Teachings of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith Regarding the Godhead as Relates to Biblical Teachings

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6573689]Frances DS,
I noticed your post and noticed that you seem to have used the Gospel Principles manual that is older than the current manual, and it would seem important to know that that particular lesson has been slightly revised in its wording. Here is the first part of the current “Exaltation” lesson (available on lds.org under Sunday School manuals):

ParkerD are you saying the the doctrine has changed, that it was in error, or it was just misunderstood.?I have also read the Gospel Princilples posted on the LDS website where FrancisDS got the information. As I read it, it doesn’t say that someone will be worshiped like God the Father but it does say that they can become gods and have spirit children. Has that teaching changed.?

Can you address this that I found in Chapter 45

“After suffering in full for their sins, they will be allowed to inherit the lowest degree of glory, which is the telestial kingdom.”

“The hell in the spirit world will not continue forever. Even the spirits who have **committed the greatest sins **will have suffered sufficiently by the end of the Millennium (see Acts 2:25-27). They will then be resurrected.”

Telestial Kingdom
“These people did not receive the gospel or the testimony of Jesus either on earth or in the spirit world. They will suffer for their own sins in hell until after the Millennium, when they will be resurrected. “These are they who are liars, and sorcerers, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie.” These people are as numerous as the stars in heaven and the sand on the seashore. They will be visited by the Holy Ghost but not by the Father or the Son. (See D&C 76:81-86, 103-6.)”

This means that hell is not eternal even though Jesus said that hell is eternal. Doesn’t Mormonism contradict the gospel of Christ?

 

[Catholic20064]

Frances DS,
If you look at some of the differences, you may notice that the sentence about the “same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father” has been taken out. I think this is an important change, in that the ambiguity was decreased since there is no real doctrinal source for that particular wording. So the conclusion that you drew from the earlier lesson material, wherein you have assumed that LDS belief is that men can eventually progress way out in eternity to become a “Heavenly Father” to a created, populated world like our Heavenly Father, and that He did that by living a mortal life on a world like ours, is drawn from a lesson that was viewed as needing to be changed to be more in line with what Joseph Smith taught on that subject (which wasn’t a great deal, but wasn’t that).

I think as I have read Joseph Smith’s King Follett Sermon many times, that the wording he gave including the quote he used from the book of John, gives the impression that the Father lived on an earth just as Christ did, and that Christ did what He had seen His Father do, which to me means that the Father was a perfect Man of Holiness when He lived on an earth and became a resurrected Being. Joseph Smith never said that to become like God would mean that exalted beings will be worshiped like Heavenly Father is worshiped. The sense is more of becoming perfect with perfect knowledge and perfect love and faith, and being a creator including organizing spirit children from their existing intelligence.

Perhaps you should contact the church and ask them to put the revised manual on the internet so as to avoid such problems.

My guess is the LDS sect had many new members who were disturbed by this idea and so they removed it to not scare them out of their new religion. I know I home taught some new members who had been taught this lesson in class with the old manual. They were shocked by some of these ideas and I had some explaining to do. I was unsuccessful in convincing them as were others who tried. They soon went inactive.

 

[RebeccaJ]

This is amusing, considering LDS are constantly saying go to LDS sources to understand LDS doctrine…so those are wrong too.

Apparently you need the updated LDS source in order to get the updated LDS doctrine.

:juggle:

 

[TheosisM]

Perhaps you should contact the church and ask them to put the revised manual on the internet so as to avoid such problems.

They put it up:

lds.org/library/display/0,4945,8865-1-4828-2,00.html

 

[lax16]

They put it up:

lds.org/library/display/0,4945,8865-1-4828-2,00.html

WHEN???

 

[TheosisM]

WHEN???

Not sure. It’s been up for at least a couple months though. The old one and the new one are there.

 

[dianaiad]

I have to disagree with this.
How do you know what a person is ready for? They may be ready for calculus. And even if they are not ready, if they are asking deep questions, so what? Why not answer them. If it is more than they can handle, then they will see that and it will show them that they are not ready for that yet. But to TELL SOMEONE what they are not ready for is assuming a lot.

I don’t know about anybody else, but I only tell people who aren’t ready for it that they aren’t ready for it. How do I know that they aren’t ready?

Because they insist on equivocating. They insist upon applying* their *definition of words and concepts to what we are talking about, and then insist that we use THEIR definitions to judge our beliefs. This doesn’t work in any other field of study–why does everyone think it would work in religious matters?

There was a recent discussion in this forum about excommunication and how it is handled in Catholicism vs. Mormonism, for instance. It took us weeks to figure out what each group MEANT by that concept. Until we did, the fireworks were a blazin…because both groups insisted upon defining what the OTHER group meant according to what THEY meant.

A digital artist working in RGB color would mean something very different when she is talking about ‘analagous colors’ than would, oh, Matisse. Neither one of them would be wrong–but they would see things very differently because of the context.

I’m not telling you this because I’m this mysterious Mormon. I’m telling you this because this is what I do for a living, and this is what I studied, and this is what my degrees are in; English, Communications and linguistics.

Religion is no different from any other field of study in this: no matter how deep and profound your faith is, you still must express yourself, and explain your beliefs, using language and words for which everybody understands the definition. If you are learning about someone else’s religion, it is THEIR definition that counts, not yours…just as, when you are teaching others about your beliefs, it’s your definition that counts.

Therefore you MUST start with the basics, so that you will understand the vocabulary.
If you don’t, you won’t ever, really, have a clue what you are asking–or what the answer is.

The other concern with this idea is that if I were to decide to be a part of something, such as the Mormon faith for example, I would want to know exactly what I am getting into.

Of course. So begin with the basics.

Sure I may not know every detail before making my decision, but if there is a topic that I am interested in, I would hope a member of whatever group I am considering or looking into would delve into it, as much as I am interested in going or as much as I feel that I need to go before deciding.

Of course. However, if you wanted to ask deep and probing questions about Don Quixote, I would hope that you would realize that learning Spanish would be helpful…English translations really don’t do that book the justice it requires.

If someone were interested in becoming Catholic and wanted to know everything that the Church teaches about Mary for example - what the doctrines are, Scriptural evidence for it, wants to read the Church Fathers comments, etc. No matter how deep that person wants to go, I will take them there and answer every question I can. If I do not know all of the answers, I will find someone who does to help them.

And if they don’t understand, say, the difference between dulia and hyperdulia they are going to be utterly lost and confused—and leave your explanations with the conviction that you worship statues, when you don’t. First, you teach them the difference between what you feel you owe to the Saints, what you owe to Mary…and what you owe to God. When THAT basic concept is down, THEN you go on to explain, right? If you don’t…well, we’re back at the statue worshiping thing again, more often than not.

If this is something that they feel is important to understand before they enter the Catholic Church, then i will help them find and understand the answers.
Sure, they may not learn or understand every detail on the teachings of Mary, but I will do everything I can to help them learn as much as they want to know.

And if you think about it, you start with the basics. If you DONT start there, I’ll bet you bring them back to the basics, right? It is rather important not to put the roof on before you build the walls, if you don’t want it falling in on you.

If they ask deep questions, I will not assume that this is ‘too much for them’. I will answer their questions. IF it confuses them, well then I would let them guide how basic or how deep we go with the conversation. I will not decide for them how deep we can and cannot go unless they just leave it open for me to teach them how I wish.
IF they are asking questions, who am I to tell them what is ‘above their head’? If the answer is, then they will soon realize it…

Please do not assume that we can’t tell who is, and who is not, in over their heads. The very nature of their questions is a pretty solid indicator of whether some one is speaking the same language, so that they understand what we are trying to say.

After all, (and back to Mary…) if someone came up to you and asked 'why do you worship Mary’s statue?" I think that would be a pretty good indication that you are going to have to take him back to the basics before you answer what he thinks he asked, don’t you?

(to be continued)

Frances DS

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD are you saying the the doctrine has changed, that it was in error, or it was just misunderstood.?I have also read the Gospel Princilples posted on the LDS website where FrancisDS got the information. As I read it, it doesn’t say that someone will be worshiped like God the Father but it does say that they can become gods and have spirit children. Has that teaching changed.?

Third Day,
In answer to your first question, I think this is a kind of case where there were a group of people on a committee to put together the first manual, and they came to a consensus that was a bit ambiguous and the people who were on a committee the next time around when a new manual was being prepared, decided to leave out the ambiguous sentence. I don’t think anyone is going to be held accountable for believing or not believing one way or the other–the important thing is to be led by the Holy Spirit, believe in becoming perfect just as Christ taught (through His grace), believe that in order to do that one must be humble and really allow Christ to change us from the inside out, and go through that process day by day, being changed through repentance.

Can you address this that I found in Chapter 45

“After suffering in full for their sins, they will be allowed to inherit the lowest degree of glory, which is the telestial kingdom.”

“The hell in the spirit world will not continue forever. Even the spirits who have **committed the greatest sins **will have suffered sufficiently by the end of the Millennium (see Acts 2:25-27). They will then be resurrected.”

Telestial Kingdom
“These people did not receive the gospel or the testimony of Jesus either on earth or in the spirit world. They will suffer for their own sins in hell until after the Millennium, when they will be resurrected. “These are they who are liars, and sorcerers, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie.” These people are as numerous as the stars in heaven and the sand on the seashore. They will be visited by the Holy Ghost but not by the Father or the Son. (See D&C 76:81-86, 103-6.)”

This means that hell is not eternal even though Jesus said that hell is eternal. Doesn’t Mormonism contradict the gospel of Christ?

I would answer that one trying to understand that concept ought to think about the word “eternal” and realize that it can mean a “kind of punishment” or a “kind of life” or a “kind of reward”, or it can mean “duration of time”. If God gives the punishment and God is an eternal Being, then the kind of punishment He gives can be described as “eternal punishment” even if the duration of time has an end. I also think a person suffering for a thousand years or more is not only going to think it is “forever”, but would be all the more regretful about their choices if they had had a concept in their mind during mortality of “I’ll only have to suffer for a thousand years if I do bad things in my life” and go on doing those bad things, when they are going to find out that the suffering is a great deal more intense than they ever would have thought possible. So what I’m saying is that God is being merciful by using the word “eternal” to describe the punishment and pains of Hell, even if they are going to end after a thousand years for a particular sinful person.

You might also look up 1 Peter 3:18-20 and think about the people at the time of Noah–who were very wicked people, not righteous at all, and yet the Savior visited them as spirits and preached the gospel of salvation to them, and they had the opportunity given them of being taught about Christ, about repentance, and about being rescued by Christ out of their spirit prison. So this doctrine of an end to the punishment of Hell (except for sons of perdition and for Satan and the fallen angels) is actually found in the Bible, just not emphasized. I think there is a good reason that it is not emphasized, as I have explained as far as a reason I can see.

 

[ParkerD]

Perhaps you should contact the church and ask them to put the revised manual on the internet so as to avoid such problems.

My guess is the LDS sect had many new members who were disturbed by this idea and so they removed it to not scare them out of their new religion. I know I home taught some new members who had been taught this lesson in class with the old manual. They were shocked by some of these ideas and I had some explaining to do. I was unsuccessful in convincing them as were others who tried. They soon went inactive.

(Actually, I did when I learned about the newer manual. I contacted a couple of people who had a position where they could influence that the new manual be posted on the internet, but that change might have already been in process. Good suggestion, though.)

As I had noted in an earlier post, I think it was a manual put together by a committee, by assignment, and that means people had different perspectives and reached a consensus on the wording for each lesson, unless they were specifically quoting scriptures or a source text. So the later committee reached a different consensus than the earlier committee (a better manual, I think)–and now that newer manual is the basis of two years worth of lessons for all adults in the LDS church so that everyone has some basic doctrinal lessons and can discuss those basic doctrines with some great reference materials to study each week on their own.

 

[FrancesDS]

Frances DS,
I noticed your post and noticed that you seem to have used the Gospel Principles manual that is older than the current manual, and it would seem important to know that that particular lesson has been slightly revised in its wording.

If you look at some of the differences, you may notice that the sentence about the “same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father” has been taken out. I think this is an important change, in that the ambiguity was decreased since there is no real doctrinal source for that particular wording. So the conclusion that you drew from the earlier lesson material, wherein you have assumed that LDS belief is that men can eventually progress way out in eternity to become a “Heavenly Father” to a created, populated world like our Heavenly Father, and that He did that by living a mortal life on a world like ours, is drawn from a lesson that was viewed as needing to be changed to be more in line with what Joseph Smith taught on that subject (which wasn’t a great deal, but wasn’t that).

…gives the impression that the Father lived on an earth just as Christ did, and that Christ did what He had seen His Father do, which to me means that the Father was a perfect Man of Holiness when He lived on an earth and became a resurrected Being. Joseph Smith never said that to become like God would mean that exalted beings will be worshiped like Heavenly Father is worshiped. The sense is more of becoming perfect with perfect knowledge and perfect love and faith, and being a creator including organizing spirit children from their existing intelligence.

Thanks for letting me know there is an update. I have reviewed the newer document.

However, from Mormon sources, there still seems to be the idea that man can become a God as our Heavenly Father is, even if the exact wording is now not in the New Member Manual of Gospels and Principles.

D&C 132:19 - “…shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths…and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.”

This shows, as you stated, that those who are exalted will be able to have families with spirit children, continuing their ‘seed forever and ever’. This goes along with the idea that the exalted will inherit “thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions” as well. These are descriptions of someone who is a ruler is it not?

I also found another Mormon manual, though there is no date on it, but it does say it is an official document from the Mormon Church…It is called Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual. In it there are several quotes related to this. To me, this same idea is there though that man can become God, just as our Heavenly Father is. This says that the document is ‘official’…

Here are several quotes from this Official Manual:

“We are the children of God, our Heavenly Father. We are members of his family. We are his spirit offspring. We were born in the premortal life as spirit beings, sons and daughters of a glorified, perfected, exalted being. This holy being himself lives in the family unit. He has a fullness of glory and power and might and dominion…We are the **literal **offspring of the most glorious personage of whom it is possible to conceive. He is God Almightly our Heavenly Father.” (Bruce McConkie, Households of Faith, 1971…)

“Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of our earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages of aeons, of evoling into a God.” (The First Presidency, F. Smith, Winder and Lund, The Origin of Man…1909)

“The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fullness of his kingdom. In other words, we will have the privelege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will have **spirit children **who **eventually will go on an earth like this one **we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fulness of exhaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this developement; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds; and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring. We will have an endless eternity for this.” (Smith, Doctrines of Salvation…)

All of the above quotes from this official manual seem to support the understanding I had from the original Gospels and Principles I had read that I discussed above…???
It seems to say that Man is capable of becoming just as God is, a God, a Heavenly Father with spirit children who will be sent to an earth like this one (which maybe is one that the man organized since he will have the power to do that), and the man will have jurisdiction over that world, peopled by his offspring.
This is just how our world now is ‘peopled’ by us, the offspring of our Heavenly Father.
Sounds like the exalted man would become a God.

Now this manual too, maybe it is out of date?? I do not know and there was no date on it.
It did say it was official and for new members…
Or maybe I am misunderstanding something??..

Please correct any of this if it is incorrect, I am still misunderstanding, or if any of this is out of date…

Thanks
Frances DS

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks for letting me know there is an update. I have reviewed the newer document.

However, from Mormon sources, there still seems to be the idea that man can become a God as our Heavenly Father is, even if the exact wording is now not in the New Member Manual of Gospels and Principles.

D&C 132:19 - “…shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths…and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.”

This shows, as you stated, that those who are exalted will be able to have families with spirit children, continuing their ‘seed forever and ever’. This goes along with the idea that the exalted will inherit “thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions” as well. These are descriptions of someone who is a ruler is it not?

I also found another Mormon manual, though there is no date on it, but it does say it is an official document from the Mormon Church…It is called Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual. In it there are several quotes related to this. To me, this same idea is there though that man can become God, just as our Heavenly Father is. This says that the document is ‘official’…

Here are several quotes from this Official Manual:

…(see earlier post)

All of the above quotes from this official manual seem to support the understanding I had from the original Gospels and Principles I had read that I discussed above…???
It seems to say that Man is capable of becoming just as God is, a God, a Heavenly Father with spirit children who will be sent to an earth like this one (which maybe is one that the man organized since he will have the power to do that), and the man will have jurisdiction over that world, peopled by his offspring.
This is just how our world now is ‘peopled’ by us, the offspring of our Heavenly Father.
Sounds like the exalted man would become a God.

Now this manual too, maybe it is out of date?? I do not know and there was no date on it.
It did say it was official and for new members…
Or maybe I am misunderstanding something??..

Please correct any of this if it is incorrect, I am still misunderstanding, or if any of this is out of date…

Thanks
Frances DS

Hi, Frances DS,
I would say that none of what you read is “incorrect” as far as they go within the context of all the details that would also be in those sources. There are two concepts, however, that don’t “jump out” at one who is reading just the sentences you cited.

First of all, it is absolutely essential to understand that all of us existed as an intelligence prior to being “born” (as that word was used by Bruce R McConkie), and that the word could just as well say “organized” or “brought forth” meaning changed to a higher form of life but with the same “personality” (for want of a better term) as when we were an intelligence. Spirit children are “brought forth” (my word choice) from an existing intelligence that has always existed, as taught by Joseph Smith. Some had different innate capacities and innate desires and personalities than others.

Secondly, it is also absolutely essential to understand that Jehovah, Jesus Christ in His pre-mortal Godhood, was God the Son in the beginning of what could be described as our “eternity” when we were “brought forth” as spirit children of Heavenly Father, in that God the Son was already completely unique from all of us and was God with all of His God-like attributes (except a physical body that would come much later, on this earth) at that beginning point when we were with Him and with Heavenly Father.

So when the expression is used “offspring of celestial parentage” then those words are used with a dramatically different meaning for all of us than the understanding that Jesus was the Firstborn. Jesus’ intelligence, from before His being brought forth as the Firstborn (and since it was before we became spirits and was while we were merely intelligences in an unorganized condition), was completely unique and had far greater capabilities that no other intelligence had, and thus could be brought forth as the Son of God with divine attributes and divine capabilities and perfection in and of Himself right at the beginning.

So keeping those two concepts in mind, then what is being conveyed by using the phrase that we are the “literal offspring of Heavenly Father” is so much different for us than for Jehovah that the only similarity is that through Him and His perfection and His capacity to endure the suffering He was willing to endure for us as well as the law of mercy and grace instituted by Heavenly Father, can we have any possibility of becoming “like God” in the words that you used in the first paragraph you cited (which, by the way, match descriptions found in the Book of Revelation about those who “inherit all things” as “he that overcometh”). In other words, in and of ourselves we were tiny in our capacity, and could not possibly progress to the point of becoming “like God” without the fact that Jehovah was already God the Son and had the capacity of enduring the suffering He was willing to endure for us.

I think it is also significant that none of those other sources you cited included a phrase that indicated those who progress to the point of being “like God” (other than that the Son of God who is already “like God”) will have the situation of being “worshiped” as Heavenly Father is worshiped, so my sense is that it is incorrect to use the words “a God as our Heavenly Father is” even though having omniscience and having omnipotence as gifts from Him through His Son.

 

[ParkerD]

(Continuation of reply to Frances DS):

I think one studying this subject needs to be so thoroughly familiar with the New Testament teachings of the Savior and of John in the book of John and his epistles and the book of Revelation, that they see the word “ruler” and they think immediately of “joint throne” or of “enter thou into the joy of thy Lord” or of “I will make thee ruler over many things”. Then the words begin to make sense within that context–otherwise they don’t make sense since in and of ourselves we have no such capability and no such capacity. It is only through Christ that it is remotely possible, but through Him it is entirely possible but yet we have to learn to have faith that He can do that for us, and also faith that “moves mountains” through learning that kind of capability and endowment from Him.

Without belief that He can do that for us, we would not yield our reliance upon His grace and His power to change our hearts into a completely “new creature” with a new capacity and new capabilities. He is the focal point of that change that we can experience. We have to be willing to yield our hearts, our desires, our small capacity, to allow Him to greatly and masterfully enlarge our capacity and our willingness to love others unconditionally as He does, and Heavenly Father and the Holy Spirit encourage us to do this “yielding” so that He and the Holy Spirit can change us. It must be completely voluntary on our part–with full purpose of heart and complete unselfishness as to our motives. Then having done that, we can be at a beginning point to have His grace infuse our lives with growth toward becoming “like Him” and toward inheriting a “joint throne” with Him.

Inheriting such a “joint throne” means being able to do by the capacity of “grace” what He is able to do by the capacity of inheritance, but it also means needing to progress toward gaining the full measure of what that grace allows us to become because of His having suffered for all of our shortcomings–our mistakes and the ways we fall far short along our own path of progress and of gaining the wisdom that He innately has.

 

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6577259]Third Day, I would answer that one trying to understand that concept ought to think about the word “eternal” and realize that it can mean a “kind of punishment” or a “kind of life” or a “kind of reward”, or it can mean “duration of time”. If God gives the punishment and God is an eternal Being, then the kind of punishment He gives can be described as “eternal punishment” even if the duration of time has an end. So what I’m saying is that God is being merciful by using the word “eternal” to describe the punishment and pains of Hell,** even if they are going to end after a thousand years for a particular sinful person.**

So you are saying that according to Mormon teaching hell is not eternal. A mass murderer, will not suffer eternal punishment but will one day enjoy happiness in the telestial kingdom? What is the Mormon interpretation of Mark 9:43-48?
“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched where: **Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched **And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched where :**Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched. **And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire where :Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched”

You might also look up 1 Peter 3:18-20 and think about the people at the time of Noah–who were very wicked people, not righteous at all, and yet the Savior visited them as spirits and preached the gospel of salvation to them, and they had the opportunity given them of being taught about Christ, about repentance, and about being rescued by Christ out of their spirit prison. .

You’re assuming that those in the Spirit prison had not repented for their disobedience before they died in the flood. If they did repent of their sins then they were capable of entering heaven but Christ came to them to announce the good news. If they did not repent then they were in hell and not in the spirit prison.

**So this doctrine of an end to the punishment of Hell **(except for sons of perdition and for Satan and the fallen angels) is actually found in the Bible, just not emphasized. I think there is a good reason that it is not emphasized, as I have explained as far as a reason I can see.

These people weren’t in hell. Heaven was not opened until Christ ascended into heaven so these people were in what Luke 16:22 calls “Abraham’s Bosom”.

 

[ParkerD]

So you are saying that according to Mormon teaching hell is not eternal. A mass murderer, will not suffer eternal punishment but will one day enjoy happiness in the telestial kingdom? What is the Mormon interpretation of Mark 9:43-48?
“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched where: **Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched **And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched where :**Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched. **And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire where :Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched”

You’re assuming that those in the Spirit prison had not repented for their disobedience before they died in the flood. If they did repent of their sins then they were capable of entering heaven but Christ came to them to announce the good news. If they did not repent then they were in hell and not in the spirit prison.

These people weren’t in hell. Heaven was not opened until Christ ascended into heaven so these people were in what Luke 16:22 calls “Abraham’s Bosom”.

Third Day,
I hadn’t realized that your question about Hell was pertaining only to mass murderers, or I would have given my opinion that they have no rescue from Hell or the pains of Hell and are sons of perdition. As to Judas Iscariot, I assume he has no possibility of rescue also because he had the light of living in the presence of Christ and sinned against that light by his act, so I assume he is also a son of perdition.

As far as the people at the time of Noah, if you are saying that they repented before the flood came then I think the Bible contradicts that thinking. If you are saying they repented as the flood was about to drown them then I think that kind of thinking would lead to a belief that God should do something to give anyone who is going to die and go to what you have called “spirit prison” in lieu of Hell the last chance opportunity to repent by not having a sudden death experience but instead the kind of death like a flood or a lingering illness where one says, “The end of my life is really here–I had better repent” and they do that. Otherwise, to send someone to “Hell” where they will suffer forever and ever would be inconsistent than for the people at the time of Noah and the flood. I think God is consistent in His punishment and in His purposes for punishment.

I agree with the two people cited in the Catholic Encyclopedia article about “Hell” on this website as follows:

Among Catholics, Hirscher and Schell have recently expressed the opinion that those who do not die in the state of grace can still be converted after death if they are not too wicked and impenitent.

The LDS belief is that the term “Hell” is fairly synonymous with the term “spirit prison”, and is somewhat like the fourth paragraph in the Catholic Encyclopedia article where it talks about “four meanings” of the word within that paragraph.

I think the fires of hell and the term “unquenchable fire” as well as the term “their worm does not die” has to do with a spiritual condition and not a physical condition, and is a description of their feelings of spiritual torment and anguish. The sons of perdition will experience that for all eternity, and that is LDS doctrine about those who are consigned to being sons of perdition.

If your comment about Abraham’s bosom means that you have taken the interpretation that everyone in spirit prison is in “Abraham’s bosom” then I disagree, though I agree that there was a need for waiting until Christ’s resurrection for the full blessings of Heaven to come to the righteous, in that they were blessed with resurrection if they had lived before the time of Christ.

I think Isaiah 61:1-2 applies much more broadly than you seem to have given credit for with what you have expressed as your belief about the duration of Hell for everyone who goes there. I also think the verses in the Bible (there are a few) that talk about “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess” are giving a commandment but also presenting an eventuality in either this life or in the spirit world (spirit prison for the wicked), and that the righteous will go in the spirit world to the place called “Paradise” where they will await their resurrection, but the wicked will go to spirit prison.

Maybe you should ask “Hirscher and Schell” (Catholics) why they have the particular beliefs that they have about this subject.

Have a good day, Third Day.

 

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6581976]Third Day,
I hadn’t realized that your question about Hell was pertaining only to mass murderers, or I would have given **my opinion **that they have no rescue from Hell or the pains of Hell and are sons of perdition

. ParkerD, I’s not looking for your opinion but the teaching of the Mormon religion. I used mass murdereres but I could have used adulterers, fornicators, child abusers or other sins that scripture clearly says excludes one from the kingdom of God. (of course I don’t believe in multiple kingdoms as you do)

As far as the people at the time of Noah, if you are saying that they repented before the flood came then I think the Bible contradicts that thinking

. It doesn’t contradict scripture. Read Romans 2:15-16. They would have been judged by the law written on their heart where their “conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them”

If you are saying they repented as the flood was about to drown them then I think that kind of thinking would lead to a belief that God should do something to give anyone who is going to die and go to what you have called “spirit prison” in lieu of Hell the last chance opportunity to repent by not having a sudden death experience but instead the kind of death like a flood or a lingering illness where one says, “The end of my life is really here–I had better repent” and they do that.

That happens all the time. Why do some die in their sleep and some die of an illness where they have months or years to reflect on their life.

Otherwise, to send someone to “Hell” where they will suffer forever and ever would be inconsistent than for the people at the time of Noah and the flood. I think God is consistent in His punishment and in His purposes for punishment.

Read Romans 2:15-16

I agree with the two people cited in the Catholic Encyclopedia article about “Hell” on this website as follows

:I wouldn’t depend on my theology from the opinion of two theologians (that I think have been dead for over a hundred years)

The LDS belief is that the term “Hell” is fairly synonymous with the term “spirit prison”, and is somewhat like the fourth paragraph in the Catholic Encyclopedia article where it talks about “four meanings” of the word within that paragraph.

If you are calling it purgatory, I would agree. But that’s not hell

I think the fires of hell and the term “unquenchable fire” as well as the term “their worm does not die” has to do with a spiritual condition and not a physical condition

, Of course. We will not be in hell in a physical earthly body

and is a description of their feelings of spiritual torment and anguish

.
“gnashing of teeth” doesn’t sound like “feelings”

The sons of perdition will experience that for all eternity, and that is LDS doctrine about those who are consigned to being sons of perdition.

What qualifies one to be a son of perdition.?

I think Isaiah 61:1-2 applies much more broadly than you seem to have given credit for with what you have expressed as your belief about the duration of Hell for everyone who goes there

.What does Isaiah 61:1-2 have to do with hell?

I also think the verses in the Bible (there are a few) that talk about “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess” are giving a commandment but also presenting an eventuality in either this life or in the spirit world (spirit prison for the wicked), and that the righteous will go in the spirit world to the place called “Paradise” where they will await their resurrection, but the wicked will go to spirit prison.

Philippians 2:10 adds “under the earth”. This would be a reference to the Catholic dogma of purgatory not hell.

Maybe you should ask “Hirscher and Schell” (Catholics) why they have the particular beliefs that they have about this subject.

I would like to but aren’t they dead? Origen put forth the idea that hell was not eternal and he was condemned for it and that was about 1800 years ago.

 

[ParkerD]

. ParkerD, …

. It doesn’t contradict scripture. Read Romans 2:15-16. They would have been judged by the law written on their heart where their “conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them”

That happens all the time. Why do some die in their sleep and some die of an illness where they have months or years to reflect on their life.

Read Romans 2:15-16
:I wouldn’t depend on my theology from the opinion of two theologians (that I think have been dead for over a hundred years)

If you are calling it purgatory, I would agree. But that’s not hell

, Of course. We will not be in hell in a physical earthly body

.
“gnashing of teeth” doesn’t sound like “feelings”
What qualifies one to be a son of perdition.?
.What does Isaiah 61:1-2 have to do with hell?
Philippians 2:10 adds “under the earth”. This would be a reference to the Catholic dogma of purgatory not hell.

Third Day,
What Moses was inspired to write about the people on the earth at the time before Noah was guided to build the ark (which took many years to accomplish) is different than what Paul wrote about people such as the Gentiles who did not have the laws of the gospel but may have been living by what was written in their hearts which was to do good among men (which I agree with totally), and that God will render to every man according to his deeds (which I agree with totally), and that outward signs such as circumcision are far less important to God than the inward covenant-making (which I agree with).

Here is what Moses was inspired to write:

Genesis 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood;…

The words I underlined in that passage don’t imply that God was seeing some people whose hearts were repentant–he was seeing that everyone had their hearts set on “only evil continually” except for Noah and his family. This is partly because the city of Enoch and that large group of covenant-keeping people in that city had been taken up from the earth because of their righteousness.

So not only do I disagree with your belief that “spirit prison” is different than “hell”, but there is no such difference expressed in the Bible when the prophets talk about “spirit prison” or “prison” or “prisoners” when speaking of the condition of the dead. Peter doesn’t express such a difference in 1 Peter 3:19-20 nor in 1 Peter 4:6.

The expression used by Paul in Philippians 2:10-11 regarding “things under the earth” would be those who have died and been buried “under the earth”. This does not mean their spirit is “under the earth”, but their bodily remains are. Here is the passage:

Philippians 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I think it is evident that God’s plan encompassed the place where the dead are “alive” as noted in 1 Peter 4:6, and that those in that spirit world (spirit prison) receive the opportunity to learn the gospel and repent, and to receive according to their works there as they come to the knowledge of Christ.

1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

Isaiah 61:1-2 has very much to do with spirit prison as one of the places where there are “captives” because of their sins and because without Christ there is no resurrection:

1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Have a good day. You can research the answer to your other questions, on your own. (It’s a simple matter to do that using the internet and search tools.)

 

[Third_Day]

=ParkerD;6585427]Here is what Moses was inspired to write:
Genesis 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Moses was also inspired to write after the flood “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth”.Gen.8:21
Man has a sinful nature. Those who do not know God are judged according to the law that is written on their hearts. That natural law has existed since the time after the fall of Adam

The words I underlined in that passage don’t imply that God was seeing some people whose hearts were repentant–he was seeing that everyone had their hearts set on “only evil continually” except for Noah and his family.

That’s still doesn’t rule out the possiblility that those who died in the flood were judged by God according to the law written on their hearts.

So not only do I disagree with your belief that “spirit prison” is different than “hell”,

Hell is eternal yet Mormonism contradicts the word of God and say that hell is not eternal

Matt. 25:46 - Jesus says, "they will go away into eternal punishment
1 Thes. 2:9 “They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction”
Isaiah 33:14 - “Who of us can dwell in the everlasting fire”

but there is no such difference expressed in the Bible when the prophets talk about “spirit prison” or “prison” or “prisoners” when speaking of the condition of the dead. Peter doesn’t express such a difference in 1 Peter 3:19-20 nor in 1 Peter 4:6.

The spirit prison was simply a holding place for those who died before the resurrection and ascension of Christ into heaven.

The expression used by Paul in Philippians 2:10-11 regarding “things under the earth” would be those who have died and been buried “under the earth”. This does not mean their spirit is “under the earth”, but **their bodily remains **are.
Here is the passage:
Philippians 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

So dead lifless bodies in the ground are bowing their knees and confessing with their tongues?

I think it is evident that God’s plan encompassed the place where the dead are “alive” as noted in 1 Peter 4:6, and that those in that spirit world (spirit prison) receive the opportunity to learn the gospel and repent, and to receive according to their works there as they come to the knowledge of Christ.

There is no second chance. Once again Mormonism contradicts the word of God " Hebrews 9:27 “for it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment”
How can you say that after death men will be allowed to “learn the gospel and repent” when the word of God says we die and are judged?

1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

The gospel was preached to those in the spirit prison that died before the word became flesh. To say that this refers to Mormon missionaires preaching Mormonism in the afterlife is inserting something in the text that isn’t there.

One more question. You believe that you can progress in eternity and become a god. Isn’t that exactly what Satan promised Adam and Eve? “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God knowing good and evil”

 

[Infinityseed]

I’m not Catholic, but I cannot help adding my two cents to this thread. As you may or may not be aware, the LDS church is specifically targetting native peoples of the Americas and catholics for conversion attempts. Having read the lies posted in this thread, I felt I must speak up. The 1840 edition that the other posters allege was changed by Joseph Smith himself does appear to have “pure and delightsome” rather than “white and delightsome”, but it begs the question why. If Joseph Smith’s intent was indeed to clarify his meaning, okay fine if you say so. But on page 72 you can find a quote that whoever made the edit missed if indeed the concern was over confusion about false racist doctrines. Please consider, and I quote:

For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceeding fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God, I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities. And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed: for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing… And because of their cursing… they did become an idle people full of mischeif and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey (pages 72-73, 1840 ed).

Never was such an action taken by God against any of the peoples who came against His chosen people. He cursed those who cursed Israel, true enough, but I guess he didn’t think of anything so clever as this until Joseph Smith came along to relate it. Not only does it show Mormon doctrine to have racist dogma at its heart, it shows that they teach that anyone who is dark-skinned is generally idle, lazy, ugly, etc. And what was that about bestiality? By contrast, all very light-skinned people must be on God’s nice list–hence Adolf Hitler’s love of the Aryan seed. What an amazing revelation of God! You know, the more I listen to Mormons speak, the more convinced I am. If they weren’t leading the simple-minded into Hell and making God out to be a liar, it would all be pretty hilarious considering that every time they attempt to cover a lie with a lie they get caught. Jesus said his sheep would recognize his voice, but I guess most Mormons will never understand that.

 

[ParkerD]

Moses was also inspired to write after the flood “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth”.Gen.8:21
Man has a sinful nature. Those who do not know God are judged according to the law that is written on their hearts. That natural law has existed since the time after the fall of Adam
That’s still doesn’t rule out the possiblility that those who died in the flood were judged by God according to the law written on their hearts.

Third Day,
I look at the punctuation used in Genesis 8:21 and recognize that the punctuation is placed incorrectly in the verse, and the word “for” would have been correctly translated into the word “because” with the meaning conveyed that God will never again curse the ground because of man because the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth. It is stating God’s promise to never again cause a flood to cover the earth.

I’m glad to see your generosity in considering the people at the time of Noah, and would hope you extend that same generosity to everyone who has ever lived or ever will live. I think that same generous spirit could extend to wanting them to actually have the gospel of Jesus Christ in their lives in the spirit world. That is what Peter wrote about.

Hell is eternal yet Mormonism contradicts the word of God and say that hell is not eternal

Matt. 25:46 - Jesus says, "they will go away into eternal punishment
1 Thes. 2:9 “They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction”
Isaiah 33:14 - “Who of us can dwell in the everlasting fire”

The spirit prison was simply a holding place for those who died before the resurrection and ascension of Christ into heaven.

I already noted that the word “eternal” means “God-given” in some contexts. However, there is a correct sense of “punishment” in that it is a kind of punishment to not achieve the glorious potential that was possible when we began this earth life, by choices against such. That is indeed a “punishment” and will probably bring regret to many people when they find out what they chose against.

So dead lifless bodies in the ground are bowing their knees and confessing with their tongues?

The expression was talking about those “under the earth” which means they have been buried, and which means their spirit is not there “under the earth” but where their spirit is, they can bow the knee in a spiritual sense and confess with the communication from their inner soul.

There is no second chance.

I agree heartily. There is no second chance.

Once again Mormonism contradicts the word of God " Hebrews 9:27 “for it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment”
How can you say that after death men will be allowed to “learn the gospel and repent” when the word of God says we die and are judged?

Yet you have said men will be judged based on what was in their heart. I agree with that. I also agree with Peter who said there is teaching in the spirit world, and it has purpose.

The gospel was preached to those in the spirit prison that died before the word became flesh. To say that this refers to Mormon missionaires preaching Mormonism in the afterlife is inserting something in the text that isn’t there.

I wrote my opinion that there will not only be “Mormon missionaries”, but Catholic missionaries and Protestant missionaries and whoever else feels missionary minded with their beliefs. There will still be choices going on, spirits making decisions about their beliefs and repenting of their sins, and no forced belief for anyone.

One more question. You believe that you can progress in eternity and become a god. Isn’t that exactly what Satan promised Adam and Eve? “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God knowing good and evil”

I suppose you realize that Genesis 3:22 says “the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil”–yet obviously this did not mean Adam and Eve became gods. It was to be “like God” in the sense of grasping a difference between good acts and evil acts, good thoughts and evil thoughts–the beginning of wisdom. It was a beginning of making those kinds of choices after their fall.

Satan’s temptation was a deception, but was not totally untrue as confirmed by Genesis 3:22. It was a mixture of truth and error. That is how Satan most often works among humankind–by giving partial truths but also giving error to deliberately deceive and lead astray from following the pure gospel and pure truth and light.

 

[ParkerD]

To the general reader:

A recent comment showed a lack of understanding about the word “curse” as used in the Book of Mormon as relates to the Lamanites. First of all, the “curse” had to do with those who rebelled against God and against making and keeping covenants with Him, being cursed with the loss of the Holy Spirit in their lives. One cannot live in rebellion and keep the Spirit.

The “mark” of the curse that had come because of the loss of the Holy Spirit, was a “mark” to allow the Nephites to distinguish who were the covenant people among them so that their children would marry within the covenant, just like Abraham wanted Isaac to marry within the covenant. That “mark” went away during the century before Christ was born, among the Nephites and the Lamanites who had joined with the Nephites, and ceased to have significance as to distinguishing the covenant people from others. It existed during the time period from about 570 BC to about 50 BC, but thereafter it did not apply, and continued to not apply throughout all the centuries thereafter in the New World.

But a “curse” still applies to those who reject the knowledge of Jesus Christ when they have an opportunity to know of Him and embrace the truths He gives to the world. The “curse” is that they do not have the Holy Spirit in their lives to guide them, when they could have taken the opportunity to receive this blessing for themselves and their families.