DiscussMormonism.com

Recently on my blog, I raised some questions about the ever looming presence of death and how it can impact your perception of life:

The Sterile Conformist wrote:
The bulk of Camus’ project could be described as searching for the answer to the problem of death. This is not to say that Camus sought immortality, but how does one live a meaningful life in the face of inevitable death? The question is an ancient one and has been asked many times in many scriptures and epics.

Consider the exchange between Nachiketas and Death in the Katha Upanishad, when Nachiketas is granted three boons from Death, his third choice is this:

Nachiketas: When a man dies, this doubt arises: some say ‘he is’ and some say ‘he is not’. Teach me the truth.

Death: Even the gods had this doubt in times of old: for mysterious is the law of life and death. Ask for another boon. Release me from this.

Nachiketas: This doubt indeed arose even to the gods, and you say, O Death, that it is difficult to understand; but no greater teacher than you can explain it, and there is no other boon as great as this.

Death: Take horses and gold and cattle and elephants; choose sons and grandsons that shall live a hundred years. Have vast expanses of land, and live as many years as you desire.

Ask for any wishes in the world of mortals, however hard to obtain. To attend on you I will give you fair maidens with chariots and musical instruments. But ask me not, Nachiketas, the secrets of death.

Nachiketas: All these pleasures pass away, O End of all! They weaken the power of life. And indeed how short is all life! Keep thy horses and dancing and singing.

Man cannot be satisfied with wealth. Shall we enjoy wealth with you in sight? Shall we live whilst you are in power? I can only ask for the boon I have asked.

When a mortal here on earth has felt his own immortality, could he wish for a long life of pleasures, for the list of deceitful beauty?

Solve then the doubt as to the great beyond. Grant me the gift that unveils the mystery. This is the only gift Nachiketas can ask.

It is interesting how quickly the presence of death can overshadow so much of the pleasures we find in this world. In Homer's Iliad death is ever present and ubiquitous, the heroes are given a constant bloody and grim reminders that they are just a spear thrust or sword stroke away from death. In Book 6 of the Iliad, Diomedes confronts the great warrior Glaucus on the field of battle and taunts him (lines 130-136):

“Who are you, big man, who among mortals? Never before have I seen you in man--enhancing battle, but now you dare to come out so far beyond all the others and await my long-shadowing spear, though they are unhappy indeed whose children oppose me!”

Glaucus responded with some of Homer’s finest poetry (lines 155 to 160):

“Why do you ask who I am? The frail generations of men have scarcely more lineage than leaves. Wind blows the leaves to earth in the fall, but springtime comes and the forest blooms: so one generation of men gives way to another. But if you really would hear who I am, listen and learn what many know already.”

When Glaucus finishes his tale, Diomedes delighted by what he hears, plants his spear in the earth and offers Glaucus his friendship saying (lines 249 to 255):

“Therefore , my friend, let us exchange our armor, that both sides may know of the old family friendship we claim from the time our grandfathers feasted together.” Having spoken, they leaped from their chariots, shook hands, and swore their faith to each other.

For some reason, I cannot help but see this passage from Homer as some kind of fulfillment of this passage from the Buddhist scriptures of the Dhammapada (Book 1, verse 6):

People forget that their lives will end soon. For those who remember, quarrels come to an end.

Acknowledging just how ephemeral life really is the beginning of wisdom, a sentiment that I’m certain Camus would have shared. If life is so short, and there is nothing permanent about us, how then should we live? Should we even bother to try? The last question is perhaps the scariest question to ask and in fact…

Do you think the LDS Church provides a viable answer to the problem of death and how to live this life meaningfully?

Arguable the reverse.

Mormonism teaches people to live for tomorrow (the next life) rather than for today (current life). Because tomorrow is eternity whereas today is just a blink of an eye in the grand scheme of things.

MrStakhanovite wrote:Do you think the LDS Church provides a viable answer to the problem of death and how to live this life meaningfully?

I think it used to have one. From my current vantage point, I don't think it was a good one, but it was there. The idea was to obliterate the division between this life and the next. Polygamy was practiced in this life because that's what God is doing now and the saints will be doing in the hereafter. The idea of the sealing power was to make death pretty much meaningless, because it guaranteed that the next life was an exact continuation of this life. God was as we are now, and we will be as he is now in the future. Thus death becomes a minor inconvenience, this life, with all of its attachments and relationships, would continue on to eternity. This is summed up in D&C 130:2, "And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy."

But the LDS church no longer really supports this. The old timers still believe it, but they are dying off. The leaders are trying to keep the aspects of this thought that sell well from a PR perspective, while jettisoning anything that doesn't fit well in a 30 second TV ad or a two minute pitch missionaries make. Thus they dearly want to preserve "Families can be together forever" because it sells well. But, "Families can be together forever" doesn't make sense without the supporting theology. This leaves the LDS church without an answer to death, just a bunch of slogans that make no sense once you think about them.

In the meantime, the LDS church is moving towards a warmed over and dumbed down version of orthodox Christian theology, while still trying to keep its traditional slogans intact. The two theologies simply don't mix well, which means the answers to death make even less sense.

The leaders need to make a decisions. Option #1 is to jettison traditional LDS theology and fully embrace orthodox Christianity. Option #2 is to retrench and go back to the traditional LDS thought. Their approach of trying to mix and match the two simply doesn't work. Both options give an answer to the question about death, but mixing the two leads to nonsense.

Hey Smith,

Aristotle Smith wrote:I think it used to have one. From my current vantage point, I don't think it was a good one, but it was there.

I’m not so sure it was a good one. D&C 131 entails materialism in my opinion:

D&C 131:7-8 wrote:There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine and pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes. We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.

I think this raises a lot of issues about identity, so much so, I’m inclined to think that under Mormon theology, *you* are not really resurrected, but something that is *like you*.

Well, why don't you explain death to all of us idiots? I get that you're into philosophy, but what justifies your sense of superiority? I just see a dude recycling Camus.

- VRDRC

Aristotle Smith wrote:The idea of the sealing power was to make death pretty much meaningless, because it guaranteed that the next life was an exact continuation of this life. God was as we are now, and we will be as he is now in the future. Thus death becomes a minor inconvenience, this life, with all of its attachments and relationships, would continue on to eternity. This is summed up in D&C 130:2, "And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy."

This is the Mormon theology I was taught and understood, as well. To me, Mormonism could solve the problem of death, but was flummoxed with the problem of continuing life. But that's really another way of approaching Camus' ultimate inquiry, how to live this life meaningfully.

sock puppet wrote:This is the Mormon theology I was taught and understood, as well. To me, Mormonism could solve the problem of death, but was flummoxed with the problem of continuing life.

This was the theology of the Nauvoo swamp. Joseph couldn't admit an error in leading his people to that death-hole, so that is the way his theology developed. Particularly since he continued with a friendly relationship with the man who sold it to them, Isaac Galland.

MCB wrote:

sock puppet wrote:This is the Mormon theology I was taught and understood, as well. To me, Mormonism could solve the problem of death, but was flummoxed with the problem of continuing life.

This was the theology of the Nauvoo swamp. Joseph couldn't admit an error in leading his people to that death-hole, so that is the way his theology developed. Particularly since he continued with a friendly relationship with the man who sold it to them, Isaac Galland.

My apologies to Mr Stak after waking up from a four hour nap having started this thread. Curious enough though I was thinking thought titles of a book. Perhaps a book that I am going to write. Who knows. The titles were Process Theology, Prestige Theology and, um, dang, somthin' else Theology. Oh well. The thesis answers more to human suffering than death.

What is this from Isaac Galland? Do you have a link?

Aristotle Smith could you expand what you see changing from the old guard to the new? It's more than just being shy about attaining Godhood, right?

Stak, we are a spirit from age to age in Joseph Smith's theology. In glory we ARE then more spirit than physical. Hence, according to my theology the spirit of man was put into the clay God fashioned and Adam, an exalted man became a living soul, tethering an exalted being to this planet in the Garden of Eden by a deliberate diminishing of his power, knowledge, and memory.

I think the best answer to death from Restoration Theology is the REAL gospel. We die to the natural man. In baptism we lay down our lives in this world to take up a new life in Christ. When this is done with power and is sealed by the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost you commence living your eternal life from that moment on. Death and awaiting resurrection is no big deal. The meaningfulness of life is abundant and clear and refreshed daily by having your life with Christ in God taught to you from thought to thought as you SHARE your life intimately with the infinite God.

For the carnal and sensual Mormons I would like to understand what THEY think and why LDS old theolgoy seems like nonsense now. Please.

What is this from Isaac Galland? Do you have a link?

Just ask Google. Unique enough name. He also used the name Isaac Garland. Enjoyed selling land to which he had no clear title.

Your version of Mormon theology is probably more Kirtlandesque. Carry on.

MCB wrote:

What is this from Isaac Galland? Do you have a link?

Just ask Google. Unique enough name. He also used the name Isaac Garland. Enjoyed selling land to which he had no clear title.

Your version of Mormon theology is probably more Kirtlandesque. Carry on.

KIRTLANDESQUAH!
KIRTLANDESQUAH!
i immediately sang this to a familiar refrain. cool.

Joseph got the swamp from him, not the theology, only then a need for a dazzling new twist?