Calling up the dead

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and especially when the person was cremated and his ashes spread at sea, or in the mountains.  The elements and molecules which once composed the living being can be remade on the spot, and do not have to be the "original" elements and molecules -- which change in any animal or human constantly throughout his life anyhow.  There is no static existence of any living being, except in the Resurrection to immortality and glory.

I wonder if it isn't just the 'blue print' that is the connection to our mortal form and that is the only thing we take with us and our bodies are 'reprinted' using immortal, perfect material this time around rather than the cells themselves somehow being brought together again and then somehow evolving into a more perfected form (I wanted to use transcendent, but mfb has made me more careful about using those terms that also have a specific theological definition, which if used here, would mean the opposite of what I am thinking, given a resurrected body is still very material in LDS belief).

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

I wonder if it isn't just the 'blue print' that is the connection to our mortal form and that is the only thing we take with us and our bodies are 'reprinted' using immortal, perfect material this time around rather than the cells themselves somehow being brought together again and then somehow evolving into a more perfected form (I wanted to use transcendent, but mfb has made me more careful about using those terms that also have a specific theological definition, which if used here, would mean the opposite of what I am thinking, given a resurrected body is still very material in LDS belief).

Somehow transcendant.  Perhaps DNA is the basic blueprint even in the eternities.

[RevTestament]

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and especially when the person was cremated and his ashes spread at sea, or in the mountains.  The elements and molecules which once composed the living being can be remade on the spot, and do not have to be the "original" elements and molecules -- which change in any animal or human constantly throughout his life anyhow.  There is no static existence of any living being, except in the Resurrection to immortality and glory.

We are all just a collection of molecules commonly found on the earth from which we are made. When we die the bacteria and other critters eat most of these molecules so they are quickly reconstituted in a new form. They could even end up in a new person - I doubt these molecules are going to get "recalled" in resurrection. The body will just be reconstituted from new molecules - that has always been my thinking. Thus the early LDS predisposition against cremation is moot. Cremated people will still get resurrected. I believe Jesus was the only resurrected person seen in his resurrection, so exactly where they are at when they are resurrected is an unknown factor, but my guess is normally they are not resurrected here on the earth. But perhaps they are, and then get translated. That's an interesting question. Wonder if the world will find out...

[Guest]

17 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm not sure why any condition of the grave would make it more difficult than another. 

True, as scripture teaches "the earth and seas shall give up their dead". How someone is buried would seem a very minor issue with a God who can call forth anyone. 

[Tacenda]

Found these quotes online, this may be what you're asking for. I don't know if the church still believes it to the extreme or not, or if this is just men's ideas. But it's what I've been taught. 

BTW, it's good to see you back on here Sanpitch! Hope you are still out there enjoying life!!

LDS Apostle Charles W. Penrose wrote:

In the divine economy, as in nature, the man “is the head of the woman,” and it is written that “he is the savior of the body.” But “the man is not without the woman” any more than the woman is without the man, in the Lord. Adam was first formed, then Eve. In the resurrection, they stand side by side and hold dominion together. Every man who overcomes all things and is thereby entitled to inherit all things, receives power to bring up his wife to join him in the possession and enjoyment thereof.

In the case of a man marrying a wife in the everlasting covenant who dies while he continues in the flesh and marries another by the same divine law, each wife will come forth in her order and enter with him into his glory. (Charles W. Penrose, “Mormon” Doctrine Plain and Simple, or Leaves from the Tree of Life, Salt Lake City, 1897, p. 66)

LDS Apostle Erastus Snow preached the following on Sunday, October 4, 1857:

Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands? . . . Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? “What!—my husband to be my lord?”

I ask, Can you get into the celestial kingdom without him? Have any of you been there? You will remember that you never got into the celestial kingdom [during the temple ceremony] without the aid of your husband. If you did, it was because your husband was away, and some one had to act proxy for him. No woman will get into the celestial kingdom, except her husband receives her, if she is worthy to have a husband; and if not, somebody will receive her as a servant. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 291)

[Sanpitch]

24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Found these quotes online, this may be what you're asking for. I don't know if the church still believes it to the extreme or not, or if this is just men's ideas. But it's what I've been taught. 

BTW, it's good to see you back on here Sanpitch! Hope you are still out there enjoying life!!

LDS Apostle Charles W. Penrose wrote:

 

Hi Tacenda, yes we're doing good and still around, thank you.

Your answer is probably about as close to what I was asking as we'll get.  You've probably heard the same things in your life that I have regarding the man calling his wife from the grave for her resurrection.

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and especially when the person was cremated and his ashes spread at sea, or in the mountains.  The elements and molecules which once composed the living being can be remade on the spot, and do not have to be the "original" elements and molecules -- which change in any animal or human constantly throughout his life anyhow.  There is no static existence of any living being, except in the Resurrection to immortality and glory.

When I was a kid I would wonder how many atoms in my body right now had been part of Jesus body

I was an odd child.

 

[hagoth7]

3 hours ago, Sanpitch said:

Hi Tacenda, yes we're doing good and still around, thank you.

Your answer is probably about as close to what I was asking as we'll get.  You've probably heard the same things in your life that I have...

?

Mary

feet

 

Edited June 24, 2017 by hagoth7
downshift

[mfbukowski]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

I wonder if it isn't just the 'blue print' that is the connection to our mortal form and that is the only thing we take with us and our bodies are 'reprinted' using immortal, perfect material this time around rather than the cells themselves somehow being brought together again and then somehow evolving into a more perfected form (I wanted to use transcendent, but mfb has made me more careful about using those terms that also have a specific theological definition, which if used here, would mean the opposite of what I am thinking, given a resurrected body is still very material in LDS belief).

There must be a DNA file somewhere.

But for me this is a scientific question in a spiritual sphere.  It is the belief in the resurrection that changes my life- not trying to figure out the chemistry of how God could pull this off.

And for me that is where that "transcendent" distinction- by banning the word- keeps me rooted in the reality of personal experience which IS spirituality.  Spirituality is about getting our act together and not usually about the chemistry of how that is done.   Of course chemistry can be an obstacle to getting our act together, but then that becomes a medical/scientific issue and perhaps those questions are best left to medical/psychiatric experts.

I think this becomes part of the physicalism issue at some point- where the phenomenology of experience separates from the physical and cannot be contained by the physical.  You often hear that around here where the spiritual is taken to be about brain activity and chemical reactions, but of course as Thomas Nagel has pointed out repeatedly, there is always something left out of statements of the form "Chemical reaction xyz is occurring in the abc lobe of Bukowski's brain" from statements of the form "Bukowski is having the experience of red".   There is nothing "red" in the description of the chemical reaction in the brain and there cannot be a logical connection made to the two type of statements.

The first is never logically identical to the second, so there is always a logical gap between the cause and the effect or the effect and the cause.   Does the experience cause the chemical reaction or does the chemical reaction cause the experience?  Which is more "real" and which is the mental projection of what is "really happening"??

The physicalist says the chemicals cause you to see God.  But if a bear is chasing you, are the chemicals causing the bear to appear?  That would be a hazardous experiment to stand still and find out.

Similarly there is no logical connection between the religious belief in resurrection and the science of how it will happen and pursuing such a connection is doomed to failure.

The religious person will say "God will take care of it- God is the creator of everything anyway and knows physics better than any mortal will ever know it" while the physicalist is stuck in one place waiting for the bear to eat him  because the chemicals in the religious persons head are the cause of the belief.  "Why it's physically impossible for resurrection to happen, reality is not just a chemical reaction in your brain"!

CHOMP CHOMP

 

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Somehow transcendant.  Perhaps DNA is the basic blueprint even in the eternities.

The LA temple has a huge spiral chandelier which one symbolically circumambulates, clockwise, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumambulation ,exactly 360 degrees,  in one continuous round,  while rising on the large staircase to the Creation room.  All must take that path to get there. (elevators available of course for the handicapped) and the circle ends precisely on the second floor exactly above the beginning, and exactly at the entry to the creation room.

Legend has it that David O McKay, prophet, at the dedication, paused before climbing that staircase and seemed to be watching someone preceding him up the staircase.  He allegedly turned to the apostles following him and said "Brethren, today you will follow me in the footsteps which the Lord Himself has trod"

I notice there are spiral staircases in many of the older, larger multi-story temples.

"But DNA was not known as a spiral helix when those temples were built"

Exactly.

Google "temple spiral staircase" and see what you get

Edited June 24, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Atheist Mormon]

On 6/23/2017 at 5:36 PM, Sanpitch said:

 Is it just a myth or an actual belief.

Put it this way....It is as real as your dreams.

[Robert F. Smith]

13 hours ago, RevTestament said:

We are all just a collection of molecules commonly found on the earth from which we are made. When we die the bacteria and other critters eat most of these molecules so they are quickly reconstituted in a new form. They could even end up in a new person - I doubt these molecules are going to get "recalled" in resurrection. The body will just be reconstituted from new molecules - that has always been my thinking. Thus the early LDS predisposition against cremation is moot. Cremated people will still get resurrected. I believe Jesus was the only resurrected person seen in his resurrection, so exactly where they are at when they are resurrected is an unknown factor, but my guess is normally they are not resurrected here on the earth. But perhaps they are, and then get translated. That's an interesting question. Wonder if the world will find out...

It may be that our spiritual bodies and material bodies are legacies of the necessary stages of our existence en route to glory, and they provide us with certain capabilities we would not otherwise have.

[RevTestament]

2 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It may be that our spiritual bodies and material bodies are legacies of the necessary stages of our existence en route to glory, and they provide us with certain capabilities we would not otherwise have.

Well, apparently Satan does not have the power to take actual physical form - nor do his minions - so yeah, our physical bodies do give us capabilities not even Satan has. He has great power to wrest the soul, but he apparently cannot have one thing he wants - a body. So it is ironic that people routinely seem to think Heavenly Father would not want one... However, according to Isaiah 42, He has a soul, so that seems to be a definite indicator of having a body.

[Robert F. Smith]

13 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Well, apparently Satan does not have the power to take actual physical form - nor do his minions - so yeah, our physical bodies do give us capabilities not even Satan has. He has great power to wrest the soul, but he apparently cannot have one thing he wants - a body. So it is ironic that people routinely seem to think Heavenly Father would not want one... However, according to Isaiah 42, He has a soul, so that seems to be a definite indicator of having a body.

Yes, and it enables Him and his angels to stop by Abraham's place at Moreh, sit down and have a feast, just as it enabled the risen Jesus to visit his Apostles and have supper with them.

[Kenngo1969]

On 6/23/2017 at 10:10 PM, mfbukowski said:

... It's kind of an ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny thing.

Reminds me of the exchange from M*A*S*H in which Charles Emerson Winchester (III), Hawkeye Pierce, and BJ Hunnicutt are talking about something or other (can't remember what it is), and BJ says, "Well, Charles!  Since you put it that way ... Whaddo you mean?!!"  

[Kenngo1969]

"Calling up" the dead?  There's a terrific short story/novel/film in there somewhere!  Perhaps I shall be the one to create it! I've got the title already, "The Phone," By Ken K. Gourdin!  

Edited June 25, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Reminds me of the exchange from M*A*S*H in which Charles Emerson Winchester (III), Hawkeye Pierce, and BJ Hunnicutt are talking about something or other (can't remember what it is), and BJ says, "Well, Charles!  Since you put it that way ... Whaddo you mean?!!"  

It's a phrase used fairly often in biology

 

Quote

 

"Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" is a catchy phrase coined by Ernst Haeckel, a 19th century German biologist and philosopher to mean that the development of an organism (ontogeny) expresses all the intermediate forms of its ancestors throughout evolution (phylogeny).

Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny

2000clicks.com/Graeme/LangWisdomSayingOntogenyRecapitulatesPhylogeny.htm

 

I didn't have time to explain it much the first time.

In other words, in the development of embryos, previous, lower stages of development are often mirrored in the higher development of creatures 

   So in the development of human embryos, many believe that the embryo passes through previous states of development so that the development of the individual recapitulates the development of the species.

 

I was using that as an analogy for the temple, in which Adam and Eve, representing every human couple, pass through all the stages of the plan of salvation which apply to all of humanity

 

For example, they are born innocent, fall from grace, grow by making decisions and receiving revelation from "true messengers", repent from sin, make sacrifices and promise to be obedient, and work their way through every gospel covenant as each of us individually do.  We are told that we should consider ourselves as if WE ARE A&E ourselves- so clearly the story applies not only to them but to each of us

 

So our personal spiritual development mirrors the plan of salvation itself as we pass through the stages of personal spiritual development symbolically represented by ordinances and covenants we receive.  We personally ARE "Everyman" (and woman of course as well) as we all go through all the same stages Adam and Eve did.

 

The culmination of the steps of the plan of salvation include resurrection and entry into the celestial kingdom which are symbolically represented as we individually receive those ordinances.

 

So I was just being lazy and saving a couple of paragraphs by saying "ontology recapitulates phylogeny."  

 

Edited June 25, 2017 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

15 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Well, apparently Satan does not have the power to take actual physical form - nor do his minions - so yeah, our physical bodies do give us capabilities not even Satan has. He has great power to wrest the soul, but he apparently cannot have one thing he wants - a body. So it is ironic that people routinely seem to think Heavenly Father would not want one... However, according to Isaiah 42, He has a soul, so that seems to be a definite indicator of having a body.

To us at least in English it seems to indicate that.  But to a Catholic it doesn't indicate that at all.   It just shows one of the problems of terminology and translation.

We might cite that as evidence that God has a body, but a Catholic would say it affirms that God is what we would call "a spirit" because for Catholics, "souls" are synonymous with "spirits".   For example the phrase "the souls in purgatory" which is used a lot, does not indicate, using our terminology, that the spirits in prison have bodies.

For clarification, we believe the term "soul" indicates the unity of the spirit with the body, as in perhaps an article about a ship sinking "100 souls were lost".

That doesn't mean that 100 spirits went to hell.  So we make the distinction with the term there, which Catholics do not make

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

"Calling up" the dead?  There's a terrific short story/novel/film in there somewhere!  Perhaps I shall be the one to create it! I've got the title already, "The Phone," By Ken K. Gourdin!  

Quote

London calling to the imitation zone
Forget it, brother, you can go it alone
London calling to the zombies of death
Quit holding out and draw another breath

From those great theologians, The Clash

https://www.google.com/search?q=lyrics+london+calling&rlz=1CAASUF_enUS748US748&oq=lyrics+london&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l5.6998j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Edited June 25, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

To us at least in English it seems to indicate that.  But to a Catholic it doesn't indicate that at all.   It just shows one of the problems of terminology and translation.

We might cite that as evidence that God has a body, but a Catholic would say it affirms that God is what we would call "a spirit" because for Catholics, "souls" are synonymous with "spirits".   For example the phrase "the souls in purgatory" which is used a lot, does not indicate, using our terminology, that the spirits in prison have bodies.

For clarification, we believe the term "soul" indicates the unity of the spirit with the body, as in perhaps an article about a ship sinking "100 souls were lost".

That doesn't mean that 100 spirits went to hell.  So we make the distinction with the term there, which Catholics do not make

The phrase "body and soul" among others indicates imo that more English speakers see "soul" as equivalent to "spirit" rather than it being a combo.  Even the term "souls were lost" is, imo, more about what is thought to make a person unique---personality, etc, the internal immaterial qualities of a person---rather than the idea of the whole person, body and spirit.

LDS stating "soul" means "body plus spirit" are, imo, using a different definition than usually understood.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul

 

Edited June 25, 2017 by Calm

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

The phrase "body and soul" among others indicates imo that more English speakers see "soul" as equivalent to "spirit" rather than it being a combo.  Even the term "souls were lost" is, imo, more about what is thought to make a person unique---personality, etc, the internal immaterial qualities of a person---rather than the idea of the whole person, body and spirit.

LDS stating "soul" means "body plus spirit" are, imo, using a different definition than usually understood.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul

 

I think the "souls were lost" usage pretty much dates to the 19th century, so what might have been a clear distinction to Joseph may not be at all clear today.

But even in Webster's 1828, this meaning was number 7. Go figure.

http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/soul

Quote

 

Soul

SOUL, noun

1. The spiritual, rational and immortal substance in man, which distinguishes him from brutes; that part of man which enables him to think and reason, and which renders him a subject of moral government. The immortality of the soul is a fundamental article of the christian system. Such is the nature of the human soul that it must have a God, an object of supreme affection.

2. The understanding; the intellectual principle. The eyes of our soul then only begin to see, when our bodily eye are closing.

3. Vital principle. Thou son, of this great world both eye and soul

4. Spirit; essence; chief part; as charity, the soul of all the virtues. Emotion is the soul of eloquence.

5. Life; animation principle or part; as, an able commander is the soul of an army.

6. Internal power. There is some soul of goodness in things evil.

7. A human being; a person. There was no a soul present. In Paris there are more than seven hundred thousand souls. London, Westminster, Southwark and the suburbs, are said to contain twelve hundred thousand souls.

8. Animal life. To deliver their soil from death, and to keep them alive in famine. Psalms 33:7.

9. Active power. And heaven would fly before the driving soul

10. Spirit; courage; fire; grandeur of mind. That he wants caution he must needs confess, but not a soul to give our arms success.

11. Generosity; nobleness of mind; a colloquial use.

12. An intelligent being. Every soul in heav'n shall bend the knee.

13. Heart; affection. The soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David. I Sam. 18.

14. In Scripture, appetite; as the full soul; the hungry soul Proverbs 27:7. Job 33:18.

15. A familiar compellation of a person, but often expressing some qualities of the mind; as alas, poor soul; he was a good soul

SOUL, verb transitive To endure with a soul [Not in use.]

SOUL, SOWL, verb intransitive To afford suitable sustenance. [Not in use.]

 

 

Edited June 25, 2017 by mfbukowski

[bcuzbcuz]

On 24 June 2017 at 10:39 PM, mfbukowski said:

The LA temple has a huge spiral chandelier which one symbolically circumambulates, clockwise, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumambulation ,exactly 360 degrees,  in one continuous round,  while rising on the large staircase to the Creation room.  All must take that path to get there. (elevators available of course for the handicapped) and the circle ends precisely on the second floor exactly above the beginning, and exactly at the entry to the creation room.

Legend has it that David O McKay, prophet, at the dedication, paused before climbing that staircase and seemed to be watching someone preceding him up the staircase.  He allegedly turned to the apostles following him and said "Brethren, today you will follow me in the footsteps which the Lord Himself has trod"

I notice there are spiral staircases in many of the older, larger multi-story temples.

"But DNA was not known as a spiral helix when those temples were built"

Exactly.

Google "temple spiral staircase" and see what you get

Or you can Google "La Sagrada Familia spiral staircase" or do the same search in Pinterest and you´ll find hundreds of pictures of the spiral staircases designed by Gaudi and how he used snailshells for his inspiration. The genius of Gaudi´s architectural fantasy can be viewed at leisure of his "temple" to faith he created in Barcelona, a temple for the people, by the people.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

Or you can Google "La Sagrada Familia spiral staircase" or do the same search in Pinterest and you´ll find hundreds of pictures of the spiral staircases designed by Gaudi and how he used snailshells for his inspiration. The genius of Gaudi´s architectural fantasy can be viewed at leisure of his "temple" to faith he created in Barcelona, a temple for the people, by the people.

Yes?  Your point?  Do you want to start a thread on architecture or something?

[katherine the great]

On 6/24/2017 at 1:37 PM, mfbukowski said:

When I was a kid I would wonder how many atoms in my body right now had been part of Jesus body

I was an odd child.

 

And now you are an odd man.    I love this topic though because if we think this through to the bitter end, there is no way that our resurrected bodies have the exact same genetic material we have now. (Or will they? We have the exact same mitochondrial DNA as our mothers and all of our direct female ancestresses-at least up to the point of mutation)

[bcuzbcuz]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Yes?  Your point?  Do you want to start a thread on architecture or something?

Does every comment need a point? You commented on the circular stairwells at some of the taller temples. I merely referenced to the excitingly enhancing and beautiful spital staircases at the L Sagara Familia,maybe not common knowledge to the Utahn brothers and sisters. Beauty is not only found in Mormon temples and Gaudi referenced his 40 year work as his dedication to creating a timeless temple for viewers of all ages, creeds and cultures.

MY reference is one of beauty. If that offends, sorry.