Intelligences Organized

[Eek!]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Now here’s where I’m going to get a little weird (it’s Friday!).

Organizing intelligence (spirit) goes hand in hand with organizing matter (element). In the Creation, all kinds of matter was organized into a world (paradise) consisting of the inanimate and the animate placed under the dominion of Adam and Eve (man is spirit).

In Exaltation, the sea of glass in the celestial kingdom is inanimate, and yet serves as a medium of knowledge serving those to whom have been given dominion over eternity (D&C 130:7). In the same way, in Adam’s world (both paradise and what we have now) element (the inanimate) might contain spiritual knowledge (e.g. brass plates and papyri) and the animate contain element (e.g. people – D&C 93:33), with whatever else we call living going either way.

I can go along with these ideas.  Especially the one about Friday!

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Both forms of organization are spiritual processes and require spiritual power (faith and priesthood), harnessing spiritual laws such as opposition (ying / yang) and agency. Hence the eternal nature of gender and marriage and their relationship to each other.

Not that this is a terribly crucial point, but... are you aware that there are more than two genders?  I believe there are six:

1.  Physiology male, endocrine system male;

2.  Physiology female, endocrine system female;

3.  Physiology male, endocrine system female;

4.  Physiology female, endocrine system male;

5.  Both; and

6.  Neither.

My recollection is that approximately one in ten thousand people are born as one of the other four genders.  So, how do they fit in? Are they "mistakes", or is that "who they really are"?    

Assuming their physical genders are "who they really are", then perhaps their genders are analogues of their spirit's reality.  The principle of Correspondences suggests this is a possibility.

Note that were it not for the greater light and knowledge about the endocrine system that we have thanks to modern science, we would not begin to be aware of those less-common genders, or at least not numbers 3 and 4 from the list above. 

Also note that we do not have the nearly same detailed understanding about the genders of spirits as we do about the genders of physical bodies.  The genders of spirits may be even more complex, for all we know.  If there are correspondences between the physical-world reality and the spirit-world reality in this area, that could theoretically explain same-sex and both-sex attraction. 

Remember, it is okay to refrain from passing judgment, or to "judge not", as Jesus put it, especially when we don't yet have a sufficiently complete picture. 

And I hope this post hasn't come across as judgmental. 

Edited June 11, 2016 by Eek!

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Eek! said:

Very interesting, thanks for the links.  I hadn't thought of how this concept could apply to the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 

Well I think it applies to us equally with them as heads of the family.

We are all in it together if we qualify.  Mom, Pop, big Brother and us kids.

[Eek!]

10 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

We are all in it together if we qualify.  Mom, Pop, big Brother and us kids.

I think we're all in it together, period.  This is assuming Mom and Pop and Brother really do love us. 

Edited June 11, 2016 by Eek!

[CV75]

29 minutes ago, Eek! said:

Not that this is a terribly crucial point, but... are you aware that there are more than two genders?

Of course (and there are genetic, psychological, cultural, and other permutations--yikes, that makes scores of genders!); but just like race, it is only because we segregate them into as many as our purposes demand; but on an eternal scale there is only one race. So, it depends how we define gender; on an eternal scale, there are only two defined as far as I an tell.

“All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng

The rest of that link of course ties together gender, marriage and organizing intelligence (and matter for that matter) by faith and priesthood for the definition of exaltation per D&C 132.

[VideoGameJunkie]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Are all beings resurrected as eunuchs? That's not a very appealing eternity.

No all resurrected will have the organs but it just won't be lust that drives us naked to have relations with women, it will be based on pure love. We will have shed our carnal desires by then and will be acting appropriately as God approves.

[Eek!]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Of course (and there are genetic, psychological, cultural, and other permutations--yikes, that makes scores of genders!); but just like race, it is only because we segregate them into as many as our purposes demand; but on an eternal scale there is only one race. So, it depends how we define gender; on an eternal scale, there are only two defined as far as I an tell.

“All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng

So if my physiology is male but my endocrine system is female, what am I?  A spirit son or a spirit daughter?   And what gender should I marry?  If all human beings are created in the image of God, is there any reason why that wouldn't include me? 

Regardless of how you answer those questions, obviously (from my previous post on the subject) there are legitimate physical sub-divisions within the categories of "male and female".   So either the Proclamation is incomplete, or it should be interpreted to include unusual genders if we do not want it to overlook any of God's children because of their physical bodies. 

And if there are physical-world subcategories that the Proclamation lumps into either the Male or Female category, why not spirit-world subcategories as well?  It's obviously painting with a broad brush about the physical, and that could easily extend to the other as well. 

So if we are open to the possibility that there may be legitimate sub-divisions within the categories of "spirit son or daughter", and if we accept that these sub-divisional genders are "an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose", then I suggest that we exclude none of them by word or deed or attitude unless and until we know otherwise.

The Proclamation on the Family embraces the principle of Correspondences between the physical-world reality and the spirit-world reality.  I'm totally upholding that principle, and in pointing out that the physical-world reality is significantly more complex than it appears at first glance, I'm suggesting that the same holds true for the spirit-world reality.

Edited June 11, 2016 by Eek!

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Eek! said:

I can go along with these ideas.  Especially the one about Friday!

Not that this is a terribly crucial point, but... are you aware that there are more than two genders?  I believe there are six:

1.  Physiology male, endocrine system male;

2.  Physiology female, endocrine system female;

3.  Physiology male, endocrine system female;

4.  Physiology female, endocrine system male;

5.  Both; and

6.  Neither.

My recollection is that approximately one in ten thousand people are born as one of the other four genders.  So, how do they fit in? Are they "mistakes", or is that "who they really are"?    

Assuming their physical genders are "who they really are", then perhaps their genders are analogues of their spirit's reality.  The principle of Correspondences suggests this is a possibility.

Note that were it not for the greater light and knowledge about the endocrine system that we have thanks to modern science, we would not begin to be aware of those less-common genders, or at least not numbers 3 and 4 from the list above. 

Also note that we do not have the nearly same detailed understanding about the genders of spirits as we do about the genders of physical bodies.  The genders of spirits may be even more complex, for all we know.  If there are correspondences between the physical-world reality and the spirit-world reality in this area, that could theoretically explain same-sex and both-sex attraction. 

Remember, it is okay to refrain from passing judgment, or to "judge not", as Jesus put it, especially when we don't yet have a sufficiently complete picture. 

And I hope this post hasn't come across as judgmental. 

No, but here's the fly in the ointment

Quote

If there are correspondences between the physical-world reality and the spirit-world reality in this area, that could theoretically explain same-sex and both-sex attraction.

 

 So either you agree with the atheists that lack of scientific evidence disproves religion, or you say that science and religion have nothing to do with each other and so science cannot disprove religion 

Unfortunately that latter position means that scientific evidence also has nothing to do with religion, and cannot help it or hurt it.

So somehow you have to wiggle your way out of that one.

[Eek!]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

No, but here's the fly in the ointment

 So either you agree with the atheists that lack of scientific evidence disproves religion, or you say that science and religion have nothing to do with each other and so science cannot disprove religion 

Unfortunately that latter position means that scientific evidence also has nothing to do with religion, and cannot help it or hurt it.

So somehow you have to wiggle your way out of that one.

"So either you agree with the atheists that lack of scientific evidence disproves religion"

Nope, I'm not saying that.

"or you say that science and religion have nothing to do with each other and so science cannot disprove religion."

Nope, I'm not saying that either.  I think the day may come when they have quite a bit to do with each other, both being quests for truth, but that day is probably a long ways off. 

I aspire to believe in true principles regardless of where they come from.  For instance there is a fundamental correspondence between the scientific method and Alma 32, even if some of the details differ.  I believe in the principle of testing something out for yourself, and trying your best to make it a fair test, as a valid way of seeking truth whether about the physical or the non-physical.  The alternative is often "take someone else's word for it", which is perfectly fine too if you have good reason to believe that your source is a reliable authority on the subject. 

I believe the principle of "gathering and organizing the lesser to form the greater, which can transcend the sum of its parts" can be applicable to spiritual creation (intelligences being organized into spirits), physical creation as described by religious text (the word "created" in the first verse of Genesis could also be translated as "organized", according to my Jewish mother), and physical creation as observed by science (energy vibrations or "strings" organizing into quarks which organize into subatomic particles which organize into atoms which organize into molecules including long-string amino acids which organize into living cells which organize into multi-cell life forms). 

I'm not saying that all principles which are true in one milieu have a correspondence in the other, but some do, and those instances can offer insights. 

I don't see that either the one or the other of your proposed statements inevitably follows.  If you do, please tell me which one; I don't have a background in philosophy so you may be seeing something that I don't see. 

Thanks!

Edited June 11, 2016 by Eek!

[CV75]

11 hours ago, Eek! said:

So if my physiology is male but my endocrine system is female, what am I?  A spirit son or a spirit daughter?   And what gender should I marry?  If all human beings are created in the image of God, is there any reason why that wouldn't include me? 

Regardless of how you answer those questions, obviously (from my previous post on the subject) there are legitimate physical sub-divisions within the categories of "male and female".   So either the Proclamation is incomplete, or it should be interpreted to include unusual genders if we do not want it to overlook any of God's children because of their physical bodies. 

And if there are physical-world subcategories that the Proclamation lumps into either the Male or Female category, why not spirit-world subcategories as well?  It's obviously painting with a broad brush about the physical, and that could easily extend to the other as well. 

So if we are open to the possibility that there may be legitimate sub-divisions within the categories of "spirit son or daughter", and if we accept that these sub-divisional genders are "an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose", then I suggest that we exclude none of them by word or deed or attitude unless and until we know otherwise.

The Proclamation on the Family embraces the principle of Correspondences between the physical-world reality and the spirit-world reality.  I'm totally upholding that principle, and in pointing out that the physical-world reality is significantly more complex than it appears at first glance, I'm suggesting that the same holds true for the spirit-world reality.

I wouldn’t presume to answer these kinds of questions for you. Like the rest of Gospel teaching, the Proclamation offers eternal principles for temporal application in a fallen world, where all kinds of conditions challenge us (it teaches correct principles so that we might govern ourselves using the abundant tools, resources and grace the Lord avails)—even those we deem or make “complex” an perplexing.

Sometimes people might conclude that they are facing an exception to an eternal principle, or might not accept a principle so as to better cope with the complexity and perplexity they suffer, but that is only developmental until they discover the correspondence; in other words, they transition from a temporal misunderstanding and misapplication of the Gospel to an eternal understanding and application.

There are also countless sub-divisions within the categories of “life and death” and within our temporal world of “death” for example, countless sub-divisions within the categories of “demise and agony” – our sufferings on earth (scripturally referred to as “death and hell”). The Atonement takes care of them all.

[Eek!]

5 hours ago, CV75 said:

Sometimes people might conclude that they are facing an exception to an eternal principle, or might not accept a principle so as to better cope with the complexity and perplexity they suffer, but that is only developmental until they discover the correspondence; in other words, they transition from a temporal misunderstanding and misapplication of the Gospel to an eternal understanding and application.

There are also countless sub-divisions within the categories of “life and death” and within our temporal world of “death” for example, countless sub-divisions within the categories of “demise and agony” – our sufferings on earth (scripturally referred to as “death and hell”). The Atonement takes care of them all.

In my opinion eternal principles to which there are no exceptions would include:  God is good, God is fair, God is loving, and God is no respecter of persons.  Any line of thinking that leads to a different conclusion has a mistake in it somewhere. 

And I agree with your conclusion about the power of the Atonement.  I believe the Atonement has the power to undo the effects of everything that is hurtful about this world and what happens in it. 

[CV75]

15 hours ago, Eek! said:

In my opinion eternal principles to which there are no exceptions would include:  God is good, God is fair, God is loving, and God is no respecter of persons.  Any line of thinking that leads to a different conclusion has a mistake in it somewhere. 

And I agree with your conclusion about the power of the Atonement.  I believe the Atonement has the power to undo the effects of everything that is hurtful about this world and what happens in it. 

Getting back to the subject of gender, two eternal principles support the resolution for someone who latches onto the false idea that they are an exception the eternal truths articulated in the Proclamation.

From an article in this month’s Ensign about someone who felt the Proclamation no longer applied to them, but discovered that it does:  "...for those of you getting close to or having already passed your “give-up point,” my advice is to remember these two things: (1) you are a child of God, who loves you, and (2) God has a plan for you. We can and must continue to trust in a bright, eternal future." https://www.lds.org/ensign/2016/06/taking-the-bus-to-kolob?lang=eng

It seems you are suggesting that the eternal principle of "degree" (for example, degrees of glory from outer darkness to exaltation) corresponds to gender as well. But “neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.” They are to be, in perfection, “one flesh,” so where all degrees of imperfection in their bodies and minds in this life will be restored to their perfect frame, they yet possess the opportunity enjoy this union of male and female in the afterlife, following the pattern of Adam and Eve.

[Eek!]

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

It seems you are suggesting that the eternal principle of "degree" (for example, degrees of glory from outer darkness to exaltation) corresponds to gender as well.

I do not see where I suggested anything like that. 

What I did suggest is, a gentle interpretation of the Proclamation on the Family that condemns no one, nor requires that God be unfair to any of his creations. I suggested an interpretation that leaves the door open to truly loving your neighbor as yourself, which is the second great commandment, because you cannot truly love someone that you condemn or otherwise see as less than yourself.

And there can be no conflict between the first and second great commandments because God is not in conflict with Himself. If there seems to be such conflict, then something has been mis-interpreted unlovingly somewhere.

 

[CV75]

4 hours ago, Eek! said:

I do not see where I suggested anything like that. 

What I did suggest is, a gentle interpretation of the Proclamation on the Family that condemns no one, nor requires that God be unfair to any of his creations. I suggested an interpretation that leaves the door open to truly loving your neighbor as yourself, which is the second great commandment, because you cannot truly love someone that you condemn or otherwise see as less than yourself.

And there can be no conflict between the first and second great commandments because God is not in conflict with Himself. If there seems to be such conflict, then something has been mis-interpreted unlovingly somewhere.

 

Of course we’re interpreting the Proclamation charitably.

Five of the six genders you contemplated allow for a degree of maleness and femaleness in both the physiology and endocrinology of the subject. I offered additional variables to consider that could affect a person’s sense of gender, and each of these are also potentially manifest in varying degrees (and some people care, or have reason to care, about how that plays out for them, and some don’t).

One could say these forces, in one way or another, act upon every human being on the planet, but in the resurrection, the perfect biology and sociality of gender will restored. Not that everyone will be exactly the same, but everyone will have the option of exaltation with gender as an essential characteristic. There is another article in this month’s Ensign that touches on this: https://www.lds.org/ensign/2016/06/what-do-we-know-about-life-after-death?lang=eng

“Those who inherit the highest degree of the celestial kingdom will be exalted, which means they will have eternal life, become like our Heavenly Father, and receive all that the Father has. To become like Heavenly Father means to acquire His attributes of perfection, including love and service.1 It also means to share in His work and glory, which is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). Exaltation includes being sealed in marriage for eternity, living in eternal families, and having eternal spirit offspring. (See D&C 76:59, 62; 130:2; 132:19–23.)”

I guess people can still assert that the Proclamation is incomplete or confusing on the subject of gender, as you allowed when you said, “So either the Proclamation is incomplete, or it should be interpreted to include unusual genders if we do not want it to overlook any of God's children because of their physical bodies.”

But according to the eternal principles in the Proclamation, there are no unusual genders, only two. There are no unusual conditions of any kind mentioned in the Proclamation, just a recognition that the common lot of all humanity that we are all God’s children, living out a common plan to get back to Him. For those who suffer in this life with gender (or any other) issues, the Proclamation can offer hope when one remembers, as did the writer of the article I mentioned earlier, who once had an issue with the teachings of the Proclamation, that “(1) you are a child of God, who loves you, and (2) God has a plan for you. We can and must continue to trust in a bright, eternal future."

Edited June 12, 2016 by CV75

[Eek!]

5 hours ago, CV75 said:

“(1) you are a child of God, who loves you, and (2) God has a plan for you. We can and must continue to trust in a bright, eternal future."

That's enough common ground that I think we can both stand on it.  Thanks for the discussion. 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Eek!

[CV75]

7 hours ago, Eek! said:

That's enough common ground that I think we can both stand on it.  Thanks for the discussion. 

That is fine and you are welcome, but I think the notion of 6 or more genders in the eternal worlds warrants further justification. As I mentioned before, I can come up with scores of designations suiting my specific therapeutic or social aims, but spiritually, “that same sociality which exists among us here” can get “coupled with eternal glory” only when it reflects our willingness to abide in the Lord’s design and will, and not ours, even if we are unable due to our probation's physical and other limitations to realize those blessings in this life.

[Eek!]

4 hours ago, CV75 said:

That is fine and you are welcome, but I think the notion of 6 or more genders in the eternal worlds warrants further justification. As I mentioned before, I can come up with scores of designations suiting my specific therapeutic or social aims, but spiritually, “that same sociality which exists among us here” can get “coupled with eternal glory” only when it reflects our willingness to abide in the Lord’s design and will, and not ours, even if we are unable due to our probation's physical and other limitations to realize those blessings in this life.

 

How do you know that the other four genders are not part of "the same sociality that exists among us here"?   It depends on what that "sociality" is, doesn't it?  And how closely it corresponds to what exists here. 

I'm not saying the other four genders necessarily do exist there, only that physical gender is demonstrably not as simple as it seems as first glance (nor as simple as portrayed in the Proclamation), and in my opinion the gender of spirits may not be as simple either. 

 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Eek!

[Ahab]

15 minutes ago, Eek! said:

How do you know that the other four genders are not part of "the same sociality that exists among us here"?   It depends on what that "sociality" is, doesn't it?  And how closely it corresponds to what exists here. 

I'm not saying the other four genders necessarily do exist there, only that physical gender is demonstrably not as simple as it seems as first glance (nor as simple as portrayed in the Proclamation), and in my opinion the gender of spirits may not be as simple either. 

 

Those other 4 genders you mentioned are still either male or female, regardless of how those 4 genders feel or what they think is their gender.

Bruce Jenner is still a male even though he feels like he is a woman and now even looks more like a woman than he did before his transformation.  He hasn't changed his actual gender.

[Eek!]

13 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Those other 4 genders you mentioned are still either male or female, regardless of how those 4 genders feel or what they think is their gender.

Semantics.

But I'm not opposed to conceding that the words "male and female" in the Proclamation be interpreted to include these unusual physical genders, as long as we also concede that those same words may include unusual genders of eternal spirits as well, if they exist.  We simply do not have nearly as much detailed information on the gender of spirits as we do on the gender of physical bodies.   

 

 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Eek!

[CV75]

32 minutes ago, Eek! said:

How do you know that the other four genders are not part of "the same sociality that exists among us here"?   It depends on what that "sociality" is, doesn't it?  And how closely it corresponds to what exists here. 

I'm not saying the other four genders necessarily do exist there, only that physical gender is demonstrably not as simple as it seems as first glance (nor as simple as portrayed in the Proclamation), and in my opinion the gender of spirits may not be as simple either. 

 

While physical (temporal) gender is not always simple (I’ve offered more permutations of complexity that you have!), and relatively few knowingly suffer such challenges in this life doesn’t make it many less simple (depending on who is looking at the situation and how, of course), physical (resurrected) gender on the other hand is also as simple as portrayed in the Proclamation for the purposes it serves. The Gospel Message is simple for the purposes it serves. People run up against complicated, personal-life situations all the time with regards to every point in the Proclamation (and the Gospel). That doesn’t make the eternal principles they put forth any less complete, relatable or applicable for practical, everyday life on earth.

D&C 132 shows that there are only men and women (husbands and wives) in the exalted world. They get there by becoming begotten sons and daughters unto God (D&C 76:24) and by keeping the covenant (Mosiah 5:7). These scriptures are quite specific. In addition, D&C 76:24 is presented in such a way as it can apply to the many kinds of worlds God creates where sons and daughters are begotten unto Him (premortal, mortal, post-mortal spirit, resurrected, physical, temporal, eternal, etc.). For example, in organizing intelligences into spirit children, God begat two genders --sons and daughters-- to inhabit the pre-mortal spirit world He created. Thus I know that "the other four genders [plus some]" are not part of the heavenly sociality that is only imperfectly reflected here -- the sociality Joseph Smith referred to -- and I know that they are not part of any other world created by God (this current world was actually created by Adam's Fall).

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, Eek! said:

Semantics.

But I'm not opposed to conceding that the words "male and female" in the Proclamation be interpreted to include these unusual physical genders, as long as we also concede that those same words may include unusual genders of spirits as well, if they exist.  We simply do not have nearly as much detailed information on the gender of spirits as we do on the gender of physical bodies.   

 

 

Yes this is an issue of semantics and all we need to realize is that things are what they are regardless of what we call them.

Male or female.  Or male and female. 

Knowing what each is and what makes each one what it is is fundamental knowledge. 

[Eek!]

23 minutes ago, CV75 said:

While physical (temporal) gender is not always simple (I’ve offered more permutations of complexity that you have!), and relatively few knowingly suffer such challenges in this life doesn’t make it many less simple (depending on who is looking at the situation and how, of course), physical (resurrected) gender on the other hand is also as simple as portrayed in the Proclamation for the purposes it serves. The Gospel Message is simple for the purposes it serves. People run up against complicated, personal-life situations all the time with regards to every point in the Proclamation (and the Gospel). That doesn’t make the eternal principles they put forth any less complete, relatable or applicable for practical, everyday life on earth.

 

D&C 132 shows that there are only men and women (husbands and wives) in the exalted world. They get there by becoming begotten sons and daughters unto God (D&C 76:24) and by keeping the covenant (Mosiah 5:7). These scriptures are quite specific. In addition, D&C 76:24 is presented in such a way as it can apply to the many kinds of worlds God creates where sons and daughters are begotten unto Him (premortal, mortal, post-mortal spirit, resurrected, physical, temporal, eternal, etc.). For example, in organizing intelligences into spirit children, God begat two genders --sons and daughters-- to inhabit the pre-mortal spirit world He created. Thus I know that "the other four genders [plus some]" are not part of the heavenly sociality that is only imperfectly reflected here -- the sociality Joseph Smith referred to -- and I know that they are not part of any other world created by God (this current world was actually created by Adam's Fall).

 

When we know the science of spirit biology as well as we now know the science of physical biology, we will know whether or not the simple language used in the sources you cite is the whole truth regarding the gender of spirits.  Until then, we do not know. 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Eek!

[CV75]

19 minutes ago, Eek! said:

When we know the science of spirit biology as well as we now know the science of physical biology, we will know whether or not the simple language used in the sources you cite is the whole truth regarding the gender of spirits.  Until then, we do not know. 

LOL I expect we'll know the science of "spirit biology" (as presumptuous as that term is!) a lot better than we "know" (as presumptuous as that term is!) gender biology!

I think you're moving the goalposts... You seem to have hardly scratched the surface of an understanding of biological gender (and hardly the "whole truth" about how gender is). And the Proclamation is not biological science, it is a compilation of eternal principles describing why gender is. Its teaching is clear and sufficiently understandable and interpretable  for generating faith, hope and charity in the attendant Gospel plan and promises no matter what anyone thinks of the science of gender.

[JLHPROF]

47 minutes ago, Eek! said:

When we know the science of spirit biology as well as we now know the science of physical biology, we will know whether or not the simple language used in the sources you cite is the whole truth regarding the gender of spirits.  Until then, we do not know. 

"[God] created man, as we create our children; for there is no other process of creation in heaven, on the earth, in the earth, or under the earth, or in all the eternities, that is, that were, or that ever will be."
— Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:122.

 

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, Eek! said:

When we know the science of spirit biology as well as we now know the science of physical biology, we will know whether or not the simple language used in the sources you cite is the whole truth regarding the gender of spirits.  Until then, we do not know. 

We don't learn that at the same time, so I would say that when any person learns that a spirit is born/ created as either a male or a female by a resurrected Father and a resurrected Mother then that person has learned how baby spirit boys and baby spirit girls are created and what that child's gender is.

And I think the main reason some of us don't know this about some people right now is because some of us see only the tabernacle of a spirit without seeing the spirit inside the tabernacle. 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Ahab

[Ahab]

24 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

"[God] created man, as we create our children; for there is no other process of creation in heaven, on the earth, in the earth, or under the earth, or in all the eternities, that is, that were, or that ever will be."
— Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:122.

 

Still not clear enough for some people,  apparently. 

Or is it that some people just don't believe it?