Sanpitch Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) I'm still not sure I am following your posts correctly.Exactly which doctrine is it you don't agree with?1. That each of us will live on our own planets separated from our current eternal families.2. That each of us will have the opportunity (if worthy) to create new worlds for our children and new eternal families. Because #1 is false and #2 is true.Alright I can almost see the logic of #2. I have assumed that "your own world" would be more like one planet. But still there is the dilution factor that after a few generations your offspring are descended from other parents and have almost no connection to you. However isn't this exactly what some are denying is the doctrine? As Tacenda quoted: "They will receive everything our Father in Heaven has and will become like Him. They will even be able to have spirit children and make new worlds for them to live on, and do all the things our Father in Heaven has done." Gospel Fundamentals [2001], 201 (Hi Tacenda good to see you) Do they make new worlds or not? Edited November 25, 2015 by Sanpitch
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Alright I can almost see the logic of #2. I have assumed that "your own world" would be more like one planet. But still there is the dilution factor that after a few generations your offspring are descended from other parents and have almost no connection to you. However isn't this exactly what some are denying it the doctrine? As Tacenda quoted: "They will receive everything our Father in Heaven has and will become like Him. They will even be able to have spirit children and make new worlds for them to live on, and do all the things our Father in Heaven has done." Gospel Fundamentals [2001], 201 (Hi Tacenda good to see you) Do they make new worlds or not? The "get your own planet" doctrine simply refers to us doing as Heavenly Father does - creating new worlds for our spirit offspring. It is found in scripture, prophetic teachings, and Church manuals. Yes, they make new worlds. Again, it comes down to whether or not you believe that we will become just like our Heavenly Father is now, which is a key tenet of Mormonism (or at least was until Pres. Hinckley said we don't know much about it.) "there is the dilution factor that after a few generations your offspring are descended from other parents and have almost no connection to you"Not sure what this has to do with the doctrine. Our spirit children in a new creation are ours, just as our children in the mortality are ours. First generation, no further descent. But sure, there are generations forward and backwards. God has a father. God will have grandchildren. Not really connected to whether we create worlds or not.
ERayR Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Alright I can almost see the logic of #2. I have assumed that "your own world" would be more like one planet. But still there is the dilution factor that after a few generations your offspring are descended from other parents and have almost no connection to you. However isn't this exactly what some are denying is the doctrine? As Tacenda quoted: "They will receive everything our Father in Heaven has and will become like Him. They will even be able to have spirit children and make new worlds for them to live on, and do all the things our Father in Heaven has done." Gospel Fundamentals [2001], 201 (Hi Tacenda good to see you) Do they make new worlds or not? It is not the making new worlds that is the problem. It is the ownership issues. As the story line goes Lucifer was willing to make new worlds and could have but he had issues with ownership. (let the glory be mine). 2
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 It is not the making new worlds that is the problem. It is the ownership issues. As the story line goes Lucifer was willing to make new worlds and could have but he had issues with ownership. (let the glory be mine). Anyone concerned about ownership has no concept of Celestial life and should review their scriptures, especially the ones concerning consecration, heirship, lineage, adoption, increase, and creation. 1
Ahab Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 "there is the dilution factor that after a few generations your offspring are descended from other parents and have almost no connection to you"Not sure what this has to do with the doctrine. Our spirit children in a new creation are ours, just as our children in the mortality are ours. First generation, no further descent.But sure, there are generations forward and backwards. God has a father. God will have grandchildren. Not really connected to whether we create worlds or not.Great and grand children count as our children, too. And not just ours but all of our parents including our great and grand parents. So no matter which planet they live on they will continue to be our children and as fathers (and mothers) we will still preside over our families with all of them being a part of our kingdom(s).The fallacy that things are "our own" applies to our children as well as to planets, ya know, if by "our own" we think they are ours alone and nobody else's. Any children I have will also be my wife's children too as well as the children of all of our parents throughout eternity past. It's not as if a family starts from scratch with each set of parents. That is a continuation of a family that has no beginning and never will have an end, even if somewhere in the family tree there are some children who do not continue to have children. 1
Sanpitch Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Great and grand children count as our children, too. And not just ours but all of our parents including our great and grand parents.So no matter which planet they live on they will continue to be our children and as fathers (and mothers) we will still preside over our families with all of them being a part of our kingdom(s).The fallacy that things are "our own" applies to our children as well as to planets, ya know, if by "our own" we think they are ours alone and nobody else's. Any children I have will also be my wife's children too as well as the children of all of our parents throughout eternity past. It's not as if a family starts from scratch with each set of parents. That is a continuation of a family that has no beginning and never will have an end, even if somewhere in the family tree there are some children who do not continue to have children.That sounds reasonable until I start thinking about it. If your logic is correct, by the 10th generation down stream, your child is also the child of 512 others also, or he/she has 1/512 of your bloodline. Maybe it doesn't matter, you can call them yours if you wish. And depending on my logic being about correct. Edited November 25, 2015 by Sanpitch
Bobbieaware Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) The whole "get your own planet" thing is nonsense so don't worry about it.How is it nonsense? Gods do have to rule and reign somewhere. So it seems to me a planet is as good a place to start as any -- especially considering how our God is the Lord of this planet. Or would it be better to rule and reign on an asteroid or a comet? Or how about on a quasar or an amorphous cloud of interstellar dust? Edited November 25, 2015 by Bobbieaware
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 That sounds reasonable until I start thinking about it. If your logic is correct, by the 10th generation down stream, your child is also the child of 512 others also, or he/she has 1/512 of your bloodline. Maybe it doesn't matter, you can call them yours if you wish. And depending on my logic being about correct. This is true.Why does it make a difference to any of these doctrines?
halconero Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 The paradigm shift has to move from the creation of planets to the creation of homes. Let's take my friend Aric. Without any further elaboration I could easily say, "Aric creates diseases." What does that mean? Is Aric a terrorist? a sexual deviant? a hypochondriac? a scientist? No doubt many would pick the last, which is correct, but the vagueness of the statement leaves it open for unnecessary and dangerous misunderstanding, and even if his profession is correctly inferred it doesn't exactly tell you Aric's purpose, methodology, or use of the disease. On the other hand, if I instead say "Aric studies the effects of HIV/AIDS vaccinations by creating and infecting lab cells with the virus to study the effects of antigens," well then you have a much more accurate picture, an understanding of the noble purpose behind it, and an inkling of his methodology. Likewise, demanding a simple answer to the question "Do you create planets or not?" sets us up for an overly simplified answer which permits and results in the aforementioned confusion and dangerous misinterpretation. What the exalted children of God really do is create homes for their children wherein they can advance, learn and grow to become like them. The requirements of this home include a place wherein children can associate, grow, manufacture their own goods and food, and become large in number. I don't imagine a small condo will accomplish this.
ERayR Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 That sounds reasonable until I start thinking about it. If your logic is correct, by the 10th generation down stream, your child is also the child of 512 others also, or he/she has 1/512 of your bloodline. Maybe it doesn't matter, you can call them yours if you wish. And depending on my logic being about correct. Bloodline not part of the Celestial realms. There is no bloodline. 1
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) How is it nonsense? Gods do have to rule and reign somewhere. So I it seems to me a planet is as good a place to start as any -- especially considering how our God is the Lord of this planet. Or would it be better to rule and reign on an asteroid or a comet? Or how about on quasar an amorphous cloud of interstellar dust? I believe D&C 88:25-26 (& TPJS 181) And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it. This earth will be our Celestial Kingdom to dwell upon while we rule and reign. It will be our Kolob as it were, under the direction of our Jehovah (Jesus Christ). Just as Kolob where Heavenly Father dwells is probably his celestialized earth under the direction of his Jehovah. Edited November 25, 2015 by JLHPROF
Sanpitch Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 I believe D&C 88:25-26 (& TPJS 181) And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it. This earth will be our Celestial Kingdom to dwell upon while we rule and reign. It will be our Kolob as it were, under the direction of our Jehovah (Jesus Christ). Just as Kolob where Heavenly Father dwells is probably his celestialized earth under the direction of his Jehovah.No wonder I'm confused, now the righteous shall inherit the Celestialized Earth and rule from there. Sounds like your offspring will be placed on other planets that you make or maybe they don't. Maybe they live on the Celestialized Earth along with you. I don't think any god lives on Kolob though, they may live near it.
Randall57 Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Don't presume to know my beliefs on all things. I don't "only follow Joseph if it fits into your box". As head of the dispensation I accept ALL his teachings, including the ones the later day prophets may have doubted. Joseph holds the keys over the dispensation, and as such presides over all his successors. Therefore I will follow his teachings over any successor if there is conflict, especially when the successor claims no revelation on the doctrine. Do you believe in polyandry?
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 I don't think any god lives on Kolob though, they may live near it. Fair enough, you are correct - I must try to be more precise.
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Do you believe in polyandry? Loaded question. Depends on how you are defining polyandry.I believe that in the eternities women have only one husband. I don't believe Joseph ever taught (or practiced) anything different.
Randall57 Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Loaded question. Depends on how you are defining polyandry.I believe that in the eternities women have only one husband. I don't believe Joseph ever taught (or practiced) anything different. Nice dodge? do you believe it is okay to marry other men's wife's here on earth as Joseph did?
JLHPROF Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Nice dodge? do you believe it is okay to marry other men's wife's here on earth as Joseph did? Sure. If you are going to limit what happened to such reductive terms, I'll just go with "sure", no explanation needed. 1
Randall57 Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Sure. If you are going to limit what happened to such reductive terms, I'll just go with "sure", no explanation needed.No, please do elaborate? Edited November 25, 2015 by Randall57
ERayR Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Do you believe in polyandry? What other standard critic questions do you have?
Randall57 Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 What other standard critic questions do you have? Dealing with our history truthfully is what the brethren want us to do, at least the way I see it from th essays. Joseph married other men's wives, we have to accept that as a truth. I believe in order to move forward we must accept our past. JL is going where many of us will not go, I would never marry a friends wife, or another women at all, my wife is all I want or need and I am blessed, and while I do not know why Joseph did, he did. So do we ignore it, or deal with it? If critics are telling the world the truth, who is missing the boat? I believe it was John Wooden that said something along the lines of -" if we tell the truth, we don't have to remember anything!" Maybe I am in the minority, but I am tired of having to "remember things," the truth, whether easy or hard is so much easier on the soul.
ERayR Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Dealing with our history truthfully is what the brethren want us to do, at least the way I see it from th essays. Joseph married other men's wives, we have to accept that as a truth. I believe in order to move forward we must accept our past. JL is going where many of us will not go, I would never marry a friends wife, or another women at all, my wife is all I want or need and I am blessed, and while I do not know why Joseph did, he did. So do we ignore it, or deal with it? If critics are telling the world the truth, who is missing the boat? I believe it was John Wooden that said something along the lines of -" if we tell the truth, we don't have to remember anything!" Maybe I am in the minority, but I am tired of having to "remember things," the truth, whether easy or hard is so much easier on the soul. Dealing with it from the critic - anti perspective is not dealing with it truthfully. It need not be ignored but to approach it from the anti buzz words pov is not very honest. The honest answer for now is we don't know. That is unless you are a clairvoyant medium.
Ahab Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 That sounds reasonable until I start thinking about it. If your logic is correct, by the 10th generation down stream, your child is also the child of 512 others also, or he/she has 1/512 of your bloodline. Maybe it doesn't matter, you can call them yours if you wish. And depending on my logic being about correct.They're all in my "bloodline" (or spiritline or whatever). My wife contributes (or would be contributing) part of herself and I would also be contributing part of myself and together we would be perpetuating parts of ourselves to create that child which would be not only the product of me and my wife but all of our ancestors going back through eternity forever.That's the way it always works. Don't you know where you came from?
Randall57 Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 Dealing with it from the critic - anti perspective is not dealing with it truthfully. It need not be ignored but to approach it from the anti buzz words pov is not very honest. The honest answer for now is we don't know. That is unless you are a clairvoyant medium.So personal revelation does not work in this case? Maybe we do know, but it hurt to accept the reason. We accept David's infidelities and sexual sins...but we refuse to accept Joseph's? Could it be his sexual sins led to his death? What he did is either right or wrong, if it is right we should embrace it, if it is wrong we should accept it, but to just say we do not know why, and then criticize others for bringing it to light is not dealing with it very well, and least in my box. What if I said I believe he sinned, and I know this by personal revelation, or if I, as one poster said on this thread, I believe it is okay, again by personal revelation? My point is we need some leadership on these issues by those that hold the keys. I used to use the excuse that they were too busy, I no longer believe there are more urgent issues than teaching us the truths our brothers and sisters are leaving the church over. It is not easy to say this, and even harder to think this way, but I now far too many people who are giving up on the church.
VideoGameJunkie Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 I have a problem with the polyandry and eternity sealings of other men's wives. That's stealing their wives for eternity. That's worse than a physical affair could ever be. I mean didn't Joseph already have enough wives, why did he need other men's?
Calm Posted November 25, 2015 Posted November 25, 2015 So women are possessions in eternity that can be stolen from men, they have no say in who they want to be with in your view? 1
Recommended Posts