rongo Posted May 31, 2022 Posted May 31, 2022 4 hours ago, manol said: Seems to me the King Follet Sermon says the Father had a mortal existence: "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!... God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did." While Jesus experienced what mortal life is like, there were some important differences between Him and us (ability to be sinless, power over death, ability to fully command the elements, etc.). That's why the Sermon in the Grove (a couple of weeks after King Follett, and a week before the martyrdom, I believe) is important. That's where Joseph Smith expanded on the thought that the Father had also been a Savior, and that this pattern extends back eternally. God is an exalted man, in the same sense that Jesus is an exalted man. But, in a sense that no one else on earth can be.
JLHPROF Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 8 hours ago, manol said: but are not "special cases" inconsistent with a God who is "no respecter of persons" and unto whom "all are alike"? I think these scriptures designed to show God's fairness and the principles of law as in D&C 130 have become so popular that they are frequently applied beyond their intent. All are NOT alike as in on equal footing. Noble and great ones, those ordained to higher callings premortally, teachings that we will all enter the next life at different stages of progress, and so on. Christ himself is the ultimate example of a special case. 1
JLHPROF Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 8 hours ago, rongo said: Because the preexistence is factored in. When we are able to see "one eternal round," it won't seem unfair at all. People have strong feelings about this idea. They much prefer to think we all are on equal footing spiritually when we are born, that the preexistence had no impact on our mortal life. It absolutely did. We don't all exit the womb exactly equal spiritually, blank skates. 1
bluebell Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 23 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: It absolutely did. We don't all exit the womb exactly equal spiritually, blank skates. In your opinion, how does that impact our chances of exaltation? We have the examples of both Jesus and Lucifer to illustrate that spiritual potential and intelligence doesn't guarantee anything on it's own, but I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on what that means as far as being able to become a joint-heir with Christ. 1
manol Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 (edited) 6 hours ago, rongo said: While Jesus experienced what mortal life is like, there were some important differences between Him and us (ability to be sinless, power over death, ability to fully command the elements, etc.). That's why the Sermon in the Grove (a couple of weeks after King Follett, and a week before the martyrdom, I believe) is important. That's where Joseph Smith expanded on the thought that the Father had also been a Savior, and that this pattern extends back eternally. God is an exalted man, in the same sense that Jesus is an exalted man. But, in a sense that no one else on earth can be. I don't disagree with that last sentence, but still Christ calls on us to be like him: “What manner of men [and women] ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am.” Was he serious? If so, then presumably there is SOME meaningful sense in which we actually CAN be like him. Going down your list: Can we actually be sinless? “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” Matthew 5:48 Can we actually have power over death? “Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die.” John 11:26 Can we potentially fully command the elements? “Whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.” Mark 11:23 Are we within our rights to dare believe that Jesus was serious, that such (seemingly highly improbable) things are actually true? Joseph Smith seemed to think so: “I believe all that God ever revealed, and I never hear of a man being damned for believing too much; but they are damned for unbelief.” - Joseph Smith, Sermon in the Grove, emphasis mine Every week those who partake of the Sacrament witness that they are “willing to take upon them the name of thy Son”. It seems to me this is related to the injunction in 3 Nephi 27:27 that we be the same manner of men (and women) as Christ. What do those words in the Sacrament prayer really mean? Not that I have “the answer”, but... I may consider myself a follower of God but I do not take upon myself the name of God. I may consider myself a follower of Joseph Smith but I do not take upon myself the name of Joseph Smith. I may consider myself a follower of Elon Musk or of Pragmatism or of a particular political party, but I do not take upon myself any of those names. So to take upon oneself the name of Jesus Christ must mean something more than merely being a sincere follower. It seems to me that there is something much deeper being done (or at least being symbolized), some willingness towards a profound level of identity being asserted, when a person affirms their willingness to take upon themself the name of Jesus Christ, and then renews that affirmation of willingness week after week. But I could be wrong. Edited June 1, 2022 by manol 1
manol Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: All are NOT alike as in on equal footing. Noble and great ones, those ordained to higher callings premortally, teachings that we will all enter the next life at different stages of progress, and so on. Christ himself is the ultimate example of a special case. I see what you mean, and agree. I think my wording was poor. The point of the scriptures I cited is that God does not unfairly favor one person over another, not that there are no differences in progression or callings. Edited June 1, 2022 by manol 3
Jaydes Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 I will also note that there is a specific doctrinal point that there is no obligation for marital or familial sealings to be performed inside the temple to be valid, and plenty of these have occurred. Same for the endowment. In the past, even some proxy baptisms were performed outside the temple, though post-temple this is the only ordinance that is mandated to occur within the temple.
JLHPROF Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 40 minutes ago, Jaydes said: I will also note that there is a specific doctrinal point that there is no obligation for marital or familial sealings to be performed inside the temple to be valid, and plenty of these have occurred. Same for the endowment. In the past, even some proxy baptisms were performed outside the temple, though post-temple this is the only ordinance that is mandated to occur within the temple. Actually Brigham specifically stated family sealing required a temple. But endowments and marriage sealings did not. 2
Jaydes Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 1 minute ago, JLHPROF said: Actually Brigham specifically stated family sealing required a temple. But endowments and marriage sealings did not. Do you have a source for this? I don't think I have seen this teaching.
webbles Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Actually Brigham specifically stated family sealing required a temple. But endowments and marriage sealings did not. Yeah, it is the one sealing ordinance that Joseph Smith never performed because there was no temple available. 2
Jaydes Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 2 minutes ago, webbles said: Yeah, it is the one sealing ordinance that Joseph Smith never performed because there was no temple available. If i recall correctly, he did perform adoption sealings, which were the family sealings of the day. It was Wilford Woodruff who by revelation introduced the modern concept of family sealings.
webbles Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 Just now, Jaydes said: If i recall correctly, he did perform adoption sealings, which were the family sealings of the day. It was Wilford Woodruff who by revelation introduced the modern concept of family sealings. No, Joseph Smith never performed an adoption sealing. He taught Brigham Young but it required a temple so he never performed it. 2
JLHPROF Posted June 1, 2022 Posted June 1, 2022 8 hours ago, Jaydes said: Do you have a source for this? I don't think I have seen this teaching. "The remarks that I shall make to you this evening will be upon the salvation of the people. There are a few ideas that I will relate to you, that the brethren and sisters should understand. There are many of the ordinances of the house of God that must be performed in a Temple that is erected expressly for the purpose. There are other ordinances that we can administer without a Temple. You know that there are some which you have received—baptism, the laying on of hands, the gifts of the Holy Ghost, such as the speaking in and interpretation of tongues, prophesying, healing, discerning of spirits, etc., and many blessings bestowed upon the people, we have the privilege of receiving without a Temple. There are other blessings that will not be received, and ordinances that will not be performed according to the law that the Lord has revealed, without their being done in a Temple prepared for that purpose. We can, at the present time, go into the Endowment House and be baptized for the dead, receive our washings and anointing, etc., for there we have a font that has been erected, dedicated expressly for baptizing people for the remission of sins, for their health and for their dead friends; in this the Saints have the privilege of being baptized for their friends. We also have the privilege of sealing women to men, without a Temple. This we can do in the Endowment House; but when we come to other sealing ordinances, ordinances pertaining to the holy Priesthood, to connect the chain of the Priesthood from father Adam until now, by sealing children to their parents, being sealed for our forefathers, etc., they cannot be done without a Temple. But we can seal women to men, but not men to men, without a Temple. When the ordinances are carried out in the Temples that will be erected, men will be sealed to their fathers, and those who have slept clear up to father Adam. This will have to be done, because of the chain of the Priesthood being broken upon the earth. The Priesthood has left the people, but in the first place the people left the Priesthood. They transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, and broke the everlasting covenant, and the Priesthood left them; but not until they had left the Priesthood. This Priesthood has been restored again, and by its authority we shall be connected with our fathers, by the ordinance of sealing, until we shall form a perfect chain from father Adam down to the closing up scene. This ordinance will not be performed anywhere but in a Temple; neither will children be sealed to their living parents in any other place than a Temple. For instance, a man and his wife come into the Church, and they have a family of children. These children have been begotten out of the covenant, because the marriages of their parents are not recognized by the Lord as performed by his authority; they have, therefore, to be sealed to their parents, or else they cannot claim them in eternity; they will be distributed according to the wisdom of the Lord, who does all things right. When we had a Temple prepared in Nauvoo, many of the brethren had their children who were out of the covenant sealed to them, and endowments were given. Then parents, after receiving their endowments, and being sealed for time and all eternity, and they have other children, they are begotten and born under the covenant, and they are the rightful heirs to the kingdom, they possess the keys of the kingdom. Children born unto parents before the latter enter into the fullness of the covenants, have to be sealed to them in a Temple to become legal heirs of the Priesthood. It is true they can receive the ordinances, they can receive their endowments and be blessed in common with their parents; but still the parents cannot claim them legally and lawfully in eternity unless they are sealed to them. Yet the chain would not be complete without this sealing ordinance being performed." JoD 16:186 3
Jaydes Posted June 2, 2022 Posted June 2, 2022 13 hours ago, JLHPROF said: "The remarks that I shall make to you this evening will be upon the salvation of the people. There are a few ideas that I will relate to you, that the brethren and sisters should understand. There are many of the ordinances of the house of God that must be performed in a Temple that is erected expressly for the purpose. There are other ordinances that we can administer without a Temple. You know that there are some which you have received—baptism, the laying on of hands, the gifts of the Holy Ghost, such as the speaking in and interpretation of tongues, prophesying, healing, discerning of spirits, etc., and many blessings bestowed upon the people, we have the privilege of receiving without a Temple. There are other blessings that will not be received, and ordinances that will not be performed according to the law that the Lord has revealed, without their being done in a Temple prepared for that purpose. We can, at the present time, go into the Endowment House and be baptized for the dead, receive our washings and anointing, etc., for there we have a font that has been erected, dedicated expressly for baptizing people for the remission of sins, for their health and for their dead friends; in this the Saints have the privilege of being baptized for their friends. We also have the privilege of sealing women to men, without a Temple. This we can do in the Endowment House; but when we come to other sealing ordinances, ordinances pertaining to the holy Priesthood, to connect the chain of the Priesthood from father Adam until now, by sealing children to their parents, being sealed for our forefathers, etc., they cannot be done without a Temple. But we can seal women to men, but not men to men, without a Temple. When the ordinances are carried out in the Temples that will be erected, men will be sealed to their fathers, and those who have slept clear up to father Adam. This will have to be done, because of the chain of the Priesthood being broken upon the earth. The Priesthood has left the people, but in the first place the people left the Priesthood. They transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, and broke the everlasting covenant, and the Priesthood left them; but not until they had left the Priesthood. This Priesthood has been restored again, and by its authority we shall be connected with our fathers, by the ordinance of sealing, until we shall form a perfect chain from father Adam down to the closing up scene. This ordinance will not be performed anywhere but in a Temple; neither will children be sealed to their living parents in any other place than a Temple. For instance, a man and his wife come into the Church, and they have a family of children. These children have been begotten out of the covenant, because the marriages of their parents are not recognized by the Lord as performed by his authority; they have, therefore, to be sealed to their parents, or else they cannot claim them in eternity; they will be distributed according to the wisdom of the Lord, who does all things right. When we had a Temple prepared in Nauvoo, many of the brethren had their children who were out of the covenant sealed to them, and endowments were given. Then parents, after receiving their endowments, and being sealed for time and all eternity, and they have other children, they are begotten and born under the covenant, and they are the rightful heirs to the kingdom, they possess the keys of the kingdom. Children born unto parents before the latter enter into the fullness of the covenants, have to be sealed to them in a Temple to become legal heirs of the Priesthood. It is true they can receive the ordinances, they can receive their endowments and be blessed in common with their parents; but still the parents cannot claim them legally and lawfully in eternity unless they are sealed to them. Yet the chain would not be complete without this sealing ordinance being performed." JoD 16:186 Interesting. Thank you.
Recommended Posts