Reincarnation - True Doctrine, Or False?

[bdouglas]

We are the great echo chamber of Ephraim!

 

I don't think so. This board is evidence to the contrary.

[manofthecloth]

To make it simple, you could start by saying how you get around Heb. 9, and then also the two BOM scriptures posed by earlier poster in this thread. And the second question, what do you base your belief in multiple mortal probationary expiations on? It seems to me all that you have is one quote by Eliza R. Snow that really cannot even be documented. Is there anything else? If so, what?

 

Simple, direct questions call for simple, direct answers.

 

First of all...you can't base a new concept on our own traditions. Our traditions drive our understanding of ourselves and God. Somewhere along the way, Joseph gave us a broader picture of a number of things including our need for a man/woman pairing for celestial level salvation to be possible. Our critics flew to pieces like glass and could "prove" we were/are wrong by the scriptures. We trusted Joseph and started finding many things in scripture which somewhat supported these new ideas, but most of all scripture did not contradict them.

 

You say Hebrews 9 directly contradicts the idea of plural probations because it is appointed unto man "once to die." When I read Paul, I see a thread which is supposed to center on Christ's one great sacrifice for all instead of many individual sacrifices. Paul is contrasting Christ's one great sacrifice with the many individual sacrifices of the High Priest in the temple. Paul also says Christ's great one sacrifice is done at the end of the world. If I am splicing Paul's every syllable as if the English translation is exact, I could wonder what he is talking about. Does that mean his sacrifice is not done until the end of the world or does it mean something more rich and more simple at the same time?

 

I will admit I don't understand exactly what Paul is saying because of his end of the world declaration, but you could be entirely right. He could be teaching exactly what mainstream Christians have been saying all along. We are created when we are born. We die and get judged, then we go to either heaven or hell.  It's very simple.

[manofthecloth]

I don't think so. This board is evidence to the contrary.

 

I suppose a apple polishing is a good thing for your MDDB career, but this forum is mostly a place to hear echos nonetheless.

[bdouglas]

First of all...you can't base a new concept on our own traditions. Our traditions drive our understanding of ourselves and God. Somewhere along the way, Joseph gave us a broader picture of a number of things including our need for a man/woman pairing for celestial level salvation to be possible. Our critics flew to pieces like glass and could "prove" we were/are wrong by the scriptures. We trusted Joseph and started finding many things in scripture which somewhat supported these new ideas, but most of all scripture did not contradict them.

 

You say Hebrews 9 directly contradicts the idea of plural probations because it is appointed unto man "once to die." When I read Paul, I see a thread which is supposed to center on Christ's one great sacrifice for all instead of many individual sacrifices. Paul is contrasting Christ's one great sacrifice with the many individual sacrifices of the High Priest in the temple. Paul also says Christ's great one sacrifice is done at the end of the world. If I am splicing Paul's every syllable as if the English translation is exact, I could wonder what he is talking about. Does that mean his sacrifice is not done until the end of the world or does it mean something more rich and more simple at the same time?

 

I will admit I don't understand exactly what Paul is saying because of his end of the world declaration, but you could be entirely right. He could be teaching exactly what mainstream Christians have been saying all along. We are created when we are born. We die and get judged, then we go to either heaven or hell.  It's very simple.

 

Ok. Good. You have at least attempted to answer first question, how is the doctrine of multiple probations reconciled with scriptures?——although you only deal with one scripture Heb. 9, not with BOM scriptures. Now how about second question, what is this doctrine based on? One flimsy Eliza R. Snow quote, which I have never even seen documented? Or is there something else?

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

I suppose a apple polishing is a good thing for your MDDB career, but this forum is mostly a place to hear echos nonetheless.

 

Baloney. Pick any thread on this forum and read through what various posters have to say. Lots and lots of differing opinions. Even this thread is an example. Some say flatly they don't believe in reincarnation. Some say they believe maybe it's true, but not on this earth. And then there is you, who says we are reincarnated six times, once for each dispensation.

 

So that is the range of opinion on this thread (among apparently active believing LDS), and it is not even a full 2 pages long.

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[manofthecloth]

To make it simple, you could start by saying how you get around Heb. 9, and then also the two BOM scriptures posed by earlier poster in this thread. And the second question, what do you base your belief in multiple mortal probationary expiations on? It seems to me all that you have is one quote by Eliza R. Snow that really cannot even be documented. Is there anything else? If so, what?

 

Simple, direct questions call for simple, direct answers.

 

Before you go on to your next point. I have a simple direct question for you.

 

In the previous verse (Heb 9:26) Paul said, "For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."  What does "once in the end of the world" mean to you?

[bdouglas]

I don't know. I will tell you frankly I don't know what that phrase means.

[bdouglas]

"Fawlty Towers" is one of my favorite comedies. In one episode Basil Fawlty says to Manuel, "This is not a proposition for Wittgenstein, Manuel." The same could be said of the scriptures. God is not setting before us complex philosophical propositions or advanced calculus problems. The gospel is supposed to be simple — simple enough for even the unlearned and unsophisticated among us to grasp. We get into trouble when we begin to treat the scriptures as though they were an advanced calculus problem or a proposition for Wittgenstein. This is called "wresting the scriptures". I don't know what the phrase means you referenced, but as for this: "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" ... well, that appears to be pretty straightforward.

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

And there are these scriptures, quoted by a previous poster:

 

33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

Alma 34

 

 24 And we see that death comes upon mankind, yea, the death which has been spoken of by Amulek, which is the temporal death; nevertheless there was a space granted unto man in which he might repent; therefore this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead.

Alma 12

 

And there are others that could be quoted, others which I can't recall off the top of my head.

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[manofthecloth]

 

"Fawlty Towers" is one of my favorite comedies. In one episode Basil Fawlty says to Manuel, "This is not a proposition for Wittgenstein, Manuel." The same could be said of the scriptures. God is not setting before us complex philosophical propositions or advanced calculus problems. The gospel is supposed to be simple — simple enough for even the unlearned and unsophisticated among us to grasp. We get into trouble when we begin to treat the scriptures as though they were an advanced calculus problem or a proposition for Wittgenstein. This is called "wresting the scriptures". I don't know what the phrase means you referenced, but as for this: "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" ... well, that appears to be pretty straightforward.

 

 

"Fawlty Towers" is a BBC sitcom.

 

So...the scriptures; even Hebrews 9 is are so straightforward that the unlearned and unsophisticated can understand it without searching?  Have you read it lately?  Try reading the whole chapter again. Humor me.

 

To avoid a faulty understanding of Paul, wouldn't it be prudent to look at his entire sermon about Christ's sacrifice for us?  I agree with you about "wresting the scriptures" because to do so would mean we are taking them out of context. Hebrews 9 really makes me think. After reading it again I can picture Paul's reasoning better and better so thank you for bringing it up. He says in verse 26 "but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." 

 

Does Paul mean Christ's sacrifice was done at the literal end of the world or could he have meant the sacrifice won't be completed until the end of the world?  

 

Is the end of the world when the Millennium starts or at the Final Judgement?

 

When does man die?  When man leaves Father or when he dies in the flesh at the end of one solitary life on earth? 

 

If Christ's sacrifice is fully complete at the end of the world, could our death only be completed also at the end of the world?  I believe yes to both.  Thinking about it: Can we not sin outside the flesh in the Spirit world? Does Christ's atonement apply to those in Spirit Paradise? In other words could Paul have been looking at our entire separation from God when contemplating man's death or did he mean only sins committed in this life are covered by the atonement. Obviously not. 

 

I believe I died the moment I left father and mother in heaven.  I was forever separated and it doesn't matter how many mortal bodies I occupy because I'm still dead unless Christ's one sacrifice is applied to me. What do you think?

Edited February 13, 2015 by manofthecloth

[bdouglas]

This from a site that looks like a cross between Hinduism and Christianity (http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-Hebrews9-27.htm):

 

 

 

Hebrews 9:27 is often quoted out of context as proof that the New Testament preaches against reincarnation. The verse that is quoted says: "... man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,.. KJV.

The logic expressed is that since a man only dies once that this is proof that we only incarnate physically once. The argument goes that if we reincarnate over and over then we die more than once. Since this scripture plainly says we die only once then this scripture obviously disproves reincarnation. However, this logic doesn't hold up. The New Testament teaches that more than one death is possible. In fact it teachs that the majority of mankind is in danger of a second death. Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years. Why would Hebrews talk of man only dying once and in Revelation speak of man dying twice. Is this a contradiction? There is no contradiction. This is made clear when Hebrews 9:27 is read in the context of what is being taught.

The author of Hebrews 9:27 was not discussing reincarnation at all. The subject being addressed was whether or not Yeshua (Jesus) had to die more than once for the sins of mankind. One of the misconsceptions about the sacrifice Yeshua made for the sins of mankind was whether or not he had to be sacrificed over and over like the sacrifices made in the temple were every year. From the Jewish mindset, this was a legitamate concern. The Jewish law required a blood sacrifice every year for the sins of the nation. The author of Hebrews dispells the notion that Yeshua had to die more than once and this is made clear when it is read in the context of the other verses.

However, this verse isn't talking about reincarnation at all. If you read the entire Chapter of Hebrews 9 you will notice that the subject was about whether or not Christ had to be sacrificed more than once. This is made obvious when the scripture is read in context with the before and after scriptures.

Hebrews 9:19 When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep."21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. 23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. NIV

The author of Hebrews uses a simile here to make his point that Christ only has to die once. With the exception of individuals such has Lazurus, who died and was physically resurrected by Christ as one of the miracles he performed to prove he was the Messiah, most people only die once. Hebrews 9:27 is not about reincarnation but is part of a series of verses that are discussing something else entirely. As such, the scripture is useless in proving or disproving reincarnation.

 

Ok. So there is a different way to look at Heb. 9: 26-27 —— although I don't buy into the above explanation or ManOftheCloth's at all. Both strike me as specious. But to others they make sense. Fine. But what about BOM verses? And then when you have discussed those verses, maybe you can answer the second question:

 

What do you base your belief in multiple probations on?

 

It can't be on the scriptures. So if not the scriptures, then what?

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

I quote BOM verses here again:

 

33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

Alma 34

 

 24 And we see that death comes upon mankind, yea, the death which has been spoken of by Amulek, which is the temporal death; nevertheless there was a space granted unto man in which he might repent; therefore this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead.

Alma 12

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

So...the scriptures; even Hebrews 9 is are so straightforward that the unlearned and unsophisticated can understand it without searching?  Have you read it lately?  Try reading the whole chapter again. Humor me.

 

To avoid a faulty understanding of Paul, wouldn't it be prudent to look at his entire sermon about Christ's sacrifice for us?  I agree with you about "wresting the scriptures" because to do so would mean we are taking them out of context. Hebrews 9 really makes me think. After reading it again I can picture Paul's reasoning better and better so thank you for bringing it up. He says in verse 26 "but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." 

 

Does Paul mean Christ's sacrifice was done at the literal end of the world or could he have meant the sacrifice won't be completed until the end of the world?  

 

Is the end of the world when the Millennium starts or at the Final Judgement?

 

When does man die?  When man leaves Father or when he dies in the flesh at the end of one solitary life on earth? 

 

If Christ's sacrifice is fully complete at the end of the world, could our death only be completed also at the end of the world?  I believe yes to both.  Thinking about it: Can we not sin outside the flesh in the Spirit world? Does Christ's atonement apply to those in Spirit Paradise? In other words could Paul have been looking at our entire separation from God when contemplating man's death or did he mean only sins committed in this life are covered by the atonement. Obviously not. 

 

I believe I died the moment I left father and mother in heaven.  I was forever separated and it doesn't matter how many mortal bodies I occupy because I'm still dead unless Christ's one sacrifice is applied to me. What do you think?

 

I just read this for the third time. I guess I'm dumb but I can't make any sense out of it. I don't mean that your writing isn't clear. It is. But the explanation seems very convoluted. Is the gospel really so convoluted? But again, maybe I'm just dumb. But on the other hand, if you have to go to so much trouble to talk your way around what seemed like in the beginning a pretty straightforward quote, maybe it's a case of "Methinks the lady doth protest too much".

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[The Nehor]

On a more practical level the idea of multiple mortal probations makes no sense in LDS theology.

 

We go to earth and have a veil placed over our mind. This is unpleasant but makes some sense. You die and go to the Spirit World and remember mortality. Then you go back to mortality and the veil hits again. How much forgetfulness do we need?

 

So what if you are faithful to the gospel in one life but not in the next? Do you need to be baptized and receive ordinances in each life? Do you get sealed to all your spouses from all your lives? Do you just need to be faithful in the majority of your lives? What about temple work? Is it possible I have done temple work for and on behalf of myself? What if I sinned in a previous life and never repented but live faithfully in this life. How do I repent of sins I don't remember? What if I was Cain or Judas Iscariot? Am I perdition no matter what I do?

 

It just doesn't fit.

[manofthecloth]

This from a site that looks like a cross between Hinduism and Christianity (http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-Hebrews9-27.htm):

 

 

Ok. So there is a different way to look at Heb. 9: 26-27 —— although I don't buy into the above explanation or ManOftheCloth's at all. Both strike me as specious. But to others they make sense. Fine. But what about BOM verses? And then when you have discussed those verses, maybe you can answer the second question:

 

What do you base your belief in multiple probations on?

 

It can't be on the scriptures. So if not the scriptures, then what?

 

Specious?  That's really harsh. Since we are the only ones in the building, we can now be nice.

 

 

I quote BOM verses here again:

 

33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

Alma 34

 

 24 And we see that death comes upon mankind, yea, the death which has been spoken of by Amulek, which is the temporal death; nevertheless there was a space granted unto man in which he might repent; therefore this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead.

Alma 12

 

 

This is a beautiful sermon about boundaries and priorities and there is no reason to refute it, but it doesn't contradict multiple probations either.  Repent before the end comes, but what end?  Do you think all repenting stops when we die? Wouldn't missionaries on the other side of the veil be saying the same thing?  In the case of spirits, has the night come yet wherein no work can be done?  No. They are still striving and working toward their own salvation as if they had never died. To everyone God has given boundaries. For mortal man, the boundaries are birth to death.  For spirits the boundaries are from the time he left Father to the end of this world if he is lucky. But even for spirits the struggle goes on and on.

 

I just read this for the third time. I guess I'm dumb but I can't make any sense out of it. I don't mean that your writing isn't clear. It is. But the explanation seems very convoluted. Is the gospel really so convoluted? But again, maybe I'm just dumb. But on the other hand, if you have to go to so much trouble to talk your way around what seemed like in the beginning a pretty straightforward quote, maybe it's a case of "Methinks the lady doth protest too much".

 

Truth is found in the contradictions and we cannot wrestle out anything useful unless we are willing to see the contradictions.  I despise the Plan of Salvation model we once used to excess with the little circles starting in the Pre-existence and with the earth in the center. You know the one. We don't use it much anymore and thank goodness for that. Why do I hate it? Because it portrays this life as grotesquely pivotal to all the rest of eternity complete with the auto assignments to either heaven (the celestial kingdom) or hell (any other kingdom). Yet, we don't really believe this life is either THE END or that grotesquely pivotal do we. It's a case of massive cognitive dissonance. Why? Because we think about our ancestors as still having a chance and we go to work for them just in case they want another chance. We pray and cheer for loved ones who departed the earth without fully repenting. Huge mythologies have been masterfully written and accepted regarding all manner of our assumptions which are not supported in scripture, but we still believe and we trust God's judgement will include one's entire existence; especially our own.

 

When we escape from this earth, (do) we suppose we are going to heaven? Do you suppose you are going to the earth that Adam came from? that Eloheim came from? where Jehovah the Lord came from? No. When you have learned to become obedient to the Father that dwells upon this earth, to the Father and God of this earth, and obedient to the messengers. He sends‑‑‑when you have done all that, remember you are not going to leave this earth. You will never leave it until you become qualified, and capable, and capacitated to become a father of an earth yourselves.

Heber C. Kimball, On November 14, 1852, President Heber C. Kimball gave an address in the Salt Lake Tabernacle. The reference is J.D. 1:356

 

There are clear contradictions found in the quote above to what we typically are willing to believe from our traditions and the scriptures. From where did President Kimball get such notions and are his words contradicted by scripture?  I say not and I love learning more from the contradictions.

[bdouglas]

Specious?  That's really harsh. Since we are the only ones in the building, we can now be nice.

 

 

This is a beautiful sermon about boundaries and priorities and there is no reason to refute it, but it doesn't contradict multiple probations either.  Repent before the end comes, but what end?  Do you think all repenting stops when we die? Wouldn't missionaries on the other side of the veil be saying the same thing?  In the case of spirits, has the night come yet wherein no work can be done?  No. They are still striving and working toward their own salvation as if they had never died. To everyone God has given boundaries. For mortal man, the boundaries are birth to death.  For spirits the boundaries are from the time he left Father to the end of this world if he is lucky. But even for spirits the struggle goes on and on.

 

 

Truth is found in the contradictions and we cannot wrestle out anything useful unless we are willing to see the contradictions.  I despise the Plan of Salvation model we once used to excess with the little circles starting in the Pre-existence and with the earth in the center. You know the one. We don't use it much anymore and thank goodness for that. Why do I hate it? Because it portrays this life as grotesquely pivotal to all the rest of eternity complete with the auto assignments to either heaven (the celestial kingdom) or hell (any other kingdom). Yet, we don't really believe this life is either THE END or that grotesquely pivotal do we. It's a case of massive cognitive dissonance. Why? Because we think about our ancestors as still having a chance and we go to work for them just in case they want another chance. We pray and cheer for loved ones who departed the earth without fully repenting. Huge mythologies have been masterfully written and accepted regarding all manner of our assumptions which are not supported in scripture, but we still believe and we trust God's judgement will include one's entire existence; especially our own.

 

When we escape from this earth, (do) we suppose we are going to heaven? Do you suppose you are going to the earth that Adam came from? that Eloheim came from? where Jehovah the Lord came from? No. When you have learned to become obedient to the Father that dwells upon this earth, to the Father and God of this earth, and obedient to the messengers. He sends‑‑‑when you have done all that, remember you are not going to leave this earth. You will never leave it until you become qualified, and capable, and capacitated to become a father of an earth yourselves.

Heber C. Kimball, On November 14, 1852, President Heber C. Kimball gave an address in the Salt Lake Tabernacle. The reference is J.D. 1:356

 

There are clear contradictions found in the quote above to what we typically are willing to believe from our traditions and the scriptures. From where did President Kimball get such notions and are his words contradicted by scripture?  I say not and I love learning more from the contradictions.

 

OK. Thank you for this. Now the second question....

 

What do you base your belief in multiple probations on? The Heber C. Kimball quote above? And the Eliza R. Snow quote? If so, then I think you have a problem.

 

It's like the 9/11 Truthers. Say there are 500 separate pieces of evidence about who was responsible for 9/11. 495 of those pieces of evidence point to Osama bin Laden and the 13 hijackers. But 5 out of the 500 pieces of evidences are anomalous, and 3 of those 5 point to, say, burn rates —— or something like that. And so the 9/11 Truther ignores the 495 pieces of evidence which point overwhelmingly to Osama bin Laden et al and seizes on the 3 which point to burn rates, and therefore concludes the US and Israel were behind the 9/11 attacks.

 

Well, it seems MP-ers do something similar with multiple probations. We have dozens of scriptures which indicate what happens when we die, none of which point to multiple probations. But then we have an Eliza R. Snow quote of questionable provenance, and an enigmatic Heber C. Kimball quote. And what does the believer in multiple probations do? He entirely ignores the dozens of scriptures  which talk about what happens after death (or he talks around them, as you have done above), and seizes on the Eliza R. Snow and Heber C. Kimball quotes instead, and from this flimsy foundation he (or you) builds an entire edifice.

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

Alma 34 again:

 

 

33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

Alma 34

 

It baffles me that you can say your doctrine of multiple probations is compatible with this scripture (not to mention the other BOM scripture also quoted above). The passage says "if we do not improve our time in this life, then cometh the night wherein there can be no labor performed." It doesn't say if you waste your time here you get baby resurrected into a new probation, it says "then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed." In other words you land in spirit prison to await the judgement.

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[bdouglas]

And again this:

 

 

 24 And we see that death comes upon mankind, yea, the death which has been spoken of by Amulek, which is the temporal death; nevertheless there was a space granted unto man in which he might repent; therefore this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead.

Alma 12

 

If you can read these two passages from Alma, and Heb. 9, and come away with multiple probations and baby resurrection, then really the scriptures can mean anything you want them to mean.

Edited February 13, 2015 by bdouglas

[manofthecloth]

On a more practical level the idea of multiple mortal probations makes no sense in LDS theology.

 

We go to earth and have a veil placed over our mind. This is unpleasant but makes some sense. You die and go to the Spirit World and remember mortality. Then you go back to mortality and the veil hits again. How much forgetfulness do we need?

 

So what if you are faithful to the gospel in one life but not in the next? Do you need to be baptized and receive ordinances in each life? Do you get sealed to all your spouses from all your lives? Do you just need to be faithful in the majority of your lives? What about temple work? Is it possible I have done temple work for and on behalf of myself? What if I sinned in a previous life and never repented but live faithfully in this life. How do I repent of sins I don't remember? What if I was Cain or Judas Iscariot? Am I perdition no matter what I do?

 

It just doesn't fit.

 

Your contradictions are wonderful. I don't know a veil was placed over my mind to forget my own sojourn with God, but I believe it with all my heart. Even the scriptures do not say my memory has been actually blocked of previous activity with God, but there are strong verses which declare there is a veil between God and me (Ether 3:19). It's logical that I will remember my past life when I depart, and it's logical I would receive another konk on my memory if I ever came back to another life. 

 

Here's a contradiction: When my brother died at age 5 of cancer, my mother was told she will raise him in the Millennium.  We've all heard that sort of thing and we believe it.  Hmm...is he an adult spirit now? Will he be (POOF) resurrected as an adult or as a child? If he is to be "raised" why wouldn't my mother just bear him again as a baby and raise him? Will he remember this life when he is raised as a child? Did Christ remember his past lives when he was born again as a child. If my brother is born again of a Terrestrial level resurrected mother, will his body be also resurrected? Is resurrection of the body merely being born into a substance which either Telestial or Terrestrial?

 

The gospel has not been available to a vast super majority of people over earth's history and does that matter? This is one of those contradictions we love to think about. To remedy it we suppose as Ephraimites we have a special pre-existence given foreordination and to be here on the earth at this time and we may be right. Jews think the very same things about their catbird place on earth (which is just before Messiah comes). I trust God will not cease to rescue us ever, but all boundaries and covenants must all still be observed. 

 

Yes I think Cain is Perdition no matter what he does (Joseph said he's still here) and no I don't think you were Judas Iscariot (we have a great prison for really bad actors), but I hope even he has an eternity to repent and struggle back to God's presence.

 

6 lives on this earth will not save me any more than 1, but 6 lives will teach me 6 times more than 1 ever could.

[Buckeye]

I haven't read the entire thread so apologies if I'm repeating something. I'm personally intrigued by the idea of reincarnation. For humans, it does seem incompatible with current scripture, but I'm open to the possibility that additional revelation could change that. In the meantime, though, I'm mostly interested in what reincarnation could mean for the lives of non-human plants, animals, bacteria, etc. in the eternities. We don't often speak about the eternal destiny of non-humans and whether resurrection will apply to them. But I know many members of the church who believe that their pets will be with them during the eternities. "It just wouldn't be heaven without fuffy," they say. And if fluffy gets to live again, then I can't see how a just God would extinguish any other life form, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant.

 

Resurrection of all life presents a huge dilemma if we assume that the same space constraints will exist in the next life as in this one. To get to the point, even assuming there was no life on earth before around 4,000 bce (a point I strongly reject), there simply is not room for all life that has existed on this planet during the past 6,000 years to co-exist together on this same "pale blue dot." Just think about how many grass seeds have sprouted, how many flies and locusts have hatched, how many plankton have swam the ocean, and on and on. The elements that make up our current bodies are the same elements that were part of their bodies. So there is a great dilemma. There isn't room for all live to be resurrected. And the "stuff" from which we would be resurrection has been shared throughout time.

 

I'm open to the possibility that reincarnation can solve this dilemma - if not for humans, at least for all other life forms. The only other idea that makes sense is multi-verses, but that would another thread.

[The Nehor]

Your contradictions are wonderful. I don't know a veil was placed over my mind to forget my own sojourn with God, but I believe it with all my heart. Even the scriptures do not say my memory has been actually blocked of previous activity with God, but there are strong verses which declare there is a veil between God and me (Ether 3:19). It's logical that I will remember my past life when I depart, and it's logical I would receive another konk on my memory if I ever came back to another life. 

 

Here's a contradiction: When my brother died at age 5 of cancer, my mother was told she will raise him in the Millennium.  We've all heard that sort of thing and we believe it.  Hmm...is he an adult spirit now? Will he be (POOF) resurrected as an adult or as a child? If he is to be "raised" why wouldn't my mother just bear him again as a baby and raise him? Will he remember this life when he is raised as a child? Did Christ remember his past lives when he was born again as a child. If my brother is born again of a Terrestrial level resurrected mother, will his body be also resurrected? Is resurrection of the body merely being born into a substance which either Telestial or Terrestrial?

 

The gospel has not been available to a vast super majority of people over earth's history and does that matter? This is one of those contradictions we love to think about. To remedy it we suppose as Ephraimites we have a special pre-existence given foreordination and to be here on the earth at this time and we may be right. Jews think the very same things about their catbird place on earth (which is just before Messiah comes). I trust God will not cease to rescue us ever, but all boundaries and covenants must all still be observed. 

 

Yes I think Cain is Perdition no matter what he does (Joseph said he's still here) and no I don't think you were Judas Iscariot (we have a great prison for really bad actors), but I hope even he has an eternity to repent and struggle back to God's presence.

 

6 lives on this earth will not save me any more than 1, but 6 lives will teach me 6 times more than 1 ever could.

Not a contradiction. Those who died as children will be resurrected as children and grow to their full age. Their spirits are in adult form. He will not be physically born again. Yes, he will remember.

Why only 6 then? Why not 666? Why should the world end if we could just go on learning forever? There are a few things we need to learn here that we cannot learn elsewhere. the rest of it we could learn more quickly elsewhere.

[pogi]

The problem of family sealings and temple work possess a real dilemma for reincarnation enthusiasts.  How many husbands will my wife be sealed to if all of her temple work is done for her past lives?  How many parents will I be sealed to?  etc.  

[The Nehor]

While desire for something to be true should not be taken too seriously most reincarnation enthusiasts seem to want it to be true. I cannot figure out why. Are they masochists or do they just lead much happier lives then I have.

"Has this world been so kind to you that you should regret leaving it?" -C.S. Lewis

[pogi]

While desire for something to be true should not be taken too seriously most reincarnation enthusiasts seem to want it to be true. I cannot figure out why. Are they masochists or do they just lead much happier lives then I have.

"Has this world been so kind to you that you should regret leaving it?" -C.S. Lewis

 

Another possible motivation is that they screwed this life up so bad, they want 5 more tries, and hope that God will judge them based on their best probation period. 

[thesometimesaint]

We believe in reincarnation. But only one to a customer, which is plenty for me.