CV75 Posted June 8, 2017 Posted June 8, 2017 (edited) 17 hours ago, RevTestament said: I gave you authoritative scripture. You gave me 2 sentences which appear to be your opinion: "Inasmuch as all are saved to a degree in a degree of glory, all are repentant to that same degree (or not). The operation of grace (which you haven’t mentioned for obvious reasons) has so much to do with this that the multiple other concepts you’ve also confounded and conflated create a bog of confusion." I don't "have to do" anything more. You appear to be adopting a condescending tone and high falut'in platitudes. CFR for your claim about degrees of repentance. I did already way back: 1 Nephi 2:15 is authoritative scripture and supports your argument no worse than whatever you're referring to. But since you cannot answer my request that you cite the reference for your claim that “Jesus is Judge,” it appears you have failed to justify your opinion that we meet up with Jesus the Judge when we die so He can figure out where to place us in the spirit world. I am pleased to come across as condescending to one who has called me wrong and said I’m completely guessing and confounding things. A particle of insight should tell you that there are things in which you have not fully repented, or of which you have repented to only a degree, and which are not covered by grace. But I will answer your rhetorical CFR (does my meeting it change your opinion? You not meeting the one I issued to you certainly doesn’t change mine!). There are plenty of scriptures about degrees of repentance. Some people “receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness” (D&C 58:29) – when applied to the commandment to repent, that seems pretty partial to me. Malachi 2:9 likewise, when people “have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.” The Book of Mormon has several references about “if’ we do something with a full purpose of heart, meaning we can do it with a partial heart (these two specify repentance): 2 Nephi 31:13; 3 Nephi 18;32. The Lord knows those who have not “truly repented of all their sins." (Moroni 6:2). A scripture word search of “full purpose of heart” also offers lots of insight on what a less-than-full purpose of heart is. D&C 121:37 acknowledges any degree of unrighteous dominion, which naturally corresponds to degrees of repentance. Lds.org has more modern references to partial confession, partial disclosure and partial restitution – all elements of partial repentance: https://www.google.com/search?q=lds.org+partial+repentance&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 You will still have to do more or better than you have to engage in an actual discussion. Edited June 8, 2017 by CV75
RevTestament Posted June 8, 2017 Posted June 8, 2017 33 minutes ago, CV75 said: But since you cannot answer my request that you cite the reference for your claim that “Jesus is Judge,” it appears you have failed to justify your opinion that we meet up with Jesus the Judge when we die so He can figure out where to place us in the spirit world. I gave you my reference for my claim that Jesus is our Judge: John 5:22-23,27 22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath acommitted all bjudgment unto the Son: You do not accept it apparently because it is not an exact quote, but a modicum of common sense should tell you what you are asking. Perhaps you believe there is no final judgment? Perhaps you believe there will be no judge at the final judgment? Perhaps you do not consider the act of judging to make one a judge? Matthew 19:28 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the aregeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, bjudging the twelve tribes of Israel. But for those who believe scripture, and believe there is a final judgment, and that the Father has given all judgment to the Son, then it seems obvious and concrete that "Christ is our judge." I suppose I can apologize for concluding that without there being an exact scriptural quotation for you. Perhaps that will satisfy you? However, when you ask me to believe you based on little to no scripture, and then get upset for me saying that you are guessing the debate seems very lopsided. Quote 1 Nephi 2:15 is authoritative scripture and supports your argument no worse than whatever you're referring to. 1 Nephi 2:15 And my father dwelt in a tent. Um, perhaps you got your citation incorrect or are just shootin the breeze?i I really don't know what you are referring to based on the thread so far. Quote A particle of insight should tell you that there are things in which you have not fully repented, or of which you have repented to only a degree, and which are not covered by grace. But I will answer your rhetorical CFR (does my meeting it change your opinion? You not meeting the one I issued to you certainly doesn’t change mine!). There are plenty of scriptures about degrees of repentance. Some people “receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness” (D&C 58:29) – when applied to the commandment to repent, that seems pretty partial to me. I have not disputed that there is partial repentance in case you didn't understand my issue with your claim. I am disputing that it has anything to do with your claim that it has to do with why people go to the telestial kingdom or that they do not need to be repentant. D&C gives a laundry list of reasons why people go to the telestial kingdom: they reject the Word, they lie, they sin, they choose not to believe the gospel but only their interpretation of one apostle or disciple, etc. Excuse me for saying so, but "partial repentance" is not listed as one of the many reasons given. Your belief that it must be so, doesn't make it so, in case you don't know how scriptural debate works. I showed that scripture says that the dead must repent to be saved/redeemed even to the Telestial kingdom. You show.....your opinion, and berate me for concluding that you are guessing. 33 minutes ago, CV75 said: I am pleased to come across as condescending to one who has called me wrong and said I’m completely guessing and confounding things. Yes, I get that impression that you are pleased with yourself. However, you have presented precious little to debate. Maybe next time you feel like disputing me, you will bring something to the table. I cannot seriously debate or present gospel principles to anyone who takes on this air. So, I think I will call it a day. Good day.
MormonVideoGame Posted June 10, 2017 Posted June 10, 2017 (edited) On 5/6/2017 at 0:20 PM, clarkgoble said: I've not seen reports that confirm that. There are lots of reports of people claiming to see things, but typically it's things extrapolated from what they could know from where they were. That's why putting the marked cards was an important study. Exactly! even the LDS church doesn't have a position on NDEs and once your spirit leaves the body isn't that suppose to mean you are dead? Here is a very interesting debate between Eben Alexander, Graham Nicholls, and Jane Aspel. The debate didn't go so well for Eben Alexander, I was very dissapointed back then. https://www.premierchristianradio.com/Shows/Saturday/Unbelievable/Episodes/Unbelievable-The-curious-case-of-Eben-Alexander-near-death-and-out-of-body-experiences Edited June 10, 2017 by MormonVideoGame
deli_llama Posted June 11, 2017 Posted June 11, 2017 On 6/6/2017 at 8:20 AM, clarkgoble said: But most of it is highly processed by the brain with a lot of gaps filled in by the brain. Think of lucid dreams you may have had and how real they seem yet we know those are purely constructed. Not only that but part of consciousness is the brain convincing you that what you are experiencing has no gaps. Which is why dreams seem so real even though they are quite gappy when you start trying to make out parts. Our initial guess at what is going on tends to be wrong as I think numerous neurological tests can attest. Clark, I know this is a couple of days old, and the discussion has moved elsewhere, but would you be willing to flesh out what you mean when you use the term lucid dreaming? Depending upon the tightness of your usage it can slightly change the meaning of the remainder of your statements, and I would like to be clear in my mind what you mean.
clarkgoble Posted June 12, 2017 Posted June 12, 2017 (edited) On 6/10/2017 at 6:40 PM, deli_llama said: would you be willing to flesh out what you mean when you use the term lucid dreaming? Depending upon the tightness of your usage it can slightly change the meaning of the remainder of your statements, and I would like to be clear in my mind what you mean. I just mean a period where you're dreaming ala sleep but have some conscious connection and memories. So more akin to say when you wake up in the middle of the dream and as you're waking up the dream is still real. You can train yourself fairly easily to go into lucid states that are like day dreaming only far more vivid. Likewise because in a lucid dream you have some control of the dream it's a useful technique to teach people who have nightmares. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucid_dream So for example when I was very young I used to have nightmares. (Now that I've had my own kids I suspect this is partially an artifact of brain development) What I taught myself to do was whenever the nightmare started I'd rip open my shirt, see the big S, and then beat the monsters in the nightmare up. Pretty much since teaching myself that I've never had a nightmare except in connection with medicine. Edited June 12, 2017 by clarkgoble
deli_llama Posted June 13, 2017 Posted June 13, 2017 (edited) On 6/10/2017 at 5:40 PM, deli_llama said: Think of lucid dreams you may have had and how real they seem yet we know those are purely constructed. Clark, i am not savvy enough to get all of the quotes into the quote feature while on a mobile device, so I will just quote the above, and please add in your most recent reply. I asked about your use of lucid dreaming to clarify what your intent was in using it. I have had conversations where lucid dreaming was used, but was not actually pointing to the phenomenon of lucid dreaming. I am a practicing lucid dreamer for years now (and it is also a large part of my professional life, lucky yeah?), so I am aware of what you meant once I was clear on your usage. I think what might have caused the need for clarification was the comment that lucid dreams are a purely constructed experience. I am not sure that the lucid dreaming community, and those few scientists that study lucid dreaming would agree that lucid dreaming are in fact purely constructed by our minds. My own experiences agree with their tentative conclusions. There are scientists that might express your sentiment, Hobson for instance, but even he has moved back and forth within camps somewhat. Others though, scientists and practitioners, have expressed that, in fact, many events inside of lucid dreaming point to connections and influence occurring that come from outside of ourselves, non-constructed. There is a large body of recorded experiences that would want to confirm this, though backing it with hard science would be better. Indigenous peoples, those practicing Tibetan Dream Yoga, or any of the other schools of dream "yoga", would also likely disagree that it is a constructed experience. Speaking of dreams in general, I am not even sure we can strictly say that they are also all constructed by our minds, and not influenced or guided by outside forces. Granted, what we experience while waking is processed in the darkroom of our sleeping minds, so there is always that to consider. And again granted, not every dream is a Dream. However, dreams and dreaming have large roles in Christianity, and this is especially true of Mormonism. Dreams and revelations have even been spoken of over the pulpit in conference. If we want to dismiss them as constructed, then we do ourselves a disservice as Mormons seeking revelation Yes, our brains do fill in the gaps that naturally occur as part of perception, and yes, those gaps are also present in dreams. Interestingly though, it is when we focus on specific things to the exclusion of that gaps, and kind of lose our looser perception, that lucid dreaming falls apart. For example, staring at a piece of art, or even a wall, while lucid dreaming can pull you out of the LD and back into the non-lucid dream (or cause you to wake up). I might have totally misread your comments, if so, I apologize. I am not sure though that we can dismiss NDE and/or OBE's as constructed either, especially when the attempt to do so is attached to the idea of dreams or lucid dreams being constructs of our mind. That isn't even settled as fact, and outside of what scientists of the materialist leanings would say, in general, the lucid dreaming community (in any form), might take exception to the idea that they are constructs or constructed. "For one I think there's a fundamental difference when one is in good health and can test experiences versus being extremely ill -- usually near death by definition -- and typically highly drugged up on drugs with known hallucinatory side effects." That is an interesting point of view. Would you be open to the idea that sometimes it is the being extremely ill, near death, could also open you up to spiritual communication or experiences? Set aside western medicine and drugs for a moment. In places and cultures where access to western medicine isn't readily available, including the use of drugs (in a medical setting), these illnesses and the subsequent experiences of Visions, Dreams, OBEs, and/or NDEs still occur, and in fact might lead to complete or miraculous healing and a spiritual calling within the community. Dismissing NDE experiences as illness/drug induced events, based on a modern western world view, might be unfair to yourself and those that have these experiences. ETA: If anyone is interested, I recommend Life After Life, by Raymond A. Moody, Jr., M.D. as a good _starting_ point for the subject from a science point of view. Edited June 13, 2017 by deli_llama Added last paragraph 1
Recommended Posts