Hey man I cut you....I cut you up so bad....you gon...you gonna wish I no cut you up so bad....
Murdering me won't bring the Smilies back....at least I don't think it will, depends on how badly Shades dislikes me I guess.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Scottie wrote:Given that low mortality rates are a product of the past 100 years, and only in first world countries, I'd say that the incredibly vast majority of spirits fall into this category. Over the span of time that humans have been on earth, a very small percentage has made it past infancy, let alone 8 years old.
Sooo...again, we all sat in the pre-existence and said, "YEAH!!! BEST FREAKING PLAN EVER!!!! Almost ALL of the spirit are going to be consigned to the lowest level of the CK with no chance for Godhood! BRILLIANT!!!"
World wide today child mortality (death under age 5) is 7%. I think your "small perecentage survive past infancy" is way, way overblown.I have family records going back over 200 years. Survival rate of children was over 80% to adulthood in my family. They weren't privileged.
I explained about the oppoortunity for proxy work during the Millenium.
This subject reminds me of an Ev Sunday School class where the teacher told the story of a man who got and heaven and was asked by St. Peter what was his last experience on earth. They put me under (the water; i.e., he was baptized). The point of the joke was that if you think people can lose their salvation, wouldn't you baptize converts by holding them under for a bit longer.
Last edited by Dr Moore on Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Indeed.. but that's the reason why I'm asking questions, isn't it? I mean, if I 'knew' that the Mormon church was true, this kind of questions would just be to entertain the mind. But as I'm seriously looking into the church doctrine as an investigator, I need to examine the doctrines and make sure they are logical and sensible to me. If I were to accept the answers in the line of God is fair/just and therefore the plan of salvation is perfect and I do not need to worry about the church doctrines, why couldn't I use those answers to go to other churches? One of the most common answers I got from my Mormon friends is that what the church believes make much more sense than what other church believes, such as the concept of trinity. So, when I ask questions about doctrines, I expect to find logical answers.
That very loophole occurred to me years ago, as well. It seems a logical conclusion. It reminds me of another idea, the true role of satan in the plan of salvation. Who was the real hero, who was the individual willing to sacrifice the MOST for the salvation of others?
In the pre-existence, the plan of salvation was not new, it was the tried-and-true formula. Everyone knew the script. There would be a savior, and there would be a satan. Now whoever volunteered for the savior role knew what his eternal reward would be. Yes, he would pay a price in suffering, but that was a brief period. But whoever volunteered to play the satan role knew the ultimate outcome as well. No eternal reward for that role.
So who really sacrificed himself for mankind?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
beastie wrote:That very loophole occurred to me years ago, as well. It seems a logical conclusion. It reminds me of another idea, the true role of satan in the plan of salvation. Who was the real hero, who was the individual willing to sacrifice the MOST for the salvation of others?
In the pre-existence, the plan of salvation was not new, it was the tried-and-true formula. Everyone knew the script. There would be a savior, and there would be a satan. Now whoever volunteered for the savior role knew what his eternal reward would be. Yes, he would pay a price in suffering, but that was a brief period. But whoever volunteered to play the satan role knew the ultimate outcome as well. No eternal reward for that role.
So who really sacrificed himself for mankind?
The nature of Satan is interesting too. Christ was God before he came to earth. Satan and Christ are alike. So that make Satan God too.
And don't forget Judas's role. He alone among the Apostles was willing to make the ultimate sacrifice.
beastie wrote:In the pre-existence, the plan of salvation was not new, it was the tried-and-true formula. Everyone knew the script. There would be a savior, and there would be a satan. Now whoever volunteered for the savior role knew what his eternal reward would be. Yes, he would pay a price in suffering, but that was a brief period. But whoever volunteered to play the satan role knew the ultimate outcome as well. No eternal reward for that role.
I've never heard this before. Do you have a reference?
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman
I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
beastie wrote:In the pre-existence, the plan of salvation was not new, it was the tried-and-true formula. Everyone knew the script. There would be a savior, and there would be a satan. Now whoever volunteered for the savior role knew what his eternal reward would be. Yes, he would pay a price in suffering, but that was a brief period. But whoever volunteered to play the satan role knew the ultimate outcome as well. No eternal reward for that role.
I've never heard this before. Do you have a reference?
It's part of the script for the endowment, scottie.