Posted by: Sarah ®
01/15/2002, 09:45:18
Author Profile Mail author
|
By "all things" do you mean to include inanimate objects? How strange. In my 25 yrs. of church membership (adult convert) I have never heard such, (although, admittedly, I'm no fan of McConkie's, and so, haven't read much of his work). I do remember one Gospel Doctrine class wherein an older gentleman advised that we chose our pets carefully, as they will go with us to the Celestial kingdom. He was quickly hushed up.
|
Posted by: RobRoy ®
01/15/2002, 10:46:50
Author Profile Mail author
|
I do remember one Gospel Doctrine class wherein an older gentleman advised that we chose our pets carefully, as they will go with us to the Celestial kingdom. He was quickly hushed up. Out of curiosity, why was he hushed? Will there be no pets in the Celestial kingdom?
|
Posted by: Sarah ®
01/15/2002, 12:02:19
Author Profile Mail author
|
I Have always wondered about that myself. Since he was hushed, we never got to explore this concept. I assume that no animal (H. Sapien, included) could go to the Calestial Kingdom sans spirit, so dogs and cats have souls, or no? More to the point in this case, I think, was the fact that this particular teacher was very program-oriented, and did not care for any deviation from his lesson plan. This topic could have been a real Pandora's box!!
|
Posted by: RobRoy ®
01/15/2002, 12:35:43
Author Profile Mail author
|
This topic could have been a real Pandora's box!! I guess that would depend on the concept of the soul and if the LDS believe that animals have souls. Roman Catholics do not.
|
Posted by: T-Bone ®
01/15/2002, 13:07:38
Author Profile Mail author
|
I have heard that pets can go with you to the celestial kingdom. I don't know what qualifies that specifically, I assume if you still want it.
|
Posted by: Randy ® Logan
01/15/2002, 13:23:37
Author Profile Mail author
|
i heard one time that your pets have to go through the temple first, to get endowments and wear tiny little doggy garments and stuff, well, assuming that your pet in question is a canine.
|
Posted by: Sarah ®
01/15/2002, 18:53:08
Author Profile Mail author
|
I've never seen kitty garments for sale in the Beehive store! I guess I'll just have to sew them myself. My question: during which of a cat's nine lives must he go to the Temple? Or, does one set of Kitty endowments suffice for all nine lives?
|
Posted by: Logan ® Randy
01/15/2002, 18:13:38
Author Profile Mail author
|
I'm pretty sure that this "spirit" doctrine does NOT include inanimate objects. I think the object has to be ALIVE to have been created first in "spirit form". But still, a "spirit aardvark", who existed in the pre-existence prior to its life here on the earth? Or a "spirit amoeba"?... Thanks,
Logan
|
Posted by: SciGirl ®
01/15/2002, 11:48:55
Author Profile Mail author
|
This principle was taught to me in the context of the end times. The earth was a spiritual being before it was a physical being, just as all things are and were. When it was created in the physical dimension, it needed to be baptized and confirmed, just as people need to be. Thus, the flood provided the baptism and the fire at the end of the world will be its confirmation. When the earth is resurrected, it will be as a crystal ball, and the highest kingdom will be there. As a child, I always thought it was a pity that the earth would be made of glass instead of pretty like it is now. The point is, that yes, I was taught this many times growing up LDS.
|
Posted by: Logan ®
01/15/2002, 18:20:26
Author Profile Mail author
|
Yes, this is exactly what I was inquiring about. Does this mean that the Earth is a living, biological entity unto itself? It has to be baptized and confirmed, right? Is this a literal thing? From your 'flood' and 'fire' references, it seems to be. So did the Earth have to BELIEVE, first, before it could be baptized? I just don't understand. And I'm being 100% serious! I wish a true LDS would explain this "deep doctrine" to me... Sincerely,
Logan
|
Posted by: SciGirl ®
01/15/2002, 18:37:47
Author Profile Mail author
|
It has always been my understanding that mormon theology dictated that the earth was a living, conscious entity, but not the same way that people are alive. For example, does the earth have the ability to "choose" right and wrong? Or like your question: is the earth required to "believe" in the gospel? In my understanding of LDS theology, the answer would be that the earth already has a perfect knowledge of all things. But because the earth must progress to a celestial plane, and because it is alive spiritually, it is still required that it be literally baptized and confirmed (the flood and the fire, respectively.) I suppose that one could make the argument from an LDS standpoint that the earth's spirit has had its calling and election made sure, or that when the intelligences were being carved out of the ether there were extra-special ones set aside for the planets, or that there is some nebulous "mystery" stuff that we don't understand associated with the choice of spirit for the earth (sort of like the Holy Ghost issues of who it is and why he doesn't have a body and when he will get one.)
....ouch, my head hurts....
|
Posted by: Logan ®
01/15/2002, 19:18:19
Author Profile Mail author
|
Geez! My head hurts, too. Nonetheless, thank you for posting such interesting LDS information -- and questions, SciGirl! On the scale of "deep doctrine", this has to weigh in pretty heavy! =)
You could write your own Mormon Doctrine with this stuff. Where were you when McConkie had HIS pen to paper? =) Seriously, all of your ideas sound just as reasonable (in the LDS world) as anything Joseph Smith ever taught!So in summary, you and I -- and everyone -- live on a living, conscious planet called EARTH -- who is ALIVE and CONSCIOUS of each of us right now. The Earth was created by God out of "extra-special intelligences" -- and it (or he or she) already has a perfect knowledge of things, and therefore, the Earth has had its "calling and election made sure". But, the Earth still needs to be literally baptized and confirmed because the Earth must progress to a celestial plane through water and fire, etc, and so on... Wow! I'll never think of my planet in the same way again. =) Seriously, SciGirl, thank you for the mental workout. Lovingly,
Logan
|
Posted by: rdl ®
01/16/2002, 08:28:07
Author Profile Mail author
|
So in summary, you and I -- and everyone -- live on a living, conscious planet called EARTH -- who is ALIVE and CONSCIOUS of each of us right now. The Earth was created by God out of "extra-special intelligences" -- and it (or he or she) already has a perfect knowledge of things, and therefore, the Earth has had its "calling and election made sure". But, the Earth still needs to be literally baptized and confirmed because the Earth must progress to a celestial plane through water and fire, etc, and so on...What happens when we annoy this living entity with our scrabbling around? I know that when I have a nasty little parasite, I squish it....earthquakes? volcanic eruptions? Hurricanes and Typhoons?
Do you suppose Anne McCaffrey is LDS? She wrote a couple of books exploring this concept. They can be found in the Fanatasy/Science Fiction Dept. This BB is nothing if not entertaining ;)
rdl
|
Posted by: Chi ®
01/17/2002, 04:37:48
Author Profile Mail author
|
It`s been YOUR understanding of such rubbish,it`s no wonder your head hurts.You say that one could make an argument from an LDS standpoint that the Earth has had it`s calling and election made sure etc etc etc, who could you have this argument with, Logan?.It`s a misnomer to call yourself Scigirl try Cavegirl
|
Posted by: SciGirl ®
01/17/2002, 11:58:06
Author Profile Mail author
|
Wow! My first angry reply! Anyway, I never claimed this was official doctrine. But, yes, I believe that you could make this argument from an LDS standpoint. If the earth has a spirit, which *is* LDS doctrine, then it is somehow sentient. If the flood comprised its baptism and the fire at the second coming comprises its confirmation by the fire of the priesthood (as it was explained to me), then the question of the earth's spiritual knowledge and position arise. After this point, I readily admit that I engaged in the type of rampant speculation that was common during some of my "deep" conversations with other "intellectual" LDS members. I have no shame in this, as LDS doctrine has many deep (as Logan put it) theological implications that are not officially talked about or embraced. When I was a believer, I enjoyed thinking about these things and trying to tie all of these types of doctrines together. I make no claim that there is any official confirmation of anything I speculated about. But these arguments were made from an LDS standpoint, because they were made to me by my mother and father, both of whom are dedicated and faithful members of the church. And at the time, it made perfect sense to me. However, if *you* would like to learn more about this specific theology, I would suggest delving into the Journal of Discourses and/or Mormon doctrine. The fact that they are not accepted as being scripture does not hinder their ability to demonstrate the views of many LDS members. PS. Why the anger?
|
Posted by: someone ®
01/17/2002, 12:04:51
Author Profile Mail author
|
it seems like we are leaving something out. We have all the ordinances here but 1...temple marraige. And I do in fact have an answer for that (although its not my theory).
|
Posted by: SciGirl ®
01/17/2002, 12:09:18
Author Profile Mail author
|
I'd love to hear your answer for the temple marriage problem -- I was never able to figure that out!
|
Posted by: someone ®
01/17/2002, 12:54:51
Author Profile Mail author
|
ok...cool. i need a bit of time to see if I can find some links;
setting it up requires a bit of a tour through the obscurities of catastrophism.
|
Posted by: someone ®
01/17/2002, 15:42:39
Author Profile Mail author
|
Ok, forgive how thrown together this is and the amount of info. First, its important to understand that this based on the specualtion of a church guy named "Anthony Larson". While he doesn't make the temple marraige claim explicit; its certainly an obvious deduction. Read the mormon pophecy link about his book, "and there shall be a new heaven and a new earth" (make sure to check out the picture on the cover) Larson takes the ideas from the the book, "The Saturn Myth" by catastrophist David Talbott and applies them to gospel prophecy puzzles. The other link is to a site discussing "The Saturn Myth" Ok, this is getting pretty cool huh? well, here are some quotes from J.S. (i think..one might be orson pratt, i can't remember).
Stuff about the Lost Ten tribes. "He did so. The Prophet turned to section 133 and read, commencing at the 26th verse, and throughout the 34th verse. He said, after reading the 31st verse, 'Now let me ask you what would
cause the everlasting hills to tremble with more violence than the coming together of two planets? 'And the place whereon they reside will return to this Earth'. Now,' he said, 'scientists will tell you that it is not scientific: that two planets coming together would be disastrous to both, but when two planets or other objects are travelling in the same direction and one of them with a little greater velocity than the other, it would not be disastrous because the one travelling faster would overtake the other. And now, what would cause the mountains of ice to melt quicker than the heat caused by the friction of the two planets coming together?' And then he asked this question: 'Did you ever see a meteor falling that was not red hot? So that would cause the mountains of ice to melt.' "'And relative to this Great Highway which should be cast up when the planet returns to its place in the great Northern Waters, it will form a highway and waters will recede and roll back.' He continued, 'Now as to their coming back from the Northern Waters; they will return from the north because their planet will return to the place from whence it was taken.' "'Relative to the waters rolling back to the north. If you take a vessel of water and swing it rapidly around your head you won't spill any, but if you stop the motion gradually, it will begin to pour out. Now,' he said, 'Brother Brown, at the present time this earth is rotating very rapidly. When this planet returns it will make the earth much heavier, and it will then revolve slower, and that will account for the waters receding from this earth for a great while...' now it may seem that this is talking about 2 planets becoming one sphere, but this may not be the case. The real clincher is a drawing by J.S. for "Brother Brown". I was unable to find it though on the web. It shows three spheres sharing the same axis with little connecting tubes at like a 15 degree angle. The middle sphere was identified as this earth, and the others weren't clearly (the context was last days 10 tribes related not afterlife; wasn't about the T, TER, and Celestial kingdom)identified. Larson in his book gives a few explanations about why it shows two spheres connecting instead of one. But IMO, if the earth is male..hehe, and if there must be a restoration of all things, then multiple planetary partners could make sense.
Related link: http://www.mormonprophecy.com/catalog.html#HEAVEN; http://www.bearfabrique.org/Saturn/saturnmyth.html
|
Posted by: SciGirl ®
01/17/2002, 15:58:09
Author Profile Mail author
|
Wow, that is really interesting -- thanks for taking the time to type all of that stuff in! It really is fascinating to see the types of speculations Joseph Smith and his compatriots came up with, and I think it really gives you insight into how his mind worked. I really find mormon historical theology fascinating, especially the ways that Joseph could tie things together that don't seem related at all, and the ways that other people have and do tie them together now where he didn't. I say again, Fascinating!! I'll have to read those links over...
|
Posted by: Logan ®
01/17/2002, 17:11:55
Author Profile Mail author
|
Nice! Thanks for posting such crazy / great information! JS was certainly a sick and deeply twisted man. But hey, so are many of us today. We're all just people with ideas looking for answers. JS was FAR OUT! =) Peace,
Logan
Modified by Logan at Thu, Jan 17, 2002, 17:12:33
|
Posted by: Chi ®
01/18/2002, 04:27:35
Author Profile Mail author
|
Wow! My first angry reply! Girlish delight,wonderful,perhaps you mistake anger for derision, concerning speculative viewpoints from yet another
self proclaimed intellectual,your Words of Wisdom suggest I delve into the JoD,perhaps the BofM the D&C as well,ummmm interesting I will take that on board,thank you young lady
(no sexism intended)
|
Posted by: someone ®
01/15/2002, 12:00:37
Author Profile Mail author
|
Well, certainly the reconciliation between the conflicting creation stories leads to both a spiritual, and a physical creation in LDS; so all living things were created first spiritually. There may be some ambiguity though in what this really means..does it everything was created with a "spirit" like we all have? maybe. could also mean that every class of living thing was simply designed first...like a blueprint. I think the idea of "spiritual creation" is certainly fundamental doctrine; but I doubt your going to find an official stance on what exactly this means from the church. The idea of us choosing our pets is probably an extension of the idea that we chose our parents; which I believe qualifies as fluff.
|
Posted by: Logan ®
01/15/2002, 18:23:19
Author Profile Mail author
|
Thank you for some very cool thoughts and insight, someone. It's definitely an interesting LDS "doctrine". I wish I knew more... Sincerely,
Logan
|
Posted by: Mat ®
01/15/2002, 20:16:42
Author Profile Mail author
|
Somewhat related are Pratt's thoughts in "The Seer".
I think he would have made a great modern sci-fi author.
"As we have proved, that spirits of men, and of horses,and all manner of beasts, and of creeping things, and of birds, are in shape of thier mortal tabernacles, it is reasonable to infer, analogically, that the spirits of grass, of herbs, and of trees, are in the form of the natural bodies of the respective vegetables which they once inhabited; and those vegetables which are now living, are inhabited by living spirits in the form of themselves...... ..... The spirits of horses, beasts, birds, and creeping things, were, not only of the shape of their respective natural bodies, but were evidentlyof the same size as those bodies when full grown; otherwise they would have represented, as infants instead of men, as colts instead of horses, &c.
The tabernacles of both animals and vegetables, continue to grow in size, until they attain to the original magnitude of thier respective spirits, after which their growth ceases. When the spirit first takes possession of the vegetable or animal seed or embryo, it contracts itself into a bulk of the same dimension as the sees or tabernacle which it enters: this is proved from the fact, that the spiritual body was afterwards sufficently contracted to enter into, and to be wholly contained whithin an infant tabernacle.
....Spirits, therefore, must be composed of substances, highly elastic in nature, that is, they have the power to resume thier former dimensions, as additional matter is secreted fr the enlargement of thier tabernacles. It is this expanding force, exerted by the spirit, which gradually develops the tabernacle as the necessary materials are supplied." He goes on about how if a tree gets its limb cut off the spirit remains intact by retracting itself into the main body of the tree. There is more if anyone is interested.
Modified by Mat at Tue, Jan 15, 2002, 20:19:01
|
Posted by: Waspinatrix ®
01/18/2002, 08:47:18
Author Profile Mail author
|
Logan:
Has anyone else here heard about the Mormon doctrine/sub-doctrine that ALL THINGS on this planet existed prior to this mortal probation? That, in the pre-existence, ALL THINGS had a "spirit" before passing into mortality?
Anyway, I was wondering what anyone else here might have heard on the subject -- or if any "experts" had any light they could shed to help brighten such a strange, dimly lit LDS doctrine. I would love to learn more... =)SciGirl:
If the earth has a spirit, which *is* LDS doctrine, then it is somehow sentient. If the flood comprised its baptism and the fire at the second coming comprises its confirmation by the fire of the priesthood (as it was explained to me), then the question of the earth's spiritual knowledge and position arise. someone:
Larson in his book gives a few explanations about why it shows two spheres connecting instead of one. But IMO, if the earth is male..hehe, and if there must be a restoration of all things, then multiple planetary partners could make sense.Me:
Yes, the 'Everything has a Spirit' thing is a doctorine. You've prolly already been refered to the PoGP, D&C and the JoD. This is one of those doctorines that make Mormanism unique in Christiandom. As I'm not personally aware of any other Christian sect that teaches such a pseudo-wiccan (or Shintoist, or Shamanist) point of view. As to the 'Fire being a recieving of the Preisthood' and the 'Earth being "male" idea... I've never seen any canonical referance to the Earth as being anthopomorphized(SP?) as male (though it has been depicted as female in D&C and the BoM; ref: Mother Nature...). Nor had I ever been told that the Earth would recieve 'Priesthood'. Rather it would be 'confirmed with the holy ghost' (ref: Bro. Moris, seminary teacher). The other problem about the 'Earth being 'male' is (not just the fact that I've always seen it depicted as female (ref: Gaia, and other European cultures...) that these other planets which have been refered to in this thread (Jupiter, Saturn, Marduk, Ra...) are *ALL* depicted as 'male'... Go homosexuality! :P Just needing change...Though half a penny don't get you anything. :\
Waspi~ Read my
|
|
