DiscussMormonism.com

Here is the third party doctrinal quote currently accepted as scripture:

I believe and accept the comforting statement of Elder Orson F. Whitney:

“The Prophet Joseph Smith declared—and he never taught more comforting doctrine—that the eternal sealings of faithful parents and the divine promises made to them for valiant service in the Cause of Truth, would save not only themselves, but likewise their posterity. Though some of the sheep may wander, the eye of the Shepherd is upon them, and sooner or later they will feel the tentacles of Divine Providence reaching out after them and drawing them back to the fold. Either in this life or the life to come, they will return. They will have to pay their debt to justice; they will suffer for their sins; and may tread a thorny path; but if it leads them at last, like the penitent Prodigal, to a loving and forgiving father’s heart and home, the painful experience will not have been in vain. Pray for your careless and disobedient children; hold on to them with your faith. Hope on, trust on, till you see the salvation of God.”

(Jas. Faust - Conference April 6, 2003)

This has brought much comfort and hope to many LDS families struggling with children of rebellion, addiction and sinfulness of every description.

My mother had quoted this often to me over the years referring to my 3 other siblings, step brother, ex brother in law etc. Now she quotes it in reference to me. This doctrine has given her the warm blanket she needs to keep her from literally dying of a broken heart. She cries less tears of despair and more of joy because of it.

Hey?!

What a strange place this afterlife will be to discover Lehi and Sariah with all of their children, curse lifted from Laman and Lemuel - heirs to the kingdom.

Jacob's son's.. the original wild bunch.

Did Judas have righteous parents? Maybe not. Regardless, it would still have to suck to be him.

Then again, I thought this scripture meant something quite absolute:

32 For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.
33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.
34 Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world.
35 For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked.

(Book of Mormon | Alma 34:32 - 35)

or is this and the miriad of other verses only refering to those without righteous parents?

Please stop knocking my last, thin straw of hope for my eventual deification. Relying on my parents is my last, best shot.

I think the idea is that parents teachings will carry on in their children as they relate things in their lives as thewe grow older.

Also a righteous covenant couple has the right to pray for and ask for help regarding their children. This is true also in the next life, where parents will continue to pray for their posterity and receive divine help in influencing the same posterity.

Example: The Abrahamic covenant, where the priesthood was promised to continue in his bloodline, hence all those who are baptised in the church are brought into the abrahamic covenant through adoption if they are not of the actual bloodline. A fullfillment of a promise made to a righteous man.

Inconceivable wrote:Did Judas have righteous parents? Maybe not. Regardless, it would still have to suck to be him.

Would it? Seems to me his actions, much like the serpent in the Garden of Eden, were essential to the storyline.

Come to think of it, Cain (or bigfoot) will be another one of those celestial surprises.



I realize that I appear to be making light of a very touchy subject. I understand it is the only thing that many TBM families have to hang the hope of their childrens salvation on - particularly those that suffer from the addictions of alcohoism, pornography or drugs.


An extension of time (after death) for forgiveness doled out to sinful children of only the saved MIT parents would make God a respecter of persons wouldn't it?

Now, do I believe that a Father is merciful to His children that may have lost power over their agency? I would hope. But that is not my point.

Gazelam wrote:I think the idea is that parents teachings will carry on in their children as they relate things in their lives as thewe grow older.

This flys in the face of the doctrine that those who reject the greater knowledge (Laman & Lemuel for instance) are subject to a proportional condemnation (a curse of dark skin along with being shouldered with the culpability of all their posterity's sins). But it might make for sinless grandchildren, sortof.

Joseph Smith is not just talking about the living, but children that have passed on as well.



Nehor,

If those are the only cards you're holding, let it ride man.

I'll add my perspective on this, as someone with inactive parents.

I can understand why the GA said it, he's talking to many a parent out there who believes that the only way to salvation is through the LDS church. It's soothing to contemplate that these children won't be lost, that eventually they will return to the LDS fold, either in this or the afterlife.

I dunno. At a practical level, what it does is perpetuate nepotism. Oh yes. The Stake president's son is an adulterer, inactive, fornicator, child abuser etc etc, but that's okay. He's special, he's born in the covenant, it is an invisible tie that will tie him in to a celestial afterlife. Those children born out of the covenant (like me!), nope,....they have no such promise.

I'm sorry. It's a complete pile of absolute and utter crock, with not very nice implications.

I can handle that 'God' is a nepotist. But if 'God' is a nepotist then he/she/it INCLUDES ALL of his/her/its children. ALL of them.
It's inclusive. From the pygmy tribes to the aborigine, the maori, the chinese, the arabs, and the west. We are all a human family, and he loves us all EQUALLY.

Mormons are no more loved by 'God' than any other nation or people. All of us, (if there is a God) will be judged according to our understanding and environment, taking into account the limitations of our physical brains and bodies. That mysterious personality soup, is something that a gracious God knows and understands. It won't matter two bits what religion you were or weren't.

In my opinion.

I also agree with the opening thread poster, that the two lines of thought in LDS theology, are contradictory and non-sensical. (If I interpreted the thread correctly..)

I agree, Miss Taken. And the scriptures support your concept. Despite the erronouse total rejection of the validity of other people who claim God as their own, the Jews knew at least one important concept: God is no respector of persons. There never was a covenant people; it's impossible to align a "covenant people" with the concept of "no respector of persons," so for Joseph to "restore" the concept only shows his ignorance of how God really works. (Joseph's gift was the Book of Mormon, nothing more. Everything else is the teachings of men mingling freely with God's own teachings.) The ancients had no clearer concept of God than the men today. They guessed, they wished, they hoped they got it right, but because they had no clearer a conduit than we do, they missed the mark, sometimes by a little, sometimes by a lot.

Occasionally the Bible actually gets it right (even a stopped watch is right twice a day). The purpose of the Atonement is to open the graves, to ensure a resurrection for all God's children. It's not a partial resurrection, dependent upon an arbitrary judgment based on values that change as society changes. It's for every person who ever lived. But then the Bible goes off on a tangent, based on the imperfect filter the ancients viewed the world through, and we're left to our own understanding.

Not a bad thing, in my opinion, since I trust my own understanding more than any man's.

Miss Taken wrote:I'll add my perspective on this, as someone with inactive parents.

I can understand why the GA said it, he's talking to many a parent out there who believes that the only way to salvation is through the LDS church. It's soothing to contemplate that these children won't be lost, that eventually they will return to the LDS fold, either in this or the afterlife.

I dunno. At a practical level, what it does is perpetuate nepotism. Oh yes. The Stake president's son is an adulterer, inactive, fornicator, child abuser etc etc, but that's okay. He's special, he's born in the covenant, it is an invisible tie that will tie him in to a celestial afterlife. Those children born out of the covenant (like me!), nope,....they have no such promise.

I'm sorry. It's a complete pile of absolute and utter crock, with not very nice implications.

I can handle that 'God' is a nepotist. But if 'God' is a nepotist then he/she/it INCLUDES ALL of his/her/its children. ALL of them.
It's inclusive. From the pygmy tribes to the aborigine, the maori, the chinese, the arabs, and the west. We are all a human family, and he loves us all EQUALLY.

Mormons are no more loved by 'God' than any other nation or people. All of us, (if there is a God) will be judged according to our understanding and environment, taking into account the limitations of our physical brains and bodies. That mysterious personality soup, is something that a gracious God knows and understands. It won't matter two bits what religion you were or weren't.

In my opinion.

I also agree with the opening thread poster, that the two lines of thought in LDS theology, are contradictory and non-sensical. (If I interpreted the thread correctly..)

While they don't say it very often I think there is an elitist philosophy. It's built into LDS scripture. Abraham's 'noble and great ones' vision. The idea that the strongest spirits generally come through certain bloodlines is not explicitly taught much but there are strong Book of Mormon and Biblical evidences of this. While not an explicit doctrine I believe it as it clarifies premortal influence for me. I've known idiot teens who were suddenly converted and overnight became powerhouses. While it doesn't seem that way to me others have told me I was like that.

Inconceivable wrote:Here is the third party doctrinal quote currently accepted as scripture:

I believe and accept the comforting statement of Elder Orson F. Whitney...

I would argue that all statements of a religious nature are "comfort" statements. This one isn't special in that regard.

Inconceivable wrote:...particularly those that suffer from the addictions of alcohoism, pornography or drugs.

Is it really possible to "suffer" from an addiction to porn? It's never been painful for me.

Oh wait... are you talking about the poor quality of acting among porn stars? Meh... you get used to it.