If gender is eternal, what is the point

[teddyaware]

20 hours ago, MrShorty said:

Perhaps I am just primed to see this, but do I detect an underlying assumption that the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are "dead ends"? What if the answer to the OP is that "deadly heresy" (that has technically never been officially refuted by the church) of progression between kingdoms? What if the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms are merely extra "stepping stones" along some people's path towards exaltation in the celestial kingdom with all of its gender based perks?

I know we are generally uncomfortable with the possibility of universal salvation/exaltation. As I understand it, much of the early saints' resistance to "The Vision" was this fear of universalism, and I don't think we have ever really gotten over that fear.

I don't know the answer.

I can actually envision a way in which the ‘there is progression between kingdoms’ and the ‘there is no progression between kingdoms’ paradigms can be successfully reconciled, with both models proving to be simultaneously correct. It all depends on one’s perspective. For example, what if the inhabitants of lower kingdoms of glory cannot progress up to higher kingdoms unless they first exit the kingdom they inhabit by falling out of it and into another state of mortal probation where all their previous experiences are forgotten and they are given another opportunity to prove themselves worthy of exaltation?

If the above scenario proves to be correct, then the reason why those in lower kingdoms of glory are prevented from progressing upward to higher kingdoms of glory is because the kingdom they’ve been assigned to is a spiritual ‘dead end.’ Therefore it could be that the only way to continue to ultimately progress upward spiritually is to take an ‘end run’ around the ‘dead end’ kingdom they presently inhabit by first falling completely out of it and into a lower, more challenging state of existence. This is similar to the common LDS teaching that we eventually had to leave the premortal heaven and enter a fallen state in order to continue our eternal progression because we had progressed as far as we could go in the premortal heaven.

Edited November 6, 2022 by teddyaware

[PeaceKeeper]

17 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Maybe this is the source- Joseph Fielding Smith in the Doctrines of Salvation.  
 

Transparently, as a general rule I leave a lot of leeway in this type of thing being in accurate without losing my business over prophets “ leading us astray.” (I don’t think in terms of black and white- and In my mind the promise not to lead astray does not refer to prophets being wrong At times. In my opinion the promise that they will not let us astray is simply that they will not guide us away from the first principles in ordinances of the church, end of story). I do however think it’s interesting that fundamental Statements like this don’t get clarified or corrected. I mean either gender is eternal or it’s not. And if we do not have genitalia, like literally do not have it, are we men and women? And if we do have it, why? 
Obviously we don’t have the answer. I’m curious about others’ thoughts though. 

I think you're misreading your source. He states we will all have a perfected body, yet, depending on our glory, the functionality of our body will be restricted. 

[PeaceKeeper]

7 minutes ago, PeaceKeeper said:

I think you're misreading your source. He states we will all have a perfected body, yet, depending on our glory, the functionality of our body will be restricted. 

Full quote to which I believe you are referring... 

[manol]

38 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

I can actually see a way in which the ‘progression between kingdoms’ and the ‘no progression between kingdoms’ paradigms can be successfully reconciled, with both models being simultaneously correct depending on perspective. For example, what if an inhabitant of a lower kingdom of glory cannot progress to a higher kingdom of unless he first falls out of the kingdom he’s in by entering into another state of mortal probation where all previous memories are forgotten as he once again attempts to prove himself worthy of exaltation and eternal lives. If this scenario proves to be the correct, then one cannot progress upward to a higher kingdom of glory without first falling out of a lower kingdom first.

That's a very, very interesting idea.  I've never thought of it quite that way. 

This comes to mind:

In John 5:29 Jesus talks about two resurrections, the Resurrection of Life, and the Resurrection of Damnation.  The Greek word is "krisis" and it means "crisis", not "damnation".  So the lesser resurrection is actually the "Resurrection of Crisis" (and NOT the "Resurrection of Damnation", because that's a bad translation).

Maybe this is reaching a bit, but the Chinese character for "crisis" is amazingly insightful, as it's a combination of the characters for "danger" and "opportunity".  So perhaps an alternative interpretation for the lesser resurrection would be "the Resurrection of Danger and Opportunity". 

With that thought in mind, let's look at the scenario you describe:

"An inhabitant of a lower kingdom of glory cannot progress to a higher kingdom unless he first falls out of the kingdom he’s in by entering into another state of mortal probation where all previous memories are forgotten as he once again attempts to prove himself worthy of exaltation and eternal lives."

I think that "entering into another state of mortal probation", the stakes being what they are, could very well be described as a "Resurrection of Danger and Opportunity"!

Or if we revert back to the Greek, a "Resurrection of Krisis".

Could your theory be what Jesus was actually teaching in John 5:29, obscured by a bad translation for all these years? 

I think so.  What do you think? 

Edited November 6, 2022 by manol

[PeaceKeeper]

5 minutes ago, PeaceKeeper said:

Full quote to which I believe you are referring... 

This is scripturally sound with Paul's letter to the Corinthians (15)

39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.

40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

D&C 131 states even in Celestial Glory you will not be able to increase depending on your glory

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.

And D&C 132

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.

(THEN SPEAKING OF THOSE WHO OBEY THE COMMANDMENTS, AND MAKE AND KEEP COVENANTS)

20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.

22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.

23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also.

24 This is eternal lives—to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.

[Rain]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

I can actually see a way in which the ‘progression between kingdoms’ and the ‘no progression between kingdoms’ paradigms can be successfully reconciled, with both models being simultaneously correct depending on perspective. For example, what if an inhabitant of a lower kingdom of glory cannot progress to a higher kingdom of unless he first falls out of the kingdom he’s in by entering into another state of mortal probation where all previous memories are forgotten as he once again attempts to prove himself worthy of exaltation and eternal lives. If this scenario proves to be the correct, then one cannot progress upward to a higher kingdom of glory without first falling out of a lower kingdom first.

I never would have thought you would be ok with reincarnation.

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, PeaceKeeper said:

Full quote to which I believe you are referring... 

He says we will be neither man nor woman.  He’s wrong- according to present revelation 

[PeaceKeeper]

57 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

He says we will be neither man nor woman.  He’s wrong- according to present revelation 

I get what you're saying. I also understand that this is not doctrine. This is his opinion. And he's entitled to have a wrong opinion. 

"I take it that..." is an opinionated statement. I also believe he is wrong on that one point but correct on the rest of his assessment. 

Now go to sleep.

[PeaceKeeper]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

He says we will be neither man nor woman.  He’s wrong- according to present revelation 

However, the point is we are all able to get there. That's the plan. All that other lesser stuff is just laziness. Jeffery R Holland stated to a group of missionaries in Chile (I was one of them): "The plan of salvation is idiotproof. All who want to be saved, will be saved."

[Thinking]

On 11/5/2022 at 12:59 AM, teddyaware said:

The answer is simple, but the revelatory means to flesh out that answer with specifics has not been disclosed as yet.

So...if you don't know the specifics, how do you know it's simple?

[teddyaware]

7 hours ago, manol said:

That's a very, very interesting idea.  I've never thought of it quite that way. 

This comes to mind:

In John 5:29 Jesus talks about two resurrections, the Resurrection of Life, and the Resurrection of Damnation.  The Greek word is "krisis" and it means "crisis", not "damnation".  So the lesser resurrection is actually the "Resurrection of Crisis" (and NOT the "Resurrection of Damnation", because that's a bad translation).

Maybe this is reaching a bit, but the Chinese character for "crisis" is amazingly insightful, as it's a combination of the characters for "danger" and "opportunity".  So perhaps an alternative interpretation for the lesser resurrection would be "the Resurrection of Danger and Opportunity". 

With that thought in mind, let's look at the scenario you describe:

"An inhabitant of a lower kingdom of glory cannot progress to a higher kingdom unless he first falls out of the kingdom he’s in by entering into another state of mortal probation where all previous memories are forgotten as he once again attempts to prove himself worthy of exaltation and eternal lives."

I think that "entering into another state of mortal probation", the stakes being what they are, could very well be described as a "Resurrection of Danger and Opportunity"!

Or if we revert back to the Greek, a "Resurrection of Krisis".

Could your theory be what Jesus was actually teaching in John 5:29, obscured by a bad translation for all these years? 

I think so.  What do you think? 

Very interesting! But please read my post again because I wrote it as I was about to fall asleep last night and I’ve edited it for greater clarity and cohesion.

[teddyaware]

7 hours ago, Rain said:

I never would have thought you would be ok with reincarnation.

Well at least it’s not the Hindu version of reincarnation where one has the possibility of being ‘reborn’ as a protozoa or a gnat.

I speculate in this manner because I find it hard to imagine that the God whose work and glory it is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man’ would so easily give up on those of his offspring who were once less valiant in the testimony of Jesus a million aeons ago in a previous phase of their existence. To me, God causing some of his beloved children to be forever stuck in a spiritual dead end is out of character with his boundless love and mercy that he extends to each of us through his infinite and eternal sacrifice.

Edited November 6, 2022 by teddyaware

[teddyaware]

4 hours ago, Thinking said:

So...if you don't know the specifics, how do you know it's simple?

It’s simple to deduce because the Family Proclamation flatly contradicts the mistaken notion into  that the lower kingdoms of glory are unisex worlds where men and women are transformed into genderless creatures. And I believe it’s also true that God’s divine dictum in Genesis, that it’s not good form men to be without female companionship, extends into the lower kingdoms of glory.

Edited November 6, 2022 by teddyaware

[teddyaware]

7 hours ago, manol said:

That's a very, very interesting idea.  I've never thought of it quite that way. 

This comes to mind:

In John 5:29 Jesus talks about two resurrections, the Resurrection of Life, and the Resurrection of Damnation.  The Greek word is "krisis" and it means "crisis", not "damnation".  So the lesser resurrection is actually the "Resurrection of Crisis" (and NOT the "Resurrection of Damnation", because that's a bad translation).

Maybe this is reaching a bit, but the Chinese character for "crisis" is amazingly insightful, as it's a combination of the characters for "danger" and "opportunity".  So perhaps an alternative interpretation for the lesser resurrection would be "the Resurrection of Danger and Opportunity". 

With that thought in mind, let's look at the scenario you describe:

"An inhabitant of a lower kingdom of glory cannot progress to a higher kingdom unless he first falls out of the kingdom he’s in by entering into another state of mortal probation where all previous memories are forgotten as he once again attempts to prove himself worthy of exaltation and eternal lives."

I think that "entering into another state of mortal probation", the stakes being what they are, could very well be described as a "Resurrection of Danger and Opportunity"!

Or if we revert back to the Greek, a "Resurrection of Krisis".

Could your theory be what Jesus was actually teaching in John 5:29, obscured by a bad translation for all these years? 

I think so.  What do you think? 

It’s an interesting possibility, but a careful analysis of Doctrine and Covenants Sections 76 and 138 also indicate that the only individuals who are going to partake of the resurrection of damnation are the sons of perdition, due to the fact that they are the only ones who will be raised from the dead who will remain “filthy still.” As just one of the many examples that validate what I just said, consider the following…

32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;

33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;

34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come— (this obviously indicates that all the rest of God’s children ultimately will obtain forgiveness for their sins).

35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.

36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—

37 And the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power;

38 Yea, verily, THE ONLY ONES WHO SHALL NOT BE REDEEMED in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath.

39 For all the rest shall be brought forth by the resurrection of the dead, through the TRIUMPH and the glory of the Lamb, who was slain, who was in the bosom of the Father before the  worlds were made. (Doctrine and Covenants 76). 

[The Nehor]

On 11/5/2022 at 8:20 AM, teddyaware said:

To me, it’s obvious that if men and women no longer have natural mutual attraction and desires to form bonds of righteous heterosexual affection with one another in eternity, it will render the Family Proclamation null and void for the vast majority of the human race, for the Proclamation clearly states that maleness and femaleness is the most crucial element pertaining to the destiny and purpose of human existence. How terribly sad and empty human existence would be if men and women were relegated to being sexless drones who were no longer romantically interested in one another. If in the eternities former earthly men and women devolve to become genderless, passionless, a romantic  entities, that would be tantamount to existing in passionless hell forever.

You are almost there. So close…..

[Calm]

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

 

I speculate in this manner because I find it hard to imagine that the God whose work and glory it is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man’ would so easily give up on those of his offspring who were once less valiant in the testimony of Jesus a million aeons ago in a previous phase of their existence. To me, God causing some of his beloved children to be forever stuck in a spiritual dead end is out of character with his boundless love and mercy that he extends to each of us through his infinite and eternal sacrifice.

Perfectly explained. …though I hope God has a better solution, one mortality seems like more than enough to me.

I love that there is something we can so thoroughly agree upon even if I have strong disagreements with you in other areas.  It just doesn’t make sense that with eternities to work with, God couldn’t find a way. He has to be perfect in creative mentality, after all.

Edited November 6, 2022 by Calm

[JLHPROF]

10 hours ago, teddyaware said:

I can actually envision a way in which the ‘there is progression between kingdoms’ and the ‘there is no progression between kingdoms’ paradigms can be successfully reconciled, with both models proving to be simultaneously correct. It all depends on one’s perspective. For example, what if the inhabitants of lower kingdoms of glory cannot progress up to higher kingdoms unless they first exit the kingdom they inhabit by falling out of it and into another state of mortal probation where all their previous experiences are forgotten and they are given another opportunity to prove themselves worthy of exaltation?

If the above scenario proves to be correct, then the reason why those in lower kingdoms of glory are prevented from progressing upward to higher kingdoms of glory is because the kingdom they’ve been assigned to is a spiritual ‘dead end.’ Therefore it could be that the only way to continue to ultimately progress upward spiritually is to take an ‘end run’ around the ‘dead end’ kingdom they presently inhabit by first falling completely out of it and into a lower, more challenging state of existence. This is similar to the common LDS teaching that we eventually had to leave the premortal heaven and enter a fallen state in order to continue our eternal progression because we had progressed as far as we could go in the premortal heaven.

I am less inclined to believe in progression between kingdoms than I am to believe in progression of kingdoms.

[smac97]

A few thoughts:

1. The Purpose of Existence is to Create: I think the central and highest purpose of our existence is to create.  Moses 1:39 speaks of the "work and glory" of God being "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man."  In the lyrics for If You Could Hie to Kolob, we read: The works of God continue, And worlds and lives abound; Improvement and progression Have one eternal round."  We exist to create.  

2. Joy and Happiness: Joseph Smith said that "{h}appiness is the object and design of our existence; and will be the end thereof, if we pursue the path that leads to it; and this path is virtue, uprightness, faithfulness, holiness, and keeping all the commandments of God” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 255–56).  Lehi taught that "men are, that they might have joy" (2 Nephi 2:25).  Eternal joy and happiness, then, seem to be the reward or result of creation.  We exist to create, and by and through that act we find and have joy.

3. Creation and Procreation: I believe that there are are two fundamental forms of creation.  The first is the creation of man (the species, not the sex), and the second is the creation of everything else.  We have unique verbs for these to acts: "As verbs the difference between create and procreate is that create is to put into existence while procreate is to beget or conceive (offspring)."  We seem to have a fundamental understanding of this distinction.  We "create" tools, clothing, shelter, food, and so on.  If we have the means to live beyond subsistence and survival utility, we proceed to creating literature, art, music,  and other beautiful things.  But all these things pale in comparison to the procreative endeavor.  The having and rearing of our children, and our socialization with them, is a fundamentally different - as in higher - form of creation.  In Genesis and Abraham we see that Adam and Eve were created last, as if everything else was created as an environment for them.  As Joseph F. Smith taught (bold emphasis added) :

Quote

We behold … man, the crowning work of God, on this earth, the masterpiece, if you please, whom inspiration teaches us, is the offspring of that eternal being who is the Creator of all things, he being the most perfect in his organization, possessing greater attributes, powers of reason, and intelligence than all other beings, constituting him the “lord of creation,” and the nearest in resemblance to the Creator. We look at these things and we cannot but come to the conclusion that this is not the work of chance, but the result of matured omniscient designs and purposes, that man is the son of God, possessing the attributes and image of his Father, and in the beginning much of this intelligence, insomuch that he was the companion and associate of God and dwelt with him, and knew no sin. The Lord gave him the earth as a possession and an inheritance, and laws for his government, that he might fill the measure of his creation and have joy therein.

4. Creation and Procreation are Collaborative Acts: It appears that the act of creating is a collaborative, and not a solitary, thing.  In Abraham 4, in the recounting of the creation of the earth, we are told that "the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth" (emphasis added).  Then, a few verses later, we are also told (emphases added) : 

Quote

And the Gods took counsel among themselves and said: Let us go down and form man in our image, after our likeness; and we will give them dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

The Ninth Article of Faith states: "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."  I think one topic about which there is much "yet to be revealed" is the collaborative nature of the acts of creation and procreation in the eternal sense of things.  Such a huge part of the human experience is us learning how to work with each other, and in particular how husband and wife do so.  We still have lots to learn, but at a minimum we have been told that "it is not good that the man should be alone" (Abraham 5:14), and, I think, axiomatically that it is also "not good" that "woman" should be alone.  So I think husband and wife will, in the eternities, work together in the creative process.

5. Diverse Contributory Functions in the Creative Process: In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul speaks of "diversities of gifts {of the spirit}," "diversities of administrations" and "diversities of operations," all working in harmony with each other.  Paul proceeds to analogize the community of the Saints to the "body" of Christ, which he says "hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body" (v. 12).  He goes on to note the diverse functions of the parts of the body are all intended to work together.  "For the body is not one member, but many.  If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?  And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?  If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? ... And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you."  (v. 14-17, 21.)  Each part contributes to the form and function of the body in its own way, each being essential and yet distinguishable and unique.

I wonder if something similar could be said about the creative process in the eternities.  D&C 131 and 132 inextricably link exaltation - the ability to create and procreate - to the union between a man and a woman.  Without marriage, a person "cannot have an increase" (131:4).  And although the kingdoms of glory are all beyond our ability to comprehend (see, e.g., D&C 76:89-90), a man without a woman, or a woman without a man will "cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity" (132:17).

Knowing that Heavenly Father loves us and wants us to be happy, this statement about "remain{ing} separately and singly" is not, I think, to convey the idea of for not abiding God's law (v. 17), but is instead a straightforward statement of truth and necessity, of choice and consequence, of direction.  He is, in effect, saying "If you want to achieve this objective, this is the path that will take you there."  The path to exaltation in the eternities - to obtaining the joy of creation and procreation - necessarily involves a man and a woman being bound to each other.  And when so bound, they work together to create and procreate, fulfilling distinct but equally essential roles.  

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[CV75]

On 11/5/2022 at 1:40 AM, MustardSeed said:

If gender is eternal, what is the point after we die and don’t make it to the tip top? We can’t procreate anyway I believe. The answer might be obvious but I haven’t had much sleep.
 

I think that pondering the temple covenants toward an eternal understanding of gender identity in relation to exaltation can answer your question. The covenants point us to the point. A sub-topic: “What does “make it” mean in terms of God’s grace?

[CV75]

12 hours ago, teddyaware said:

I can actually envision a way in which the ‘there is progression between kingdoms’ and the ‘there is no progression between kingdoms’ paradigms can be successfully reconciled, with both models proving to be simultaneously correct. It all depends on one’s perspective. For example, what if the inhabitants of lower kingdoms of glory cannot progress up to higher kingdoms unless they first exit the kingdom they inhabit by falling out of it and into another state of mortal probation where all their previous experiences are forgotten and they are given another opportunity to prove themselves worthy of exaltation?

If the above scenario proves to be correct, then the reason why those in lower kingdoms of glory are prevented from progressing upward to higher kingdoms of glory is because the kingdom they’ve been assigned to is a spiritual ‘dead end.’ Therefore it could be that the only way to continue to ultimately progress upward spiritually is to take an ‘end run’ around the ‘dead end’ kingdom they presently inhabit by first falling completely out of it and into a lower, more challenging state of existence. This is similar to the common LDS teaching that we eventually had to leave the premortal heaven and enter a fallen state in order to continue our eternal progression because we had progressed as far as we could go in the premortal heaven.

I would say that, since Christ descended below all things, and ascended above all things, His mercy and grace are sufficient for all that humble themselves to finish the Father's work as designed in Abraham 3;24-26, which is: 1) first estate - 2) an earth -- 3) second estate -- 4) for ever and ever.

[manol]

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Well at least it’s not the Hindu version of reincarnation where one has the possibility of being ‘reborn’ as a protozoa or a gnat.

I speculate in this manner because I find it hard to imagine that the God whose work and glory it is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man’ would so easily give up on those of his offspring who were once less valiant in the testimony of Jesus a million aeons ago in a previous phase of their existence. To me, God causing some of his beloved children to be forever stuck in a spiritual dead end is out of character with his boundless love and mercy that he extends to each of us through his infinite and eternal sacrifice.  [emphasis manol's]

I think you are absolutely right.

The narrative we have been given has gaps, and I think this is intentional because it gives us individually participation in the "discovery" of higher truths like what you are describing here.  We pretty much have to rely on the Spirit (and we may get some of the details wrong!) because conclusive proof is not spelled out in the scriptures, but enough evidence to catch our attention and get us pondering and praying is sprinkled here and there. 

And in my very limited experience, these not-spelled-out, gap-filling bits and pieces of the Gospel are indeed "Good News". 

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I am less inclined to believe in progression between kingdoms than I am to believe in progression of kingdoms.

That may very well be how it works!

Once all of the links are acknowledged, we are all connected with one another in something like a great web.  And if "we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect" (D&C 128:18), then advancement as a connected group is implied.  The emphasis on individual exaltation that is presently dominant still makes sense because those who progress faster within the group end up teaching and elevating the rest.

On 11/5/2022 at 10:39 AM, MrShorty said:

As I understand it, much of the early saints' resistance to "The Vision" was this fear of universalism, and I don't think we have ever really gotten over that fear.

Can you elaborate?  I'm not aware of "the early saints' resistance to 'The Vision'" (which Vision?), nor their fear of universalism. 

Edited November 6, 2022 by manol

[teddyaware]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I am less inclined to believe in progression between kingdoms than I am to believe in progression of kingdoms.here’s the bottom line point: 

Here’s what for me is the bottom line point on this question: Whatever the processes or mechanisms might be that the Lord employs to allow for his children to continue there eternal progression after the resurrection, it’s hard for me to imagine that a million eons from now there won’t some way for those in the terrestrial kingdom to finally progress until they obtain a fulness of celestial glory. I say this because if extremely imperfect fallen mortals are able progress to celestial glory after the very short timespan of this life, it’s difficult to fathom why righteous beings, who have been personally ministered to by the Lord Jesus Christ himself for millions of millennia, wouldn’t able to obtain the same. Think about it — what would be the point of having Jesus Christ personally minister to those in the terrestrial kingdom if they forever remain utterly incapable of obtaining a fulness of the same glory Jesus Christ himself represents and enjoys? What righteous purpose would it serve to hold them back forever because of something that happened billions of centuries ago?

Edited November 6, 2022 by teddyaware

[echelon]

On 11/5/2022 at 12:59 AM, teddyaware said:

For me, to imagine that male female attraction ends with the resurrection is tantamount to saying that the saved in the lower kingdoms of glory are no longer human beings and that they no longer have an eternal identity and purpose.

According to our theology,  celibate angels who choose to remain in the lower degrees of the celestial kingdom are still happier that those in the lower kingdoms, even if the lower kingdoms get to enjoy intimate relationships.  Attraction just isn't a factor in the overall happiness of anyone beneath the highest degree of glory.  Imagine the happiness of the celibate angel in the celestial kingdom!  It's beyond our comprehension.  

Also, gender is more than biological, I think it is also a calling, hence the different responsibilities laid out in the proclamation as well as in church governance among the 3 kingdoms.

[manol]

13 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Whatever the processes or mechanisms might be that the Lord employs to allow for his children to continue there eternal progression after the resurrection, it’s hard for me to imagine that a million eons from now there won’t some way for those in the terrestrial kingdom to finally progress until they obtain a fulness of celestial glory. I say this because if extremely imperfect fallen mortals are able progress to celestial glory after the very short timespan of this life, it’s difficult to fathom why righteous beings who have been personally ministered to by the Lord Jesus Christ for millions of millennia wouldn’t able to obtain the same? Think about it — what would be the point of having Jesus Christ personally minister to those in the terrestrial kingdom if they forever remain utterly incapable of obtaining a fulness of the same glory Jesus Christ himself enjoys? What righteous purpose would it serve to hold them back forever because of something that happened billions of centuries ago?

YESSS!!

You're drawing an inclusive circle, you're "enlarging your tent", without compromising your principles!  Who cares whether any of us have the details figured out, we can completely trust whatever the process ends up being. 

[InCognitus]

27 minutes ago, manol said:

Can you elaborate?  I'm not aware of "the early saints' resistance to 'The Vision'" (which Vision?), nor their fear of universalism. 

He's referring to section 76 of the Doctrine and Covenants.  See Revelations in Context: The Vision, where it describes how the revelation was received at the time:

Quote

“It was a great trial to many,” Brigham Young remembered. “Some apostatized because God … had a place of salvation, in due time, for all.”¹³ Young himself had difficulty accepting the idea: “My traditions were such, that when the Vision came first to me, it was directly contrary and opposed to my former education. I said, Wait a little. I did not reject it; but I could not understand it.”¹⁴ His brother Joseph Young also confessed, “I could not believe it at first. Why the Lord was going to save every body.”¹⁵

Perhaps in a knee-jerk reaction to what seemed to be hints of Universalism, some early members overlooked the subtle beauty of “the Vision.” Avoiding the extremes of Universalism and the orthodox view of heaven and hell, it suggested that the sufferings of the disobedient would indeed ultimately end but that the Lord also held out the promise of unimaginable rewards for those who are “valient in the testamony of Jesus.”¹⁶

Many of those who stumbled at the vision simply needed some time to ponder it or the patient explanation of a missionary or spiritual leader. Joseph Young remembered, “After I had prayed over it and Joseph had explained it I could see it was nothing but good sense accompanying the power of God.”¹⁷ Brigham Young had to “think and pray, to read and think, until [he] knew and fully understood it for [himself].”¹⁸