Place in the Church for Singles

[manol]

double post

Edited March 25 by manol

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, manol said:

I'm not comfortable with the idea of heaven (i.e. the Celestial Kingdom) having a two-class social structure, a person's status and happiness being dependent on their ability to attract at least one mate (of the correct gender).

I don't see how heaven can be heaven if anyone we really care about – which presumably would include everyone – is in their own private hell to any degree. If heaven isn't heaven for everyone, then it really isn't heaven for anyone.

Likewise down here. If the paradigm isn't working for everyone, then it really isn't working for anyone.

Maybe the problem does not lie within those for whom the current paradigm doesn't work. Maybe the problem lies with the current paradigm. I realize that may be a disturbing thought for most members of the LDS Church, but if the Church is still a work in progress, then some basic paradigms may be still be incomplete or incorrect.

Rather than waiting around for the leadership of the LDS Church to come up with a better paradigm, my unoriginal suggestion is this: “Seek, and ye shall find.”

 

My big problem with this approach is that it gives hell a veto on heaven. No one can be happy unless everyone is happy.

 

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

My big problem with this approach is that it gives hell a veto on heaven. No one can be happy unless everyone is happy.

 

I think it could work if all it meant was the door was always open and people could change.  No one in heaven gives up on anyone not there, but still are having a blast even if they miss others not there.

I would think being evil would get lonely, repetitious, and boring after a million or billion years.

Edited March 25 by Calm

[The Nehor]

Just now, Calm said:

I think it could work if all it meant was the door was always open and people could change.

I would think being evil would get lonely, repetitious, and boring after a million or billion years.

I would hope so but humans haven’t tired of it yet.

[manol]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

My big problem with this approach is that it gives hell a veto on heaven. No one can be happy unless everyone is happy.

Excellent point!

If I'm following along correctly: I'm saying something like,“Draw a big enough circle to include everyone, such that you genuinely care about what happens to them”, and you're saying something like, “Not so fast! There's a really big price tag attached to that. If no one can be happy unless everyone else is happy, then everyone's happiness is vetoed by any one person's bad choices!”

If ANYONE goes to hell for eternity, then you are absolutely right! In that case the only way for me to back-peddle out of my paradigm would be to make exceptions for the really bad folks: I'd have to say, “I no longer love THAT neighbor as myself. The worth of THAT soul is no longer great. I must rid my heart of every thought of THAT brother or sister, or else it hurts too damned much.”

So either nobody goes to hell for eternity, OR my paradigm is fatally flawed, which is of course possible (and my paradigm is inevitably incomplete at best.) In the meantime indulge me, if you will, in a thought experiment:

Imagine that you have absolutely zero fear for your own soul. Imagine that the final outcome for you is not in doubt. Give yourself permission to feel what this feels like.

Next, imagine that you have absolutely zero fear for anyone else's soul. Imagine that the final outcome is not in doubt for anyone. Again, give yourself permission to feel what this feels like.

Okay.

NOW, how much veto power does hell have? If a hellish experience is merely part of the path for some, rather than a destination, then it is just another of the many experiences that work together for our good. 

 

 

Edited March 25 by manol

[morgan.deane]

On 3/23/2024 at 4:35 PM, bluebell said:

I think sometimes too, posters are focused on the discussion aspect of this forum and it doesn’t always occur that someone is seeking support and comfort rather than discussing a topic from different perspectives. 

This is a really good point. I'm normally all about discussing things from every angle. I've been blogging a long time and have a long list of books that show how much I like thought and discussion: https://mormonwar.blogspot.com/  

But this subject is different. It really hits me hard because I've lived it for so long and it goes the heart of my salvation and if God even exists and hears my thousands upon thousands of prayers. Even though my marriage was bad from the start, those few years it felt so good not to have the weight of church culture on me it was like having the boot off of my neck. For the first time in my life I felt like I kind of belonged. But now its been another 15 of having that constant pressure and isolation. No matter how many good things I have in my life- time with my daughter, great concerts, a really fun movie, publishing yet another article or book, precious time with friends, occasionally a decent date- I still come home to an empty house and all of that pressure.

I'd also add this thread is a good example of the difficulty in even talking about it. As there are a few people that kind of get it, usually because they are single or close to one, but many more that don't get it. I have much more empathy for women, minorities and the alphabet community getting talked at by people who haven't really experienced what they have.

Getting back to your good point, perhaps its a luxury of not being personally feeling it that lets people go with the discuss from every angle approach.

Writing about this I can feel my emotional stiches starting to burst and its definitely not a fun academic exercise, so I wish everyone the best and I'm probably moving on. Thanks your comments and understanding.  Good luck! 

PS: I was watching this episode of Frasier as I wrote this, and one of my favorite scenes in all of television came on. They discuss all of their failed relationships and all the times they tried and failed, then Niles throws his wedding ring off the balcony and they share this moment. I'm definitely out there with them: https://youtu.be/cOzVgUX2Np4?si=HQzUrtfz-t729zNn

 

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, manol said:

Imagine that you have absolutely zero fear for your own soul. Imagine that the final outcome for you is not in doubt. Give yourself permission to feel what this feels like.

Next, imagine that you have absolutely zero fear for anyone else's soul. Imagine that the final outcome is not in doubt for anyone. Again, give yourself permission to feel what this feels like.

Okay.

NOW, how much veto power does hell have? If a hellish experience is merely part of the path for some, rather than a destination, then it is just another of the many experiences that work together for our good. 

I have seen too many people broken by experiences to believe that all things work together for good. If it does produce a good that good must be in some other world.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I would hope so but humans haven’t tired of it yet.

Each individual lives potentially only to about one hundred years, give or take some years depending on health (outside of accident or disease or murder)….  Imagine living 100 years for each of those one hundred years.  And imagining living with others such as yourself…all self protective and experienced enough after a couple of thousand years not to fall for any games.  How could you manipulate someone who knows you so well?  If you are always intent on being top man, what other person would cooperate with you given they too want to dominate?  How could life not get boring?

[manol]

18 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I have seen too many people broken by experiences to believe that all things work together for good. If it does produce a good that good must be in some other world.

I've seen/experienced some of what you're referring to, but I think going into it here would be a distraction. 

And I understand that a concept which is not at all in evidence in this world seems like it can only be (wishfully) talking about some other world, but in my experience this stuff still has utility here.

When I use wording like “all things work together for our good”, I'm deliberately pulling it from scriptures accepted in an LDS setting, but that's not where I get the concept from. It comes from near-death experiences. Actually my paradigm is that our experiences, good and bad, are (or will be) of benefit to EVERYONE, not just the person they happen to. In other words, the heavy lifting and/or heavy stumbling that individuals do, some under vastly heavier loads that others, is a gift to all that is. Again, I understand that such is not in evidence and probably seems like eye-rolling fantasy.

Please consider watching five minutes of this video from 17:41 (which it should be cued up to) to about 22:40. If those two experiences speak to you, watching the whole forty-something minutes is worthwhile, as each little segment is great:

I'm not expecting to change your mind, just trying to communicate, because your objections are reasonable and deserve the best reply I can muster.  
 

Edited March 26 by manol

[bluebell]

20 hours ago, manol said:

Thanks for asking for clarification!

Regarding hells, I think they are temporary (D&C 19:6-12). 

I think the Good Shepherd coerces no one, nor does he give up on anyone.  I think he has a job that is inclusive of everyone (Moses 1:39), and that he will succeed (D&C 3:1). 

I think the worth of souls is great (D&C 18:10).

I think our role is more participatory than we realize; I think he is the vine and we are the branches (John 15:5). 

I also think he was absolutely serious when he said, "What manner of men [and women] ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am" (3 Nephi 27:27).

So I'm not saying that "hell[s] cannot exist."  They do!  Two men can be standing in a field, the one is in heaven and the other is in hell.  Imo hell is more a state of mind, or a very low spiritual energy level, rather than a geographical location.  By way of example:  "You will not be punished for your anger; you will be punished by your anger" (Buddha). 

I must have misunderstood the other post, because if the Celestial kingdom has different "levels" (for lack of a better term), that wouldn't seem to negate anything that you've said above.

[manol]

Another double post... on the industry-related message boards where I participate quite a bit, the "edit" button is located where the "quote" button is on this board.  So sometimes on this board I hit the gas pedal when I meant to hit the brakes, with predictable results. 

Edited March 26 by manol

[manol]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

I must have misunderstood the other post, because if the Celestial kingdom has different "levels" (for lack of a better term), that wouldn't seem to negate anything that you've said above.

Thanks bluebell, my views might be described as "long-path universalism".  I don't know what the entirety of the path looks like, but I think we're not supposed to leave anyone behind, nor do I think any of us get left behind. 

Here's an imo relevant link to one of the segments in the NDE compilation video that I linked to above; in it she says we're like the cogs on a gear - we're all needed - echoing what Joseph Smith said along the lines of "we without them cannot be made perfect, neither can they without us be made perfect".   It's about two minutes long:

https://youtu.be/hQL2N6UqXTE?t=1444

And this arguably is reinforcing the idea that "the worth of souls is great." 

Edited March 26 by manol

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, manol said:

Thanks bluebell, my views might be described as "long-path universalism".  I don't know what the entirety of the path looks like, but I think we're not supposed to leave anyone behind, nor do I think any of us get left behind. 

Here's an imo relevant link to one of the segments in the NDE compilation video that I linked to above; in it she says we're like the cogs on a gear - we're all needed - echoing what Joseph Smith said along the lines of "we without them cannot be made perfect, neither can they without us be made perfect".   It's about two minutes long:

https://youtu.be/hQL2N6UqXTE?t=1444

And this arguably is reinforcing the idea that "the worth of souls is great." 

Thanks for the further explanations. 

How does your beliefs about not leaving anyone behind mesh with the latter-day saint gospel teaching about 1/3 of God's children (plus lucifer) already being left behind?  Or does it not mesh at all? 

Also, how do you view God's ability to feel joy and be happy relative to having already lost 1/3 of His children to their own choices (if you do ascribe to that belief)?

[manol]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

How does your beliefs about not leaving anyone behind mesh with the latter-day saint gospel teaching about 1/3 of God's children (plus lucifer) already being left behind?  Or does it not mesh at all? 

Also, how do you view God's ability to feel joy and be happy relative to having already lost 1/3 of His children to their own choices (if you do ascribe to that belief)?

I don't think the principles taught in the Parables of the Prodigal Son and the Good Shepherd have an expiration date.   They are just as much his children as any of us.   I don't think the LDS church has the whole story yet. 

D&C 19:6-12 informs us that the "eternal damnation" language in Section 29 is not literal, so likewise perhaps there are significant elements of the story of the 1/3 who rebelled and were cast out that are not literal.  At a minimum there has to be more to the story than the few verses available.

Edited March 26 by manol

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, manol said:

I don't think the principles taught in the Parables of the Prodigal Son and the Good Shepherd have an expiration date.   They are just as much his children as any of us.   I don't think the LDS church has the whole story yet. 

I agree, they are His children.  But how do your beliefs mesh with the principal of agency?   If someone never wants to live a celestial law, how do we not leave them behind without forcing them to live a law they don't want to live?

[manol]

33 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I agree, they are His children.  But how do your beliefs mesh with the principal of agency?   If someone never wants to live a celestial law, how do we not leave them behind without forcing them to live a law they don't want to live?

I think free agency is always honored because it is an essential part of the mechanism by which we progress. 

I think "someone [who] never wants to live the celestial law" is a hypothetical that none of us can say is ever really the case.  "Never" is a very very very long time.  And my understanding is that "time" itself is a construct that does not apply on a celestial level anyway. 

What is Christ's mission? (Moses 1:39)

Will he succeed, even if there are hypothetical situations that would be failure? (D&C 3:1)

I don't expect this to make any sense but I'll toss it out anyway:  If a person could see who and what we really are, the end result would not be in question, BUT the enormity of the work to be done would be apparent. 

In my opinion.

 

Edited March 26 by manol

[Calm]

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

Thanks for the further explanations. 

How does your beliefs about not leaving anyone behind mesh with the latter-day saint gospel teaching about 1/3 of God's children (plus lucifer) already being left behind?  Or does it not mesh at all? 

Also, how do you view God's ability to feel joy and be happy relative to having already lost 1/3 of His children to their own choices (if you do ascribe to that belief)?

Just as something to be considered….

It doesn’t say 1/3, but a third part. The first part may have had numerous individuals, the second middling and the third part only a few. Or in some other order…or two massive and one tiny, or one massive and two tiny. What the other two parts refer to has been speculated about, such as the leaders with Christ, the followers of Christ and those he has chosen, and the last part are the rebellious; in pre1978 it was often the faithful, the neutrals, and the rebellious, but BY discounted that with saying there were no neutrals in heaven), but nothing revealed iirc. 

Not saying that it makes any difference for those who see any children lost as likely unbearable for God, just that some push the idea that God has lost a huge amount of children already and that may not be true. 
 

The third part might even be a symbolic label for the ‘other’ or something else sinister given how scripture likes things in threes.

There are those who speak quite strongly against this usage and insist third part means one third based on how third part is used in the scriptures, but I still see that interpretation as overly rigid. Don’t see the examples they choose as only making sense as equal numbers. 

Edited March 26 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, manol said:

don't expect this to make any sense but I'll toss it out anyway:  If a person could see who and what we really are, the end result would not be in question, BUT the enormity of the work to be done would be apparent. 

In my opinion.

If God understood who we were when he either adopted us as intelligences or spirits, why would he not have chosen all who would eventually desire the Celestial Kingdom and not take any intelligences that would end up in a situation where it would be better they had never been created by him?  It is stacking the deck in his favour, but who wouldn’t for their children?

Since he has not forced us to make that choice, but merely nurtured those who would make that choice given who they always have been, even before God drew them to him, it is based on their moral agency. 

Edited March 26 by Calm

[manol]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

If God understood who we were when he either adopted us intelligences or spirits, why would he not have chosen all who would eventually desire the Celestial Kingdom and not take any intelligences that would end up in a situation where it would be better they had never been created by him?  It is stacking the deck in his favour, but who wouldn’t for their children?

Since he has not forced us to make that choice, but merely nurtured those who would make that choice given who they always have been, even before God drew them to him, it is based on their moral agency. 

Whether or not the Book of Abraham is the most accurate depiction of our relationship to God, I definitely agree with you that God would have figured out a way to set things up for long-term success. 

[ZealouslyStriving]

On 3/25/2024 at 12:09 AM, The Nehor said:

I have seen too many people broken by experiences to believe that all things work together for good. If it does produce a good that good must be in some other world.

"Some blessings come soon, some come late, and some don’t come until heaven; but for those who embrace the gospel of Jesus Christ, they come."  - Jeffrey R. Holland

[The Nehor]

33 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

"Some blessings come soon, some come late, and some don’t come until heaven; but for those who embrace the gospel of Jesus Christ, they come."  - Jeffrey R. Holland

I wish I still trusted that promise. I used to love that line.

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I wish I still trusted that promise. I used to love that line.

Faith is a choice.

[MustardSeed]

11 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Faith is a choice.

Faith is so painful sometimes.  I’m sorry for your hurt.  It must be so hard to hold on when promises are yet unfulfilled. 
 

FTFY

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Faith is a choice.

Maintaining faith after broken promises may be a choice but it also feels dishonest.

[Calm]

20 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Faith is a choice.

Yes, but when you have been beaten with a bat every time you have a glimmer of hope, faith is a hard choice to make. (My hope crushed again and again was not in the Church or the spirit and nothing as complicated as love, just the promise of health being improved by this or that treatment…I just might have gotten a treatment that will do more than maintain status quo of a room or two in my construction while the overall structure continues to slowly crumble and I am terrified to hope because my gut says that means another major doom is coming based on way too consistent past experience.)

Edited March 31 by Calm