So What Is The Real Plan Of God. Or Is The Plan Of Salvation A Complete Disaster.

[CV75]

Well that appears to be working for about .01% of His children.  If God is ok with that then I guess we should be too.  But it is pretty clear that this point in earth's history that the vast majority of God's children were never ever going to find the plan of salvation in their mortal lives.  

 

And it is not like God has made it easy to find his church.  By instituting polygamy from the very beginning, it caused a lot of people to regard the church from coming from somewhere else than heaven.  Then instituting a racial policy further distanced people from the church.  

 

On the surface, God not only put distance between Himself and man, He seemed to also put obstacles in recognizing His church when it was finally restored.  But like I said, it is His plan.  We are just sent to wander here on earth doing the best we can with the vast majority of us not getting any guidance from God unless we happen to be some lucky soul that stumbles upon the church.  Being struck by lightning has much better odds.

I’m not sure why you keep asserting this when things could have turned out differently based on mankind’s individual and collective choices. The plan works in mortality for as many people as follow it in mortality. It is available in mortality for as many as those who have it have availed it to them. It stands to reason that things may play out differently on different worlds.

 

Despite the opposition inherent in this life, God did make it easy in the beginning. But enough people refused to follow and interfered with its availability to others. He will not override mankind’s agency (acting on them after they have lost it is not the same thing).

 

The Restoration only picks up where things left off, and in the midst of a lot of resistance that was perpetuated after the Flood. Let’s not make the Restoration out to be the means of denying the Gospel to the world.

 

 “On the surface” is the certainly operative phrase!

Edited September 22, 2015 by CV75

[pogi]

Well that appears to be working for about .01% of His children.  

 

What are you responding to exactly?  I don't see how your comment relates to Stephen's post.  God's mercy is working for 100% of his children.  Hid plan extends beyond the grave, and the 99.9% are not forgotten or neglected.  He knows us all individually and is preparing us in a way that the humble followers of truth will one day know him perfectly (be they Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, or atheist), but it will happen line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, for reasons explained in the scripture above. 

 

If you think that the gospel teaches that God is not giving line upon line to non-Mormons, you are greatly mistaken.  We have a lot to learn from other faiths. 

Edited September 22, 2015 by pogi

[Kevin Christensen]

Well that appears to be working for about .01% of His children.  If God is ok with that then I guess we should be too.  But it is pretty clear that this point in earth's history that the vast majority of God's children were never ever going to find the plan of salvation in their mortal lives.  

 

And it is not like God has made it easy to find his church.  By instituting polygamy from the very beginning, it caused a lot of people to regard the church from coming from somewhere else than heaven.  Then instituting a racial policy further distanced people from the church.  

 

On the surface, God not only put distance between Himself and man, He seemed to also put obstacles in recognizing His church when it was finally restored.  But like I said, it is His plan.  We are just sent to wander here on earth doing the best we can with the vast majority of us not getting any guidance from God unless we happen to be some lucky soul that stumbles upon the church.  Being struck by lightning has much better odds.

Imagine a universe in which the ruling Deity decided that the First and Great Priority was absolute Efficiency, and the Second was absolute immediate universal fairness and immediate justice.

Imagine yourself living there. And consider whether you are living in Heaven or Hell.

"Seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you" might not be as efficient as visible angels and devils on our shoulders at all times and in all places, prodding and punishing as required by the moment to achieve the desired efficiency and equality and consequence conformity.. But is efficiency really the most important thing? Especially if you have a lot of time and a diverse lot to work with.

Alma 29, I notice, does not endorse efficiency over love.

And it's not just obstacles that God puts out there. The Book of Mormon is rather distinctive, and I think, rather inviting. There are also some very clear signs pointing the way for those who care to look. "By their fruits shall ye know them" work" for anyone who takes an interest.

It's not hard to tell a grape from a thorn or a fig from a thistle. Even a bruised or damaged grape is still obviously a grape. and even a bruised or damaged fig is distinct from a thistle.Unless of course, a person has no interest, or rather, different interests.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

[jkwilliams]

And it's not just obstacles that God puts out there. The Book of Mormon is rather distinctive, and I think, rather inviting. There are also some very clear signs pointing the way for those who care to look. "By their fruits shall ye know them" work" for anyone who takes an interest.

It's not hard to tell a grape from a thorn or a fig from a thistle. Even a bruised or damaged grape is still obviously a grape. and even a bruised or damaged fig is distinct from a thistle.Unless of course, a person has no interest, or rather, different interests.

 

 

Of course, one problem is that people can't agree on what is a grape and what is a thorn. 

[Kevin Christensen]

Of course, one problem is that people can't agree on what is a grape and what is a thorn.

It's not that hard. I've eaten grapes and I pulled thorns from my hand and feet and bike tires. If I plant a grape seed and nourish the vine, I can get more grapes. Planting thorns... well...

http://en.fairmormon.org/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets

One of the things about that study that still astounds me is that anyone could have done it, and no one had. What most people do is to simply make their decisions based on something other than the obvious differences between grapes and thorns, or figs and thistles.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

[jkwilliams]

It's not that hard. I've eaten grapes and I pulled thorns from my hand and feet and bike tires. If I plant a grape seed and nourish the vine, I can get more grapes. Planting thorns... well...

http://en.fairmormon.org/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets

One of the things about that study that still astounds me is that anyone could have done it, and no one had. What most people do is to simply make their decisions based on something other than the obvious differences between grapes and thorns, or figs and thistles.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

 

I was thinking more in terms of the church being a net positive in one's life or not. 

[Kevin Christensen]

I was thinking more in terms of the church being a net positive in one's life or not.

Yes, but that is not what "By their fruits shall ye know them" really asks us to consider. By adding the contrasts of grapes and thorns and of figs and thistles, Jesus is encouraging a different kind of comparison than something as personally subjective as "Whatever floats your boat..." or "Ye shall know them by whatever turns you on."

It's easy to tell a grape from a thorn. The grape is a distinctive fruit that grows on specific vines. A sour grape, a fallen grape, a rotten grape, a grape to which I have a personal aversion, is still a grape, and not a thorn.

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

[jkwilliams]

Yes, but that is not what "By their fruits shall ye know them" really asks us to consider. By adding the contrasts of grapes and thorns and of figs and thistles, Jesus is encouraging a different kind of comparison than something as personally subjective as "Whatever floats your boat..." or "Ye shall know them by whatever turns you on."

It's easy to tell a grape from a thorn. The grape is a distinctive fruit that grows on specific vines. A sour grape, a fallen grape, a rotten grape, a grape to which I have a personal aversion, is still a grape, and not a thorn.

 

I would hope that you don't think decisions about what is good for the soul are so casual and flippant. That said, I think you might find that people of other faiths disagree with you on your assessment of the fruits of the church and prophets.

[Robert F. Smith]

Well that appears to be working for about .01% of His children.  If God is ok with that then I guess we should be too.  But it is pretty clear that this point in earth's history that the vast majority of God's children were never ever going to find the plan of salvation in their mortal lives.  

 

And it is not like God has made it easy to find his church.  By instituting polygamy from the very beginning, it caused a lot of people to regard the church from coming from somewhere else than heaven.  Then instituting a racial policy further distanced people from the church.  

 

On the surface, God not only put distance between Himself and man, He seemed to also put obstacles in recognizing His church when it was finally restored.  But like I said, it is His plan.  We are just sent to wander here on earth doing the best we can with the vast majority of us not getting any guidance from God unless we happen to be some lucky soul that stumbles upon the church.  Being struck by lightning has much better odds.

You seem intent on missing the point:  The immediate Gospel Plan has never been visible in this life to the vast majority of humans and was never intended to be.  Again, St Paul says that they who have not the Law of Moses are a law unto themselves -- judged by their own cultural norms.  Jesus came only to the Jews, an obvious drop in the bucket, chosen precisely because they were few.  The rules imposed on the Jews by God makes outsiders cringe.  Why would anyone want to be a Jew?  Or a Christian for that matter?  How much leaven does it take to leaven the whole loaf?  Do you fault God for being demanding?  Or do you fault Him for not being imminent enough?

 

Abiding by Jewish and Christian rules kind of dampens the party atmosphere -- wine, sex, and song, or eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.  Man likes to put distance between himself and God, and Brother Brigham put a racist rule between the Mormons and God which lasted until 1978 (God was not the author of it).  Polygamy has been an ancient practice from Patriarchal times, which God did not condemn unless it was excessive and/or was done without His sanction.  In fact God specifically gave Saul's wives to David.

 

So, most of your assumptions are false, californiaboy, including your failure to acknowledge universal salvation.

[Robert F. Smith]

I would hope that you don't think decisions about what is good for the soul are so casual and flippant. That said, I think you might find that people of other faiths disagree with you on your assessment of the fruits of the church and prophets.

It greatly depends on whom you consult, John.  The anti-Mormons clearly have nothing good to say, even if there were something good to say -- blatant prejudice motivates so many -- and Pew Research seems to come up with nice comments repeatedly, only because the data drives them to do so.

 

If you consult non-Mormon scholars such as Harold Bloom, Ernst Benz, Krister Stendahl, Margaret Barker, Stephen Webb (and many others), they seem to likewise have a great deal of good to say.  How can that be, in light of your dark assessment?

[jkwilliams]

It greatly depends on whom you consult, John.  The anti-Mormons clearly have nothing good to say, even if there were something good to say -- blatant prejudice motivates so many -- and Pew Research seems to come up with nice comments repeatedly, only because the data drives them to do so.

 

If you consult non-Mormon scholars such as Harold Bloom, Ernst Benz, Krister Stendahl, Margaret Barker, Stephen Webb (and many others), they seem to likewise have a great deal of good to say.  How can that be, in light of your dark assessment?

 

Dark assessment? Where's that coming from? My point is that one can look at the fruits of the LDS church, even positively, and not agree that it is actually God's true church. 

[Kevin Christensen]

I would hope that you don't think decisions about what is good for the soul are so casual and flippant. That said, I think you might find that people of other faiths disagree with you on your assessment of the fruits of the church and prophets.

My FAIR essay on Biblical Keys for Discerning True and False Prophets is not causual and flippant, but the culmination of several decades of effort and reflection on my part. And my early response to the premise of this thread, (which garnered several rep points but no direct response from California Boy), is actually cut and paste from the last section of that essay.

I have noticed that many people from other faiths disagree with me prophets, and what sort of fruit we ought to consider as possessing the relevant identifying characteristics. My essay does go into that as well.

But like the essay points out. The Bible contains at least 28 distinctive characteristics, neatly paired into positive and negative points that make them very easy to use. Anyone could have gathered them. And now, no one even has to do that.

They can just look at a convenient hypertexted list for the identifying characteristics that distinguish grapes from thorns, true prophets from false.

But my point is, who actually considers them? We have as detailed description of what characterizes the fruit in question. What people do end up considering are things like, "Have any of the rulers, or of the Pharisees believed on him?"

Or "well there is Miciah, a prophet... but I hate him, for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil." Or "This is a hard saying.... who can hear it?"

Or "this guy hangs out with people we consider disreputable and says things we disagree with, and asks for changes in behavior we prefer not to make, and he's a threat to our professional and political and economic ambitions..."

Not what I want. Not what I think.

The questions should be, "Is Jesus the Christ?" "Is Joseph Smith a prophet?" "Is this real?"

Not, "Does he say only what I want to hear? Do his followers avoid doing anything I find embaressing or offensive? Does he ask more than I want to give? Does he ask for faith, when, if I am being asked to sacrifice something I want, does he provide proof, absolute certainty, so I don't have to settle for simple, incomplete, ongoing "cause to believe.:

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

Edited September 22, 2015 by Kevin Christensen

[jkwilliams]

The questions should be, "Is Jesus the Christ?" "Is Joseph Smith a prophet?" "Is this real?"

 

 

Indeed, and my point was that you are going to get a wide diversity of opinion about the answers to those questions. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Dark assessment? Where's that coming from? My point is that one can look at the fruits of the LDS church, even positively, and not agree that it is actually God's true church. 

You said something different, John:  "I think you might find that people of other faiths disagree with you on your assessment of the fruits of the church and prophets."

[Kevin Christensen]

Dark assessment? Where's that coming from? My point is that one can look at the fruits of the LDS church, even positively, and not agree that it is actually God's true church.

And one can go through the Bible and pick out offending behaviors by believers, Kings, prophets, their followers, the disciples of Christ, and not agree with them. Bad fruit!

But that is not the same thing as considering what actually distinguished the grapes in question (true prophets), from thorns (false prophets).

And incidentally, the phrase "God's true church" does not appear in D&C 1:30, a key verse in the section where God formally describes and defines "mine authority... and the authority of my servants."

If I'm looking for what God expressly spells out that I should expect, rather that what I surmise that I should expect, it turns out that I actually might see something else when looking in the same direction.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

[jkwilliams]

And one can go through the Bible and pick out offending behaviors by believers, Kings, prophets, their followers, the disciples of Christ, and not agree with them. Bad fruit!

But that is not the same thing as considering what actually distinguished the grapes in question (true prophets), from thorns (false prophets).

And incidentally, the phrase "God's true church" does not appear in D&C 1:30, a key verse in the section where God formally describes and defines "mine authority... and the authority of my servants."

If I'm looking for what God expressly spells out that I should expect, rather that what I surmise that I should expect, it turns out that I actually might see something else when looking in the same direction.

 

 

I'm not talking about offending behaviors. I am saying that people can and do disagree about whether the LDS church really does provide the fruits of the kingdom. I'm not sure why you think that means people complaining about personal failings of believers. 

[jkwilliams]

You said something different, John:  "I think you might find that people of other faiths disagree with you on your assessment of the fruits of the church and prophets."

 

Kevin suggested that the fruits of the kingdom were fulfillment of prophecy and other requirements of the true church. My response is that people can and do look at the church and disagree that it has those fruits. Nothing dark at all about it. 

[california boy]

I’m not sure why you keep asserting this when things could have turned out differently based on mankind’s individual and collective choices. The plan works in mortality for as many people as follow it in mortality. It is available in mortality for as many as those who have it have availed it to them. It stands to reason that things may play out differently on different worlds.

 

Despite the opposition inherent in this life, God did make it easy in the beginning. But enough people refused to follow and interfered with its availability to others. He will not override mankind’s agency (acting on them after they have lost it is not the same thing).

 

The Restoration only picks up where things left off, and in the midst of a lot of resistance that was perpetuated after the Flood. Let’s not make the Restoration out to be the means of denying the Gospel to the world.

 

 “On the surface” is the certainly operative phrase!

 

In order to accept your speculation that the plan of salvation would have played out much differently if Cain and others early on had been more righteous, you have to also accept that God had no foresight into what would happen.  That seems to go directly counter to the belief that God knows all including how each of us will behave on earth.  

 

I am not suggesting that God has taken away our free agency.  But I am suggesting that to believe your speculation, one would have to assume that what God planned for mankind fell apart because of the sins of Cain and others that committed egregious sins early on completely devastated the plan of Salvation being found IN MORTALITY.   (People seem to overlook this very important point I have made repeatedly.)  

[california boy]

What are you responding to exactly?  I don't see how your comment relates to Stephen's post.  God's mercy is working for 100% of his children.  Hid plan extends beyond the grave, and the 99.9% are not forgotten or neglected.  He knows us all individually and is preparing us in a way that the humble followers of truth will one day know him perfectly (be they Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, or atheist), but it will happen line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, for reasons explained in the scripture above. 

 

If you think that the gospel teaches that God is not giving line upon line to non-Mormons, you are greatly mistaken.  We have a lot to learn from other faiths. 

 

 

Well evidently you are the only one that is not sick of me repeating OVER and OVER again in this thread that I am ONLY talking about receiving the plan of salvation WHILE here on earth.  (This point has been in just about every post I have posted on this thread in case you missed it)

 

Stephen said

By placing distance between the presence of God and man and God's truth, God has given us a greater amount of freedom of choice.  God wants people to seek Him out and seek out His truth and His righteousness without overwhelming proof. 

 

I assume Stephen was talking about this earth life when he talked about placing distance between the presents of God and man.  My comment referred to the fact that finding the gospel in this life has happened to less than .1% of Gods children.  99.9% of Gods children have not found the gospel WHILE on earth.

 

Do you now see how my comment relates to Stephen's comment?  Do you see that I was not addressing the opportunity to receive the gospel in the next life?  Do you see that the whole point of this thread is to talk about just how important it is to receive the Plan of Salvation in MORTALITY if less that .01% have ever been able to receive it IN MORTALITY?

[Robert F. Smith]

Kevin suggested that the fruits of the kingdom were fulfillment of prophecy and other requirements of the true church. My response is that people can and do look at the church and disagree that it has those fruits. Nothing dark at all about it. 

Of course, some people can and do disagree with the Mormons about whether they demonstrate the fruits of the true Saints of God or of His true Church, which is to be expected, and is often very subjective.  What you did was to make it sound like a blanket negative judgment by others, instead of nuancing it.

 

What I appreciate more is the frequent judgment by Jews, for example, which see Jesus in a positive light and do not make a knee jerk condemnation of Christianity. If we are to make fair assessments, what would they look like?  We have plenty of good examples already on hand.  Can we extrapolate from them?

[stephenpurdy]

Well that appears to be working for about .01% of His children.  If God is ok with that then I guess we should be too. 

 

 

I could argue that your number estimate here is wrong after you consider children who have died and those who receive temple blessings by proxy.  It is possible that many, many people (like many innocent children who have died), simply don't need a long life in trying to progress in the gospel.  Maybe, they already have what they need in the eyes of God.  But even if your number is correct, I'm sure God was quite aware that it would be the way it is. 

 

Furthermore, it seems to me that you are pushing the idea that everyone who does not receive exaltation is a "loser". 

 

LDS theology does not paint it that way.  In fact, in LDS theology, the only ones who are losers are the "sons of perdition".  There is the .01% that you are looking for.   The grand majority of people will ultimately gain amazing blessings after entering mortality.

 

-Stephen

Edited September 23, 2015 by stephenpurdy

[Maedros]

I think that the after life is an integral part of the gospel plan - the gospel plan is not Mormonism - the church of Joseph Smith has but a small portion of the entire plan. The difference in percentage between those who have the saving ordinances now and those who don't is acceptable to God; this also is part of the plan. Work performed in the next life is part of that contingency - the mission of the church and by extension us its members is to spread this message to all the earth. Satan has thwarted this throughout the ages and is continuing to do so now but he cannot do anything to spite the great creator for he proves to be just another instrument in bringing to pass things far greater than what he imagined. We also, are limited in our understanding of the plan in spite of all the prophets - not one prophet save Joseph Smith and the brother of Jared (perhaps) possessed the knowledge of the whole plan. From the days of Adam to this very day: the plan of salvation has been at work and as we lived before this earth, we live beyond which is all part of the plan. Among the latter-day saints there is only a handful who are worthy for exaltation anyway so even us who have the gospel now need the afterlife to continue our progression. The parable of the lost sheep answers the question of whether there is any point in doing this work if the majority of the world don't accept our message - if we measure success through our human understanding and if we expect success to be being latter-day saint or not then it appears to be a failure but God's ways are not our ways and His thoughts are not our thoughts and that is not how he measures success. We latter-day saints think that we are the most spiritual people in the world but nothing is further from the truth; some of the worst people I've met were mormons and some of the best people are non-mormons. The Savior's work is to save the souls of mankind whether in this life or the one hereafter; whose to say that the kingdom of glories are our final state, the work may continue even then and those who inherit a lesser kingdom may yet achieve exaltation. 

Edited September 23, 2015 by Maedros

[jkwilliams]

Of course, some people can and do disagree with the Mormons about whether they demonstrate the fruits of the true Saints of God or of His true Church, which is to be expected, and is often very subjective.  What you did was to make it sound like a blanket negative judgment by others, instead of nuancing it.

It wasn't a blanket negative judgment, but I can see how you read it that way.

 

What I appreciate more is the frequent judgment by Jews, for example, which see Jesus in a positive light and do not make a knee jerk condemnation of Christianity. If we are to make fair assessments, what would they look like?  We have plenty of good examples already on hand.  Can we extrapolate from them?

Do you have some examples of this frequent judgment by Jews? What do you think we can extrapolate from them?

[CV75]

In order to accept your speculation that the plan of salvation would have played out much differently if Cain and others early on had been more righteous, you have to also accept that God had no foresight into what would happen.  That seems to go directly counter to the belief that God knows all including how each of us will behave on earth.  

 

I am not suggesting that God has taken away our free agency.  But I am suggesting that to believe your speculation, one would have to assume that what God planned for mankind fell apart because of the sins of Cain and others that committed egregious sins early on completely devastated the plan of Salvation being found IN MORTALITY.   (People seem to overlook this very important point I have made repeatedly.)  

There is no speculation that Cain had his agency! He could have acted differently, changing his and others’ receptiveness to availability of the Gospel message. The Lord waits and watches and allows us to influence each other for better or worse. Happens every day; we’re all involved.

 

God’s foresight and foreknowledge have no impact on another’s agency! That has been well-explained in this thread and many others!

 

God’s plan for mankind will never fall apart, no matter how Cain or anyone else acts—that is the point. The plan’s success doesn’t hinge on when people accept His blessings, but that they have the opportunity to choose to do so. Of course God wants all His children exalted, but more than that, He wants all His children to choose it themselves (otherwise it is not worth having).

 

By the same token, of course He wants all His children to make good choices in mortality, but more than that, He wants all His children to choose it themselves (otherwise it is not worth having).

 

And by the same token, of course He wants all His children to have access to the Gospel in mortality, but more than that, He wants all His children to make good choices so its availability is a function of their individual and collective choices (otherwise it is not worth having available).

 

Mortal agency always trumps the mortal ideal (for example, the Gospel being available to and chosen by everyone in mortality), but this does not mean the mortal ideal cannot be had (in fact agency is the very basis of it). And the lack of meeting the ideal is no indication of the failure of the principle of agency, which is the actual plan.

 

This is why Cain’s actions (for example) could have influenced a more ideal mortality by having the Gospel more accessible to God’s children.

[california boy]

I could argue that your number estimate here is wrong after you consider children who have died and those who receive temple blessings by proxy.  It is possible that many, many people (like many innocent children who have died), simply don't need a long life in trying to progress in the gospel.  Maybe, they already have what they need in the eyes of God.  But even if your number is correct, I'm sure God was quite aware that it would be the way it is. 

 

Furthermore, it seems to me that you are pushing the idea that everyone who does not receive exaltation is a "loser". 

 

LDS theology does not paint it that way.  In fact, in LDS theology, the only ones who are losers are the "sons of perdition".  There is the .01% that you are looking for.   The grand majority of people will ultimately gain amazing blessings after entering mortality.

 

-Stephen

Except I am not talking about how many people will enter the celestial kingdom.  I am talking about the number of people who will hear the gospel here on earth.  That number doesn't change even if you die before the age of 8.  Just about every person will never find the church of Christ or have the opportunity to learn the truths while here on earth.

 

So was the plan all along that the children of God would only receive the gospel after they die?  Your post only supports what I have pointed out.