Jump to content

Praying for the dead


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Navidad said:

Hi my friend. I find your use of the third person here very interesting. I am interested in how your previous "born again" experience relates to, or integrates with your current Catholic identity? I have an equal interest in how LDS identity works in correlation within someone who previously, let's say was Baptist prior to converting to the LDS faith. I hope that makes sense.

My question assumes that at one time in your life you claimed a born again experience and probably preached and taught the same. When you became Catholic, how did that change, complete, amend, or influence your sense of self as having been born again? Your use of the third person causes me to think that maybe you now reject that identity for yourself? That is a question, not a statement. You obviously have experienced differing spiritual identities in your life including being born again and being Catholic. I am wondering how those identities fit together in your sense of self? Do you see yourself as a born again Catholic? I think I kind of like that concept! When you converted to Catholicism were you rebaptized or was your previous baptism accepted as sufficient? I am not sure I asked this well. I hope my questions makes sense.

Navidad...hey...Other questions need more time to answer. I don't have much time on weekdays. Labor Day is around the corner though...

The Catholic Church holds that anyone that is human may sacramentally baptize, IF, they intend to do what the Church (Catholic) does. Name your human. It does not matter what they believe. They can baptize if they can meet that single condition. They can be confused about their sexual orientation, atheist, criminal, Baptist (!), etc. My wife and I have never been "re-baptized".

The Catholic Church does not believe in re-baptism. Once baptized, always baptized. The complete remedy for original sin, (which LDS verbally deny, ordinarily without a complete grasp of our meaning), and any actual sin, is baptism. If through grave sin, another remedy is needed, one cannot undergo baptism again...or be born again again. Born twice, yes, born three or more times, no. Once of the flesh, once of the Spirit. The remedy for sins unto death after baptism, according to the faith I have accepted, is the Sacrament of Confession. Anyway...late on a Tuesday night...more details to follow...probably on the long weekend, which is happily anticipated.

Because of once baptized always baptized, this might give a clue as to why I might have referred to "happy born agains" in the third person. While I have great hope, I do not presume to count myself among that number. There will be, those who have been born again, who retain the mark of their baptisms, that are not necessarily eternally happy (the regenerated can still lose their souls through abuse of their privileges as members of Christ and sons or daughters of the Father). I use born again as a synonym for regenerated, a fully Catholic concept. Our good God willing, I look forward to sharing some more developed thoughts about your excellent questions in the near future.

Thank you for your interest Navidad,

Rory

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Navidad said:

I don't want to take up any more space and time with this. I will simply thank you and point out one thing from this part of your kind reply.

It is true that I won't probably find LDS members outside a non-LDS church mocking those who attend. But I sure do find LDS members mocking us on this forum, in the ward, at Sunday dinners, at LDS-related meetings I attend - etc. By not even remotely trying to present a fair and unbiased perspective or to understand evangelical diversity, that is perhaps the worst form of dismissal and negation of our faith. "I have the truth . Why would I want to learn more about the faith of someone who doesn't?" I have heard those words over and over again. We (non-LDS Christians) must all be pretending. I don't think folks here understand how deeply it hurts to be spiritually dismissed because of the LDS doctrines of onliness. Deeply. I have scores, if not hundreds of LDS friends who I respect and love. For them to reject the validity of my faith, baptism, sense of the Holy Spirit, and blessed assurance that I have been  washed clean by blood of the atoning lamb - that is deeply personal and deeply hurtful. It is especially so when done by a people I have come to love.

 

We have entire congregations of Evangelicals given false information and actually trained in "Antimormonism" and how to trip up or "help save" their neighbors and friends and especially our missionaries.

Preachers preach lies from the pulpit about us.

Obviously those are not right behaviors for any Christians, but unfortunately I have seen it in both sides.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Fault-finding is not an auspicious approach to tolerance and pluralism.

Amen! I would simply suggest there are many ways to fault-find! There are also many ways to be hurtful. Apparently, since I am not a member you have no problem seeing my aggressive and authoritative claims; but those same attributes in hurtful LDS members are unknown to you. Fascinating!

Link to comment
12 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

We have entire congregations of Evangelicals given false information and actually trained in "Antimormonism" and how to trip up or "help save" their neighbors and friends and especially our missionaries.

Preachers preach lies from the pulpit about us.

Obviously those are not right behaviors for any Christians, but unfortunately I have seen it in both sides.

I wonder if you are not talking about fundamentalists? Could/would your provide me any names of evangelical institutions where antimormonism is taught? Perhaps a few names of evangelical churches where preachers preach lies about you? Are you sure they are not fundamentalist organizations, churches, and pastors? As you point out, whatever they are, that is not appropriate behavior for any Christian. Thank you for acknowledging that it occurs on "both sides." At least I think you did. Thanks for that. Brother Smith scolded me well yesterday. I have to give his words a lot of thought.

 

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I wonder if you are not talking about fundamentalists? Could/would your provide me any names of evangelical institutions where antimormonism is taught? Perhaps a few names of evangelical churches where preachers preach lies about you? Are you sure they are not fundamentalist organizations, churches, and pastors? As you point out, whatever they are, that is not appropriate behavior for any Christian. Thank you for acknowledging that it occurs on "both sides." At least I think you did. Thanks for that. Brother Smith scolded me well yesterday. I have to give his words a lot of thought.

Perhaps you are actually unacquainted with the numerous evangelical institutions and pastors taking a strong public stance against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  One of the reasons why Richard J. Mouw (evangelical Presbyterian pastor and Pres of Fuller Theological Seminary) took such a strong condemnatory position toward his fellow evangelicals was precisely because there was such a powerful evangelical anti-Mormon movement at many evangelical seminaries, such as DTS (Dallas Theological Seminary), and well-funded anti-Mormon institutions like IRR (Institute for Religious Research).  Many evangelical books have been published attacking the LDS Church, most of them based on lies.  It is the LDS Church which is the injured party in those activities, not the other way around -- despite your claim of both-sidesism.

Quote

I am now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community.  Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening, we have sinned against you.
                        Richard J. Mouw, in Salt Lake Tabernacle, Nov 2004; cf. Richard J. Mouw’s harsh criticism of his fellow evangelicals for “bearing false witness against” Mormons (in the foreword to F. Beckwith, C. Mosser, and P. Owen, The New Mormon Challenge [Zondervan, 2002], 11);  see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nflH3U6_4K8

 

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Perhaps you are actually unacquainted with the numerous evangelical institutions and pastors taking a strong public stance against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  One of the reasons why Richard J. Mouw (evangelical Presbyterian pastor and Pres of Fuller Theological Seminary) took such a strong condemnatory position toward his fellow evangelicals was precisely because there was such a powerful evangelical anti-Mormon movement at many evangelical seminaries, such as DTS (Dallas Theological Seminary), and well-funded anti-Mormon institutions like IRR (Institute for Religious Research).  Many evangelical books have been published attacking the LDS Church, most of them based on lies.  It is the LDS Church which is the injured party in those activities, not the other way around -- despite your claim of both-sidesism.

 

Ok. I respect you, value your thoughts, and take them to heart. Richard Mouw was and is a strong evangelical. Dallas Seminary was and remains largely a fundamentalist institution. It is where you go to seminary if you are a theological fundamentalist with evangelical missiological leanings. IRR is far more fundamentalist than evangelical while claiming the evangelical moniker. If you notice, on their website they dodge the question "Are Mormons Christians?" They rewrite the question "Is Mormonism Christian? That is a typical dodge by those who are fundamentalists but don't want to be seen as being either judgmental or appreciative of individual Mormons. It is a way to be judgmental without appearing to be so. They don't mention the trinity in their statement of faith, but make it a prerequisite for someone to be a Christian. This is another attempt at being an evangelical in fundamentalist clothing. I could go on, but won't. BTW, I like your word "both-sideism." It may be the counter linguistic device for "onlyism." Given the church's long long history of defaming non-LDS (sectarian) ministers and ministries, and knowing what I know about fundamentalist anti-Mormonism I would be hard pressed not to be a both-sideist.

Link to comment
On 6/18/2021 at 8:41 PM, Islander said:

Again, there is no scriptural support for that practice. We pray for each other every day. There is absolutely no mention anywhere in scripture of praying to God for the dead. That is a Roman practice with no root in historical Christianity or modern revelation.

I can’t imagine a greater imaginable example of the living turning their hearts to their dead relatives, and intervening mightily in their behalf, to the end that they might obtain salvation, than the great Latter-Day Saint program of the redemption of the dead. Please take thoughtful note the following:

1) While seeking out the vital records of their dead, so that vicarious saving gospel ordinances might be performed in the temples on their behalf, it’s standard practice for those thus engaged to pray earnestly for divine assistance and guidance to the end that the earthly vital records of their lives might be located to facilitate in the process of their salvation.

2) Prior to the saving vicarious ordinances being performed in the temples, it’s standard practice for members to pray to God that the sacred rites that are about to be performed will have their intended effect on the dead for whom the ordinances have been vicariously performed.

3) When individuals are serving in the temples as proxies for the dead, it is, in reality, the dead themselves who are being baptized after baptismal prayers are offered on their behalf; and again, in reality it’s the dead themselves who are confirmed members of the Church and given the gift of the Holy Ghost after the confirmatory prayers are offered in behalf of the dead.

4) Again, when those who serve as proxies for the dead participate in the initiatory ordinances of the temple, it’s the dead themselves who are the recipients of the prayers of blessing that are pronounced during washings and anointings offered on their behalf.

5) Fast forward to the prayer circle and your mistaken notion that prayers should not be made for the dead is blown out of the water.

I could go on and on, but by now you must surely get my point. Sometimes it really is true that the proverbial forest can’t be seen for the many obscuring trees. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

5) Fast forward to the prayer circle and your mistaken notion that prayers should not be made for the dead is blown out of the water.

Hi,

I'm assuming that the prayer circle is done inside of the temple. Are you able to elaborate on this point here? Are prayers for the dead included in the prayer circle? I understand if you can't say more.

Thanks.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, MiserereNobis said:

Hi,

I'm assuming that the prayer circle is done inside of the temple. Are you able to elaborate on this point here? Are prayers for the dead included in the prayer circle? I understand if you can't say more.

Thanks.

The “dead” (represented by proxies) are standing right there and are the central focus of the prayers.

Link to comment
14 hours ago, Navidad said:

Ok. I respect you, value your thoughts, and take them to heart. Richard Mouw was and is a strong evangelical. Dallas Seminary was and remains largely a fundamentalist institution. It is where you go to seminary if you are a theological fundamentalist with evangelical missiological leanings. IRR is far more fundamentalist than evangelical while claiming the evangelical moniker. If you notice, on their website they dodge the question "Are Mormons Christians?" They rewrite the question "Is Mormonism Christian? That is a typical dodge by those who are fundamentalists but don't want to be seen as being either judgmental or appreciative of individual Mormons. It is a way to be judgmental without appearing to be so. They don't mention the trinity in their statement of faith, but make it a prerequisite for someone to be a Christian. This is another attempt at being an evangelical in fundamentalist clothing. I could go on, but won't. BTW, I like your word "both-sideism." It may be the counter linguistic device for "onlyism." Given the church's long long history of defaming non-LDS (sectarian) ministers and ministries, and knowing what I know about fundamentalist anti-Mormonism I would be hard pressed not to be a both-sideist.

The executive director of IRR, which labels itself "evangelical," was Dr Robert M. Bowman Jr (till 2018), who used to hold forth frequently on this board, and even showed up at FAIR conferences.  I count him as a friend, and a very reasonable and kind-hearted opponent -- with a strong academic edge.  He was always a gentleman.  Before Bowman took over, the IRR was critical of Dr Richard Mouw.  I don't think they took that same position under Bowman.  I am not familiar with his replacement, John Groat.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, teddyaware said:

The “dead” (represented by proxies) are standing right there and are the central focus of the prayers.

I was a little surprised first time I found out who the head proxy was in the Prayer Circle.  I wonder what it was like back in the old days when prayer circles were held in ward meetinghouses?  Even though I didn't know it, that was still going on when I was a kid.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I was a little surprised first time I found out who the head proxy was in the Prayer Circle.  I wonder what it was like back in the old days when prayer circles were held in ward meetinghouses?  Even though I didn't know it, that was still going on when I was a kid.

It seems that I remember reading somewhere that back in the 19th century the folks would wash each other's feet prior to the Prayer Circle. Am I correct? Maybe there were some Anabaptists in there somewhere! Of course, there were - the Whitmers!

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Navidad said:

It seems that I remember reading somewhere that back in the 19th century the folks would wash each other's feet prior to the Prayer Circle. Am I correct? Maybe there were some Anabaptists in there somewhere! Of course, there were - the Whitmers!

There were early Christian prayer circles.  https://www.nothingwavering.org/2011/03/10/27219-the-early-christian-prayer-circle-and-the-ring-dance.html

Link to comment
On 8/31/2021 at 6:35 AM, Navidad said:

Hi my friend. I find your use of the third person here very interesting. I am interested in how your previous "born again" experience relates to, or integrates with your current Catholic identity? I have an equal interest in how LDS identity works in correlation within someone who previously, let's say was Baptist prior to converting to the LDS faith. I hope that makes sense.

My question assumes that at one time in your life you claimed a born again experience and probably preached and taught the same. When you became Catholic, how did that change, complete, amend, or influence your sense of self as having been born again? Your use of the third person causes me to think that maybe you now reject that identity for yourself? That is a question, not a statement. You obviously have experienced differing spiritual identities in your life including being born again and being Catholic. I am wondering how those identities fit together in your sense of self? Do you see yourself as a born again Catholic? I think I kind of like that concept! When you converted to Catholicism were you rebaptized or was your previous baptism accepted as sufficient? I am not sure I asked this well. I hope my questions makes sense.

I believe differently now about what happens when one is born again. To be born again means that one's first birth as a child of Adam is inadequate. a second birth is required which restores the soul to friendship with God with the infused virtues of faith, hope, and charity. When Adam fell, his spiritual union with God was truly lost. He experienced spiritual death. His children are born in the same sad condition. On this much, most Protestants and Catholics are agreed.

Luther spoke of regeneration as God graciously covering up our sins with the blood of Christ, (the dunghill covered with snow allusion). Catholics think this is a cramped and unappreciative view of God's work in us. The Catholic Church teaches that if Adam fell through sin, that the regeneration by Christ does more than merely cover up a creature that remains offensive. Redemption is more than a mere judicial pardon. Adam became truly unrighteous before God. Redemption through the second Adam and second birth reverses this completely. It brings life and true righteousness back to the soul. It gives eternal life, the life that Adam had in God before his fall. It permits God to be intimate with us again because He communicates His own life to us. It is a stupendous truth. By partaking of the divine nature, we can have union with God again:

"As all things of his divine power which appertain to life and godliness, are given us, through the knowledge of him who hath called us by his own proper glory and virtue. By whom he hath given us most great and precious promises: that by these you may be made partakers of the divine nature..."  (2 Pet. 1:3-4)

One writer explains very beautifully I think, the precious opportunity that is given in this life to those who have been born again:

"Even while living in the flesh, they bear evidence of their heavenly origin, by going on from virtue unto virtue. Though sojourning in this vale of tears, they are ever on the assent, approaching gradually nigher to the high summits of holiness; they reflect in their lives the perfection of their heavenly Father, who surrounded as He thus is in Sion by this noble family, is seen to be, in all truth, the God of gods."  ---Ps. 83:8 (it is Psalm 82 or 84 in Protestant Bibles)

---The Liturgical Year, Dom Prosper Gueranger, Vol. 11, p. 330, St Bonaventure Publications (2000)

I want to say that I do not feel like I am always "ever on the assent". I feel the weight of my flesh, but I also feel the pull of the Spirit. If I reflect the perfection of my heavenly Father, it is undoubtedly a dim reflection.

We are taught that without Christ we can do nothing. Every time I say through the day "Jesus, Saviour, have mercy", it is because I am acted upon by our gracious God to ask it. It makes me hope that I am still climbing and not falling. Any act pleasing to God is only by God's grace. The act may be truly small. But I am small. And the grace is great.

I am pretty sure that if we are making progress, God finds a way to keep us from recognizing it too clearly. We are all prone to have pride and becoming complacent. It is okay with me if I seem to be the least worthy of God's servants so much of the time. I know I do not deserve what my good God wants to give to me. That gives me hope too. It is better to fall and get up knowing one's unworthiness, than to never fall and begin to forget one's unworthiness. Of course, the saints retain through wisdom the knowledge of their unworthiness, while doing great things with God's grace, taking no credit for it.    

We can lose the great promises that God gives us in our second birth through willful acts of faithlessness. Like Adam at his fall, those who are born again may foolishly throw away the treasure that God has given them through baptism. Such souls will always have been born again, and that cannot be repeated. In contrast to those who eventually see Jesus face to face, to know God as he is, and who are happy, those are "unhappy born agains" who reject God's great and precious promises. St. Paul wisely set the example in explaining his fear of becoming a "castaway" (KJV). I think the Douay says "reprobate". Either way, I can not assume that I will be among them, but I hope to always remain a happy born again.       

Rory 

Link to comment
On 9/1/2021 at 12:40 PM, MiserereNobis said:

Hi,

I'm assuming that the prayer circle is done inside of the temple. Are you able to elaborate on this point here? Are prayers for the dead included in the prayer circle? I understand if you can't say more.

Thanks.

The very purpose of the prayer circle, one might say, is to teach both the living and the dead what they need to know to be exalted.

We are in the same "class" together on both sides of the Veil of death

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
On 9/1/2021 at 1:33 PM, teddyaware said:

I can’t imagine a greater imaginable example of the living turning their hearts to their dead relatives, and intervening mightily in their behalf, to the end that they might obtain salvation, than the great Latter-Day Saint program of the redemption of the dead. Please take thoughtful note the following:

1) While seeking out the vital records of their dead, so that vicarious saving gospel ordinances might be performed in the temples on their behalf, it’s standard practice for those thus engaged to pray earnestly for divine assistance and guidance to the end that the earthly vital records of their lives might be located to facilitate in the process of their salvation.

2) Prior to the saving vicarious ordinances being performed in the temples, it’s standard practice for members to pray to God that the sacred rites that are about to be performed will have their intended effect on the dead for whom the ordinances have been vicariously performed.

3) When individuals are serving in the temples as proxies for the dead, it is, in reality, the dead themselves who are being baptized after baptismal prayers are offered on their behalf; and again, in reality it’s the dead themselves who are confirmed members of the Church and given the gift of the Holy Ghost after the confirmatory prayers are offered in behalf of the dead.

4) Again, when those who serve as proxies for the dead participate in the initiatory ordinances of the temple, it’s the dead themselves who are the recipients of the prayers of blessing that are pronounced during washings and anointings offered on their behalf.

5) Fast forward to the prayer circle and your mistaken notion that prayers should not be made for the dead is blown out of the water.

I could go on and on, but by now you must surely get my point. Sometimes it really is true that the proverbial forest can’t be seen for the many obscuring trees. 

I addressed the issue of the temple ordinance on a previous response so I will be brief here. We are commanded to participate in the vicarious ordinance as an act of love and obedience. But the ordinance as such is symbolic just like every other ordinance performed on earth. It is not a mechanical process with linear relationship or impact across the veil. At the end, it is the will of a sovereign God the pours His grace and mercy on the living and the dead. So, there is no direct efficacy on any temporal ritual perform on behalf (notice; NOT for) the dead. There is a significant difference. We praise and offer thanksgivings to our Heavenly Father for the privilege or participating on the ordinance but it ends there.

The temple work benefits those in the spirit world that died in faith but unaware of or unable to participate in the ordinances of salvation while in their temporal existence. Those that died in sin or refused the Gospel salvation are done. There is no temple or prayer that can bridge the gulf of woe and misery as warned in Alma 34:32-35, Helaman 13:30-39. The Savior warned about hell and outer darkness as a definitive place beyond hope: Matt 10:28; see also 5:29-30; 23:15,33; Luke 10:15; 16:23 and eternal punishments in Matt 25:26.

Again, there is absolutely no scriptural support; ancient or modern revelation, for an efficacious prayer for the dead, as the Roman Catholics practice or a "personal prayer for a dead kin" which was the original argument of the post. 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Islander said:

I addressed the issue of the temple ordinance on a previous response so I will be brief here. We are commanded to participate in the vicarious ordinance as an act of love and obedience. But the ordinance as such is symbolic just like every other ordinance performed on earth. It is not a mechanical process with linear relationship or impact across the veil. At the end, it is the will of a sovereign God the pours His grace and mercy on the living and the dead. So, there is no direct efficacy on any temporal ritual perform on behalf (notice; NOT for) the dead. There is a significant difference. We praise and offer thanksgivings to our Heavenly Father for the privilege or participating on the ordinance but it ends there.

The temple work benefits those in the spirit world that died in faith but unaware of or unable to participate in the ordinances of salvation while in their temporal existence. Those that died in sin or refused the Gospel salvation are done. There is no temple or prayer that can bridge the gulf of woe and misery as warned in Alma 34:32-35, Helaman 13:30-39. The Savior warned about hell and outer darkness as a definitive place beyond hope: Matt 10:28; see also 5:29-30; 23:15,33; Luke 10:15; 16:23 and eternal punishments in Matt 25:26.

Again, there is absolutely no scriptural support; ancient or modern revelation, for an efficacious prayer for the dead, as the Roman Catholics practice or a "personal prayer for a dead kin" which was the original argument of the post. 

I’m guessing you either never read Doctrine and Covenants 138, or, if you have read it, you most certainly didn’t digest and comprehend it’s contents. Try reading Section 138 with an open mind (temporarily putting aside your preconceived notions) and see if what’s written there squares with your present state of understanding with regard to the salvation of the wicked and rebellious who are held within the spirit prison in the great world of the departed dead?

Edited by teddyaware
Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
On 9/14/2021 at 4:50 AM, teddyaware said:

I’m guessing you either never read Doctrine and Covenants 138, or, if you have read it, you most certainly didn’t digest and comprehend it’s contents. Try reading Section 138 with an open mind (temporarily putting aside your preconceived notions) and see if what’s written there squares with your present state of understanding with regard to the salvation of the wicked and rebellious who are held within the spirit prison in the great world of the departed dead?

Does verse 57 mean that all LDS elders, starting from Joseph Smith onwards, are still preaching
in the spirit world?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, theplains said:

Does verse 57 mean that all LDS elders, starting from Joseph Smith onwards, are still preaching
in the spirit world?

Yes. And though not specifically stated, it’s clear that even after the Second Coming there will always be authorized priesthood ministers in the spirit world to preach the gospel to those in the spirit prison prior to the final judgement in order to assure that all the dead will have been given sufficient time and ample instruction to either accept or reject Christ as their Savior. In other words, there won’t be a single individual who won’t be given sufficient time (at vert least 1000 years) and instruction to decide if they’d rather spend eternity in one of the Father’s many mansions of post-resurrection glory or in hell. This is a God who truly is the embodiment of perfect justice, mercy and love! 

Link to comment
42 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

In other words, there won’t be a single individual who won’t be given sufficient time (at vert least 1000 years) and instruction to decide if they’d rather spend eternity in one of the Father’s many mansions of post-resurrection glory or in hell. This is a God who truly is the embodiment of perfect justice, mercy and love! 

You mean in the telestial Kingdom right?

They certainly won't qualify for outer darkness, and there will no longer be spirit prison....  so what "hell" is that?

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

You mean in the telestial Kingdom right?

They certainly won't qualify for outer darkness, and there will no longer be spirit prison....  so what "hell" is that?

None will obtain an inheritance in any of God’s kingdoms of post-resurrection glory unless they are first willing to bow the knee to God the Father and confess to him that Jesus is the Christ. The name of Christ is the only name given under heaven whereby men must be saved. No acknowledgement of Christ as Redeemer means no salvation in any of the kingdoms of glory. The utter refusal to acknowledge Christ as Lord and Savior is the very essence of the unpardonable sin. It’s also critically important to understand that while it’s indeed possible to suffer for one’s own sins in the spirit prison it’s impossible to atone for one’s own sins because only an infinite and eternal being (God) can offer up the required infinite and eternal atoning sacrifice for sin.

106 These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times, when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work;
107 When he shall deliver up the kingdom, and present it unto the Father, spotless, saying: I have overcome and have trodden the wine-press alone, even the wine-press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God.
108 Then shall he be crowned with the crown of his glory, to sit on the throne of his power to reign forever and ever.
109 But behold, and lo, we saw the glory and the inhabitants of the telestial world, that they were as innumerable as the stars in the firmament of heaven, or as the sand upon the seashore;
110 And heard the voice of the Lord saying: These all shall bow the knee, and every tongue shall confess to him who sits upon the throne forever and ever; (D&C 76)

The above last verse references the following…

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Those who obtain the telestial kingdom will eventually receive forgiveness of their sins through Christ. It’s only the sons of perdition who won’t be redeemed through faith in Christ because they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge him as Lord and Savior. And remember, no man can say Jesus is the Christ — and really believe and mean it — unless it be by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is why the inheritors of the telestial kingdom are ministered to by the Holy Spirit whose most important mission is to testify of the Father and the Son.

Edited by teddyaware
Link to comment
3 hours ago, theplains said:

Does verse 57 mean that all LDS elders, starting from Joseph Smith onwards, are still preaching
in the spirit world?

Well, they do take breaks from "preaching", but generally yes they always "preach" or otherwise share the gospel with other people, including dead people, whenever they have the opportunity. 

When they don't share the gospel it is generally because they are around others who are not in prison who also know what they know, so here is no need to preach to the choir, so to speak, on those occasions.  They may still sing to God about it though.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, teddyaware said:

In other words, there won’t be a single individual who won’t be given sufficient time (at vert least 1000 years) and instruction to decide if they’d rather spend eternity in one of the Father’s many mansions of post-resurrection glory or in hell

 

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

109 But behold, and lo, we saw the glory and the inhabitants of the telestial world, that they were as innumerable as the stars in the firmament of heaven, or as the sand upon the seashore;
110 And heard the voice of the Lord saying: These all shall bow the knee, and every tongue shall confess to him who sits upon the throne forever and ever; (D&C 76)

The above last verse references the following…

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Those who obtain the telestial kingdom will eventually receive forgiveness of their sins through Christ.

So how do you square these statements?

Spend eternity in hell, or forgiveness?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, bOObOO said:

They may still sing to God about it though.

If I wake in the afterlife hearing I Am A Child Of God, it'll be Hell for me no matter where I am. I am completely baffled how anyone finds enjoyment in that funeral dirge. 

Edited by Chum
Link to comment
On 9/30/2021 at 2:33 PM, teddyaware said:

Yes. And though not specifically stated, it’s clear that even after the Second Coming there will always be authorized priesthood ministers in the spirit world to preach the gospel to those in the spirit prison prior to the final judgement in order to assure that all the dead will have been given sufficient time and ample instruction to either accept or reject Christ as their Savior. 

Do you believe Joseph Smith ascended to heaven like the hymn "Praise to the Man" indicates?

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...