Gaslighting Planets

[Kishkumen]

Even with my rusty memory the idea of born as spirit children in a preexistence is not forgetable. It appeared so often it seemed beyond question. I was a little surprised by your observation that it is a Brigham Young idea. I agree with your sense that it is an awkward idea at best. It does give spirit a family dimension. It might be best not to lose that.

It is an idea of the era of Brigham Young. My recollection is that it was more of a grass roots speculation that became doctrine over time.

[LittleNipper]

The TRUTH and not speculation will set one free.

[Kishkumen]

The TRUTH and not speculation will set one free.

Sometimes truth is arrived at through a process that includes speculation.

[huckelberry]

The TRUTH and not speculation will set one free.

Sometimes truth is arrived at through a process that includes speculation.

I would imagine that Nipper can see some use for speculation. He speculates that people were all vegetarians before the flood and in heaven will be the same. I am inclined to doubt the vegetarian before the flood idea but I am not sure. One way or another it is an question which does not rise to the level of consideration as truth which is in view saying that the truth will set you free.

I think it is interesting to observe that the speculation about Jesus relationship to God for Christians struggled on for a good many years before settling the trinity formulae. Now I believe that formulae protects some important truth but I can see some point to Kishkumens thought that the formula's rigidity has inhibited peoples thought . Perhaps.

I wonder if for Mormon thinking a view of emanation of our spirits might be clearer than birth with the absurdity of a womb dealing with billions of births. It might not be impossible to conceive of a singular eternal God who as the ground of being has more individuated dimensions with whom we relate as God,even a male female pair.

Speaking with caution left behind, One might imagine a couple being that nearer dimension at one with the eternal God. And to upset all pictures a trinity where the Spirit is first and a male female pair is our immediate link. ( so would it be Mom or Dad who was incarnate in Jesus?)

Nipper , for my own beliefs I am sticking with the traditional creed.Nicene will work. though I might take a clue from Kabbalah and consider possible different dimensions of God,relative to self in eternity,in relation to spirits, in relation to physical creation, in relation to incarnate in Jesus in relation to individual humans.

[Kishkumen]

Ultimately what we are talking about here is different ways of seeing Diety more or less through a Platonic lens. This is true of the Nicene Creed, and it is true of Kabbalah. It is also true of Swedenborg and Joseph Smith. Footnotes to Plato, as the old saying goes. It is true both of philosophy and much of theology. Honestly, I am not all that enamored of the Nicene Creed. It is one option, the one that Constantine enforced. I see nothing particularly special about it, so I don’t feel tied to it. I am not saying it is a bad formulation of Deity, and that I stand against people finding their truth in it. I just don’t find mine there, and I see no good argument that I, or anyone else, should be obliged to do so.

[Analytics]

I think what we are really talking about is the philosophies of men, mingled with scripture.

What I honor about the post-fall Adam as depicted in the temple is his simple dedication to the Truth with a capital T. He wasn’t looking for a religious belief that he would find satisfying. He was dedicated to what’s actually true and wasn’t going to believe or commit to anything that didn’t align with that simple reality.

In that sense, he reminds me of the new atheists.

[Philo Sofee]

The TRUTH and not speculation will set one free.

Sometimes truth is arrived at through a process that includes speculation.

Sometimes???

[Philo Sofee]

I think what we are really talking about is the philosophies of men, mingled with scripture.

What I honor about the post-fall Adam as depicted in the temple is his simple dedication to the Truth with a capital T. He wasn’t looking for a religious belief that he would find satisfying. He was dedicated to what’s actually true and wasn’t going to believe or commit to anything that didn’t align with that simple reality.

In that sense, he reminds me of the new atheists.

Wow, I had not thought it in those terms,... most interesting...

[Kishkumen]

I think what we are really talking about is the philosophies of men, mingled with scripture.

What I honor about the post-fall Adam as depicted in the temple is his simple dedication to the Truth with a capital T. He wasn’t looking for a religious belief that he would find satisfying. He was dedicated to what’s actually true and wasn’t going to believe or commit to anything that didn’t align with that simple reality.

In that sense, he reminds me of the new atheists.

Yes, post-fall Adam is a fine symbolic representation of childhood with its stark categories and gullibility.

[Analytics]

Yes, post-fall Adam is a fine symbolic representation of childhood with its stark categories and gullibility.

Hmmm. Was post-fall Adam gullible? He wasn't the one that fell for the religion the protestant preacher learned from Lucifer.

Maybe Adam overprioritized the truth. Who's to say his life wouldn't have been better had he joined the community that was led by the confused preacher and Lucifer? They were all fine people, I'm sure.

Maybe he was simplistic. Naïve. Simple minded. Callow. Sophomoric.

Post-fall Adam was many things. But he was not gullible.