seem to find it goofy to believe other planets will be populated and ruled over by heavenly beings who are joint heirs with Christ, crowned as kings, and seated with Him on thrones of eternal power.

 

Agreed. Like I said in my first post in this thread, that deification is so central to the Bible's (especially the New Testament's) message that its rejection amounts to a rejection of many portions of the Bible itself, Christ's divinity, atoning sacrifice, and the nature of the Father.