Recent updates to General Handbook

[telnetd]

On 8/20/2024 at 4:49 PM, Stargazer said:

I am a little puzzled by the apparent objection, actually. Are you contending against a claim that telnetd has made, or the statement "we are saved by grace and exalted by works"? To me this sounds oversimplified regarding "works," but true to a degree. Is that a problem?

I don't understand the premise of your question.  Saved by grace may be a reference 
to the resurrection.  Exaltation by works is becoming a god after fulfilling all the 
commandments.

[Nofear]

32 minutes ago, telnetd said:

I don't understand the premise of your question.  Saved by grace may be a reference 
to the resurrection.  Exaltation by works is becoming a god after fulfilling all the 
commandments.

I think worrying about works/grace etc.  unnecessarily complicates actual theology. It's not one or the other. It's both. Always.

If we are to be exalted we must become like Christ possessing a perfection of our character -- having not one whit of evil inclination in our being* at any level. This can only occur because of the Atonement. It is a grace afforded all of us if we choose to partake of it. It is not foisted upon us. We choose it. We avail ourselves of the Atonement through external and internal works. Those works can be and often are assisted by grace. The Atonement itself is a grace, the Grace if one wants. It's not just one or the other. Thus, it is perfectly accurate to say one's exaltation is through grace (e.g. saved by grace) but fully bringing that grace into one's life takes a fair bit of work too (e.g. keeping the commandments and one's covenants).

Similarly, I don't like it when we call resurrection a "free gift". It is a condition that happens to have already been met by every mortal because of covenants we kept in the first estate. We don't have to do anything more for that to happen. But, we did do things. At the same time, we can't resurrect ourselves. That is a grace we get because of our covenant fidelity in the pre-mortal realm.

* Having an omnipotent being who might be inclined to use that power in less than good way is not a recipe for a stable society of exalted beings.

[InCognitus]

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

Please rephrase.  

"But, if we wish to overcome spiritual death and enter back into God's presence, 
we must be obedient to laws and principles. This is exaltation by works. Thus, 
according to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works".

What is taken out of context?

The full context is shown in my post here, and quoted below:

On 8/20/2024 at 3:17 PM, InCognitus said:

I know I'm not CV75 (and you asked him), but I'm familiar with the issue.

The problem comes when that quote is presented as being our doctrine, when the quote is actually taken out of context from the article (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1981/04/salvation-by-grace-or-by-works?lang=eng).

The article explores various reasoning regarding the relationship between grace and works, and it explains that while some reasoning might sound good, it may or may not be correct doctrine. In context, the article says that the quoted statement is a "doctrinal error" (the quote provided by telnetd is shown in blue, and the relevant context regarding that statement is shown in red below):

Quote

The second typical explanation goes something like this: The fall of Adam brought two kinds of death into the world—physical death, which is the separation of body and spirit, and spiritual death, which is separation of man from God. The atonement of Christ overcame physical death through the Resurrection. This is salvation by grace because it comes to all men automatically and does not depend on what kinds of lives they have lived. But, if we wish to overcome spiritual death and enter back into God’s presence, we must be obedient to laws and principles. This is exaltation by works. Thus, according to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works.

This is an appealing explanation because it seems to provide a logical argument that fits the statements of Paul neatly into it. However, there is a doctrinal error involved here. While the resurrection of the dead is certainly an integral part of the plan of salvation, and is unconditional and independent of men’s works, the term salvation as used in the scriptures does not mean physical resurrection alone. As Elder Bruce R. McConkie has pointed out, salvation is synonymous with exaltation:

“Salvation in its true and full meaning is synonymous with exaltation or eternal life and consists in gaining an inheritance in the highest of the three heavens within the celestial kingdom. With few exceptions this is the salvation of which the scriptures speak. It is the salvation which the saints seek.” (Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966, p. 670.)

Those who are uncomfortable with Paul’s statements about grace and salvation should bear in mind that the same teachings are found in other scripture as well. Nephi, for example, nearly echoes Paul’s words to the Ephesians when he says, “For we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do” (2 Ne. 25:23). And Lehi’s explanation of the Atonement to Jacob is remarkably similar to Paul’s explanation of justification by faith in Romans 3 [Rom. 3], even down to the phrase “by the law no flesh is justified” (see 2 Ne. 2:5). Likewise, the Doctrine and Covenants points out that both justification and sanctification come by grace (see D&C 20:30–31).

So when taken out of its context, the quote is a misrepresentation of our doctrine (it is "doctrinal error").  

The blue portion shows what you posted and represented to be our doctrine, and the red portion (and what follows in the rest of the article) shows why it is not our doctrine and why it was taken out of context.  The part you quoted is said to be a "doctrinal error" in the article, and appears under the subheading titled "Inadequate Explanations" (see original Ensign article).  

Edited August 22, 2024 by InCognitus

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

I don't understand the premise of your question.  Saved by grace may be a reference 
to the resurrection.  Exaltation by works is becoming a god after fulfilling all the 
commandments.

I was trying to figure out where the other person was coming from, or how they understood what you were saying. Nevermind about that.

 

 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, telnetd said:

Those who don't return to God's presence suffer spiritual death.

Everyone but the sons of perdition will spend eternity with at least one member of the Godhead.

[Stargazer]

58 minutes ago, Nofear said:

I think worrying about works/grace etc.  unnecessarily complicates actual theology. It's not one or the other. It's both. Always.

Well, yes, but...

If one has all the works that are wanted, without Christ it's all nothing when it comes to salvation. There may be more than a few highly exemplary individuals in the Telestial Kingdom who rejected Christ's Atonement, and thus had to atone for their own sins the hard way.

[Nofear]

12 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Well, yes, but...

If one has all the works that are wanted, without Christ it's all nothing when it comes to salvation. There may be more than a few highly exemplary individuals in the Telestial Kingdom who rejected Christ's Atonement, and thus had to atone for their own sins the hard way.

In many ways I agree with you. My quibble goes back to disagreeing with the general tendency to call Salvation  "free". We kept covenants associated with our time before mortality. Salvation is our Heavenly Parents keeping their end of the covenant(s) we may with them.

As for post-mortality, all individuals in any of the kingdoms (Celestial, Telestial, or Terrestrial) will have to face justice for the sins committed as a consequence imperfections in our character. The only way to avoid that justice is to become a new person, "perfected in Christ" with respect to the parts of us that are relevant to the sin committed. Exaltation will only be obtained after being fully perfected in Christ. I anticipate that it will take myself quite some time, even after my death. Consequently, I'll face justice for that which I didn't repent of even if I find myself being comfortable with, and hence to be an inhabitant of, the Celestial Kingdom. How all the timeline works, and if we'll have any grace period to delay/avoid justice, etc. etc., I don't know. Suffice it to say, far better to repent of as much as one can now.

 

[Calm]

8 hours ago, telnetd said:

Please rephrase.  

"But, if we wish to overcome spiritual death and enter back into God's presence, 
we must be obedient to laws and principles. This is exaltation by works. Thus, 
according to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works".

What is taken out of context?

It is taken out of context because such is not doctrine, but doctrinal error as stated by the full quote. 

Edited August 22, 2024 by Calm

[telnetd]

On 8/22/2024 at 11:35 AM, Nofear said:

That is a grace we get because of our covenant fidelity in the pre-mortal realm.

What do you mean?

[telnetd]

On 8/22/2024 at 12:15 PM, InCognitus said:

The full context is shown in my post here, and quoted below:

The blue portion shows what you posted and represented to be our doctrine, and the red portion (and what follows in the rest of the article) shows why it is not our doctrine and why it was taken out of context.  The part you quoted is said to be a "doctrinal error" in the article, and appears under the subheading titled "Inadequate Explanations" (see original Ensign article).  

Including @Calm

InCognitus, I saw the link you quoted.

You said the blue part involves a doctrinal error.

But, if we wish to overcome spiritual death and enter back into God’s presence, we 
must be obedient to laws and principles. This is exaltation by works. Thus, according 
to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works.

One part you seemed to agree with was the following:

"Salvation in its true and full meaning is synonymous with exaltation or eternal 
life and consists in gaining an inheritance in the highest of the three heavens 
within the celestial kingdom. With few exceptions this is the salvation of which 
the scriptures speak. It is the salvation which the saints seek." (Mormon Doctrine, 
2nd ed., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966, p. 670.)

What laws and principles did those in the two lower divisions of the celestial 
kingdom and the terrestrial/telestial kingdoms fail to obey to inherit eternal
life? 

[telnetd]

On 8/22/2024 at 12:30 PM, bluebell said:

Everyone but the sons of perdition will spend eternity with at least one member of the Godhead.

Where do you get this from?

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, telnetd said:

Where do you get this from?

It's church doctrine that everyone will inherit a kingdom of glory except sons of perdition.  From the church's website:

• "Those who inherit the celestial kingdom will dwell in the presence of God and Christ forever (see D&C 76:62)."
• "The inhabitants of the terrestrial kingdom will enjoy the presence of the Son but not the fulness of the Father (see D&C 76:77)."
• "Those in the telestial kingdom will receive the Holy Ghost through the ministration of those in the terrestrial kingdom (see D&C 76:86, 88)."

Saying that everyone but the sons of perdition will have access to at least one member of the Godhead would have been a better way to say it.

[InCognitus]

3 hours ago, telnetd said:

Including @Calm

InCognitus, I saw the link you quoted.

You said the blue part involves a doctrinal error.

But, if we wish to overcome spiritual death and enter back into God’s presence, we 
must be obedient to laws and principles. This is exaltation by works. Thus, according 
to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works.

I didn't say the blue part involves doctrinal error, the article itself says the blue part is doctrinal error (but I do agree with the article).  Considering the fact that the article says that statement is a doctrinal error, why did you say this was something "taught" in the April 1981 Ensign magazine, as shown below?

On 6/13/2024 at 7:54 AM, telnetd said:

You might be referring to being saved by grace and exaltation by works as taught
in the April 1981 Ensign magazine.

As the context shows, the article is teaching that the statement you quoted is part of an "Inadequate Explanation" and is a "doctrinal error". 

Do you now see how you used the statement out of context to claim that the article is teaching something that it is actually teaching against?  

Since you included a link to the entire article, you had to be aware of the context, right?  So why did you quote it as something "taught" in the Ensign article?

3 hours ago, telnetd said:

One part you seemed to agree with was the following:

"Salvation in its true and full meaning is synonymous with exaltation or eternal 
life and consists in gaining an inheritance in the highest of the three heavens 
within the celestial kingdom. With few exceptions this is the salvation of which 
the scriptures speak. It is the salvation which the saints seek." (Mormon Doctrine, 
2nd ed., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966, p. 670.)

What laws and principles did those in the two lower divisions of the celestial 
kingdom and the terrestrial/telestial kingdoms fail to obey to inherit eternal
life? 

The whole point of the article is that even when Salvation is defined as exaltation or eternal life in the celestial kingdom, that salvation is still by grace through faith and not of our works, because none of us can merit exaltation in the celestial kingdom by our works alone (all have sinned).  

As for those who don't receive "eternal life" in the celestial kingdom, it is because (as Paul taught) they reap what they sow, and they sow to the flesh rather than to the spirit, as he wrote in Galatians 6:7-9:

"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.  For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not."  (Galatians 6:7–9)

[Calm]

5 hours ago, telnetd said:

You said the blue part involves a doctrinal error.

No, the author of the original article which is the original source of the quote, who wrote the quote as part of the article so it was never meant to stand alone, says it’s a doctrinal error in the quoted part in the paragraph following the original quote.  We are repeating what he said, pointing out how you took the quote out of context.

In essence he is saying ‘this is how some people understand works and grace: salvation is grace, exaltation is works….but they are wrong’.

Removing the nuance stuff and just leaving the bare bones so it is easily seen:

begin quote——-

“The second typical explanation goes something like this… This is salvation by grace…This is exaltation by works. Thus, according to this explanation, we are saved by grace and exalted by works.

This is an appealing explanation…However, there is a doctrinal error involved here.”

end quote—————

He then explains the error:

begin quote———

”While the resurrection of the dead is certainly an integral part of the plan of salvation, and is unconditional and independent of men’s works, the term salvation as used in the scriptures does not mean physical resurrection alone. As Elder Bruce R. McConkie has pointed out, salvation is synonymous with exaltation…””

end quote———

What you did is like taking a description that said “we were told the couch was blue, but that isn’t true, it’s more green” and claiming the description says the couch is blue because of the quote “the couch was blue” was all that was used of the entire description.  The description did not say the couch was blue, but green.

Which is a complete misrepresentation of what was said.  And is the fundamental flaw of taking things out of context.

Edited August 25, 2024 by Calm

[ZealouslyStriving]

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

Where do you get this from?

Abraham 3:26

"And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever."

[Nofear]

On 8/25/2024 at 12:37 PM, telnetd said:

What do you mean?

I mean that God didn't require us to go to mortality but that if we were to experience mortality 1) we agreed to terms and conditions both in preparation for and what we'd experience (e.g. memory loss). In return, God promised us 2) resurrection and other blessings. I firmly believe this situation and agreement was formalized through legally binding covenant. Having done our part (preparation to come and being born) we await at least one part of the Lord's side of the covenant -- resurrection. There is no formal revelation on this matter and I give my view on this by way of opinion, albeit a pretty strong one.

[Calm]

19 hours ago, Nofear said:

legally binding covenant

Legal has artificial connotations to me, imposed by man based on arbitrary standards even if reasonable (speed limits for example are part of a legal covenant that allows us to drive safely).

I know we say God is a god of law, but generally the laws he abides by are the natural ones of the universe and as far as we know those laws aren’t just chosen because we like them, but because they are inherent in the structure of the universe. 
 

I prefer calling it a lovingly binding covenant, a perfect love being as unbreakable as any other natural law. 

Edited August 27, 2024 by Calm

[Nofear]

Agreed. Legal and God is redundant as all His words are true and faithful. Just saying binding would be sufficient. We humans, on the other hand, have not the same fidelity.

Edited August 27, 2024 by Nofear

[telnetd]

On 8/25/2024 at 7:09 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Abraham 3:26

"And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever."

How do you know if one has kept their second estate?

Maybe the purpose of the second estate is to return to live with Heavenly Father
so all who kept their second estate are those who returned to live with Him.

Edited August 28, 2024 by telnetd

[telnetd]

On 8/26/2024 at 5:41 PM, Nofear said:

I mean that God didn't require us to go to mortality but that if we were to experience mortality 1) we agreed to terms and conditions both in preparation for and what we'd experience (e.g. memory loss)

What about the need (the requirement) for mortality mentioned in Gospel Principles?

Our Heavenly Father knew we could not progress beyond a certain point unless we 
left Him for a time. He wanted us to develop the godlike qualities that He has. 
To do this, we needed to leave our premortal home to be tested and to gain 
experience. Our spirits needed to be clothed with physical bodies.

[telnetd]

On 8/25/2024 at 6:52 PM, Calm said:

In essence he is saying ‘this is how some people understand works and grace: salvation is grace, exaltation is works….but they are wrong’.

The way I read it was that salvation is grace (free) in the sense that nothing we 
do on earth is required for us to be resurrected. On the other hand, exaltation is 
for those who obey all the laws and perform all the ordinances (the works part of
it).

As @InCognitus pointed out, we reap what we sow.  Reaping and sowing gives
the allusion to works since you cannot reap for the free gift of resurrection.

Hope I understood it correctly.
 

Edited August 28, 2024 by telnetd

[telnetd]

On 8/25/2024 at 2:21 PM, bluebell said:

It's church doctrine that everyone will inherit a kingdom of glory except sons of perdition.  From the church's website:

• "Those who inherit the celestial kingdom will dwell in the presence of God and Christ forever (see D&C 76:62)."
• "The inhabitants of the terrestrial kingdom will enjoy the presence of the Son but not the fulness of the Father (see D&C 76:77)."
• "Those in the telestial kingdom will receive the Holy Ghost through the ministration of those in the terrestrial kingdom (see D&C 76:86, 88)."

Saying that everyone but the sons of perdition will have access to at least one member of the Godhead would have been a better way to say it.

That makes it clearer.  There's access and then there's presence.

[webbles]

23 minutes ago, telnetd said:

How do you know if one has kept their second estate?

Only God and the person knows.  Keeping their second estate means that they will accept Christ and his atoning power at the final judgement.  The few who reject Him there are the sons of perdition and didn't keep their second estate.

[webbles]

18 minutes ago, telnetd said:

What about the need (the requirement) for mortality mentioned in Gospel Principles?

Our Heavenly Father knew we could not progress beyond a certain point unless we 
left Him for a time. He wanted us to develop the godlike qualities that He has. 
To do this, we needed to leave our premortal home to be tested and to gain 
experience. Our spirits needed to be clothed with physical bodies.

It is a requirement if we want to progress.  We aren't required to progress.  We could have chosen to stay in the pre-mortal state.  God won't force us to come to Earth.

[webbles]

9 minutes ago, telnetd said:

The way I read it was that salvation is grace (free) in the sense that nothing we 
do on earth is required for us to be resurrected. On the other hand, exaltation is 
for those who obey all the laws and perform all the ordinances (the works part of
it).

As @InCognitus pointed out, we reap what we sow.  Reaping gives the allusion to
works since you cannot reap for the free gift of resurrection.

Hope I understood it correctly.
 

You keep misreading the Ensign article.  You need to read the rest of it.  The author of the article, Gerald N. Lund, explicitly states that the statement "saved by grace, exalted by works" is doctrinal error.  He says it in the very next statement.  The fact that you keep saying that it isn't doctrinal error makes me believe that you haven't actually read the full article.  He goes on how it is impossible for us to exalt ourselves with any of our works.