The Grand Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man

[UncleanDeacon]

Since the change of being in the 11 and a half hour to now only the beginnining of an ongoing restoration, we must kick the second coming hundreds of years into the future.

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, UncleanDeacon said:

Since the change of being in the 11 and a half hour to now only the beginnining of an ongoing restoration, we must kick the second coming hundreds of years into the future.

The "ongoing restoration" extends into the millennium and into the eternities.  So we truly are just at the beginning.  With that perspective, the second coming of Christ is quite "soon" in comparison. 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

The "ongoing restoration" extends into the millennium and into the eternities.  So we truly are just at the beginning.  With that perspective, the second coming of Christ is quite "soon" in comparison. 

Jesus is just endorsing Mormon Standard Time.

[mfbukowski]

On 6/28/2023 at 6:15 AM, CV75 said:

I don't know, but the further away it is (Betelgeuse is 642.5 light years), the longer ago the occurrence that would eventually be observed from Earth. One way of guessing the "grand event" is to connect it with a simultaneous event similarly unrecognized by the world at large but known to those who have knowledge of the fullness of the gospel. So, one approach might be to identify such an earlier event of spiritual significance (e.g., First Vision, any of the events in Nephi's Vision, Moroni's hiding of the plates, Christ's appearing in America, etc. -- any of these unrecognized as such by the world at large), calculating  the number of years to the present day plus x number of years, and see what astronomical objects within that distance might have reacted in the past to produce such a phenomenon by that projected date.

But since God created worlds without end, then maybe we will be among the last to get the news.  😲 

 

[InCognitus]

On 6/28/2023 at 7:15 AM, CV75 said:

I don't know, but the further away it is (Betelgeuse is 642.5 light years), the longer ago the occurrence that would eventually be observed from Earth. One way of guessing the "grand event" is to connect it with a simultaneous event similarly unrecognized by the world at large but known to those who have knowledge of the fullness of the gospel. So, one approach might be to identify such an earlier event of spiritual significance (e.g., First Vision, any of the events in Nephi's Vision, Moroni's hiding of the plates, Christ's appearing in America, etc. -- any of these unrecognized as such by the world at large), calculating  the number of years to the present day plus x number of years, and see what astronomical objects within that distance might have reacted in the past to produce such a phenomenon by that projected date.

There was a lot of excitement by some in September 2017 related to the "great wonder in heaven" of Revelation 12.  As the EarthSky website put it:

Quote

On September 23, 2017 the sun will be in the zodiac constellation Virgo — “a woman clothed with the sun”. The moon will be at the feet of Virgo — “with the moon under her feet”. The ‘nine’ stars of the zodiac constellation Leo, plus three planets (Mercury, Venus, and Mars), will be at the head of Virgo — “on her head a crown of 12 stars”. The planet Jupiter will be in the center of Virgo, and, as the weeks pass after September 23, Jupiter will exit Virgo to the east, past her feet, so to speak — “She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth”. Jupiter is the largest of the planets, the “king” of the planets, so to speak — “She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod”.

The "woman" in Revelation 12 symbolizes the coming forth of the church of God.  And I have no idea how this might be related to September 23, 2017.  But the same website also points out that this same event has happened at least four other times, in 1827, 1483, 1293, and 1056.

If we want to correlate signs in the heavens with key points in history, the 1827 version of this event (as described above) occurred on September 22-23, 1827.  The Jewish celebration of Rosh Hashanah, or Feast of  Trumpets, began on the evening of September 21, 1827 and it is a two day observance.  And we all know that Joseph Smith left his home in the late evening of September 21, 1827 to arrive at the hill just after midnight at the beginning of the 22nd to retrieve the plates for the Book of Mormon. 

At least two LDS related web sites picked up on this: 

https://thirdhour.org/blog/faith/september-23rd-sign-heavens/

https://www.deilataylor.com/signs-of-september/

This person posting on this last website used the software “Stellarium" to check the events on September 22, 1827 (awesome software, by the way).

I have no idea if this all means anything, or what it means.  I'm just throwing it out there.  So let the speculation begin. 

Edited July 2, 2023 by InCognitus

[CV75]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

There was a lot of excitement by some in September 2017 related to the "great wonder in heaven" of Revelation 12.  As the EarthSky website put it:

The "woman" in Revelation 12 symbolizes the coming forth of the church of God.  And I have no idea how this might related to September 23, 2017.  But the same website also points out that this same event has happened at least four other times, in 1827, 1483, 1293, and 1056.

If we want to correlate signs in the heavens with key points in history, the 1827 version of this event (as described above) occurred on September 22-23, 1827.  The Jewish celebration of Rosh Hashanah, or Feast of  Trumpets, began on the evening of September 21, 1827 and it is a two day observance.  And we all know that Joseph Smith left his home in the late evening of September 21, 1827 to arrive at the hill just after midnight at the beginning of the 22nd to retrieve the plates for the Book of Mormon. 

At least two LDS related web sites picked up on this: 

https://thirdhour.org/blog/faith/september-23rd-sign-heavens/

https://www.deilataylor.com/signs-of-september/

This person posting on this last website used the software “Stellarium" to check the events on September 22, 1827 (awesome software, by the way).

I have no idea if this all means anything, or what it means.  I'm just throwing it out there.  So let the speculation begin. 

Nice example! Now if we were to locate a qualifying star(s) 200 light years away, the light from a major observable event involving it on 09/22/1827 would reach Earth in 2027.

[Niblo]

On 6/29/2023 at 1:55 PM, CA Steve said:

Crap!

I wonder if I can get my deposit back on my backyard doomsday bunker?

😜

I'll let you be in my bunker, if I can be in yours (with apologies to Bob Dylan).

Edited July 2, 2023 by Niblo

[The Nehor]

I don’t see the purpose of such a nebulous sign in the first place. Why have a sign that could mean anything or nothing?

Unless we get a prophetic equivalent of Samuel the Lamanite announcing it and what it will be what is the point?

Edited July 3, 2023 by The Nehor

[Kenngo1969]

13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I don’t see the purpose of such a nebulous sign in the first place. Why have a sign that could mean anything or nothing?

Unless we get a prophetic equivalent of Samuel the Lamanite announcing it and what it will be what is the point?

As tempted as I am to reach the same conclusion with regard to not a few signs of the Second Coming, my personal opinion is that, probably, the Brethren gradually will be less oblique about calling the signs what they are as the time draws nearer.  To be clear, I don't believe, necessarily, that this "non-obliqueness" will take the form of "Thus saith the Lord ..."  Rather, I think that "non-obliqueness" that takes the form of "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear ..." will be much more common.

A part of me wonders if that isn't part of what President Russell M. Nelson was referring to when he said:

 

Quote

 

... (I)n coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.

My beloved brothers and sisters, I plead with you to increase your spiritual capacity to receive revelation. ... Choose to do the spiritual work required to enjoy the gift of the Holy Ghost and hear the voice of the Spirit more frequently and more clearly.

 

President Russell M. Nelson (April 2018), "Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives," Salt Lake City UT: Address delivered at the 188th Annual General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed at https://site.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/04/revelation-for-the-church-revelation-for-our-lives?lang=eng&adobe_mc_ref=https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/04/revelation-for-the-church-revelation-for-our-lives?lang=eng&adobe_mc_sdid=SDID=73249F73E031E80D-183BA6907CD95FF3|MCORGID=66C5485451E56AAE0A490D45%40AdobeOrg|TS=1688404474&v=Control

My $0.02, actual value, as always, much less.  Apologies for the length of the link.

[Stargazer]

On 6/29/2023 at 7:45 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

No, those expectations are absurd - according to the science. So if you aren't misreading it, then you don't understand it. The paper itself that you reference doesn't allow for such a thing. The explosion of the star, it states would occur some decades after the carbon is all gone. But the carbon isn't gone - and so it cannot occur for decades at the very earliest (assuming that the carbon is in fact just about all gone - which the authors themselves don't believe).  So it cannot happen tomorrow. It cannot happen next week, It cannot happen in the next decade. It is, perhaps, possible that it could occur within a century - but no one - including the authors of this research - believes that this is the case. And this is assuming that these guesses are accurate - the paper has been heavily contested on some of its assumptions - the biggest being its claim that the 2,200 day periodic shift is the primary and not a secondary (this switch changes the math considerably).

So the question is, why do you?

Scientists contest heavily with themselves all the time. Consensuses are not arrived at in haste, generally. Early claims are rebutted by many, yet later prove to be true, nevertheless. And other times, the early claims are completely and finally rebutted. The phlogiston theory of heat was first proposed in 1667 and remained on the list of viable theories for a hundred years. Lemaitre first wrote of what Fred Hoyle later called the "Big Bang" theory in 1925. Einstein was at first not a fan, saying "Your calculations are correct; but your physics are abominable." Hoyle never strayed from his preferred "Steady State" theory. Lemaitre was eventually proven correct.  Consensus on the topic has been reached, but there are still some holdout who think something else is at play. Perhaps their doubts will eventually be borne out, but I doubt it. The James Webb Telescope is finding new things out all the time, so I expect we will learn a lot of new things eventually.

They are already finding objects out there that they would have said were impossible objects. So your saying "cannot" so often (as in "So it cannot happen tomorrow. It cannot happen next week, It cannot happen in the next decade.") is a bit risky, or so it seems to me. What they think they know about carbon burning may prove to be mistaken. Or more likely not mistaken, but we will see.

I am a mere enthusiast. I like to think that carbon fusion will end very soon and result in a spectacular show. I bring this topic up because I want people to think about the Second Coming. I think it is very near, and getting nearer. Will A Betelgeuse Show presage it? I don't know, but it's worth speculating about.

On 6/29/2023 at 7:45 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

I don't disagree with you - but this is simply wild speculation created only by the vagueness of the language and not the science. Consider this:

The research argues speculatively (and this is contested) that this is occurring faster than we originally thought would happen - that is, that it is possible that it could occur in hundreds of years instead of hundreds of thousands. But it doesn't mean at all that we should take the comments of the researcher (who obviously is not a native English speaker) and suggest that the most favorable interpretation of his language to your theory should be used rather than his science - which isn't anywhere near as favorable.

If I were he, I would be quite conservative in my predictive expressions with regard to this topic. It's easier to explain away an earlier-than-expected occurrence of a supernova than a later-than-expected one. In the first case, you're just being commendably cautious. In the second, you're a loose cannon.

On 6/29/2023 at 7:45 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

I don't have a clue. Quite frankly, I think that it is pointless to speculate about it. My involvement here isn't about what it might be, it is simply to point out the problems with suggestions about what you think it is.

I just want to discuss the topic because I think it's interesting. As to the pointlessness of speculation, why is it pointless? Plenty of people on this forum argue about speculative topics all the time. We look through a glass, darkly, and with great abandon around here. What does it mean to be resurrected? Heck, I don't know. The available revelations on the subject are very vague and lend themselves to much discussion. It's entertaining though, isn't it? Which ultimately may be the sole raison d'être of this entire site.

On 6/29/2023 at 7:45 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

And if we really want to parse the non-canonical statement by Joseph Smith about the grand sign - "But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc." - if this is Betelgeuse exploding, we won't call it a planet, or a comet. Why? Because we will know what it is.

Just because something is non-canonical does not remove from it any and all applicability. Joseph was not saying it would be a comet or a planet, just that it would be pooh-poohed by the current intelligentsia as nothing more than a common astronomical event -- when it was actually a significant sign.

The concept of "supernova" did not exist in Joseph's lifetime. I'm reasonably sure that he was not well-read on the then current state of astronomy, so being vague is entirely reasonable. Did God show him what it would look like in a personal revelation? I'd bet real money that He did -- though I also bet that we won't ever know this in this lifetime. How would Joseph describe a supernova in mid-1800s terminology? He didn't have a word for it, and so he might have just used a couple of the words that seemed reasonable to use to help him describe what he was shown. 

My Native American ancestors used their word for "deer" to refer to the horses and cows that the Europeans brought with them. Because what other word would they use? They look kind of like deer, just larger. Similarly, we North Americans use the word "elk" to refer to that large species of deer that some NA natives called the "wapiti". But the Europeans say "elk" to what we call "moose." 

On 6/29/2023 at 7:45 PM, Benjamin McGuire said:

More to the point, what is the nature of a planet or comet that isn't shared with a supernova? They move through the heavens. And that seems to be what Joseph Smith was indicating there. So we are discussing not only a literary interpretation of a recording of Something Joseph Smith said, but then trying to place that in the context of this research on the star Betelgeuse. It seems to me to be more than a little stretch - with no real value.

You're entitled to think it valueless. It's a free world, after all. But your disdain is noted.

I'm Stargazer here for a reason. I love talking about astrophysics. Talking about Betelgeuse is highly interesting to me, and regardless of whether a supernova will be a herald of the Second Coming, I read or listen to everything new I see that comes out about it. But posting an article about Betelegeuse without a Latter-day implication is definitely off-topic for the site. May I not be permitted to relate it to the second-most glorious event of this earth's existence, after its creation?

Will Betelgeuse's explosion be the "grand sign" in my speculation? If not, hooray! If so, then likewise hooray! There are plenty of other things to speculate about in connection with the Lord's return. Is it valueless to discuss those things, too? 

What does it means for the Dead Sea to be healed? How can potable water spring forth from the Temple Mount? Will the armies of the Middle East truly surround and nearly conquer all of Israel before the Lord's foot touches the Mount of Olives? Plenty to talk about in keeping the hope of the Lord's return alive.

You don't have to like it.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Stargazer

[Stargazer]

16 hours ago, Stargazer said:

They are already finding objects out there that they would have said were impossible objects. So your saying "cannot" so often (as in "So it cannot happen tomorrow. It cannot happen next week, It cannot happen in the next decade.") is a bit risky, or so it seems to me. What they think they know about carbon burning may prove to be mistaken. Or more likely not mistaken, but we will see.

I should like to point out that as @Benjamin McGuire stated, the author of the paper which the Anton Petrov channel video commenting upon made a clarification which Anton recognized in a pinned comment: 

"Small clarification/Update: The author of the paper recently confirmed that their calculations suggest the carbon burning stage is still far from over and there are at least hundreds of years of burning left, after which it'll enter the final stages that will last about 3 decades. 
     But once again, this is just the first such study and further follow up may discover something that was missed here or clarify exactly what the fundamental node for this star is.
     Either way, exciting stuff, but important to remember, science often relies on multiple sources of evidence. I'm not going to hold my breath about this to be honest as we are a lot more likely to see a supernova in the Tarantula nebula before Betelgeuse."

Woosley and Janka, in their 2006 paper, "The Physics of Core-Collapse Supernovae", which appeared in Nature Physics, suggested that in a star of 15 solar masses carbon fusion would last on the order of 2000 years, whereupon the subsequent stages of Neon, Silicon, and Oxygen would take place on the order of about 3 years before the iron core collapsed and triggers the supernova. For reference, Betelgeuse's mass is given as 16.5 to 19 solar masses.

I note that all these papers talk of calculations and models based on what we believe we know about astrophysics. Nobody has observed the process in reality. Betelgeuse is the very first opportunity our astrophysicists will have had to watch in real time, and when it blows it will be the closest supernova ever to be observed in history. Ringside seating Yay!

The point I am trying to make here is that even though the author of the paper, Dr. Saio, may be of the opinion that carbon fusing is still far from over, his opinion comes as a result of calculations based on what he knows now. Do the fusion stages move in lockstep, so that it would require carbon fusion to be 100% complete before the iron core collapse occurs? Or might the core collapse get triggered once the proportion of iron in the core reaches a certain threshhold, but before carbon is used up?  When a supernova blows, it spews all kinds of atoms into space. The fact that earth supports life is due to the supernova that created our carbon not having used up all its carbon before going kablooie. Oxygen was not totally used up when the stage slipped from oxygen fusion producing Si, S, Ar, and Ca to silicon fusion producing iron. Does such a star support multiple fusion layers simultaneously? 

We simply do not know these things. We are constantly being surprised. Will Betelgeuse be the Great Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man? I have no idea. But maybe it will. We will see.

 

[rodheadlee]

I love this thread

[Sara H]

On 6/28/2023 at 4:02 AM, Stargazer said:

As many of you know, I chose my screen name, Stargazer, because I have a particular interest in astronomy and astrophysics. Combine this with the "Signs of the Times" and there is an approaching astronomical event that may possibly herald a divine event. I'm speaking of a sign of the Second Coming, what Joseph Smith referred to as "one grand sign of the Son of Man in heaven". This is referred to in the book Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith.

When mentioning it, he says that the world will disregard its import: "But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc." See Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, Chaper 34.

We do not know the actual nature of the sign, other than it will appear in the sky, and that it will be seen as an astronomical event, of no other import than any other event. And the Prophet doesn't say anything about the event that would indicate it might be a cause of destruction. 

In the Book of Revelation, there are astronomical events spoken of (chapter 8 which DO cause destruction on the earth. Besides geological events (e.g. an earthquake), a "star" called Wormwood will fall into the sea. It seems to be a comet or meteorite that emits poisonous substances that kills life in the seas, and sinks a third of the ships at sea (good time to avoid cruise ships). But I'm not looking to bring these events up.

What I do want to bring up is this "grand sign," and suggest that it might be a supernova, which when it ignites will be visible both night and day for a number of months. And we have a candidate for the supernova!

Yes, I'm talking about Betelgeuse.

Betelgeuse is a red supergiant star of spectral type M1-2 and one of the largest visible to the naked eye. It is usually the tenth-brightest star in the night sky and, after Rigel, the second-brightest in the constellation of Orion. It's believed to be about 8 million years old, and because of its size, it is near the end of its life on the main sequence. Without going into the astrophysics of the matter (some astronomers believe it is in the carbon-fusing stage, which is the last stage before kablooie), it is now believed by many astronomers that it may go supernova any time in the next 100,000 years. In other words, it could happen any day now. Or in a few more hundred years. For more information about this star, see the Wikipedia article linked to above.

One recent astrophysical paper, "Comment on the feasibility of carbon burning in Betelgeuse" postulates that Betelgeuse is already in the carbon-burning phase and is therefore close to a supernova explosion. Although one paper's author recently confirmed that their calculations suggest the carbon burning stage is still far from over and there are at least hundreds of years of burning left, after which it'll enter the final stages that will last about 3 decades. There will undoubtedly be more studies of this in the near future, as it is of particular interest to astrophysicists.

For recent information on this, have a watch of science YouTuber Anton Petrov's video "Potential Evidence That Betelgeuse May Go Supernova Early After All." 

Finally, for those of you who believe that there will be "grand sign", but aren't committed to Betelgeuse, what other kind of astronomical event do you think this means?

The fact that there is not a significant indication of the second coming, which suggests that there will not be a second coming, is the grand sign of the second coming. Just a few short weeks ago, my husband and I were having a conversation about this very topic. As we were growing up, we had the misconception that we were members of the generation that had been predestined to be the Latter-day Saints who would assist Christ in establishing a theocracy on earth after his second coming. The longer I live, the less likely it is that thing will ever take place. My husband was taken aback when he began researching the history of our church because he discovered that every generation of Latter-day Saints has been instructed that their generation is the generation that is going to usher in the second coming. And now my children are of the opinion that theirs will be the generation that lives to see the return of Christ. 

 

My spouse is of the opinion that by the year 2100, only a small fraction of the population of the globe will even be aware of the fact that Christ will return. In eighty years, religion won't be anything like what we can even begin to envision it to be now. And I think that's the case. As time passes and we move further away from the turn of the millennium, the following generation will place less importance on any of the Abrahamic religions. And if there is no such thing as the latter days, how can people call themselves Latter-day Saints? I believe the brethren are aware of this, which is why there is a movement to redefine what we mean when we say "Mormonism." 

 

So, if Christ hasn't returned by the year 2050, what will happen then? How much longer do we have to wait before we start to consider the possibility that there won't be a significant sign? The name of the Latter-day Saint faith alone makes a strong assertion, more so than any other religion could possibly do so with only its name alone. Therefore, before we can discern any concrete evidence of Christ's return, the first thing we need to do is calculate how much longer the last days will last. 

 

[mfbukowski]

40 minutes ago, Sara H said:

So, if Christ hasn't returned by the year 2050, what will happen then? How much longer do we have to wait before we start to consider the possibility that there won't be a significant sign? The name of the Latter-day Saint faith alone makes a strong assertion, more so than any other religion could possibly do so with only its name alone. Therefore, before we can discern any concrete evidence of Christ's return, the first thing we need to do is calculate how much longer the last days will last. 

Imo, just as the Garden of Eden was a parable of the Fall of Everyman/Woman leading to the Plan of Happiness through following the Commandments, and belief in the Savior, we will all have our own individual Second Coming soon after death. 😁

Maybe it will be literal as well, but imo such beliefs are not the purpose for the scriptural stories, they are to help us to be ready for our own PERSONAL "Second Coming" for believers, and First Surprise for non-believers.

Bottom line: both are to teach us all to be Good Children. 

I think about the stained glass windows in the European cathedrals, where all the essentials of the bible were depicted for those who could not read.

At our stage of spiritual development, maybe we ALL are in the same stage - still needing the stories, even today, but now we write them in the language of "science" instead of stained glass. 😉

Edited July 11, 2023 by mfbukowski

[Benjamin McGuire]

1 hour ago, Sara H said:

So, if Christ hasn't returned by the year 2050, what will happen then? How much longer do we have to wait before we start to consider the possibility that there won't be a significant sign? The name of the Latter-day Saint faith alone makes a strong assertion, more so than any other religion could possibly do so with only its name alone. Therefore, before we can discern any concrete evidence of Christ's return, the first thing we need to do is calculate how much longer the last days will last. 

One of the interesting things is that what we have today in Mormonism has already changed dramatically from early Mormonism. Early Mormonism believed (following the ideas that were taught in the restorationist movement in which early Mormonism participated) was that there was no determinate point in time when the second coming would occur - that it would occur as soon as all of the necessary conditions were met. The Church could, in that context, expedite the second coming by working actively to fulfill as many of those conditions as possible as soon as possible. As Mormonism parted ways from the restorationist movement its view began to shift from an indeterminate time frame for the second coming to a determinate timeframe at some point in the future. This belief change was reinforced with Joseph Fielding Smith who was among the earliest dispensationalists in Mormonism - his dispensationalism was closely connected to his belief (and the influences on that belief) of a young earth creationist viewpoint. For those of his contemporaries with whom he debated the issue of young earth creationism versus an old earth creationism (James Talmage, B.H. Roberts, and so on), the question of the second coming was viewed quite differently.

I know a little bit about what you describe. When I was quite small, my father moved us to Missouri for a couple of years - to be a part of the gathering to the American Zion that was supposed to occur (he still points out, when we discuss the subject - he is 83 now - that for a period of time he lived in the only branch of the Church with two dedicated temple sites within its borders - Far West, and Adam-ondi-Ahman). They left after a couple of years for a number of complicated reasons. He was a convert to Mormonism (he joined in 1971, and lived in Missouri between 1973 and 1975).

Anyway, what I really wanted to add to this was that there is an awful lot of mentions of Mormonism in science fiction. Heinlein used references to Mormonism on a fairly regular basis. When they made his Starship Troopers into a movie, the movie makes a suggestion that the futuristic bug war was started when a group of Mormon extremists tried to colonize a world that was within the boundaries of the "Arachnid Quarantine Zone." Their settlement (Port Joe Smith) was the first human settlement destroyed in the conflict in which the film is set. Mormonism's view that there are lots of worlds, populated by beings who look like us (because they are children of the same God that we are), would allow for wide range of shifts in expectations and theology around the meaning of the second coming and its timing. Among other sorts of teachings that have, to some extent, fallen by the wayside since they were popular in my younger days, is the idea that for all of the worlds that God created, and all of the people that have (and will) live on those worlds, there was only one oldest son - only one Savior. As Joseph Smith taught:

Quote

For the Lord he is God, and his life never ends, And besides him there ne’er was a Saviour of men. … He’s the Saviour, and only begotten of God — By him, of him, and through him, the worlds were all made, Even all that career in the heavens so broad, Whose inhabitants, too, from the first to the last, ... Are sav’d by the very same Saviour of ours; And, of course, are begotten God’s daughters and sons, By the very same truths, and the very same pow’rs. (Times and Seasons 4:82–85.)

Brigham Young wrote:

Quote

How many earths are there? I observed this morning that you may take the particles of matter composing this earth, and if they could be enumerated they would only be a beginning to the number of the creations of God; and they are continually coming into existence, and undergoing changes and passing through the same experience that we are passing through” (“Remarks,” Deseret News, Aug. 24, 1870, 343).

Marion G. Romney wrote:

Quote

Jesus Christ, in the sense of being its Creator and Redeemer, is the Lord of the whole universe. Except for his mortal ministry accomplished on this earth, his service and relationship to other worlds and their inhabitants are the same as his service and relationship to this earth and its inhabitants. … In short, Jesus Christ, through whom God created the universe, was chosen to put into operation throughout the universe Elohim’s great plan ‘to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man’—the gospel of Jesus Christ—the only way whereby man can obtain eternal life” (“Jesus Christ: Lord of the Universe,” Improvement Era, Nov. 1968, 46, 48; see also D&C 76:19–24).

Elder McConkie wrote:

Quote

Now our Lord’s jurisdiction and power extend far beyond the limits of this one small earth on which we dwell. He is, under the Father, the Creator of worlds without number. (Moses 1:33.) And … the atonement of Christ, being literally and truly infinite, applies to an infinite number of earths.

Just as the creative and redemptive powers of Christ extend to the earth and all things thereon, as also to the infinite expanse of worlds in immensity, so the power of the resurrection is universal in scope. Man, the earth, and all life thereon will come forth in the resurrection. And the resurrection applies to and is going on in other worlds and other galaxies. (Mormon Doctrine)

I was taught (like many others) that only this earth was wicked enough to kill the Messiah - and so his mortality was spent here - even though the effects of his sacrifice were felt on all the worlds populated by God's children. In this context, we could suggest that the second coming is far, far off - perhaps millennia into the future - when the conditions for it are met, not only here, but everywhere else. And the fact that this created a stereotype that fit well enough into the speculative fiction of my childhood that I found regular references to it (as Mormons search the cosmos for evidence that their God stepped foot on this world or that world), leads me to believe that Mormonism can and will adapt if it becomes increasingly apparent that the second coming isn't as imminent as we thought it was.

Edited July 11, 2023 by Benjamin McGuire

[Benjamin McGuire]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

We simply do not know these things. We are constantly being surprised. Will Betelgeuse be the Great Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man? I have no idea. But maybe it will. We will see.

The challenge isn't just this. It is the interpretation of what Joseph Smith said. For much of my early years participating in the Church, there was an expectation that the sign that this refers to was also the sign mentioned in Joseph Smith Matthew - that is, it isn't a sign so to speak, but the appearance in the heavens of the glorified Jesus Christ himself, descending to the earth with a host of glorified beings to begin their reign on earth and usher in the millennial period. The brightness of Jesus Himself, in this context, is the bright light that others will mistake for a planet or for a comet (or even - according to the other recording of that conference talk by Joseph Smith - two comets colliding).

When we do not understand the meaning of the texts, it becomes even more difficult to say with any certainly what that sign would actually be. Perhaps the best thing we could say is only what Joseph Smith said - that we would know it when we see it.

[Stargazer]

16 hours ago, Sara H said:

The fact that there is not a significant indication of the second coming, which suggests that there will not be a second coming, is the grand sign of the second coming.

I'm sorry, but this makes no sense at all. Perhaps I am missing something. 

16 hours ago, Sara H said:

Just a few short weeks ago, my husband and I were having a conversation about this very topic. As we were growing up, we had the misconception that we were members of the generation that had been predestined to be the Latter-day Saints who would assist Christ in establishing a theocracy on earth after his second coming. The longer I live, the less likely it is that thing will ever take place. My husband was taken aback when he began researching the history of our church because he discovered that every generation of Latter-day Saints has been instructed that their generation is the generation that is going to usher in the second coming. And now my children are of the opinion that theirs will be the generation that lives to see the return of Christ. 

And maybe their generation will be THE generation.

The New Testament saints were expecting the Second Coming during their own time. It didn't happen. Some of the Christians of the 10th century were expecting it during their time (because the year 1000 is such a nice round number, I guess). Some modern Christians were thinking about the year 2000 for the same reason.

Check out chapter 43 of the Gospel Principles manual. It's all about the Second Coming. You might want to review it.

16 hours ago, Sara H said:

My spouse is of the opinion that by the year 2100, only a small fraction of the population of the globe will even be aware of the fact that Christ will return. In eighty years, religion won't be anything like what we can even begin to envision it to be now. And I think that's the case. As time passes and we move further away from the turn of the millennium, the following generation will place less importance on any of the Abrahamic religions. And if there is no such thing as the latter days, how can people call themselves Latter-day Saints? I believe the brethren are aware of this, which is why there is a movement to redefine what we mean when we say "Mormonism." 

Kind of cynical aren't we?

There is no movement to redefine "Mormonism". In the first place, "Mormon" as a demonym is being downgraded for the simple reason that the church is not the church of "Mormons", but the Church of Jesus Christ. A reemphasis of basic principles is hardly evidence of decline. As for the Abrahamic religions, Christianity in general remains strong worldwide, and so is Islam. You see a few loud cynical souls in the Western nations and assume that they represent the bulk of the people. Yes, a smaller percentage of people there describe themselves as Christian than before. But most of them tend to live according to the principles that Christ taught. They may not attend church, and they may be embroiled in the sinful ways of the world, but they haven't fully abandoned Christ. That time will come, though. The scriptures are very clear that there will be a even greater falling away than previously. But that is not evidence against the second coming. On the contrary, it is an indicator that it comes ever nearer.

16 hours ago, Sara H said:

So, if Christ hasn't returned by the year 2050, what will happen then? How much longer do we have to wait before we start to consider the possibility that there won't be a significant sign? The name of the Latter-day Saint faith alone makes a strong assertion, more so than any other religion could possibly do so with only its name alone. Therefore, before we can discern any concrete evidence of Christ's return, the first thing we need to do is calculate how much longer the last days will last. 

When you write "How much longer do we have to wait before we start to consider the possibility that there won't be a significant sign?" I am reminded of what the Lord said about 2000 years ago.

Luke 12:45-46 -> "But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers."

It seems to me that the Lord delays His coming for precisely that reason: to shake out the irresolute souls who have not the strength of character to endure to the end, but who will give up and go the way of the world.

The signs in the earth already are strong for the approach of the 2nd Coming. The restoration of the fullness of the Gospel, the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, the turmoil throughout the world, and especially the presence of overwhelming wickedness worldwide, some of which has never before existed: the greedy refusal to have children (abortion & birth control); and the attempts to convince children that they are in the wrong body and to influence them to seek medical intervention to "become" the opposite sex. These are all evidences. Yes, the world has always been in turmoil to some extent, but this modern world with practically instant communications means that we are constantly aware of all of it. Two hundred years ago nobody knew what was happening a few hundred miles away. Russia could invade Ukraine and it would be months before word with reach the US. China could have floods and earthquakes killing hundreds of thousands, and we'd never know about it until decades later, if then. Wars were happening all over the world a thousand or half a thousand years ago, and nobody outside those local areas knew about it. But now it's "wars and rumors of wars" because there's 7 billion people and instant communications.

When the Church of Jesus Christ was restored to the earth in 1830, few of the signs of the times had been seen. The First Vision was actually the first sign. But the restored Gospel had to be taken to the whole earth before the Lord could return. The Jews were still a century away from returning in significant numbers to the Holy Land.  But the time is now getting quite ripe. The state of Israel was established in the late 1940s, and is surrounded by hostile states who would dearly love to crush it; the Middle East is a powder keg, and the stage is set for the final stage of the Tribulation. 

I was baptized at age 14 in 1966. There were only 10 temples operating, with only 3 outside the US and Canada. There were only 2,480,899 members, most in North America. The church was an American church. Now look at it. The Church has 315 temples in various phases, which includes 178 dedicated temples (with 174 currently operating and 4 previously-dedicated, but closed for renovation), 58 currently under construction, and 79 others announced (not yet under construction). There are over 17 million members. There are now more members outside the US and Canada than in them.

Just because the prophets have been preparing us for decades to be ready for the time to come, but it hasn't come yet, does not mean that you should throw up your hands in resignation. The Lord said only the Father knows when. And we cannot calculate it, even if we can observe what is happening. In my earlier years in the church I remember hearing members talking about whether the Lord's return was "right around the corner", and of course lots of members wanted to be a part of those events. But in God's timetable it should have been obviously too early. Some members recognized that with significant areas of the world not yet open to the preaching of the gospel, His return was not yet. Large areas of the earth's population had no ready access to the restored church: including the Communist bloc, Africa, India, China and the bulk of Asia. Some members doubted that the European Communist bloc would ever be open to our missionaries for many decades, but just 23 years after my baptism, suddenly that bloc opened up. Africa and southeast Asia began to receive missionaries, along with India. 

When I was baptized there were very few native LDS in Asia. Now there are 1,281,560 members in 2,103 congregations. There were just a few thousand in Africa, concentrated in South Africa. Africa now has 791,837 members in 2,559 congregations.

Edited to add: Certain economists who are paying attention to what is happening in China are saying that that country may be nearing an economic collapse, and with a long-standing promise to their people that they would act to bring Taiwan back into their fold, they may get desperate and pull a "tail wagging the dog" move to disguise their own turmoil by attempting an invasion of Taiwan, which would likely bring on the collapse even more quickly. Time will tell, but if something like that happens there may be great changes in that huge country -- and opportunities to spread the gospel there may increase.

With all this progress and interesting developments, why so cynical?

 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2023 by Stargazer

[Stargazer]

5 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

The challenge isn't just this. It is the interpretation of what Joseph Smith said. For much of my early years participating in the Church, there was an expectation that the sign that this refers to was also the sign mentioned in Joseph Smith Matthew - that is, it isn't a sign so to speak, but the appearance in the heavens of the glorified Jesus Christ himself, descending to the earth with a host of glorified beings to begin their reign on earth and usher in the millennial period. The brightness of Jesus Himself, in this context, is the bright light that others will mistake for a planet or for a comet (or even - according to the other recording of that conference talk by Joseph Smith - two comets colliding).

The grand sign of the coming of the son of man is the coming of the son of man himself? Seems a little self-referential, doesn't it?  Will the appearance of the glorified Jesus Christ be scoffed at as a mere astronomical event?

I suppose it could be. When people don't want to acknowledge an inconvenient fact they can become marvelously creative in finding ways of explaining the fact away.

5 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

When we do not understand the meaning of the texts, it becomes even more difficult to say with any certainly what that sign would actually be. Perhaps the best thing we could say is only what Joseph Smith said - that we would know it when we see it.

But perhaps we could discuss Betelgeuse.  I hope it blows in my lifetime, regardless of whether it presages anything in particular. It will be a marvelous sight.

[Stargazer]

5 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

I was taught (like many others) that only this earth was wicked enough to kill the Messiah - and so his mortality was spent here - even though the effects of his sacrifice were felt on all the worlds populated by God's children. In this context, we could suggest that the second coming is far, far off - perhaps millennia into the future - when the conditions for it are met, not only here, but everywhere else. And the fact that this created a stereotype that fit well enough into the speculative fiction of my childhood that I found regular references to it (as Mormons search the cosmos for evidence that their God stepped foot on this world or that world), leads me to believe that Mormonism can and will adapt if it becomes increasingly apparent that the second coming isn't as imminent as we thought it was.

FWIW, I'm curious as to what you might think of my proposed solution to the Fermi Paradox. If you feel inclined, check it out here: The Fermi Paradox in Light of Moses 1:33-39. If you don't feel inclined to read it, or comment, no worries. 

[Benjamin McGuire]

16 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

The grand sign of the coming of the son of man is the coming of the son of man himself? Seems a little self-referential, doesn't it?  Will the appearance of the glorified Jesus Christ be scoffed at as a mere astronomical event?

Exactly. But isn't that redundancy precisely what Willard Richards recorded of that sermon that you reference? I'll quote that part again for you (emphasis mine):

Quote

But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc. But the Son of Man will come as the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, which will be as the light of the morning cometh out of the east.

The prophecy itself is open to interpretation, and we have more than one interpretation from contemporaries of Joseph Smith. Wendle Mace wrote that Joseph Smith told him that the sign was in fact the return of the city of Enoch, descending from heaven. Orson Pratt taught that "it is to be like our sun seen over one entire side of the globe, and then passing immediately round to the other, or else it will encircle the whole earth at the same time." (JD 8:50). In any case, we also here have this problem that you pointed out - that what Joseph Smith may have considered to be an astronomical event may not be exactly what you have in mind as an astronomical event ...

30 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

But perhaps we could discuss Betelgeuse.  I hope it blows in my lifetime, regardless of whether it presages anything in particular. It will be a marvelous sight.

I am sure that it will be.

37 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

FWIW, I'm curious as to what you might think of my proposed solution to the Fermi Paradox. If you feel inclined, check it out here: The Fermi Paradox in Light of Moses 1:33-39. If you don't feel inclined to read it, or comment, no worries. 

I am a fan of John Wheeler's participatory anthropic principle. I like the idea that the universe creates observers who - through their observations - fine tune the universe. If I were to look in scripture for something of this sort, I wouldn't go to Moses, but to Abraham, where we read in 4:17-18 (emphasis mine):

Quote

And the Gods set them in the expanse of the heavens, to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to cause to divide the light from the darkness. And the Gods watched those things which they had ordered until they obeyed.

However, I would say that what I really believe is that neither Moses nor Abraham was written with the intent to answer this sort of questions - and when we try to get these texts to answer these kinds of questions, we are only going to get our own biases presented back to us. We are looking for ways to read the text to support a position we have intuited rather than finding the meaning in the text that its author(s) intended.

In any case, I think that there are a number of assumptions that we haven't yet proven that are necessary for the Fermi paradox to be valid. One of the core issues that really isn't addressed in anything I have seen is the idea that interstellar space travel - even if it occurs at the speed of light - would place detection of our civilization outside of nearly any other sufficiently advanced lifeforms other than those that might exist among our closest neighbors. Take Betelgeuse, for example, at 650 light years away - although it wouldn't support intelligent life in that system - if they were there, they wouldn't receive our first weak radio waves for another several hundred years, let alone send something back in response to it. And while we can look at exo-planets and start to determine the nature of their atmospheres and the potential for life based on the presence of the necessary chemical ingredients (as we understand it), we are still often looking at the states of those planets hundreds of millions if not billions of years in the past - we can predict possibly where life might have evolved, but not where it did. Further, we have to deal with the fundamental nature of the universe and the way that it is expanding. What if the theory introduced in 2013 is right, and our universe is merely the event horizon of an explosion created by the collision of a star and a black hole in a 4th dimensional universe? In such scenarios we might conclude that it is quite reasonable to assume that conditions for advanced life (like our own) did not exist until a certain point in the development of the expanding universe - meaning that we may not be alone, but we are unable as of yet, to determine who our neighbors might be (and they would all be in the same situation as we are).

This doesn't mean that your solution is out in left field - I think that any discussion of the paradox is going to be plagued by untestable assumptions (my own included).

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

This doesn't mean that your solution is out in left field - I think that any discussion of the paradox is going to be plagued by untestable assumptions (my own included).

To quote Mr. Spock, "That much is certain." 

 

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

What if the theory introduced in 2013 is right, and our universe is merely the event horizon of an explosion created by the collision of a star and a black hole in a 4th dimensional universe?

Wow, cool! Hadn't heard this one before. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

[Kenngo1969]

11 hours ago, Stargazer said:

The grand sign of the coming of the son of man is the coming of the son of man himself? Seems a little self-referential, doesn't it?  Will the appearance of the glorified Jesus Christ be scoffed at as a mere astronomical event?

 

 

With all due deference to any senior Brethren or Gospel scholars in the Church of Jesus Christ who may have reached the same conclusion, I had the same thought.  Logically, to me, it makes no sense to say that the Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man is ... His Coming!  A sign of a thing is a sign of the thing, and the thing's the thing!  While Joseph Smith said that people would mistake the Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man simply for another astronomical phenomenon [a very impressive astronomical phenomenon, but simply another astronomical phenomenon, nonetheless], I don't know that there will be anyone who will be able to mistake the Coming of the Son of Man for anything other than what it actually is!

Edited July 12, 2023 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

To quote Mr. Spock, "That much is certain." 

 

Also, to quote Mr. Spock [with raised eyebrow, and with reference to many things on this thread and to this thread itself], "Fascinating!"

[Kenngo1969]

@Benjamin McGuire

Quote

But what will the world do? They will say it is a planet, a comet, etc. But the Son of Man will come as the sign of the coming of the Son of Man, which will be as the light of the morning cometh out of the east.

Still, Joseph Smith seems, to me, both linguistically and logically, to be separating the two: In order to say that one thing is as another, one must do so.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Kenngo1969