Are the inheritors of the Terrestrial kingdom damned?

[Stargazer]

On 12/17/2020 at 9:41 PM, Ahab said:

That is a very good explanation but one more detail should be clarified here:  Is it salvation (to any degree) or damnation (a form of punishment) when a person is judged to be worthy of only the Telestial kingdom?

What if one is judged to be worthy of one the lower degrees of the Celestial Kingdom? Is that a form of damnation?

DC 131:1-4
1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees;
2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.
4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase.

Keep in mind that the Telestial, Terrestrial and Celestial kingdoms are degrees of glory. Calling any of them a form of damnation is to malign the mercy of God. Even if being adjudged unworthy of a higher glory is being stopped in progression at that level is defined as damnation, it is by no means a punishment.

Saying '...only the Telestial kingdom" is almost calling it a "booby prize," when it most assuredly is not. I know we all do it, however. 

I sometimes reflect upon C. S. Lewis's saying: "It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible Gods and Goddesses. To remember that the dullest, and most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship.” Those adjudged as inheritors of the Telestial Kingdom are beings of glory. We should always remember that.

I've come to believe that we were only sent here into mortality upon Father's knowledge that we had the capability of becoming as Himself. If He felt this way about us, we were already worthy of some inexpressible glory -- it only remained to put us to the test to determine which glory that was to be.

 

[carbon dioxide]

22 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

What if one is judged to be worthy of one the lower degrees of the Celestial Kingdom? Is that a form of damnation?

DC 131:1-4
1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees;
2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.
4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase.

Keep in mind that the Telestial, Terrestrial and Celestial kingdoms are degrees of glory. Calling any of them a form of damnation is to malign the mercy of God. Even if being adjudged unworthy of a higher glory is being stopped in progression at that level is defined as damnation, it is by no means a punishment.

Saying '...only the Telestial kingdom" is almost calling it a "booby prize," when it most assuredly is not. I know we all do it, however. 

I sometimes reflect upon C. S. Lewis's saying: "It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible Gods and Goddesses. To remember that the dullest, and most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship.” Those adjudged as inheritors of the Telestial Kingdom are beings of glory. We should always remember that.

I've come to believe that we were only sent here into mortality upon Father's knowledge that we had the capability of becoming as Himself. If He felt this way about us, we were already worthy of some inexpressible glory -- it only remained to put us to the test to determine which glory that was to be.

 

Yes it is a form of damnation.  To dam a river is to cut off the natural flow.  To put a stop.  If we have limitation on our eternal progression, then we are damned. Only those who are exalted are not damned as they are able to reach their full potential.  Anything less would be a damnation.   So one can receive a kingdom of glory while being damned as well.  Its another form of the good, better, and best.  The telestial kingdom is a good place.  The Terrestrial Kingdom is a better place.  The celestial is the best place with the best place of all being the highest level in the Celestial. 

[Stargazer]

On 12/18/2020 at 9:29 PM, JLHPROF said:

But the idea that a Terrestrial being can never be Celestialized ...

There is no scriptural warrant for the idea that a Terrestrial being could never be Celestialized, to the best of my knowledge. And I've studied the problem a lot. I would come down firmly against the idea of a Telestial person being able to be advanced to the Terrestrial, however. I've explained my reasons for that above.

On 12/18/2020 at 9:29 PM, JLHPROF said:

...or that a single Celestial person in eternity can never reach exaltation through future union is too limiting on God's work, the atonement and progression.

I understand why you would feel that way. Unfortunately, the scriptures do not support the idea of achieving exaltation for a single Celestial person "through future union"

Christ clearly stated that there was no marrying nor giving in marriage in the resurrection.

Matt 22:30 - For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

In short, the question of marriage must be answered before resurrection. Presumably, this excludes the possibility of marriage after resurrection.

This was discussed in The Ensign for February 1986 in "I Have a Question" article written by David H. Yarn, Jr., emeritus professor of philosophy and instructor of religion at Brigham Young University.

In pertinent part he remarks:

"...the Lord did not say there would be no people in the married state in the resurrection, but that there would be no marriages made in the resurrection."

Something Elder Bruce R. McConkie said years ago seems to confirm the idea that one's marital status must be decided in advance of the resurrection:

"Anyone who comes up in the resurrection in the marriage state has the absolute guarantee of eternal life, but he will not then be a possessor and inheritor of all things — there is a great deal of progress and advancement to be made after the grave and after the resurrection. But he will be in the course where he will go on in the schooling and preparing processes until eventually he knows all things and becomes like God our Heavenly Father, meaning that he becomes an inheritor of eternal life."  ["Celestial Marriage" by BRUCE R. MCCONKIE of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles - November 6, 1977 - BYU Speeches]

I don't feel I can argue with the scriptures, usually anyway. So, I don't see it as a possibility for a marriage to be entered into post-resurrection. But I do see it as a possibility for two never-in-mortality-marrieds to be married and sealed by proxy before resurrection.

I am aware of two women who were sealed to partners they were never married to in life. In both cases, there had been an engagement that was interrupted by death. In one case, the death occurred in war (World War I) and in the other by automobile accident. I believe this required special permission that was obtained, but there's a principle there. And that principle is that the marriage need not be contracted in mortality to be valid in the resurrection. But Matthew 22:30 seems to come down clearly in the negative respecting in- and post-resurrection marriage. So that ain't happening.

[Stargazer]

38 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Yes it is a form of damnation.  To dam a river is to cut off the natural flow.  To put a stop.  If we have limitation on our eternal progression, then we are damned. Only those who are exalted are not damned as they are able to reach their full potential.  Anything less would be a damnation.   So one can receive a kingdom of glory while being damned as well.  Its another form of the good, better, and best.  The telestial kingdom is a good place.  The Terrestrial Kingdom is a better place.  The celestial is the best place with the best place of all being the highest level in the Celestial. 

Yes to all that, but the word "damnation" is still too pejorative for my tastes. It's a curse, after all. The word has a history behind it, and the history is tightly wound up with the false doctrine of either/or heaven-or-hell. There are no degrees in apostate Christianity.

Of course I can't argue against its use. It's used in official church publications, after all.  See here:

Damnation: "The state of being stopped in one’s progress and denied access to the presence of God and His glory. Damnation exists in varying degrees. All who do not obtain the fulness of celestial exaltation will to some degree be limited in their progress and privileges, and they will be damned to that extent." -- from Guide to the Scriptures

I don't like the word.  So what, right?

But it's just that we understand the word so very differently from non-LDS Christians that its use is a bar to clear communication.  We're hosed to that extent, at least.

[AtlanticMike]

We're at my mom's house for Christmas and she has a bookcase full of old mormon books, anywhere from the 1880sto 1970s or so, and after flipping through a couple dozen, alot of apostles and prophets believed the inhabitants of the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms were damned. Here's what Joseph fielding Smith says on the subject. "They were to go into all the world and preach the gospel, all who accepted and were baptized should enter the celestial kingdom,  but all others would be damned, or be assigned to one of the other kingdoms." That's in Answers to Gospel Questions, volume 5 page 147-148. Atleast 5 others say the same. I think it was a wider belief years ago, even though, I still think its true.

Edited December 25, 2020 by AtlanticMike
Spelling

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

Christ clearly stated that there was no marrying nor giving in marriage in the resurrection.

Matt 22:30 - For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

I'm not saying this to disagree with your overall point, but I have a different take on what Jesus said in Matthew 22:23-33, Mark 12:18-27, and Luke 20:27-39 about marriage in the resurrection.  I don't think Jesus is saying, "there will be no marriages performed at all in the resurrection or after the resurrection".  Instead I understand this to mean that there will be no marriage for the specific people that Jesus was asked about in the context of the question.  The question came from the Sadducees: "Now there were with us seven brethren" (Matt 22:25).  The Sadducees didn't even believe in the resurrection and they were out of touch with true principles in many other ways, and the response by Jesus begins by putting their question in this context:  "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt 22:29).  In other words, they (the Sadducees) didn't understand the resurrection from the dead as taught in the scriptures and the "power of God", which I understand to mean that they didn't have the priesthood keys and authority to seal a man and woman for eternity.  

So when Jesus says, "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven", I understand the "they" to mean the specific people who are in the circumstances posed in the question:  Not married and sealed by the priesthood power of God.  I think this idea is reinforced in Luke's account of this event, where Jesus says, "The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage" (Luke 20:34).  Elsewhere, the "children of this world" are contrasted against the "children of light" (Luke 16:8).  So in other words, "they" are people who marry under civil law only, the authority of the world, and not by the authority of God which is eternal.

Basically I see Jesus teaching the exact same thing as is taught in Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–17:

Quote

15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.
16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.
17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.
(Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–17)

But to your overall point, I think it would be a rather unfair judgement to be someone who had never heard the gospel in this life and then die 10 minutes before the resurrection takes place.  Obviously this is a strained hypothetical situation that could be picked apart, but I'm just trying to understand the principle in the overall scope of how things may play out.  I think it's fair to say that marriage is an earthly ordinance (or at least that's the way we generally understand it), but I'm not sure that it makes sense to absolutely cut out the possibility of marriages being performed after the resurrection.  At the very least, that's not what I believe Jesus is saying in Matthew 22:30.

Edited December 25, 2020 by InCognitus

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

Matt 22:30 - For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

In short, the question of marriage must be answered before resurrection. Presumably, this excludes the possibility of marriage after resurrection.

Nope.

That's why we have temples so the work is done by proxy, on earth, and therefore obviously BEFORE resurrection.

He was teaching our exact Doctrine.

Believe it or not, but there is no contradiction at all between our beliefs and what Jesus said 

Edit: perhaps I missed that this was not part of the discussion...  if so, Please forget the error 

Edited December 25, 2020 by mfbukowski

[Stargazer]

21 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

We're at my mom's house for Christmas and she has a bookcase full of old mormon books, anywhere from 1880 to 1970 or so, and after flipping through a couple dozen, alot of apostles and prophets believed the inhabitants of the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms were damned. Here's what Joseph fielding Smith says on the subject. "They were to go into all the world and preach the gospel, all who accepted and were baptized should enter the celestial kingdom,  but all others would be damned, or be assigned to one of the other kingdoms." That's in Answers to Gospel Questions, volume 5 page 147-148. Atleast 5 others say the same. I think it was a wider belief years ago, even though, I still think its true.

Damnation is something to be avoided, but it doesn't represent the same hazard that the sectarian world understands it to be. That does not change.

Unlike the previous dispensation, when by the time 200 years had passed the church was in varying degrees of apostasy and revelation had long since ceased, we are still in a state where revelation continues. The knowledge of the Lord continues to increase.  I think past church leaders would be surprised to find how much our knowledge has increased, if they had simply been transported in time to now. For example, President Joseph Fielding Smith's revelation that is now DC 138 was received in 1918, almost 100 years after the First Vision.  It advanced our understanding of how things are organized in the Spirit World with respect to the teaching of those dwelling there.

I believe that our understanding of the purposes and intentions of God have increased beyond some simplistic ideas that may have populated the stage many years ago. I assume that we will be learning more as time progresses.

 

[Stargazer]

17 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

I'm not saying this to disagree with your overall point, but I have a different take on what Jesus said in Matthew 22:23-33, Mark 12:18-27, and Luke 20:27-39 about marriage in the resurrection.  I don't think Jesus is saying, "there will be no marriages performed at all in the resurrection or after the resurrection".  Instead I understand this to mean that there will be no marriage for the specific people that Jesus was asked about in the context of the question.  The question came from the Sadducees: "Now there were with us seven brethren" (Matt 22:25).  The Sadducees didn't even believe in the resurrection and they were out of touch with true principles in many other ways, and the response by Jesus begins by putting their question in this context:  "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt 22:29).  In other words, they (the Sadducees) didn't understand the resurrection from the dead as taught in the scriptures and the "power of God", which I understand to mean that they didn't have the priesthood keys and authority to seal a man and woman for eternity.  

So when Jesus says, "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven", I understand the "they" to mean the specific people who are in the circumstances posed in the question:  Not married and sealed by the priesthood power of God.  I think this idea is reinforced in Luke's account of this event, where Jesus says, "The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage" (Luke 20:34).  Elsewhere, the "children of this world" are contrasted against the "children of light" (Luke 16:8).  So in other words, "they" are people who marry under civil law only, the authority of the world, and not by the authority of God which is eternal.

I've seen this before, but I think it is a weak argument. It's convoluted and not at all the simplest argument, if Occam's Razor is applicable to the question. It strains logic.

17 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

Basically I see Jesus teaching the exact same thing as is taught in Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–17:

But to your overall point, I think it would be a rather unfair judgement to be someone who had never heard the gospel in this life and then die 10 minutes before the resurrection takes place.  Obviously this is a strained hypothetical situation that could be picked apart, but I'm just trying to understand the principle in the overall scope of how things may play out.  I think it's fair to say that marriage is an earthly ordinance (or at least that's the way we generally understand it), but I'm not sure that it makes sense to absolutely cut out the possibility of marriages being performed after the resurrection.  At the very least, that's not what I believe Jesus is saying in Matthew 22:30.

The dying "10 minutes before the resurrection takes place" argument is definitely strained. I would call it overstrained to the point of breaking, in fact.

To start with, the resurrection does not simply "take place". There isn't a universal moment which is designated as the "resurrection moment".  The resurrection is not a point in time, it is a process or progressive event, as it were. It started the moment Jesus was resurrected, and the scriptures reported that there were some who had died before Jesus did who were resurrected just after his resurrection -- and showed themselves to some of members of the church. By the same token, there will have been many more who were resurrected since that time. For example, Moroni, who appeared to Joseph Smith to reveal the location of the plates of the Book of Mormon, John the Baptist who conferred the Aaronic priesthood, and Peter, James and John, who conferred the Melchizedek. Each one of us who die will be resurrected in our own time, according to our own progress. The last man or woman who dies during the mortal lifetime of this earth will not be limited to ten minutes to get his or her ducks in a row before being rushed into a resurrected body. In fact, those who will come forth in the resurrection of the unjust will be delayed until the very end -- they're not going to be hurried at all.  I presume they get delayed until it has been fully demonstrated that they will not come forth in the resurrection of the just.

To sum up, there's no deadline to resurrection day. Everyone resurrects in his or her own time. 

And we're not dealing here with fallible human concepts of "fairness". God put us here because we were eligible to be tested in order to show whether we were suitable to do His work. Once we prove we're not suitable, or cannot be made to be suitable, then we've reached our pinnacle. We volunteered to be tested, knowing that we might not be found suitable. It's entirely fair.

[Stargazer]

24 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Nope.

That's why we have temples so the work is done by proxy, on earth, and therefore obviously BEFORE resurrection.

You didn't read what I wrote. Or didn't read it well enough. Because you just restated exactly what I was saying. Obviously BEFORE resurrection. Duh.

I was saying that DURING and AFTER resurrection is too late for settling the marriage question. Exactly what the Lord told the Sadducees. 

In other words, you're resurrected in the marital status that you'll keep for ever afterward. You don't go out on dates as a resurrected being in order to find a spouse. 

 

24 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

He was teaching our exact Doctrine.

Believe it or not, but there is no contradiction at all between our beliefs and what Jesus said 

Yep.

24 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Edit: perhaps I missed that this was not part of the discussion...  if so, Please forget the error 

No, I shall pester you with your error at random times in the future.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

You didn't read what I wrote. Or didn't read it well enough. Because you just restated exactly what I was saying. Obviously BEFORE resurrection. Duh.

I was saying that DURING and AFTER resurrection is too late for settling the marriage question. Exactly what the Lord told the Sadducees. 

In other words, you're resurrected in the marital status that you'll keep for ever afterward. You don't go out on dates as a resurrected being in order to find a spouse. 

 

Yep.

No, I shall pester you with your error at random times in the future.

Yep It was that usual hubris of mine acting up.

Sorry again! 😖🥴

[AtlanticMike]

Quote from Joseph Fielding Smith" This earth will become a celestial kingdom when it is sanctified. Those who enter the terrestrial kingdom will have to go to some other sphere which will be prepared for them. Those who enter the telestial kingdom, likewise will have to go to some earth that is prepared for them, and there will be another place which is hell where the devil and those who are punished to go with him will dwell. Of course those who enter the telestial kingdom and those who enter the terrestrial kingdom will have the ETERNAL PUNISHMENT which will come to them in knowing that they might, if they had kept the commandments of the lord, have returned to his presence as his sons and his daughters. This will be TORMENT  to them, and in that sense it will be HELL." Answers to gospel questions, volume 2, page 210. 

     So I wanted to provide the quote above which is from the 10th president of the church because I think it will help us understand that we should never strive or be satisfied for 2nd best like some have suggested on this thread. There's nothing in Mormonism that even hints that we should settle for anything other than 1st place,(celestial glory). Everything we do is for that purpose and that purpose alone. No matter what you do in life, always strive for 1st, never quit, If you have limitations, physical or mental, work inside of those and again, never quit. The only person on earth that can tell you that you didnt come in first and achieve your goal, is you. 

[InCognitus]

On 12/25/2020 at 5:07 PM, Stargazer said:

To sum up, there's no deadline to resurrection day. Everyone resurrects in his or her own time. 

First, I agree that my example of dying 10 minutes before the resurrection was rather absurd, and if the resurrection occurs for each and every person in their own time, then that may allow a space of time for those who haven't had a chance to be sealed to do so even if it is by proxy.

 But regarding my take on Matthew 22:25 you said:

On 12/25/2020 at 5:07 PM, Stargazer said:

I've seen this before, but I think it is a weak argument. It's convoluted and not at all the simplest argument, if Occam's Razor is applicable to the question. It strains logic.

I'd like to understand your point of view better about why you see my reading as convoluted, because I think the way that I was looking at it is the most straight forward and logical way of reading it (I mean this sincerely, and not as a point of contention.  I respect your point of view and I want to learn from it).  And to be clear, I'm not putting so much weight on the word "they" in Matthew 22:25 as referring to the Sadducees only (which was the context of the question), but I see it as all who are in the situation of being married by civil authority only and not by the power of God.  Because that's exactly the way it reads to me in Doctrine and Covenants section 132:15-20.  

In D&C 132, those who are married by civil authorities only are described in verses 15-18 using the same language that Jesus uses in Matthew 22:25.  And then for those who are sealed by the "power" of God, it says the following:

Quote

19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
(Doctrine and Covenants 132:19)

I'd honestly like to hear your thoughts.

[Stargazer]

4 hours ago, InCognitus said:

And to be clear, I'm not putting so much weight on the word "they" in Matthew 22:25 as referring to the Sadducees only (which was the context of the question), but I see it as all who are in the situation of being married by civil authority only and not by the power of God.

There is an argument where the reference to "they" is to the Sadducees as well as others who do not believe in the resurrection. It was made by the brother in the I Have a Question answer, and I found it weak and convoluted. Perhaps "convoluted" isn't the right word. A better word is probably forced, or awkward and unconvincing. Since you're not claiming that idea after all, never mind.

The plain fact is that virtually everyone who has ever been married in this world was married only by civil authority, or, in other words, not by the Lord's word or power, and would not be able to receive the wonderful blessings associated with the new and everlasting covenant. But it is also a plain fact, that all who have not been able to be so sealed in this life, can, through faith, repentance and proxy ordinances nevertheless receive those blessings in the end. Even a Sadducee who was in the argument with Jesus can receive them, through repentance.

That is of course the beauty of the Gospel. All who would have accepted it if they had heard it are equal to those who did and did.

[AtlanticMike]

"It is easy to understand an axiom among the latter day saints - SALVATION without EXALTATION is DAMNATION." Apostle LeGrand Richard's, A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, page 274. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

"It is easy to understand an axiom among the latter day saints - SALVATION without EXALTATION is DAMNATION." Apostle LeGrand Richard's, A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, page 274. 

I wish we had chosen a different word than damnation for labeling the state of nonexaltation. It creates a great deal of confusion when someone else understands “damnation” as essentially burning in hell. It just doesn’t make sense to describe even those in the CK who are not exalted as damned when how you perceive hell is what “damnation” describes. 
 

I think I follow the idea of how “damnation” was changed when Latter-day thought is there is no eternal burning in hell (as in souls lost in there suffering without ending) save perhaps for a few though even those we are not told that is their eternal destiny (perdition).  Inability to progress thus replaces suffering as the essence of damnation as that is what separates us from being fully one with God.

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I wish we had chosen a different word than damnation for labeling the state of nonexaltation. It creates a great deal of confusion when someone else understands “damnation” as essentially burning in hell. It just doesn’t make sense to describe even those in the CK who are not exalted as damned when how you perceive hell is what “damnation” describes. 
 

I think I follow the idea of how “damnation” was changed when Latter-day thought is there is no eternal burning in hell (as in souls lost in there suffering without ending) save perhaps for a few though even those we are not told that is their eternal destiny (perdition).  Inability to progress thus replaces suffering as the essence of damnation as that is what separates us from being fully one with God.

Doctrine and Covenants 76 tells us that the inheritors of the terrestrial kingdom are visited and ministered to by the Son of God, and that the inheritors of the telestial kingdom are visited and ministered to by angels from the celestial kingdom, as well as by ministers from the higher terrestrial kingdom. With all this ministering and teaching going on, it’s difficult to imagine what all the bother and fuss is about if those in the lower realms of glory are incapable of being taught how to progress toward greater and greater outpourings of divine light and knowledge than the degree of light and knowledge that they already possess.

With regard to the unfortunate practice of saying that those who inherit telestial and terrestrial glories are damned, I believe it mostly grows out of a misunderstanding of portions of Doctrine and Covenants 76. This misunderstanding begins when readers take certain verses out of context and mistakenly conclude that the inheritors of the telestial kingdom are liars, sorcerers, whoremongers, etc who obtain that glory because they at least didn’t commit the unpardonable sin. But that’s not what the revelation actually reveals.

What Section 76 does teach is that these wicked individuals “suffer the wrath of God on earth” and at the time of death are thrust down to hell to suffer for their own unrepented sins, without mitigation, in a process described as the “winepress of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God.”

 Section 76 indicates that this winepress of divine wrath is a place where a process is employed by the Savior that’s specifically designed to subdue the rebellious spirits of his open enemies until their unremitting sufferings cause them to no longer desire to be liars, whoremongers, sorcerers, etc., and are transformed until they’re ultimately willing to exercise faith in Christ, repent of their sins, receive divine pardon, and willingly bow their knees before God the Father and confess to him, by the power of the Holy Spirit, that Jesus is the Christ.

When one understands that the inheritors of the telestial kingdom are repentant former sinners who have received the forgiveness of God, it’s much easier to think of them as the inheritors of a great salvation rather than mistakenly viewing them as persistently wicked people who are damned for not being willing  to exercise faith in Christ unto repentance.

Edited December 28, 2020 by teddyaware

[Mark Beesley]

Not having read all the posts in the thread, this has probably already been said.  
 

We can safely consider the word damned as the Lord’s way of describing anyone who inherits anything less than everything His Father offers. So even a person who is raised to a celestial glory but never entered into the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, and is therefore excluded from the highest glory God bestows—that of creating life—is damned, in a sense.

Seek charity.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

Doctrine and Covenants 76 tells us that the inheritors of the terrestrial kingdom are visited and ministered to by the Son of God, and that the inheritors of the telestial kingdom are visited and ministered to by angels from the celestial kingdom, as well as by ministers from the higher terrestrial kingdom. With all this ministering and teaching going on, it’s difficult to imagine what all the bother and fuss is about if those in the lower realms of glory are incapable of being taught how to progress toward greater and greater outpourings of divine light and knowledge than the degree of light and knowledge that they already possess.

If I understand what you're saying here, you're saying that there is progression between kingdoms, right?  If so then the final judgment is really not so final after all.

Edited December 28, 2020 by ksfisher

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

If I understand what you're saying here, you're saying that there is progression between kingdoms, right?  If so then the final judgment is really not so final after all.

Taken literally a final judgment would mean there are no more judgments after that one, so what about the children (which would also be children of our Father in heaven) we would reproduce after our resurrection ?  They would never be judged at all?

I think the point is that all of us will be judged before we are resurrected and that when we are judged we will have qualified for maybe only some small part of the glory that it is possible for all of us to attain.  With some attaining more glory than others of us.

And don't forget, glory is all about intelligence, so try not to do stupid stuff.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Taken literally a final judgment would mean there are no more judgments after that one, so what about the children (which would also be children of our Father in heaven) we would reproduce after our resurrection ?  They would never be judged at all?

I think the point is that all of us will be judged before we are resurrected and that when we are judged we will have qualified for maybe only some small part of the glory that it is possible for all of us to attain.  With some attaining more glory than others of us.

And don't forget, glory is all about intelligence, so try not to do stupid stuff.

That's not really what was being talked about.

[teddyaware]

3 hours ago, ksfisher said:

If I understand what you're saying here, you're saying that there is progression between kingdoms, right?  If so then the final judgment is really not so final after all.

No, that’s not what I’m saying. What I am saying is it’s obvious that educational programs designed to facilitate the continued spiritual progress of the children of God within the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms are, most assuredly,, key institutional components of the post-resurrection governance of the kingdom of God .Whatever the specific end goals of this dynamic, ongoing program of continuing education might be, I won’t venture to guess,; but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that after eons of time some of those being taught will outgrow the parameters that define the laws of the kingdom in which they reside.

Edited December 28, 2020 by teddyaware

[Glenn101]

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Section 76 indicates that this winepress of divine wrath is a place where a process is employed by the Savior that’s specifically designed to subdue the rebellious spirits of his open enemies until their unremitting sufferings cause them to no longer desire to be liars, whoremongers, sorcerers, etc., and are transformed until they’re ultimately willing to exercise faith in Christ, repent of their sins, receive divine pardon, and willingly bow their knees before God the Father and confess to him, by the power of the Holy Spirit, that Jesus is the Christ.

Verse 112 also says "And they shall be aservants of the Most High; but where God and Christ dwell they cannot come, worlds without end."

Also, 2 Nephi 28:8 seems to warn us against such a doctrine.

Quote

And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will cjustify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

When one understands that the inheritors of the telestial kingdom are repentant former sinners who have received the forgiveness of God, it’s much easier to think of them as the inheritors of a great salvation rather than mistakenly viewing them as persistently wicked people who are damned for not being willing  to exercise faith in Christ unto repentance.

I do not get that from the text of Section 76. The people who inherit the Telestial Kingdom would appear to be those who are not repentant and did not avail themselves of the mercies of the Atonememt. When they attain the Telestial Kingdom they have had to suffer fo their own sins that they had not repented of. They are not forgiven but have paid the price before they attain their kingdom. At some point after death, they will also have the veil of the pe-esixtence removed and remember the excitement and hope that I believe we all had prior to coming to this earth.

Glenn

[Ahab]

3 hours ago, ksfisher said:

That's not really what was being talked about.

Yes it was, and the short answers to your 2 earlier questions were also Yes and Yes.

[Ahab]

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

No, that’s not what I’m saying. What I am saying is it’s obvious that educational programs designed to facilitate the continued spiritual progress of the children of God within the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms are, most assuredly,, key institutional components of the post-resurrection governance of the kingdom of God .Whatever the specific end goals of this dynamic, ongoing program of continuing education might be, I won’t venture to guess,; but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that after eons of time some of those being taught will outgrow the parameters that define the laws of the kingdom in which they reside.

So you're saying that MAYBE there will be progression from lower orders of glory to higher levels of glory if not a definite absolute YES in all cases.  Otherwise what would be the point of trying to teach those with less glory/intelligence how to gain more?