You'll rejoice when you see your children in hell

[_Boilermaker]

Becoming more LIBERAL.

So what do you believe happens to unbaptized infants and those who haven't heard about Jesus?

[_Nightlion]

It referred to the manner of living peacefully and happily, also referred to by Christ as "The Way".

Just how broad is your WAY? I suspect that there is no discrimination between clean and unclean or between pretense of and the power of godliness.

[_mercyngrace]

It referred to the manner of living peacefully and happily, also referred to by Christ as "The Way".

Just how broad is your WAY? I suspect that there is no discrimination between clean and unclean or between pretense of and the power of godliness.

You suspect incorrectly.

eta: The way is extraordinarily narrow. In fact, the way is Christ alone and in the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2). I simply believe that we have a much longer time to discover the way than the 80 or so years we are mortals on this rock.

“When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the Gospel—you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil before you will have learned them (all). It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Six 1843–44, p.348)

Just because you reached a rung before someone else doesn't mean they aren't climbing in the same direction.

[_Boilermaker]

You suspect incorrectly.

One of the ways that people discredit Christian Universalism is by making a parody of it by claiming we believe Christ isn't necessary for salvation or by claiming we believe we won't be judged. There is no free lunch into heaven. We all will be judged and those who haven't trusted in Christ will be required to do so before they can make it into heaven. The particularly rebellious may suffer quite a bit before they get there. Those of us who hope in universal salvation are saying that God doesn't just limit His ability to save someone to the few years we live on earth -- God has all of eternity to convince us to follow Him and He doesn't give up. Could some decide to completely reject Him forever? I suppose theoretically they could, but I suspect God will outlast their rebellion.

[_Nightlion]

You have no problem being unsophisticated and indiscriminate about it?

I have this very simple faith that Christ came to save the world rather than to condemn the world. He promised to draw everyone to him after his resurrection. Somehow, in a way I don't completely claim to understand, Christ will use the freedom he gave to everyone to bring them willingly to salvation. There are entire books on the subject if you're interested which are much more "sophisticated" than I can present on a discussion board. I have linked to a couple of articles which can get you started. I get the feeling you are more interested in exalting yourself by condemning others, but I don't know you beyond this discussion board so I could be wrong.

My exaltation is entirely between me and Christ. I rejoice daily. But what good will it do to pretend all is peace and contentment with Christ when he spoke specifically commanding those who follow him to seek the kingdom taking no thought for their lives and to remain steadfast with one accord (Acts 1) until you receive the promise of the Father which is the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost? Which is that change of heart spoken of in all ages of the world and the specialty of the Book of Mormon.

This relativism of Universalism is the plan of Satan plain and simple. Once he gets hold of religion he begins to teach HIS way. This he cannot help but further his campaign from the beginning in the hopes that in the next round more than 1/3rd join him and in the next even more until in a thousand eternities he wins all. Muh heh heh heh, he mutters underneath his breath, as nothing is revealed. (Dylan nod)

[_Fence Sitter]

And yet 70 seconds feels like an eternity if you are in pain. So why procrastinate? And if your choices breed remorse and disrupt relationships, why persist one second longer than is necessary?

Procrastination implies one believes the actions are wrong. I don't. I have managed to live a very happy life for 50 years plus both within and outside of the LDS system, maybe I am an exception. I merely point out that regardless of who is right, 70 years will be meaningless. I think there is a misconception among many LDS that somehow they are happier than other people because of their religious beliefs.

The reward is inherent in who we become. Three kingdoms? Section 76, outside the added heading, only uses the word "kingdom" in the singular. There are various kinds of beings to be sure. You see that already, all around you. Some are absolutely miserable, hell bent, and make choices that are destructive to themselves and others. Some are operating from a place of peace and are able to experience joy even in the midst of adversity. And there are all kinds of folks in between. To be in a place isn't the same as to be a being with a certain kind of "glory" or lack thereof. We are all here together now and the same sociality will exist "there" only coupled with the glory that corresponds to the laws we abide. Celestial beings will minister to (teach, lead) terrestrial beings, and terrestrial beings will pay it forward to telestial beings (D&C 76), each lifting others up and seeking to save them. This is why parents who keep their covenants are promised to have their children with them, for example.

This still does not explain the need for three distinct levels of reward. It is like there is some sort of grading system. "Hey you gat an A- so you make the Celestial while your brother got a B+ so he will have to start in the Terrestial." Bizarre. If there is continual progression, a tiered reward system seems a bit pointless, however it does make sense if one looks at how Joseph Smith mixed and matched information from his surroundings.

Because it's what we know.

Because Christ taught that the epitome of godliness was to be found in unity and if He is the Son of God, then His plea that we become one even as He and His Father are one is rather significant. Also because, if God is love, there must be something to this idea of reconciliation between beings or at-one-ment.

And yet playing with dolls foreshadows the loving connections we desire to have with others. We know loving connections are essential. Even our bodies bear this out - babies without these kinds of emotional bonds are scarred and some even die. I don't think we can possibly disregard this as fundamental to who we are or invented.

You explain why we do it but not why we assume God's ways are like ours. I think the error is in assuming what makes us happy as mortals would also make us happy as an immortal being with a completely different makeup. Part of the problem I have with an eternal reward system is the belief that were we to exist in any fashion like we do now that eventually a billion or trillion or a trillion years from now boredom would be the result. I don't think our finite minds are capable of imagining what kind a life would be enjoyable infinitely. Again "Heaven" just seems to be a projection of what we think would make us most happy as mortals. I think the assumption that as infinite beings we would have need of emotional rewards and personal relationships is probably wrong.

I don't disagree with you here, Fence Sitter. And I think all religions, mine included, are only as healthy and godly as the individuals filling the pews. I believe that much of what we need to learn on earth, we can learn without organized religion. Life, for the humble and wise, teaches more than enough. Even Brigham Young, referring to the signs and tokens of the temple, said that the rich get them in the temple, the poor get them on the mountaintop. What I find in my church (not my faith but my church) is a community in which I can learn to live out the atonement in relationships with others who profess the same goal. We serve together, we work together, we study, learn, and pray together. And when our natural frailties disrupt the harmony, we have covenanted to forgive each other.

Here we agree but then the next logical step then is to conclude that a benevolent God (the LDS one) would not have created such a system. As LDS we are big on an Apostasy where 'precious parts' of Gods Church was not on the earth for 1000-1500 years. Why would God remove his Church from the earth for all that time? Why would God limit the availability of his one true Church to so few people? It seems every religion believes they are somehow God's chosen and no one else is as 'special' in God's eyes. Frankly I think if God exists and loves us, that is bunk and he would not operate that way. It is however what a church made up by men would look like. I suspect you may agree with me on this one but most LDS would not. Mixing and matching what one agrees with and what one rejects would be seen by most TBMs as a form of apostasy

Yes there are. I recommend they return to the temple and notice the path of progression that begins in the initiatory (pre-mortal) and culminates in the celestial room. If they can show me where in the ceremony, some members of the group are separated out and their progression is stopped, I may rethink my position. The temple is the height of LDS orthodoxy.

You know I am not the scriptorium most here are but my sense of what most LDS believe is that what we do here on this life has eternal consequences, not just temporary ones that can be worked out later.

Thanks

[_sansfoy]

You have no problem being unsophisticated and indiscriminate about it?

I have this very simple faith that Christ came to save the world rather than to condemn the world. He promised to draw everyone to him after his resurrection. Somehow, in a way I don't completely claim to understand, Christ will use the freedom he gave to everyone to bring them willingly to salvation. There are entire books on the subject if you're interested which are much more "sophisticated" than I can present on a discussion board. I have linked to a couple of articles which can get you started. I get the feeling you are more interested in exalting yourself by condemning others, but I don't know you beyond this discussion board so I could be wrong.

Yes, that is my feeling in these discussions. The neo-Calvinists are the worst, but it's a common thread with most discussions with evangelicals.

Cor 15:18 - For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

All. Not most, not the righteous, not the chosen. All.

Romans 5:18 - Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Again, all.

[_mercyngrace]

You suspect incorrectly.

One of the ways that people discredit Christian Universalism is by making a parody of it by claiming we believe Christ isn't necessary for salvation or by claiming we believe we won't be judged. There is no free lunch into heaven. We all will be judged and those who haven't trusted in Christ will be required to do so before they can make it into heaven. The particularly rebellious may suffer quite a bit before they get there. Those of us who hope in universal salvation are saying that God doesn't just limit His ability to save someone to the few years we live on earth -- God has all of eternity to convince us to follow Him and He doesn't give up. Could some decide to completely reject Him forever? I suppose theoretically they could, but I suspect God will outlast their rebellion.

Indeed.

I can't count how many times I've been accused of teaching the doctrine of Nehor on LDS message boards. His doctrine was that one need no fear and tremble (i.e. REPENT). This is false.

The most damaging loss to Christianity, in my opinion, was this beautiful doctrine. The result of believing that some are beyond God's love is that we feel free to judge and condemn. We also rationalize our indifference to those around us who are in the most desperate need. We justify mistreatment of the fallen or as-yet-unrepentant. No wonder so many people reject Christianity.

[_Boilermaker]

Indeed.

I can't count how many times I've been accused of teaching the doctrine of Nehor on LDS message boards. His doctrine was that one need no fear and tremble (i.e. REPENT). This is false.

The most damaging loss to Christianity, in my opinion, was this beautiful doctrine. The result of believing that some are beyond God's love is that we feel free to judge and condemn. We also rationalize our indifference to those around us who are in the most desperate need. We justify mistreatment of the fallen or as-yet-unrepentant. No wonder so many people reject Christianity.

And just because I think we may all be saved doesn't mean I believe we are necessarily going to receive the same reward. What we do in this life does have eternal consequences and may limit us in some way. This whole discussion has actually made me rethink my resignation from Mormonism. I've been reading the Book of Mormon a little each day and find that it brings me closer to God than when I'm ignoring it. Hell infested religion is pretty stifling. The comment of the Catholic apologist on EWTN shook me up quite a bit because I have a couple of children who aren't too interested in Jesus at this point.

[_mercyngrace]

Fence Sitter -

I want to respond but I'm running my kids to the dentist so I won't be home again for a while.

Really quick:

I don't believe LDS are happier than others generally but I believe if they understood the gospel better, they would be.

I don't believe that happiness in this life only comes via the LDS church. There is a very real distinction between the gospel and the church. One being the way, and the other being merely the vehicle for presenting the way to the world. One never fails the other is a hot mess in many regards. The church is valuable and useful only insofar as the gospel is practiced within it. When the gospel is not, it goes from stepping stone to stumbling block - a fact we have learned by sad experience over and over and over again.

I believe that much of the wisdom of the gospel is accessible to the wise and humble aside from any religious context. Truth, all truth, wherever we find it, is what matters. That the church is a repository for the priestly order does not make it perfect or even remotely so. Look at Eli's sons in 1 Sam 2 or the Sadducees in Christ's day.

What I am talking about goes well beyond the temporary institution of the COJCOLDS.

Anyway, gotta run.

Cate

PS I am glad that you are happy... "if one member is honoured, all the members rejoice with it"

Much love!