Hie to Kolob

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

 I wasn't aware that it was doctrinal that he was exalted or planning for his brethren  with various gods or that it was necessary for the earth to atone for anyone's blood.

1. D&C 132:49 For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with Abraham your father.

This is a step above receiving the Calling and Election ordinance.  It is the 3rd step.  As Joseph said "3rd key:  It is one thing to be on the mount and hear the excellent voice, etc., and another to hear the voice declare to you, You have a part and lot in that kingdom. "

2. "Earth" must atone refers to the people (the world), not the planet.  It also has reference to the scriptural principle of "blood crying from the earth".

3.  Brigham Young -  The spirit of Joseph, I do not know that it is just now in this bowery, but I will assure you that it is close to the Latter-day Saints, is active in preaching to the spirits in prison and preparing the way to redeem the nations of the earth, those who lived in darkness previous to the introduction of the Gospel by himself in these days.  He has just as much labor on hand as I have; he has just as much to do. Father Smith and Carlos and brother Partridge, yes, and every other good Saint, are just as busy in the spirit world as you and I are here. They can see us, but we cannot see them unless our eyes were opened. What are they doing there? They are preaching, preaching all the time, and preparing the way for us to hasten our work in building temples here and elsewhere, and to go back to Jackson County and build the great temple of the Lord. They are hurrying to get ready by the time that we are ready, and we are all hurrying to get ready by the time our Elder Brother is ready.

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

1. D&C 132:49 For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with Abraham your father.

This is a step above receiving the Calling and Election ordinance.  It is the 3rd step.  As Joseph said "3rd key:  It is one thing to be on the mount and hear the excellent voice, etc., and another to hear the voice declare to you, You have a part and lot in that kingdom. "

2. "Earth" must atone refers to the people (the world), not the planet.  It also has reference to the scriptural principle of "blood crying from the earth".

3.  Brigham Young -  The spirit of Joseph, I do not know that it is just now in this bowery, but I will assure you that it is close to the Latter-day Saints, is active in preaching to the spirits in prison and preparing the way to redeem the nations of the earth, those who lived in darkness previous to the introduction of the Gospel by himself in these days.  He has just as much labor on hand as I have; he has just as much to do. Father Smith and Carlos and brother Partridge, yes, and every other good Saint, are just as busy in the spirit world as you and I are here. They can see us, but we cannot see them unless our eyes were opened. What are they doing there? They are preaching, preaching all the time, and preparing the way for us to hasten our work in building temples here and elsewhere, and to go back to Jackson County and build the great temple of the Lord. They are hurrying to get ready by the time that we are ready, and we are all hurrying to get ready by the time our Elder Brother is ready.

 

Good answers.  I have definite problems with the idea of "blood crying from the earth", but I do not have a problem with the "blood and sins of this generation" and our partial culpability for that.  I survived the '60's on the wrong side, so yes I can understand at least that much of it, while our culture still spins out of control due to, in a tiny tiny way, to my efforts.  I can imagine another person who lived in the 19th century who was anti-Mormon and then later repented - or didn't- for being possibly partially responsible for Joseph's murder in a small way.  But I do believe in a kind of cultural sin where even we are responsible for abortion for perhaps not doing enough to stop it.

Brigham Young?  Meh.  I do not doubt that Joseph is working for the Kingdom so I suppose I have to give that one up as well.  But I still think "mingling with gods and planning for his brethren" is poorly phrased for PR purposes when it might have been more along the lines of a simple "Helping God's kingdom" instead.

And then repeating it over and over?  It is understandable that some might see that as worshiping Joseph.  But yes I can see your point of view.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Brigham Young?  Meh.  I do not doubt that Joseph is working for the Kingdom so I suppose I have to give that one up as well.  But I still think "mingling with gods and planning for his brethren" is poorly phrased for PR purposes when it might have been more along the lines of a simple "Helping God's kingdom" instead.

D&C 132:49 addresses that as well.
1. D&C 132:49 For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with Abraham your father.

How is that not "mingling with Gods"?

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

D&C 132:49 addresses that as well.
1. D&C 132:49 For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with Abraham your father.

How is that not "mingling with Gods"?

You are not understanding my point, please re-read what I said. I was talking about PR.

Meat before milk.

Edited March 21, 2017 by mfbukowski

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

You are not understanding my point, please re-read what I said. I was talking about PR.

Meat before milk.

No, I understood your point.
Have I ever appeared to care about PR?

At some point we need to stop worrying so much about how our beliefs appear to the outside world.

[mfbukowski]

On 3/21/2017 at 7:53 AM, Five Solas said:

Artistic merit notwithstanding, the answer to, "Were you there when the angels sang?" for any of us alive today is--No.

Just for fun, consider God's answer to Job's charge of injustice, beginning in Job 38:4--

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding

To which Job can only conclude (42:6)--

Therefore I despise myself,
and repent in dust and ashes

Now try to imagine this exchange if Job had been LDS:  Where was I ?!?  Well, I was right there in the pre-mortal existence!  With your latter-day prophet Joseph Smith and a whole lot of other worthy people.   No, I don't remember it exactly because of your veil thing.   But what kind of rhetorical question is that, LDS Heavenly Father?  Surely you remember.  And it's your fault that I don't!

--Erik

PS.  Of course, maybe that's how it really did go--and wicked scribes & translators over the millennia made some adjustment.  What does the JST say again?

;0)

Since you are a literalist about the Book of Job, which was a temple play, I would want to ask you what kind of god would play games with people's lives in bargaining with Satan?

I mean if everything in the book is literally true, then that must be also, right?

But of course it appears you believe that God also sends those who have had no chance to hear about Christ to burn in hell forever through no fault of their own.

Of course I mean that in a nice way.

Just a little sibling rivalry there, bro, in this apologetics game.   I couldn't let you get away with that!

 

[Five Solas]

On 3/22/2017 at 8:49 PM, mfbukowski said:

Since you are a literalist about the Book of Job, which was a temple play, I would want to ask you what kind of god would play games with people's lives in bargaining with Satan?

I mean if everything in the book is literally true, then that must be also, right?

But of course it appears you believe that God also sends those who have had no chance to hear about Christ to burn in hell forever through no fault of their own.

Of course I mean that in a nice way.

Just a little sibling rivalry there, bro, in this apologetics game.   I couldn't let you get away with that!

 

It may have been used as a temple play, but that doesn't imply God was playing.  The story reveals several things about the character of God.  First, His sovereignty.  Satan is unable to initiate anything against Job until God wills it.  All creation, including Satan, depends upon God.  [And here I'll pause to say that I don't think the Book of Job enjoys a large LDS fan club.] 

Second, God is sovereign over suffering and He uses the Refiner's Fire ultimately for the good of believers. 

Which leads to the third, that God thereby made Job a better man and gave him understanding.  He also restored him, see the last chapter of the book.  

There have certainly been worse explanations made to the question of theodicy over the millennia.  I can think of a couple on this very board.  You get away with nothing, my friend.

:0)

--Erik

[Calm]

This was the first prelude music this week and the most interesting piece.

[RevTestament]

On 3/11/2017 at 11:43 PM, MiserereNobis said:

Hi LDS friends,

I imagine this topic won't get too many responses because it isn't about gays, evolution/science/creationism, or philosophy (ha! clarkgoble has been a wonderful contributor of late on this board, much to Mark's happiness I'm sure). And I'm not going to be confrontational or anything, so I figure this thread will waste away after a few responses  

I was reading over the lyrics for "If You Could Hie to Kolob" and was struck by the mystical nature of this hymn.  I was also struck by how blatant the unique Mormon theological beliefs are in this song.  It doesn't shy away from controversial Mormon ideas, such as eternal progression and the plurality of gods.  It seems a bit of an anomaly to me, in that it is not "Child of God" or "I Believe in Christ" or any other hymn which most Christians (Protestants?) might find acceptable, which is why I'm making this thread.  How often is this song sung?  How much thought do you think the congregation gives to the lyrics when they sing it?  I mean the average LDS congregation, of which the more thoughtful and educated posters here might not be representative (this is true in Catholicism or any other religion, so I'm not trying to say the average Mormon isn't thoughtful, but that the average religious person doesn't devote as much time to thinking about their religion as those who post here or on other religious forums).  Also, when the hymn is sung, how often are all verses sung?

I'm drawn to the mystical interpretations of the hymn.  Eternity means beyond time, so in eternity there is no beginning, middle, or end.  My answer to the text would be no, we cannot find where these things begin or end, because when we experience the vision beyond time and place in mystical experience, there is no beginning or end.  Everything just is.  God, and by extension our deepest truest self, has always been.

Finally, I've often advocated that Mormons should celebrate their unique (and sometimes controversial) doctrines.  Yes, many people would probably find this hymn to be odd and the doctrines behind the hymn to be odder still.  But they're your doctrines -- don't shy away from them or try to explain them in such a way that they become mainstream.  Instead, offer them up as the unique ideas of Mormonism.  From my experience on this board, JLHPROF is a good example of not showing any hesitation about doctrines that other Christians might find weird at best or heretical at worst (yes, JLHPROF, I'm expecting a rep point from you...)

I don't really personally feel our additional scriptures are all that controversial, with the probable exception of the Book of Abraham. In other words most of them can be discussed entirely within the context of the Bible - at least the KJV. For instance someone mentioned the Snow couplet "As man is God once was, and as God is man may become." While you allude to LDS shying away from our doctrines, and perhaps are alluding to Hinkley's interview with King in which he essentially did this, I believe it is defensible from the Bible itself. 

In John Jesus said He does nothing of Himself except what He has seen the Father do, which raises the position that He had seen the Father lay down His life for the sheep, and was simply following the example the Father had given Him. I believe this can also be seen in the Hebrew name of the Father, YHWH, which is shared by our Savior. The Hebrew letters mean "Behold the hand, behold the nail/peg"

So although LDS are unique, one would expect a church which claims to be the only true church to be unique.

On 3/12/2017 at 2:54 PM, MiserereNobis said:

I totally agree with you here.  The Catholic conception of God is that He is beyond space and time, which means He is ultimately beyond the ability of our space/time bound minds to comprehend.  Couple this with the fact that concepts are rooted in language, and you get one reason why we say the nature of God is a mystery.  The closest we can come to describing His nature is through poetry and paradox (there was a discussion about this on another thread somewhere recently...).  The immediate knowledge of God comes to the chosen few through direct mystical experiences, and then those who are in Heaven whose knowledge of Him is not mediated through space/time and language.

I have a deep interest in mysticism and perhaps that's why this hymn stuck out to me as something quite special.  It's a tad bit better than, say, "In Our Lovely Deseret"

Again, I see what you are saying, but I don't fully agree.  Embrace the uniqueness.  Also, the proselytes should be made known of the Mormon theology of Gods and eternal progression before they are baptized, shouldn't they?  So they know what type of theology they are subscribing to?

LDS don't consider God to be incomprehensible. This was pointed out in a talk by Dallin H Oaks just today in the Church conference. That doesn't mean we totally understand God, but we don't have creed or something like that which dictates a certain belief about the nature of the Godhead. We are somewhat content to admit that we are still figuring God out. This is a major difference between LDS Christianity and Catholicism, and if you want I'll be happy to discuss my issues with the doctrine of the Trinity.

Just briefly I will state that we can know God through His word, and His word seems to show that although He may be difficult to understand, He wants us to try. Here is one scripture on this issue I like:

Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

The Christian convert Nabeel Quereshi gave up his entire life to become Christian, because he was a Muslim. He said:

"The pursuit of God is the noblest endeavor man can ever undertake." LDS Christians believe themselves to be in this endeavor. A mystery yes, but not an impossibility - by design.

[CMZ]

On 3/12/2017 at 0:32 PM, JLHPROF said:

Again, please explain why the case of the letter at the beginning of the word god/God should matter?  Especially when it was a choice made by the scribe, not the speaker of the inspired words.

It doesn't matter much, especially when it goes on to say, "Then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them." That's a god, or a God, any way you slice it.

[CMZ]

On 3/21/2017 at 10:17 AM, JLHPROF said:

This is a step above receiving the Calling and Election ordinance.

 

Kind of, and kind of not.

[MiserereNobis]

16 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I don't really personally feel our additional scriptures are all that controversial, with the probable exception of the Book of Abraham.

Perhaps when it comes to scripture, but there are quite a few Mormon doctrines that are controversial from the point-of-view of traditional Christianity.  This is especially true when it comes to the nature of things, such as God, humans, angels, devils, and so-forth.  The differences between Mormonism and traditional Christianity are stark on these issues, so much so that the Catholic Church decided that LDS baptism does not qualify as Christian baptism specifically because of the LDS view of God.  I use the term controversial simply to point out that they are problematic for traditional Christianity and generate lots of discussion.

Quote

In other words most of them can be discussed entirely within the context of the Bible - at least the KJV. For instance someone mentioned the Snow couplet "As man is God once was, and as God is man may become." While you allude to LDS shying away from our doctrines, and perhaps are alluding to Hinkley's interview with King in which he essentially did this, I believe it is defensible from the Bible itself.

I wasn't thinking specifically of Hinkley, but of the way many of these unique doctrines are presented, often trying to show that they are not very unique.  This happens on the member level but also on the PR level.  It is understandable but I personally think you'd be better served not doing it.  I'll be sure to tell President Monson next time he calls me

Quote

In John Jesus said He does nothing of Himself except what He has seen the Father do, which raises the position that He had seen the Father lay down His life for the sheep, and was simply following the example the Father had given Him. I believe this can also be seen in the Hebrew name of the Father, YHWH, which is shared by our Savior. The Hebrew letters mean "Behold the hand, behold the nail/peg"

I don't think Jesus's statement supports that interpretation, but is part of a larger context that supports the Trinity, such as "I and my Father are One."

Also, I have never heard that YHWH means that.  I was told it comes from a verb that means "to be" or "to exist" and is thus connected to God's declaration to Moses that His name is "I am that I am."  Can you provide a reference for that, please?

Quote

So although LDS are unique, one would expect a church which claims to be the only true church to be unique.

Yes, that is exactly my point.  Own the unique doctrines, like the super cool hymn that started this thread

Quote

LDS don't consider God to be incomprehensible. This was pointed out in a talk by Dallin H Oaks just today in the Church conference. That doesn't mean we totally understand God, but we don't have creed or something like that which dictates a certain belief about the nature of the Godhead. We are somewhat content to admit that we are still figuring God out. This is a major difference between LDS Christianity and Catholicism, and if you want I'll be happy to discuss my issues with the doctrine of the Trinity.

When a Catholic says that the nature of God is a mystery, that doesn't mean that God is totally and utterly incomprehensible.  Not at all.  Humans can know much of God through study and experience.

My experience is that Mormons don't really admit that they are still trying to figure God out.  My experience is that Mormons often look down on the traditional Christian view of the mystery of God's nature by saying that Mormons do know the nature of God, which means that they know more about God than traditional Christians.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that if we are all trying to figure God out, Mormons place themselves farther along the path than traditional Christians.

Also, while you may not have an official creed about the nature of the Godhead, there are certainly Mormon doctrines about it that I would guess are required to believe in to be a good Mormon.  Could a Mormon be a Trinitarian, for example?  It doesn't seem so to me, because Trinitarianism doesn't fit into Mormon theology and cosmology.  It appears to me that there are beliefs about God that one must hold to be a Mormon.

Quote

The Christian convert Nabeel Quereshi gave up his entire life to become Christian, because he was a Muslim. He said:

"The pursuit of God is the noblest endeavor man can ever undertake." LDS Christians believe themselves to be in this endeavor. A mystery yes, but not an impossibility - by design.

I agree whole-heartedly!  It is one reason why I am so drawn to mysticism and the monastic life, because it is a no-holds-barred pursuit of God.  And, ultimately, the quest for salvation is the pursuit of God, because once we are in heaven we will know God perfectly and immediately and His nature will no longer be a mystery to us.

 

Edited April 3, 2017 by MiserereNobis

[RevTestament]

12 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Perhaps when it comes to scripture, but there are quite a few Mormon doctrines that are controversial from the point-of-view of traditional Christianity.  This is especially true when it comes to the nature of things, such as God, humans, angels, devils, and so-forth.  The differences between Mormonism and traditional Christianity are stark on these issues, so much so that the Catholic Church decided that LDS baptism does not qualify as Christian baptism specifically because of the LDS view of God.  I use the term controversial simply to point out that they are problematic for traditional Christianity and generate lots of discussion.

Well, what I am trying to say is that although as presented they are seen as controversial, they can be supported within the context of the Bible - so it is not like they come from left field like the Urantia Book. Generally, unlike the Catholic Church most all other Christian denominations are opposed to the idea of additional scripture, so have a hard time with another book like the Book of Mormon from the get-go. Yet, Revelation 11 indicates the 2 witnesses will prophesy. When I point this out, others will usually squiggle or squirm, like what they have to say is not going to be the word of God. Similarly with baptism for the dead. Anyway, if there is a particular doctrine you have in mind, I am willing to discuss it, although my time is limited right now. 

"I wasn't thinking specifically of Hinkley, but of the way many of these unique doctrines are presented, often trying to show that they are not very unique.  This happens on the member level but also on the PR level.  It is understandable but I personally think you'd be better served not doing it.  I'll be sure to tell President Monson next time he calls me "

Perhaps you should put in a line to Joseph Smith since he too said as much in his King Follet sermon.

"I don't think Jesus's statement supports that interpretation, but is part of a larger context that supports the Trinity, such as "I and my Father are One.""

So you believe this is just a figure of speech? That Jesus didn't see our Father do anything? Perhaps you believe that Moses didn't see His back parts either?

"Also, I have never heard that YHWH means that.  I was told it comes from a verb that means "to be" or "to exist" and is thus connected to God's declaration to Moses that His name is "I am that I am."  Can you provide a reference for that, please?"

YHWH or Yehovah/Yahowah means I am the Word/Life/Breath. But in Hebrew each letter has an individual meaning. Individually that is the meaning of each letter. 

YHWH  - will explain it well enough although I don't read the John passage as relating to Moses. I believe it refers to El Shaddai.

"Yes, that is exactly my point.  Own the unique doctrines, like the super cool hymn that started this thread

When a Catholic says that the nature of God is a mystery, that doesn't mean that God is totally and utterly incomprehensible.  Not at all.  Humans can know much of God through study and experience."

That's not the way it comes across in the Doctrine of the Trinity.

"My experience is that Mormons don't really admit that they are still trying to figure God out.  My experience is that Mormons often look down on the traditional Christian view of the mystery of God's nature by saying that Mormons do know the nature of God, which means that they know more about God than traditional Christians.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that if we are all trying to figure God out, Mormons place themselves farther along the path than traditional Christians."

LDS Christians do have a penchant for trying to explain our understanding of God to others - I certainly am not denying that. We believe our understanding is scriptural according to the Bible, or at least I do, and that others have merely drifted from that, or didn't fully understand in the first place. It's not exactly like Jesus filled in every detail. You have to admit. He didn't give much specificity regarding the Holy Spirit for instance.

"Also, while you may not have an official creed about the nature of the Godhead, there are certainly Mormon doctrines about it that I would guess are required to believe in to be a good Mormon.  Could a Mormon be a Trinitarian, for example?  It doesn't seem so to me, because Trinitarianism doesn't fit into Mormon theology and cosmology.  It appears to me that there are beliefs about God that one must hold to be a Mormon." Well, certainly LDS believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as personages of the Godhead, but no we don't follow the creeds regarding exactly what nature they are in the Godhead. I believe this is again where we shine for those who wish to pursue the truth of God. For instance we will not be declared anathema or excommunicated for not believing that Yeshua was begotten before all worlds/time. My personal belief is that Christians do not understand the begotten nature of the Son at all. So I kinda hearken back to the earliest Christian debates on the topic between Arius and Athanasius. I am not Arian per se, but I agree more with him than Athanasius for example.

"I agree whole-heartedly!  It is one reason why I am so drawn to mysticism and the monastic life, because it is a no-holds-barred pursuit of God.  And, ultimately, the quest for salvation is the pursuit of God, because once we are in heaven we will know God perfectly and immediately and His nature will no longer be a mystery to us."

Here I will hazard a few comments towards the mystery of God - first, that the doctrine of the Trinity does not comport with scripture but actually hides the true nature of God.

I believe that Yeshua was begotten as the Son by the oath of the Father - so that they have a covenantal relationship. This is the foundation of His priesthood.

Further, I believe the scriptures were literal in stating that the Father said to Jesus "Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee." So I see the Son being begotten by this oath in time on a day, rather than in the creedal formula of being begotten before all ages/time.

Also I believe that man will understand God's nature before knowing Him perfectly in heaven.

Revelation 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

I believe Yeshua revealed this mystery, and the temple veil was ripped allowing men to see the mystery, and that it will continue to be revealed in the Lamb. This is also supported by the Book of Mormon:

Ether 4:16 And then shall my revelations which I have caused to be written by my servant John be unfolded in the eyes of all the people. Remember, when ye see these things, ye shall know that the time is at hand that they shall be made manifest in very deed.

So in short, I don't believe you can fully understand God if you aren't willing to look at anything outside of the Doctrine of the Trinity. This doctrine declares that the Son is not the Father, and will be the Son forevermore. I believe this is contrary to Isaiah 9:6 which declares that the Son shall be called the Eternal Father. I believe that is His inheritance when all the government is inherited by Him as prophesied. The doctrine of the Trinity makes Him immutable and therefore incapable of inheriting His government... so I read it anyway.