What is Mormonism's Ultimate Punishment?

[_Mister Scratch]

Scratch

I am not terrified of the doctrine. Not at all. I think you have it wrong and yes the fact that NOBODY in LDS leadership has come to your conclusion is telling. You can conclude I am in error. But I think the conclusion of those who know and may believe the passages have much more meaning then your conclusion. That said you may be right. As noted, I do recall one 19the century leader stating that some of those close the Joseph Smith that apostatized would be SoPs. And I do not recall who said that.

Fair enough. I think it's worth noting that my reading has far more evidence, both in-text and contextual (historically and scripturally speaking).

Yet somehow I am suspicious that this is agenda driven and an attempt to put another arrow in your quiver to argue that LDS view apostates as worse than murderers and adulterers.

No. I don't think that the majority of LDS actually think this, even though this is what the D&C actually says. I mean, probably every one of this knows and likely loves someone who has committed apostasy. Probably none of us would like to see these apostates burning in eternal torment within the confines of Outer Darkness. But, unpleasant as it is, that's what D&C 76 says will happen to these folks.

So we will just have to agree to disagree. You think you are correct. I do not. I think my interpretation as well as almost ALL LDS and LDS leaders means much more then your single conclusion. But hey,that is just me.

Clearly, as you admitted above, it is not "ALL" LDS. In fact, you've failed to supply any textual evidence from any leaders in support of your reading of the scriptural passage. I myself don't recall having ever read an "official" statement endorsing your position. I wonder if this interpretation is just a "feel good" sort of spin meant to ease the pain of knowing what will happen to one's apostate loved ones?

In any case, this wouldn't be the first time that poorly understood doctrine was allowed to circulate amongst the rank-and-file. Just think of the recent example involving DNA evidence. For years, the general membership was allowed to believe that Native Americans--i.e., all those folks living on reservations, running casinos, and so forth---were descended from the Nephites and Lamanites. Now, however, it turns out that this interpretation of the doctrine was incorrect.

[_Coggins7]

Polygamy and polyandry were a few of the ones discarded, along with the Curse of Cain and so forth,

The principle of plural marriage has never been discarded, it is simply not practiced at this time. The Curse of Cain was never official doctrine, but one part of a doctrinal explanation for the Priesthood ban. It may have been an official explanation or theory, but it was never settled doctrine.

which were supposed to be everlasting...that means NO end, not when some old white men declare it. I don't think an all-knowing God changes his mind on that stuff.

PC mud slinging. Can't you do better than this?

[_unwell3398]

Polygamy and polyandry were a few of the ones discarded, along with the Curse of Cain and so forth,

The principle of plural marriage has never been discarded, it is simply not practiced at this time. The Curse of Cain was never official doctrine, but one part of a doctrinal explanation for the Priesthood ban. It may have been an official explanation or theory, but it was never settled doctrine.

which were supposed to be everlasting...that means NO end, not when some old white men declare it. I don't think an all-knowing God changes his mind on that stuff.

PC mud slinging. Can't you do better than this?

You're wrong on the first part (do your homework), even GBH said it was no longer even TAUGHT or practiced (and that's a lie actually...) and numerous leaders have spoken about the evils of it. The modern day church rarely even teaches about it anymore...some say they've even been told in meetings that it's not necessary for the celestial kingdom! Completely skewed away from former doctrine and teachings.

About the mudslinging...sorry, that's you and Nehor's fortay. Mine was a pointed statement of what's easily concluded through observation.

[_Jason Bourne]

Clearly, as you admitted above, it is not "ALL" LDS. In fact, you've failed to supply any textual evidence from any leaders in support of your reading of the scriptural passage. I myself don't recall having ever read an "official" statement endorsing your position. I wonder if this interpretation is just a "feel good" sort of spin meant to ease the pain of knowing what will happen to one's apostate loved ones?

Here are a few that support my conclusion:

Speaking of the sons of perdition, Joseph Fielding Smith taught that "before a man can sink to this bitterness of soul, he must first know and understand the truth with a clearness of vision wherein there is no doubt" (Doctrine of Salvation 1:49). Such clarity requires a confirming vision from heaven. Joseph Smith taught that to become a son of perdition, a person must have the heavens opened unto him, and know God....He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it"(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.358).

Interesting that the man who claimed to have the vision and wrote Section 76 seems to agree with the conclusion I am promoting. Can you dispute Joseph's own explanation of his own scripture?

It is very difficult for a person to receive this kind of sure knowledge in the first place. Such persons are normally high-level LDS leaders. Spencer W. Kimball stated, "The sin against the Holy Ghost requires such knowledge that it is manifestly impossible for the rank and file to commit such a sin" (The Miracle o Forgiveness, p.123)" Even apostasy from the Mormon Church does not automatically qualify a person to this punishment. [/b]

Here is the comment from Smith in full and he is the one that said some apostates could fall into this category:

All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it; and from that time he begins to be an enemy. This is the case with many apostates of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[_Mister Scratch]

Clearly, as you admitted above, it is not "ALL" LDS. In fact, you've failed to supply any textual evidence from any leaders in support of your reading of the scriptural passage. I myself don't recall having ever read an "official" statement endorsing your position. I wonder if this interpretation is just a "feel good" sort of spin meant to ease the pain of knowing what will happen to one's apostate loved ones?

Here are a few that support my conclusion:

Speaking of the sons of perdition, Joseph Fielding Smith taught that "before a man can sink to this bitterness of soul, he must first know and understand the truth with a clearness of vision wherein there is no doubt" (Doctrine of Salvation 1:49). Such clarity requires a confirming vision from heaven. Joseph Smith taught that to become a son of perdition, a person must have the heavens opened unto him, and know God....He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it"(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.358).

Interesting that the man who claimed to have the vision and wrote Section 76 seems to agree with the conclusion I am promoting. Can you dispute Joseph's own explanation of his own scripture?

Jason, this quotation is confusingly cited. The way you've placed the quotations marks makes it unclear whether the bolded portion is:
A) a verbatim quote from Joseph Smith
B) a verbatim quote from JFS
C) some reading put into the manual by a CES employee.

And anyways, I think that most rank-and-file who get up and bear their testimonies would say that they know the truthfulness of the Church with precisely this kind of "clarity."

It is very difficult for a person to receive this kind of sure knowledge in the first place. Such persons are normally high-level LDS leaders. Spencer W. Kimball stated, "The sin against the Holy Ghost requires such knowledge that it is manifestly impossible for the rank and file to commit such a sin" (The Miracle o Forgiveness, p.123)" Even apostasy from the Mormon Church does not automatically qualify a person to this punishment. [/b]

Where is this coming from? It looks like a source which is quoting The Miracle of Forgiveness.... Further, it's unclear based on this whether this "sin against the Holy Ghost" is the same thing as what is described in D&C 76.

Here is the comment from Smith in full and he is the one that said some apostates could fall into this category:

All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it; and from that time he begins to be an enemy. This is the case with many apostates of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Citation? Your case begins to have merit when the Kimball and Smith quotes are juxtaposed. Though Kimball may not have been "speaking as a prophet" in this instance....

[_Jason Bourne]

Scratch

Sorry so sloppy. I have to run right now but I will clean this up hopefully tomorrow.

[_harmony]

You're wrong on the first part (do your homework), even GBH said it was no longer even TAUGHT or practiced (and that's a lie actually...) and numerous leaders have spoken about the evils of it. The modern day church rarely even teaches about it anymore...some say they've even been told in meetings that it's not necessary for the celestial kingdom! Completely skewed away from former doctrine and teachings.

How odd... lies associated with plural marriage. Surely this is a classic example of deja vu.

Geez, where are the smilies when I need them?

[_Coggins7]

You're wrong on the first part (do your homework), even GBH said it was no longer even TAUGHT or practiced (and that's a lie actually...) and numerous leaders have spoken about the evils of it. The modern day church rarely even teaches about it anymore...some say they've even been told in meetings that it's not necessary for the celestial kingdom! Completely skewed away from former doctrine and teachings.

About the mudslinging...sorry, that's you and Nehor's fortay. Mine was a pointed statement of what's easily concluded through observation.

Do your own homework my girl, and learn to use language in a clearer, more precise manner. It is not taught and practiced. Precisely. It is still a part of the Gospel and an eternal principle, and if you had asked GBH regarding this he would have clearly explained it to you. The principle itself has never been abandoned. So perhaps you can find me a source that claims the doctrine is not true?

Principles may be taught and then neglected, and practices may come and go, depending upon the state and receptiveness of the people with which God is working. The principles, however, do not change, and never have. All the confusion about such spread by critics of the Church are confusions resulting from the conflation of the speculations and theological theories of the General Authorities with revealed teachings, or "official' doctrine and counsel. Here's the rub: without the Spirit, it will be well nigh impossible, in some cases, to disentangle the two. One is "left to himself" to sort it out with his or her limited intellect and tangle of biases.

[_Jersey Girl]

Loran

Do your own homework my girl,

What on earth do you mean by that?

[_Coggins7]

Huh?