Answer Me This?

[Palerider]

 

The parable in Matthew 13 is about the "kingdom of Heaven".

 

Jesus says that the parable is about the world. Matt. 13: 24 "Another parable he put forth to them saying, "The Kingdom of Heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field."      

 

The man, Vrs 37: "He that soweth the good seed is the Son of Man." and his seeds represent the kingdom of heaven in the world. Vrs. 38: "the good seed are the children of the kingdom", those whom the kindom brings forth because they follow Christ's teachings.

 

It is about Christ's kingdom here on earth and what happens to it after it is established by Him.  

 

Agreed.

 

Christ's kingdom or church (I hesitate to use the word "church" because of the organizational connotation it brings with it), is invisible to us at this point.

 

Where does it say this? I'm saying this. I'm saying that at this point in time, 2013, the Kingdom of Heaven is invisible to us. It is not any single organization.

 

 Archaeological, historical, and biblical evidence points to a very real, very visible organization. So does the parable. Agreed to this point. 

 

The wheat didn't suddenly disappear among the tares. The servants could distinguish the two, but could not separate them with ease. Tares and wheat exist as discreet units.      All people go through phases of determining what is true doctrine and what is not. Many here on this site admit to the same. The type of people we become is determined by whose doctrines we choose to follow. That is why a "maturing" is involved. It is when they are mature that the determination has been made as to whether they are a wheat or a tare. What kind of fruit has been brought forth. See verse 26.

 

 I can share from personal experience that when tares get into your wheat field it isn't hard that hard to tell them apart if you just look closely. Nor do the tares "infect" or "mix" with the wheat in any biological sense. It is maybe difficult to tell the two apart in the first couple months, until the ear appears. 

 

Israel only exists amorphously at this point in time although it is known unto the Lord, in that he knows all of our hearts. 

 

If the early apostles' writings are any indication, they thought that Israel was among them, and that it included the Gentile converts. This is true. Romans 9: 6, 9:   "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:....but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

 

After He has sown "good seed" which are good people with correct and pure doctrine, (read apostles and the subsequent converts), the Devil comes along and attempts to corrupt the kingdom with his false doctrines and false teachers. See verse 25 which even has a footnote in the LDS scriptures referring to the great apostacy. 

 

Agreed. Notice that the good people doesn't disappear. Nor are they destroyed or subsumed by the the bad people. This is consistent with the LDS belief that even following the apostasy many good people continued among the earth. It also doesn't preclude any thought of restoration or gatherings in (more on the gathering in the next few paragraphs). It certainly doesn't establish it. 

 

This is my personal opinion, but you could say that the maturing of the ears of wheat, which helps the farmer truly distinguish between the tares and the wheat, could be the maturing of the Kingdom through the Restoration <- Just a personal thought, not really related to the parable.

 

And 20 years ago I would have agreed with you, but the fact is that there are no biblical scriptures that absolutely place the "gathering" of Israel in a pre-2nd coming scenario. Most can actually be read as that gathering taking place IN CONJUNCTION WITH and after the second coming. This is an inherently LDS (and a few others) mindset. You have to go back and re-read all of the Old testament prophecies with this specific question in mind: Could this actually be taking place AFTER the Savior makes His second appearence?" You might be surprised at the answer.

 

This is all accomplished "while men sleep". In other words, those who were supposed to guard the field, because of their human frailties were unable to do so.

 

This could also be read as apostasy. Precisely

 

The angels ask in verse 28 if they should go down and purify (or restore) the kingdom to it's original purity and their request id denied. They are told that it shall remain as it is until those who are truly the Lord's have reached maturity and the harvest is thne engaged.

 

The Kingdom remains pure. In no place during the parable does Christ infer that the good people he has seeded around the world have disappeared. What the angels request is to cleanse the world, not the gospel. If the Kingdom had remained pure why are you not a Roman Catholic? Where do you get this idea that I'm saying the good people disappeared. Non-sequitur......

 

The field is the earth in the sense that it is (and will be) the Lord's Kingdom when all false doctrine and false teachers are removed at the time of the harvest.  

 

The earth will definitely be the Lord's Kingdom.

 

The earth is the Lord's Kingdom (church) even now although it remains unclean at this point in time.

 

No. The Kingdom of Heaven is likened unto the Man planting the seeds, and the seeds themselves. The earth is the area in which they are planted. Once the wicked are harvested, the earth will be pure. I believe that's what I just said.....No?

 

Also, the "gathering" as portrayed in Matthew is not the same as the gathering of Israel, ARE YOU SURE? WHO SAYS SO? or the Restoration, which can occur before the final harvest. The word "gather" is not used in most english translations nowadays, and is not used in translations in other languages. In Spanish and French the words "cosechar," "recoger" or "maissoner" are used, which indicate harvesting and collecting, rather than a gathering. This makes it clear that the verse is referring to final judgment, in which the Lord will reap the field, and divide the wheat from the tares. In no sense does this prohibit the people of God from gathering, or having truths restored to them in preparation for the Harvest.

 

Edited December 22, 2013 by Palerider

[Sevenbak]

Why are there not more Mormons? If the church is true and God answers prayers why are there not many many more members of the church? Many people pray for guidance in their lives and they get divergent answers or insight. Some follow one path some another. Many despise the path that others are on as corrupt, yet everyone seems to claim the same direction from God. 

 

So either there is not one true church or God does not answer prayers equally. Which is it? 

 

I am not trying to be troublesome, it is just that this is the issue that troubles me most about the church and religion in general. Claims that there is one path and God told me what it is.

I think Nephi answered it pretty bluntly.

 

 

1 Nephi 14:12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were ^afew, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon ^ball the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

[rpn]

Because mortals come to God in their own time and way.  And because the process of doing so is littered with traditions of their fathers.

[omni]

1. So someone can hear the gospel in this life time and reject it and not suffer any permanent punishment for that rejection? What would be the point of accepting the gospel here in this life if there are no consequences? I disagree very strongly with this. It is my opinion that our decisions here absolutely have eternal consequences. We have the power to seal up relationships for eternity, certainly those decisions are forever.

2. Then a mortal probation wherein someone dies just after birth would absolutely be the way to go. I am sorry I do not accept that. The tests are not just mildly unequal, they are wildly different. They vary from no test at all to a lifetime of strict obedience to a very specific set of rules and a single wrong decision ( a really bad one like murder) can condemn one forever.

You've hit it on the head of what I believe is a fundamental flaw in Mormon theology. I actually struggled a lot with this on my mission, but then put it on my shelf and went back to work.

With a current rate of activity in the church of about 1/3, we are essentially damning more souls than we are exalting. Those fortunate people who never hear the gospel here on Earth will then have the opportunity to accept it in the hereafter (boy that's gotta be a tough decision) without the risk of later falling away.

[Tiki]

Why are there not more Mormons? If the church is true and God answers prayers why are there not many many more members of the church? Many people pray for guidance in their lives and they get divergent answers or insight. Some follow one path some another. Many despise the path that others are on as corrupt, yet everyone seems to claim the same direction from God. 

 

So either there is not one true church or God does not answer prayers equally. Which is it? 

 

I am not trying to be troublesome, it is just that this is the issue that troubles me most about the church and religion in general. Claims that there is one path and God told me what it is.

D&C123:12

[Robert F. Smith]

Why are there not more Mormons? If the church is true and God answers prayers why are there not many many more members of the church? Many people pray for guidance in their lives and they get divergent answers or insight. Some follow one path some another. Many despise the path that others are on as corrupt, yet everyone seems to claim the same direction from God. 

 

So either there is not one true church or God does not answer prayers equally. Which is it? 

 

I am not trying to be troublesome, it is just that this is the issue that troubles me most about the church and religion in general. Claims that there is one path and God told me what it is.

Excellent question, Monster, and putting it in terms of "religion in general" is certainly apropos.  However, you might want to expand that to include ideology or philosophy in general.  People do get attached to their particular POVs, pending conversion (or paradigm shift) to some other POV -- be it secular or religious.

 

The Mormon theory is that it isn't supposed to be easy, nor that the test is simple.  Mormon theology tends to be somewhat masochistic, suggesting that difficulties (challenges) are what brings growth, both physically and spiritually.  After all, it it were easy, it might be worthless.  And then there is the Nietzschean notion that, "What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger."  Indeed, the powerful streak of humanism which infects Mormonism, might very well revel in the Nietzschean "death of God" theology only because it was a false god anyhow.

 

And, if we are going to talk numbers, consider the Chosen People of God, the Jews ("how odd of God to choose the Jews").  Few in number, yet still around after thousands of years.  It seems unlikely to me that God focuses on numbers:  Quality rather than quantity?

 

The 300 at Thermopylae made all the difference.  Etc.

[Robert F. Smith]

You've hit it on the head of what I believe is a fundamental flaw in Mormon theology. I actually struggled a lot with this on my mission, but then put it on my shelf and went back to work.

With a current rate of activity in the church of about 1/3, we are essentially damning more souls than we are exalting. Those fortunate people who never hear the gospel here on Earth will then have the opportunity to accept it in the hereafter (boy that's gotta be a tough decision) without the risk of later falling away.

See my post #58, and question your own assumptions and speculations here.  You're an RM and yet you have some rather goofy notions of LDS theology?!

[Robert F. Smith]

.........................................   

 

Rather, the people who truly hunger and thirst after righteousness and who are willing to educate themselves through the scriptures, and with the help of the Spirit, are able to lead the type of lives that are acceptable to God, without being attached to any particular Christian "religion". 

 

.........................................   

Where does that leave God's Chosen People, the Jews?

[Robert F. Smith]

If I understand you correctly it is not important what religion you belong to but how you live your life. If that is the case I do not think I would pick Mormonism to get me to God. There are simpler and more enjoyable paths.

My point exactly, and Mormon theology would suggest that the easy way won't get you to God -- or at least to the preferred glory.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Robert F. Smith

[DBMormon]

You've hit it on the head of what I believe is a fundamental flaw in Mormon theology. I actually struggled a lot with this on my mission, but then put it on my shelf and went back to work.

With a current rate of activity in the church of about 1/3, we are essentially damning more souls than we are exalting. Those fortunate people who never hear the gospel here on Earth will then have the opportunity to accept it in the hereafter (boy that's gotta be a tough decision) without the risk of later falling away.

unless you take another view in Mormon theology which is to say membership in the Church in this life means very little in terms of exaltation then many thought.

Edited December 22, 2013 by DBMormon

[Robert F. Smith]

I think as Paul states, the "Law" is written in the hearts of all men and that as stated in John, the Spirit of Christ enlightens all men who come into this life. 

 

That being said I think the actual experience of coming to this life and having a physical body is so enlightening that it prepares us for further instruction in the next life.

 

I think the importance of "ordinances" in this life, as advanced by some are just WAY overrated........ 

Since Mormonism is universalist anyhow, and since nearly everyone will be saved in glory (or one of several authentic glories), your point is well taken.  Paul does say that they who have not the Law are a law (lower case) unto themselves -- and will be judged accordingly.  And it is true that the light of Christ enlightens all who come into the world, etc., so that indeed, we are prepared for further instruction here or hereafter -- thanks to those who lovingly perform the essential ordinances in this life as saviors on Mt Zion.

 

The atonement has tremendous reach and shouldn't be soft-peddled.  God's plan will get nearly all of us back, and the joy will be vast and eternal.

 

Through it all, of course, there has been horrific suffering and unmentionable evil.  All that can and will be overcome.  Some will sit on the sidelines, others will show the full measure of their love and devotion.  All must follow conscience.

[omni]

See my post #58, and question your own assumptions and speculations here.  You're an RM and yet you have some rather goofy notions of LDS theology?!

 

 

I'm disappointed Robert,  I would expect someone with your experience to know how damnation is interpreted within Mormon theology.

 

Individuals are damned whenever they are prevented from reaching their full potential as children of God. Damnation is falling short of what one might have enjoyed if one had received and been faithful to the whole law of the gospel. In this sense, all who do not achieve the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom are damned, even though they are saved in some degree of glory. They are damned in the sense that they will not enjoy an eternal increase or the continuation of the family unit in eternity (D&C 132:4, 19). In this context, damnation does not necessarily refer to eternal suffering in hell with the devil, for loss of blessings is in itself a type of hell and damnation

 

 

[Avatar4321]

 Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right. (D&C 9:7-

 

 

Many don't even bother asking. It's amazing how many religious people I've talked to who think asking God whether what they believe is true is either a foreign concept or blasphemous.

 

Those of us who do learn usually learn by the grace of God.

[Palerider]

Where does that leave God's Chosen People, the Jews?

 

The Jews are just as free to become Christian (one who worships God through Christ and recognizing His Messiahship) as anyone else. They don't have to join a particular denomination (or religion) of Christianity in order to do that.

[Palerider]

Since Mormonism is universalist anyhow, and since nearly everyone will be saved in glory (or one of several authentic glories), your point is well taken.  Paul does say that they who have not the Law are a law (lower case) unto themselves -- and will be judged accordingly.  And it is true that the light of Christ enlightens all who come into the world, etc., so that indeed, we are prepared for further instruction here or hereafter -- thanks to those who lovingly perform the essential ordinances in this life as saviors on Mt Zion.

 

The atonement has tremendous reach and shouldn't be soft-peddled.  God's plan will get nearly all of us back, and the joy will be vast and eternal.

 

Through it all, of course, there has been horrific suffering and unmentionable evil.  All that can and will be overcome.  Some will sit on the sidelines, others will show the full measure of their love and devotion.  All must follow conscience.

 

I'm aware of Mormonism's universalist tendencies and in some ways, I don't disagree with them. I think "Hell" or "Eternal damnation", whatever they may consist of, is reserved for those who truly LOVE evil and prefer it to righteousness even when they have experienced it's capacity for fulfillment and happiness.

 

I do take issue however with the alien concept of a variety of "glories" or "kingdoms" with their several restrictions. Although Paul hints at the possibility of varying degrees of bodily glory in the resurrection, there is no Biblical basis for separate or restricted "kingdoms" as such. I believe there is in the Old Testament, already evidence of beings of varying degrees of glory currently dwelling with God in His kingdom, I see no reason why that should change. But if you insist on references, I'll do my best to find you some. I'll bet you could already bring them to mind though if you think of it in the correct light. 

 

Ordinances for the dead likewise follow suit of being an over-reaching or stretching of the scripture in order to satisfy the demands of an eccentric mind that can't give God the credit of instituting Grace as He will.

 

Similar to those who refuse blood transfusions as a trespass against the command regarding the consumption of blood, don't you think?  

Edited December 22, 2013 by Palerider

[Palerider]

My point exactly, and Mormon theology would suggest that the easy way won't get you to God -- or at least to the preferred glory.

 

I don't think he's neccesarily looking for the "easy way".

 

But "simpler" than Mormonism would be a step in the right direction.   As it (Mormonism) started out wanting to restore the "plain and precious" and ended up evolving in to a gnostic's dream of secret knowledge and busy work.......

 

As Thomas Jefferson said:

 

"The religion builders have so distorted and deformed the doctrines of Jesus, so muffled them in mysticisms, fancies and falsehoods, have caricatured them into forms so inconceivable, as to shock reasonable thinkers.....Happy in the prospect of a restoration of primitive Christianity, I must leave to younger persons to encounter and lop off the false branches which have been engrafted into it by the mythologists of the middle and modern ages." 

 

Sadly, his dream of a restoration has not yet been fulfilled........

Edited December 22, 2013 by Palerider

[Robert F. Smith]

I'm disappointed Robert,  I would expect someone with your experience to know how damnation is interpreted within Mormon theology.

That makes two of us, omni.

We can all redefine terms to fit our preconceptions, and some scholars have their predilections and I understand why they say what they say.  

However, we probably ought to heed the primary meanings of such words as defined in Scripture, and I think that Holzapfel ends his encyclopedia article by returning to the more correct understanding:  

 

Ultimate and total damnation comes only to the devil and his angels, who rebelled in the first estate, and to the sons of perdition, who are damned eternally and denied entrance into any kingdom of glory hereafter (D&C 76:32-34). The sons of perdition are those guilty of unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost (D&C 132:27; cf. Mark 3:29), which includes the willful denial of the "Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame" (D&C 76:35).

 

Some of my best friends wrote articles for that encyclopedia.  Sometimes I take issue with their particular understandings and emphases.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't think he's neccesarily looking for the "easy way".

 

But "simpler" than Mormonism would be a step in the right direction.   As it (Mormonism) started out wanting to restore the "plain and precious" and ended up evolving in to a gnostic's dream of secret knowledge and busy work.......

 

As Thomas Jefferson said:

 

"The religion builders have so distorted and deformed the doctrines of Jesus, so muffled them in mysticisms, fancies and falsehoods, have caricatured them into forms so inconceivable, as to shock reasonable thinkers.....Happy in the prospect of a restoration of primitive Christianity, I must leave to younger persons to encounter and lop off the false branches which have been engrafted into it by the mythologists of the middle and modern ages." 

 

Sadly, his dream of a restoration has not yet been fulfilled........

I like Jefferson, despite his shortcomings (we all have them), and I recommend that we be tolerant of one another's commitments and beliefs.

 

I think Joseph restored primitive Christianity, but I don't feel badly if someone else doesn't agree with me.  Sadly, Jefferson didn't live long enough to be able to judge for himself the claims of Joseph Smith.

 

Harold Bloom does say something similar to you on the Gnostic nature of Mormonism, but the secret knowledge aspect of it is more closely related to ancient mystery religions and initiations than to classic Gnosticism.  Certainly there is nothing similar in the arcane and complex claims of Gnosticism, which would require formal seminary instruction on a par with Roman Catholic seminary in order to comprehend it.  Mormon theology is so much simpler that even a fully lay priesthood can understand and administer it.  This is especially the case since Mormonism expels the supernatural in favor of a monistic base of natural law.

[Robert F. Smith]

The Jews are just as free to become Christian (one who worships God through Christ and recognizing His Messiahship) as anyone else. They don't have to join a particular denomination (or religion) of Christianity in order to do that.

I was thinking of Jews as Jews rather than as potential Christians.  How do you see them in salvation history?  Do they remain the Chosen People of God (along with the remainder of Israel, wherever they are) now, prior to any conversion to Christianity?  Is the establishment of the State of Israel merely self-fulfilling prophecy, or the authentic destiny of His people.  Did it mean anything at all in eternal terms that Orson Hyde dedicated Palestine to the gathering?  Or just more nonsense from Joseph Smith?

[Storm Rider]

Since Mormonism is universalist anyhow, and since nearly everyone will be saved in glory (or one of several authentic glories), your point is well taken.  Paul does say that they who have not the Law are a law (lower case) unto themselves -- and will be judged accordingly.  And it is true that the light of Christ enlightens all who come into the world, etc., so that indeed, we are prepared for further instruction here or hereafter -- thanks to those who lovingly perform the essential ordinances in this life as saviors on Mt Zion.

 

The atonement has tremendous reach and shouldn't be soft-peddled.  God's plan will get nearly all of us back, and the joy will be vast and eternal.

 

Through it all, of course, there has been horrific suffering and unmentionable evil.  All that can and will be overcome.  Some will sit on the sidelines, others will show the full measure of their love and devotion.  All must follow conscience.

 

Yes, we are universalists, but the import is that each individual will be judged according to the truths they have been given. There is a cross to bear of each of us and sacrifices to be made; the humility to put aside our own desires and will and accept our Father's will is a refining fire that never stops.

[volgadon]

Come on now.......I thought the OP was asked fairly honestly.

 

You sont find things like this begging the question? "So either there is not one true church or God does not answer prayers equally. Which is it?"

[volgadon]

I was thinking of Jews as Jews rather than as potential Christians.  How do you see them in salvation history?  Do they remain the Chosen People of God (along with the remainder of Israel, wherever they are) now, prior to any conversion to Christianity?  Is the establishment of the State of Israel merely self-fulfilling prophecy, or the authentic destiny of His people.  Did it mean anything at all in eternal terms that Orson Hyde dedicated Palestine to the gathering?  Or just more nonsense from Joseph Smith?

 

I'll drop you a note about a project of mine along those lines.

 

Anyway, I will mention here that Jewish thinkers have long grappled with the question of their numerical inferiority compared to non-Jews. The great Italian rabbi and scholar, Elijah Benamozegh formulated a brilliant answer. Just as the Levites presented a small portion of the Israelites, so are Jews small in numbers, but they fulfill the role of priests to mthe nations.

[Robert F. Smith]

I'll drop you a note about a project of mine along those lines.

 

Anyway, I will mention here that Jewish thinkers have long grappled with the question of their numerical inferiority compared to non-Jews. The great Italian rabbi and scholar, Elijah Benamozegh formulated a brilliant answer. Just as the Levites presented a small portion of the Israelites, so are Jews small in numbers, but they fulfill the role of priests to mthe nations.

Yes, and one can also reflect on the Abrahamic blessing that through his seed shall all nations of the Earth be blessed.   Many see that only as prophecy of Christ's atonement.  Others think that the Galut (Exile) is the means by which all nations have been blessed by Jewish achievements in science, medicine, and the arts (all out of proportion to their numbers, as William F. Albright pointed out).

[omni]

That makes two of us, omni.

We can all redefine terms to fit our preconceptions, and some scholars have their predilections and I understand why they say what they say.  

However, we probably ought to heed the primary meanings of such words as defined in Scripture, and I think that Holzapfel ends his encyclopedia article by returning to the more correct understanding:  

 

Ultimate and total damnation comes only to the devil and his angels, who rebelled in the first estate, and to the sons of perdition, who are damned eternally and denied entrance into any kingdom of glory hereafter (D&C 76:32-34). The sons of perdition are those guilty of unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost (D&C 132:27; cf. Mark 3:29), which includes the willful denial of the "Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame" (D&C 76:35).

 

Some of my best friends wrote articles for that encyclopedia.  Sometimes I take issue with their particular understandings and emphases.

 

The key word here is "total", as in total damnation.  Since I never used that word and was referring to damnation in the traditional LDS sense, my original point stands.

[omni]

unless you take another view in Mormon theology which is to say membership in the Church in this life means very little in terms of exaltation then many thought.

 

 

I would agree with you, but does the church?  If so, why the massive resources and effort to bring others into the church if it means very little in terms of salvation?