Telestial kingdom

[RevTestament]

30 minutes ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

It might have been that JS added telestial to what swedenborg did. One doesn't want to copy things word for word.

It's just the typical JS copied from here, there and everywhere argument. He was this supersophisticated teenager who read Swedenborg and looked up unknown maps with Moroni on them, etc, etc, despite critics calling him an illiterate drunk. I wish they would make up their minds. Perhaps, Swedenborg was just ahead of his time and saw some truth in the biblical description of Paul's three degrees of glory - that of the stars, moon, and sun. In a sense I think they are both wrong to the extent that the Father has many rooms in His House, and that we are told we shall each receive according to our works. So in this sense there are as many degrees of glory as there are people to receive it... but I do agree with the three main degrees, and find them to comport with the Bible as well.

I also happen to believe that Protestant historicists such as Sir Isaac Newton got a lot of biblical prophecy right. They arrived at the truth first. It certainly doesn't mean there is something sinister or bad about building on that truth. As Joseph taught - truth is truth no matter where you find it.

1 Corinthians 15:40

40 ^aThere are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the ^bcelestial is one, and the glory of the ^cterrestrial is another.

 

Edited May 30, 2017 by RevTestament

[Teancum]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 5:10 PM, poptart said:

What's it like?

Nobody knows.  Nobody knows if it is real.

[Teancum]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 6:48 PM, pogi said:

The sun is a celestial body, as is the moon and the stars.  It is in reference to anything extraterrestrial. 

The terrestrial is compared to the glory of the moon not the stars...that is the telestial.

Of course these kingdoms are not really the sun, moon, and stars.  It is metaphorical to describe their differences in glory from a terrestrial perspective. 

The sun is a star that is burning it gases and an incredible high level of heat. This star eventually die in a few billion years obliterating all the planets in the solar system including the earth. That is it.

[RevTestament]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

The sun is a star that is burning it gases and an incredible high level of heat. This star eventually die in a few billion years obliterating all the planets in the solar system including the earth. That is it.

Yeah,,, and Christ is not the bright day star or morningstar...we know you don't believe anymore.

[pogi]

11 minutes ago, Teancum said:

The sun is a star that is burning it gases and an incredible high level of heat. This star eventually die in a few billion years obliterating all the planets in the solar system including the earth. That is it.

Not sure what this has to do with my post, but it is kind of a depressing and bleak outlook, isn't it?  I sure am grateful for the assurance and hope of an afterlife. 

[Teancum]

29 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Yeah,,, and Christ is not the bright day star or morningstar...we know you don't believe anymore.

Ahhh really?  You know what I believe and don't believe and what is in my heart.  Hardly. 

I suggest you jump off your high and mighty judgmental horse lest you be judged with the same judgment you judge with. 

[Teancum]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

Not sure what this has to do with my post, but it is kind of a depressing and bleak outlook, isn't it?  I sure am grateful for the assurance and hope of an afterlife. 

You stated the Sun is a celestial body. I interpreted that, perhaps incorrectly, to mean that you, like JFS believed it to be some sort of celestial kingdom.  Sorry if I am wrong.

Depressing or not it is what it is.  If a belief in something that may not be true gives you comfort more power to you.  I want that as well. Yet I am willing to confront the evidence that no matter what I want to believe it may not be so.  Tough as it is.

[Teancum]

34 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Yeah,,, and Christ is not the bright day star or morningstar...we know you don't believe anymore.

By the way who is the WE that judges what I believe?  You have a mouse in your pocket?  Or is there some committee here on this board of WE.....

[RevTestament]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

Ahhh really?  You know what I believe and don't believe and what is in my heart.  Hardly. 

I suggest you jump off your high and mighty judgmental horse lest you be judged with the same judgment you judge with. 

You are the one who pulled the sun out of any symbolic biblical context, and said it will blow up and take the earth with it - the end. Sure sounds to me like you don't believe Christ is the morningstar, but if you do, maybe you would like to take back your post?

[pogi]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

If a belief in something that may not be true gives you comfort more power to you. 

The same to you. 

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

...no matter what I want to believe it may not be so.  

True, but that includes the belief that there is no afterlife. 

[Teancum]

4 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

You are the one who pulled the sun out of any symbolic biblical context, and said it will blow up and take the earth with it - the end. Sure sounds to me like you don't believe Christ is the morningstar, but if you do, maybe you would like to take back your post?

IT is clear that the sun will blow up. Just like stars have been doing for billions of years.  How that shows what I believe about God and or Jesus, well I do not make the connection. Do you doubt our sun will explode in a few billion years?  If yes what does that say about your intellect.  There, you like conjecture about what you believe like you did with me?

[Teancum]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

The same to you. 

True, but that includes the belief that there is no afterlife. 

I do not claim to know whether there is or is not an afterlife. There is little solid evidence that there is and all belief in this i ultimately faith based.  But I hope there is something more after this life. That is where I am.... HOPE. 

[RevTestament]

10 minutes ago, Teancum said:

IT is clear that the sun will blow up. Just like stars have been doing for billions of years.  How that shows what I believe about God and or Jesus, well I do not make the connection. Do you doubt our sun will explode in a few billion years?  If yes what does that say about your intellect.  There, you like conjecture about what you believe like you did with me?

Whoa - why so defensive? That was the jist of your argument with Pogi:

58 minutes ago, Teancum said:

The sun is a star that is burning it gases and an incredible high level of heat. This star eventually die in a few billion years obliterating all the planets in the solar system including the earth. That is it.

That is how you responded to his discussion about the biblical allusion from scripture:

"The sun is a celestial body, as is the moon and the stars.  It is in reference to anything extraterrestrial. 

The terrestrial is compared to the glory of the moon not the stars...that is the telestial.

Of course these kingdoms are not really the sun, moon, and stars.  It is metaphorical to describe their differences in glory from a terrestrial perspective."

You seem to continue to play fast and loose or you just don't understand the biblical symbolism Pogi is addressing. Pogi is simply referencing Paul like D&C does:

1 Corinthians 15:41

41 There is one glory of the ^asun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the ^bstars: for one star ^cdiffereth from another star in ^dglory.

Paul is trying to teach about degrees of glory and you say the sun is going to blow up - the end. Then you get all defensive when I say you don't believe anymore. What gives Teancum? Do you believe there are different degrees of glory like unto the sun, moon and stars? and that Jesus Christ likens Himself to the brightness of the sun?

[pogi]

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

That is where I am.... HOPE. 

Me too.  It feels good to hope, and I feel assured in my hope through my personal experiences.  I am confident that I have a loving father to return to, along with loved ones awaiting my return home.

[Teancum]

23 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Whoa - why so defensive? That was the jist of your argument with Pogi:

That is how you responded to his discussion about the biblical allusion from scripture:

"The sun is a celestial body, as is the moon and the stars.  It is in reference to anything extraterrestrial. 

The terrestrial is compared to the glory of the moon not the stars...that is the telestial.

Of course these kingdoms are not really the sun, moon, and stars.  It is metaphorical to describe their differences in glory from a terrestrial perspective."

You seem to continue to play fast and loose or you just don't understand the biblical symbolism Pogi is addressing. Pogi is simply referencing Paul like D&C does:

1 Corinthians 15:41

41 There is one glory of the ^asun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the ^bstars: for one star ^cdiffereth from another star in ^dglory.

Paul is trying to teach about degrees of glory and you say the sun is going to blow up - the end. Then you get all defensive when I say you don't believe anymore. What gives Teancum? Do you believe there are different degrees of glory like unto the sun, moon and stars? and that Jesus Christ likens Himself to the brightness of the sun?

Hmm... well you declared to me what I DO NOT believe and I wondered if you can read my mind.  I find arguments that go down this path specious as well as a personal attack.  I am up in the air about what I believe. You ask if I believe if different degrees of glory (which by the way there is not one Christian denomination that interprets those verses by Paul in the way the LDS Church does...as I am sure you know) my answer is I do not know.  And nor do I think you or anyone else knows though I know many like to think they do. I used to as well.

[clarkgoble]

On 5/30/2017 at 3:57 PM, RevTestament said:

It's just the typical JS copied from here, there and everywhere argument. He was this supersophisticated teenager who read Swedenborg and looked up unknown maps with Moroni on them, etc, etc, despite critics calling him an illiterate drunk. I wish they would make up their minds. Perhaps, Swedenborg was just ahead of his time and saw some truth in the biblical description of Paul's three degrees of glory - that of the stars, moon, and sun. In a sense I think they are both wrong to the extent that the Father has many rooms in His House, and that we are told we shall each receive according to our works. So in this sense there are as many degrees of glory as there are people to receive it... but I do agree with the three main degrees, and find them to comport with the Bible as well.

I also happen to believe that Protestant historicists such as Sir Isaac Newton got a lot of biblical prophecy right. They arrived at the truth first. It certainly doesn't mean there is something sinister or bad about building on that truth. As Joseph taught - truth is truth no matter where you find it.

1 Corinthians 15:40

40 ^aThere are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the ^bcelestial is one, and the glory of the ^cterrestrial is another.

 

The idea of three levels is pretty common in neoplatonism especially in the renaissance revival. The word telestial most likely comes out of that. A lot of terminology Joseph used appears to come out of Thomas Taylor's translation of Plato and various platonists like Iamblichus. The word telestic is commonly used there. The neoplatonist Hierocles had a three tiered system where the first was the telestic. There are certain parallels to elements of Mormon thought it the broadly hermetic tradition but probably more accurately conceived of as the remnants of renaissance platonism especially the theurgical form that one finds in Iamblichus and the classic hermetic texts. I found one passage in the Taylor translation of Iamblichus that was available to Joseph a few weeks ago that has a lot of parallels to D&C 76. There are some differences since D&C 76 only has three layers with the metaphors of sun, moon and stars. The hermetic and platonic texts tend to have the seven planets (the sun was one of these) and then the fixed stars. Often they have a total of 60 heavenly bodies. But there are some really strong parallels both to D&C 76 but also elements of the Book of Abraham. (Also interesting both the hermetic texts and platonic texts tie all these back to Egypt) 

While people do point to Swedenborg really a lot of the elements in his thought can be found in earlier figures. Most significantly though it's through the renaissance where the texts of late antiquity were rediscovered (or at least reappreciated). It was also during that era that more esoteric Jewish traditions became more widely dispersed. So you have merkebah, hekhalot, and similar traditions in gnosticism, hermeticism and platonism all getting discussed and significantly affecting the memory plays in the art of memory. All of these likely were known by Joseph. Which isn't to downplay his prophetic role of course, any more than his strong protestant influences minimize his prophetic role. But it is interesting how much he reconstructs is a reconstruction of many ideas of late antiquity that weren't widely known. Which ultimately is what Mormons have always claimed - stuff Jesus taught that never made it into the main traditions yet which elements of are reflected in many other texts.

Edited June 1, 2017 by clarkgoble

[RevTestament]

7 hours ago, Teancum said:

Hmm... well you declared to me what I DO NOT believe and I wondered if you can read my mind. 

No, I simply read what you wrote, and made some inferences based upon it.

Quote

"I find arguments that go down this path specious as well as a personal attack." 

I'm sorry if you felt that way, but I believe I made some reasonable inferences based upon what you said, and you never did take back your post, or claim to believe what I inferred you didn't. You just saw what you thought was a weak spot to launch a counter.

Quote

I am up in the air about what I believe. You ask if I believe if different degrees of glory (which by the way there is not one Christian denomination that interprets those verses by Paul in the way the LDS Church does...as I am sure you know) my answer is I do not know.  And nor do I think you or anyone else knows though I know many like to think they do. I used to as well.

Ok, I accept that your beliefs are not set. I was not trying to be coy nor offensive.

May I suggest you consider the parable of the sower? I believe it mirrors the 3 main kingdoms outlined by D&C quite well. I believe it even has a reference to the 3 degrees of glory within the celestial kingdom - those who heard the word and did it:

Matthew 13:23

23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that ^aheareth the word, and ^bunderstandeth it; which also beareth ^cfruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

I am not going to try to talk you in to returning to the LDS Church Teancum, but are you willing to discuss some scripture? We can just stick with the Bible if you like. Do you believe any Bible prophecy has come true? what if a lot of biblical prophecy has come true? Would that tend to sway your belief that there is an Almighty Author behind it?

 

[RevTestament]

9 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

The idea of three levels is pretty common in neoplatonism especially in the renaissance revival. The word telestial most likely comes out of that.

ProbablyHagoth linked to a google search which includes most ancient texts since they are in the public domain, and I didn't see even one instance of "telestial," so "probably" is not going to cut it with me. i want some concrete proof. 

However, I have always thought it should be the other way around - that the terrestrial should be the lowest kingdom. Care to explain that to me?

Quote

A lot of terminology Joseph used appears to come out of Thomas Taylor's translation of Plato and various platonists like Iamblichus. There are certain parallels to elements of Mormon thought it the broadly hermetic tradition but probably more accurately conceived of as the remnants of renaissance platonism especially the theurgical form that one finds in Iamblichus and the classic hermetic texts. 

While people do point to Swedenborg really a lot of the elements in his thought can be found in earlier figures. Most significantly though it's through the renaissance where the texts of late antiquity were rediscovered (or at least reappreciated). It was also during that era that more esoteric Jewish traditions became more widely dispersed. So you have merkebah, hekhalot, and similar traditions in gnosticism, hermeticism and platonism all getting discussed and significantly affecting the memory plays in the art of memory. All of these likely were known by Joseph. Which isn't to downplay his prophetic role of course, any more than his strong protestant influences minimize his prophetic role. But it is interesting how much he reconstructs is a reconstruction of many ideas of late antiquity that weren't widely known.

I don't find much Platonism in the Church or scriptures. I accept that early Christianity may have discussed the 3 levels of heaven. That would be an interesting discussion to me. Have anything concrete? I do realize JS' Hebrew teacher got him reading things like the Kabbalah and maybe the Talmud, but I don't see a lot of that in our scripture either. 

[Broker]

If this world is a Telestial Kingdom and it's where a lot of people end up after the Judgement...maybe there really is a form or reincarnation. You keep getting sent down until you get it right.

Reincarnation (Telestial Kingdom), Praying to ancestors (Genealogy).  Maybe some so-called pagan beliefs have something in common with Mormon beliefs.

Nobody will agree with this theory and will probably cite scripture to refute, but I'm convinced we only understand about 1% of what really goes on out there.....

 

 

[clarkgoble]

10 hours ago, RevTestament said:

ProbablyHagoth linked to a google search which includes most ancient texts since they are in the public domain, and I didn't see even one instance of "telestial," so "probably" is not going to cut it with me. i want some concrete proof. 

Well absolute proof is unlikely for most influences. Here's one Juvenile Instructor post on the topic though. I quote Iamblichus in the comments.

Quote

I don't find much Platonism in the Church or scriptures. I accept that early Christianity may have discussed the 3 levels of heaven. That would be an interesting discussion to me. Have anything concrete? I do realize JS' Hebrew teacher got him reading things like the Kabbalah and maybe the Talmud, but I don't see a lot of that in our scripture either. 

His Hebrew teacher almost certainly didn't get him reading Kabbalism. I know some claimed that but there's really near zero evidence for it. The source for the Kabbalistic quote in the Times and Seasons, the main argument for a Kabbalistic influence, is now known to be the Sefer Nishmat Hayyim by Manasseh ben Israel, a relatively recent text (1651) on the afterlife in Jewish tradition. It really doesn't discuss much of the broader Kabbalistic tradition at all apparently. (I've not read it not being able to read Hebrew)  If there are Kabbalistic influences on him they come much more indirectly through the masonic/hermetic culture and not either Seixas, of Oberlin college, who taught him in the 30's nor Alexander Neibaur who was a Jewish dentist who converted and helped Jospeh with Hebrew in the 40's.  

It's worth noting though that most Kabbalism basically is a more esoteric form of platonism that shifted how earlier merkebah and hekhalot traditions evolved. There's a fair argument that gnosticism influenced it a fair bit too although that's still controversial. So many of the ideas in Kabbalism actually are part of both the platonism of late antiquity as well as the renaissance revival of theurgic platonism (that in turn was the main influence on the creation of speculative Masonry).

Platonism proper though is a big influence on the Gospel of John and the Epistle to the Hebrews. In Mormon texts it's an unmistakable influence on texts like D&C 93. Many have noted the parallels between the JST translation of Gen 1 & 2 to Philo's commentary on them although I don't think anyone's postulated a direct influence. Platonism also was the basic way many Mormons such as the Pratts viewed creation of spirits prior to the changes with Joseph's revelation on spirits as matter. (Which many have also argued also as a platonic conception although a more stoic influence via reading about Tertullian is possible - that's almost certainly the influence on Orson Pratt and how he took the doctrine)

It's not just platonism though but a particular translation of various platonic texts by Thomas Taylor. Again the Juvenile Instructor has had a fair number of posts along that line. I suspect a book will be out eventually putting them in a more coherent form. Steve Fleming who wrote most of those posts argued in his dissertation for an influence on Joseph from Taylor's translation of the Timaeus. More recently he's looked at the Phaedro. I found some quotes from Taylor's Iamblichus which sound very similar.

Various others have written on platonic influences. Quinn did in Magic World View but did so in a rather poor fashion. While a few of the parallels he found are interesting, I don't recommend that. Fleming has done the most work but Sam Brown's work, especially on the chain of being, is probably the best known. It pops up in most of his works, but "The Early Mormon Chain of Belonging" is the well known one. He did a session at SMPT last year that touched on it too. His In Heaven as It Is On Earth touches on a lot of that as well.

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by clarkgoble

[theplains]

On 2017-5-30 at 0:27 AM, The Nehor said:

If you consider the purifying flames of hell "nothing to fear" then you are braver then I.

I don't believe in a type of purgatory.

Jim

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, theplains said:

I don't believe in a type of purgatory.

Jim

I do and sadly the Savior seem to too.

Quote

 

15 Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.

16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;

17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink—

 

 

[theplains]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I do and sadly the Savior seem to too.

 

Your quote does not signify anyone dying and then going to a place of suffering for their sins (i.e. a type of purgatory).

Jim

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, theplains said:

Your quote does not signify anyone dying and then going to a place of suffering for their sins (i.e. a type of purgatory).

Jim

If you are arguing that there are people on Earth pre-death suffering as the Savior did I would like to ask where you think they all are and how it could be "and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not" if they are experiencing it right now? So that implies they are dead. I am not sure if purgatory has defined physical boundaries in the afterlife or whether it is something you just carry with you and figure I can learn that when I get there (hopefully the information will be secondhand).

Edited June 1, 2017 by The Nehor

[clarkgoble]

28 minutes ago, theplains said:

Your quote does not signify anyone dying and then going to a place of suffering for their sins (i.e. a type of purgatory).

It certainly can be read as that though. But I'd be the first to admit the text doesn't actually say some people never repent. It does seem, on the basis of D&C 76, to assume those in telestial glory don't.