Gaslighting Planets

[Kishkumen]

At times I’ve had to muddle my way through temple service. Other times I have had experiences that are truly difficult to describe with words. This last week my wife and I went to do some sealings for family names that had been researched and then prepared to take to the temple.

It didn’t suck.

Regards,
MG

I am glad to learn of this MG. It impresses me to see you willing to say that some times you have muddled through the temple. And I agree with you that one can have experiences therein that are truly profound and difficult to capture in words.

[Analytics]

Great way to say your perspective is valid and mine isn’t. I would say, to the contrary, that Mormonism isn’t your cup of tea and you are glad to be out of it. I am happy for you. You have made an important discovery for yourself. But your discovery is your discovery and may not apply to everyone in their journey. It is not necessarily the case for everyone that “the emperor has no clothes” and that “temple worship sucks.”

Fair enough. Temple worship isn't my cup of tea. That's certainly true.

By the same token, shouldn't you qualify your criticisms of Brigham Young's contributions to doctrine (e.g. shouldn't you say that while you subjectively find President Young's revelations to be "lampoonable," others believe they are true and profound)?

If you insist I qualify my perspective by continuously acknowledging others may see things differently, I'd put it this way:

The problem isn't that "the LDS Church has largely failed to prepare even more seasoned members to appreciate and benefit from" temple worship. The problem is that for some (many? most?) seasoned members and new converts alike, temple worship will never be their cup of tea.

[Analytics]

At times I’ve had to muddle my way through temple service. Other times I have had experiences that are truly difficult to describe with words. This last week my wife and I went to do some sealings for family names that had been researched and then prepared to take to the temple.

It didn’t suck.

Regards,
MG

Touche. I'm glad you had a meaningful experience.

[LittleNipper]

The GOD who cannot create other GODs is far superior, because such a GOD wasn't the brainchild of some other GOD bigger than HIM.

There's nothing my god cannot do. My god can create a god that's bigger than him, and then make himself bigger than the god that is bigger that he just created. All while being the biggest.

Superior.

*self-high-five*

You better do some more investigating; however, according to everything I've heard regarding Mormonism, the Mormon god was born on a pre-existing planet created by some other god. My GOD cannot sin and couldn't be created as HE always existed. So there is something GOD cannot do. GOD is and there never was a time when HE wasn't.

Hebrews 6:13-20 For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear an oath by no one greater, He swore by Himself, 14 saying, “indeed I will greatly bless you and I will greatly multiply you.” 15 And so, having patiently waited, he obtained the promise. 16 For people swear an oath by one greater than themselves, and with them an oath serving as confirmation is an end of every dispute. 17 In the same way God, desiring even more to demonstrate to the heirs of the promise the fact that His purpose is unchangeable, confirmed it with an oath, 18 so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have taken refuge would have strong encouragement to hold firmly to the hope set before us. 19 This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and reliable and one which enters within the veil, 20 where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek

[huckelberry]

Kiskumen,
I think outsider comments about getting a planet makes it seem like the idea is a prize for passing the test. Images can trivialize it. That leaves out the great big matter of exaltation which is much more than a prize. But the transformations considered are a mystery. There is a lot there which overlaps traditional Christian hopes. There is more than enough unknown to make that difficult to speak of. Reluctance of leaders to try and explain in a general interview is understandable. I have never seem much reason to be shocked by the Larry King interview. ,

"Lds folks cherish the temple"
I find myself wondering if I have heard that phrase before. May have been too long ago to remember. Is there a way you could express the why and how? (or is it either obvious to someone or not really communicable?)

Τhanks for this thoughtful post, huckelberry. Yes, I think there is a lot more overlap with traditional Christian hopes in the Mormon doctrine of exaltation than many people realize. Even when you speak of getting a prize for passing a test, it was the apostle Paul who likened the Christian to an ancient athlete whose quest for salvation was a rigorous striving to overcome.

Moreover, the Orthodox faith and the Church Fathers have numerous times discussed “theosis,” Christian divinizarían through the grace of Christ. Mind you, I am not saying that the Mormon version is identical to the Orthodox version, far from it (and I am inclined to say I wish the two were more similar, with the LDS view leaning more in the direction of the Orthodox one), but this lampooning of Mormons for teaching a form of divinizarían of the Christian through Christ is mean spirited and unfair, not to mention bigoted.

I am Facebook friends with some faithful LDS people who absolutely love the temple. They include former ex-Mormons, BYU professors, and members of my own family. I cherish the temple to this day. My experience in the LDS temple was a crucial part of my spiritual development. The chance to go to the House of the Lord and be able to step outside of the mundane world to focus on spiritual things was something I cherished. Some of my most memorable experiences in life occurred in the temple. I understand that the temple is not for everyone, and I wish that not everyone was sent through it, or, at the very least, better prepared and better taught before they go.

I don’t know exactly what you are asking about regarding the origin of the phrase I used. Maybe I picked it up somewhere and yet I do not recall its origin.

Kishkumen, you answered my question about the temple very well thank you.

Your comment about an understanding of divinization where orthodox and LDS came closer together is interesting. That could happen on a personal level I think, It would be unlikely on an institutional level.

[Kishkumen]

Fair enough. Temple worship isn't my cup of tea. That's certainly true.

And believe me when I say that is perfectly cool with me.

By the same token, shouldn't you qualify your criticisms of Brigham Young's contributions to doctrine (e.g. shouldn't you say that while you subjectively find President Young's revelations to be "lampoonable," others believe they are true and profound)?

Yeah, I think I was saying that apparently others seem to find them easy to make fun of. My suspicion is that The God Makers would not have been made had not Brigham Young taught what he taught. And, yes, that is my opinion.

I have no doubt that some people find them to be profound, and I have no problem with that.

If you insist I qualify my perspective by continuously acknowledging others may see things differently, I'd put it this way:

The problem isn't that "the LDS Church has largely failed to prepare even more seasoned members to appreciate and benefit from" temple worship. The problem is that for some (many? most?) seasoned members and new converts alike, temple worship will never be their cup of tea.

Yeah, I don’t know what the numbers would be, and I am unconcerned about it. I know what my experience was at the time, and I don’t need for this to find support in others’ opinions. Everyone is entitled to their personal experience and opinion, in my view, but they are not entitled to project it onto others and be taken seriously in doing so. So, no, I do not erroneously insist that the temple is for everyone and everyone must love it.

But I know some LDS people who really do, and I know that I really did. At the time, it was changes to the temple that unsettled me, not the temple itself. I was a person who experienced what I believe to be profound spiritual experiences that really impacted me personally. To this day I do not reject those experiences or look at them as mere emotionalism, etc. I don’t ascribe to them a more specific epistemic meaning, such as, “because I felt this way, there were Nephites in Ancient America.” I also don’t say, “I felt the same way watching a Honda commercial, so it’s essentially meaningless.”

My experience, my choice. We are all entitled, in my view.

[Moksha]

What's the purpose of having a harem of Celestial wives and engaging in eternal sex unless you have some planet to put your spirit children on? That's the plan, man.

[Kishkumen]

What's the purpose of having a harem of Celestial wives and engaging in eternal sex unless you have some planet to put your spirit children on? That's the plan, man.

That’s one version of it, anyway!

[msnobody]

What's the purpose of having a harem of Celestial wives and engaging in eternal sex unless you have some planet to put your spirit children on? That's the plan, man.

Got to have one as someone else has staked His claim on this one.

[SLCC alum]

Some years ago in an elders quorum lesson I remember someone commenting that when they became a god they would create a world dedicated to hunting. I’ve always liked this idea, that as a god you could create worlds to pursue any side hobbies or interests. Trampoline world, wood-working world, beercraft world, doggie-heaven world, etc. As a Mormon god the possibilities are almost endless. When staring the monotony of an eternity of the business aspects of Godhood in the face, having worlds just for fun probably helps relieve the stress of managing an infinite posterity.