Elder Kevin S. Hamilton emphasizes importance of Christ’s organized church

[mfbukowski]

27 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Great question. I wouldn't discount the idea that God desires fellowship, praise, communication, and interaction with His sentient creation. Without making Him dependent on us, I believe he grants us agency so we can please, disappoint and yes, surprise Him on occasion. Someone on this forum may see that as another nasty Greek incursion into my theology. So be it.
 

I don't want to offend you for the alleged "14th time". It is best that we ignore one another. We cannot communicate.

[Bernard Gui]

48 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Didn't that happen in Genesis 2:7? God formed humans and then breathed life into them? The words hayyah and  hayyim in Hebrew are used a lot in the Old Testament. It refers to life, living, living and flowing water, capturing people alive and then killing them, the living God, and on and on. Is it your belief that the spirit children of your faith had life? Or did life (hayyim) begin when they became human? Is Gen 2:7 some kind of a metaphor?

The spirit children of all faiths have spiritual life prior to their mortal existence. They have physical or mortal life by being born into this earthly existence, and they will have eternal life in the next realm because of the atonement is Jesus Christ.

I notice you omitted “they are taken home.” Being taken home clearly means they return to the place from whence they came. It’s not a metaphorical home somewhere in the recesses of Gods mind, but the “first place” existence of Alma 13.

Quote

3 And this is the manner after which they were ordained—being called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God, on account of their exceeding faith and good works; in the first place being left to choose good or evil; therefore they having chosen good, and exercising exceedingly great faith, are called with a holy calling, yea, with that holy calling which was prepared with, and according to, a preparatory redemption for such.
4 And thus they have been called to this holy calling on account of their faith, while others would reject the Spirit of God on account of the hardness of their hearts and blindness of their minds, while, if it had not been for this they might have had as great privilege as their brethren.
5 Or in fine, in the first place they were on the same standing with their brethren; thus this holy calling being prepared from the foundation of the world for such as would not harden their hearts, being in and through the atonement of the Only Begotten Son, who was prepared—
6 And thus being called by this holy calling, and ordained unto the high priesthood of the holy order of God, to teach his commandments unto the children of men, that they also might enter into his rest—
 

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by Bernard Gui

[MiserereNobis]

35 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Good one.

It's a circular argument.

God is already PRESUMED to be without a beginning, therefore there is no cause for his beginning.

Maybe because arguments are based on language and in the end, the truths of God are ineffable, which is why we end up with illogical paradox when we strain our minds to explain that which is ultimately unexplainable. Faith and reason lead us to God, but to experience Him, we have to travel through the cloud of unknowing. 

[Teancum]

55 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Good one.

It's a circular argument.

God is already PRESUMED to be without a beginning, therefore there is no cause for his beginning.

So the caveat is everything the BEGINS to exist has a cause and since God has no beginning God does not need a cause.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Teancum

[Bernard Gui]

3 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So the caveat is everything the BIGINS to exist has a cause and since God has no beginning God does not need a cause.

“God” or the “God of the Bible?”

[Teancum]

3 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

“God” or the “God of the Bible?”

Is there a difference?

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, OGHoosier said:

I believe that, per the classical Christian view, God never began to exist, so He does not have nor need a cause.

So it's a circular argument because it PRE-SUMES that God never began!

God never began, so he did not need a cause to "begin him", an odd idea in itself, but still Circular. (a question-begging definition). So because he never began he is not in the set of things which began which exempts him from beginning so he never needed a cause, so he didn't have one,so by default he must have been the first cause.

Follow that?

But Hume demolished the IDEA of "causation" as even a necessary idea through a kind of Pragmatism.

All we can know is what APPEARS to be "causation" and cannot be shown to be anything but consistent correlation.

Every time I let go of my pen, it falls.  Do I "cause" it to fall, or is gravity the cause, or does earth just suck? 🤪😉.  If I am an astronaut and let go of my pen, it does not fall.  If I am under water and the pen floats, does it "fall"? 

What IS gravity and what causes gravity? Ultimately causation itself is a confusion caused by language itself, relying on human perception of what follows what.

With that, then you also presume an entire metaphysics, as did, say Descartes.

"I think therefore I am".  In the light of this kind of THINKING, how does THAT work.???

For 2000 years all of these arguments have been sliced and diced, and finally we hit Wittgenstein/Heidegger/James and Alma and all of postmodernism, and everyone just throws up their hands and says "We will call it "true" if it does what we need it to, and makes sense, and is "sweet". 

So what works for you? 

And we wonder why communication is a problem.

https://images.app.goo.gl/k7SJ3pkWbXT1dh2KA

Edited February 6, 2023 by mfbukowski

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I don't want to offend you for the alleged "14th time". It is best that we ignore one another. We cannot communicate.

I said that tongue-in-cheek. I was kidding! One of the challenges of monological communication. Maybe I should use an emoticon when I am being me - which is often trying to make a joke or kidding around!

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I notice you omitted “they are taken home.” Being taken home clearly means they return to the place from whence they came. It’s not a metaphorical home somewhere in the recesses of Gods mind, but the “first place” existence of Alma 13.

I didn't omit it on purpose. I travel a lot. Whenever I think I am going home, that means I am going to wherever my wife is at that time. She is my center, my home. When I think of going to my spiritual home . . . it will be wherever Christ is - that is my center, my home spiritually. I was born in Indiana. We moved away when I was 1 year old. I have never been back there. I grew up in Pennsylvania. That is the closest thing to an earthly literal home I have. On the other hand after living here in Mexico full-time for seven years, here sounds like home. We lived in Florida for twenty two years. . . in San Diego for ten years. From whence have I come? I have decided that for me in this life, at this time - home is where my wife is. I hope that makes some kind of sense to you. I assume that going home when I die is to be where the center of my faith is - to Christ.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Navidad

[Chum]

1 minute ago, Navidad said:

[deep things!]

Care to give is a primer on Hell sometime? I'm in the camp that sees Sheol, Hades, Tartarus and Gehanna as distinctly separate places - and that a long time ago, they all got mashed together into a new God-Created-Eternal-Agony-for-Temporary-Transgression place.

[Chum]

8 minutes ago, Navidad said:

We lived in Florida for twenty two years.

I wish you much healing.

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

I didn't omit it on purpose. I travel a lot. Whenever I think I am going home, that means I am going to wherever my wife is at that time. She is my center, my home. When I think of going to my spiritual home . . . it will be wherever Christ is - that is my center, my home spiritually. I was born in Indiana. We moved away when I was 1 year old. I have never been back there. I grew up in Pennsylvania. That is the closest thing to an earthly literal home I have. On the other hand after living here in Mexico full-time for seven years, here sounds like home. We lived in Florida for twenty two years. . . in San Diego for ten years. From whence have I come? I have decided that for me in this life, at this time - home is where my wife is. I hope that makes some kind of sense to you. I assume that going home when I die is to be where the center of my faith is - to Christ.

But that is what the scripture means....we are going back home to God. One can't be taken back to a home where one hasn't been before. No elaboration is needed. It's quite plain.

And there is this in a didactical poetic form...

Quote

Mormon 9:11-13

And now, if ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who doth vary, 

and in whom there is shadow of changing, 

then have ye imagined up unto yourselves a god who is not a God of miracles.

But behold, I will show unto you a God of miracles, 

even the God of Abraham, 

and the God of Isaac, 

and the God of Jacob; 

and it is that same God who created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are.

Behold, he created Adam,

and by Adam came the fall of man.

And because of the fall of man 

came Jesus Christ, even the Father and the Son;

and because of Jesus Christ 

came the redemption of man.

And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ, 

they are brought back into the presence of the Lord;

And this in the same form....

Quote

Alma 42

Now, repentance could not come unto men except there were a punishment, 

     which also was eternal as the life of the soul should be, affixed opposite to the plan of happiness, 

     which was as eternal also as the life of the soul.

Now, how could a man repent

except he should sin?

How could he sin 

if there was no law?

How could there be a law 

save there was a punishment?

Now, there was a punishment affixed,

and a just law given,

which brought remorse of conscience unto man. 

Now, if there was no law given—if a man murdered he should die—

     would he be afraid he would die if he should murder?

And also, if there was no law given against sin men

     would not be afraid to sin.

And if there was no law given,

     if men sinned what could justice do,

     or mercy either,  

     for they would have no claim upon the creature?

But there is a  law given,

and a punishment affixed,

     and a repentance granted;

     which repentance mercy claimeth;

     otherwise, justice claimeth the creature

     and executeth the law,

     and the law

 inflicteth the punishment;

if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed,

and God would cease to be God.

But God ceaseth not to be God,

and mercy claimeth the penitent,

and mercy cometh

because of the atonement; 

and the atonement bringeth to pass 

the resurrection of the dead;

and the resurrection of the dead

bringeth back men into the presence of God;

and thus they are restored into his presence, 

to be judged according to their works, 

according to the law and justice. 

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by Bernard Gui

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Chum said:

I wish you much healing.

I worked in 13 different school districts in Florida - from Santa Rosa (my favorite) to Miami-Dade and everywhere in between. I got to see a lot of different ideologies in the public schools of the same state.

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

And that is what the scripture means....we are going home to God. You can't go back to a home that you haven't been to before. It's quite plain.

Ok. I know what you are saying. Just one more question. Is the place you go when you die or reach your ultimate exaltation, a place you have been to before? Where were you when you were spirit children? Is the place you are going upon death and then exaltation different from any place you have ever been before, but the commonality is that you will be "back home" with God?

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Is there a difference?

Yes. If logic is used to prove there is a God, then it is a leap of logic to equate that God with the God of the Bible.

[Teancum]

Just now, Bernard Gui said:

Yes. If logic is used to prove there is a God, then it is a leap of logic to equate that God with the God of the Bible.

Why?

[Nofear]

18 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Ok. I know what you are saying. Just one more question. Is the place you go when you die or reach your ultimate exaltation, a place you have been to before? Where were you when you were spirit children? Is the place you are going upon death and then exaltation different from any place you have ever been before, but the commonality is that you will be "back home" with God?

LDS asserts that the earth will receive a Celestial Glory and be inhabited by those of the Celestial Kingdom (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/37-millennium-and-glorification-of-the-earth?lang=eng). We do not know locations for the other kingdoms. We also do not know the location of the premortal realm aside from the idea that we dwelt in the presence of our Heavenly Parents.

Much of the basics of our mostly universalist theology is contained in D&C 76. Joseph was absolutely enthralled by this revelation. Curiously, it was not entirely well received by the Church membership in its day.

[Bernard Gui]

21 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Ok. I know what you are saying. Just one more question. Is the place you go when you die or reach your ultimate exaltation, a place you have been to before? Where were you when you were spirit children? Is the place you are going upon death and then exaltation different from any place you have ever been before, but the commonality is that you will be "back home" with God?

Please see my edit for more BoM references to the pre-mortal existence.

Yes, it is a place we have been to before. The two scriptures I quoted indicate we are taken back home to God. When we were spirit children we were with God. The places, though described in the D&C and PoGP, are not relevant at this point.

[Bernard Gui]

4 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Why?

So one proves logically that God exists. We're not done yet.

Which one? Baal, Odin, Zeus, Shiva, Yahweh, Ra? Here's a partial list of the candidates... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_the_gods

 

[manol]

8 minutes ago, Nofear said:

Much of the basics of our mostly universalist theology is contained in D&C 76. Joseph was absolutely enthralled by this revelation. Curiously, it [Section 76] was not entirely well received by the Church membership in its day.

Really?  Why was that? 

Edited February 6, 2023 by manol

[Nofear]

26 minutes ago, manol said:

Really?  Why was that? 

This is what I got from Bushman in Rough Stone Rolling. This article says much the same: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2017/10/the-triumph-and-glory-of-the-lamb-doctrine-and-covenants-76-in-its-historical-context?lang=eng

Quote

Even so, the revelation challenged early Latter-day Saints because it overturned traditional Christian ideas about the afterlife. President Brigham Young (1801–77), for instance, admitted to being troubled by the revelation when first encountering it. “My traditions were such,” he confessed, “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."

 

[OGHoosier]

5 hours ago, manol said:

There are words attributed to Jesus which are imo inconsistent with who he is, as the Prince of Peace and the great teacher who gave us the Sermon on the Mount and who taught us to love our neighbor and so forth. The "I came not to bring peace, but a sword..." passage is an example of such. 

How do the words of that passage make you feel?  Do they invite you to love God (Moroni chapter 7)?  Does the Spirit bear witness to them (D&C 8-9)?  Do they taste delicious to your soul (Alma chapter 32)?  If not, then imo it is our job to reject them or at the very least put them on the back burner until we know for sure. 

Imo those words would never have been spoken by the Christ I have come to know, and were presumably written into his mouth by someone with an agenda.   

Honestly, I love those and feel the Spirit rather strongly with regard to them. 

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

I said that tongue-in-cheek. I was kidding! One of the challenges of monological communication. Maybe I should use an emoticon when I am being me - which is often trying to make a joke or kidding around!

Well you kid about it very often and quite vociferously with no evidence of it being a joke. Regardless, more evidence of non- communication 

[Navidad]

On 2/6/2023 at 10:04 AM, Chum said:

Care to give is a primer on Hell sometime? I'm in the camp that sees Sheol, Hades, Tartarus and Gehanna as distinctly separate places - and that a long time ago, they all got mashed together into a new God-Created-Eternal-Agony-for-Temporary-Transgression place.

Interesting topic and one about which we know very little. Let me think about it.

[Navidad]

19 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Well you kid about it very often and quite vociferously with no evidence of it being a joke. Regardless, more evidence of non- communication 

My bad. Sorry.