The Depressing Plan of Salvation

Post by **_The Nehor** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:35 pm

Not teaching the Plan of Salvation because it might scare children would be more dangerous. The Book of Mormon is called a warning for a reason. It's meant to shake us up. That's what God does. Teaching it badly can destroy people.

I still smart from a zealous Sunday School Teacher who taught (without evidence) that repenting of something and doing it again multiplied the sin exponentially and then drew up a chart showing how bad it could get. My response? I knew I would probably not stop doing what I was doing so at the age of 10 I stopped repenting....and didn't start again till my late teens. Thanks a lot moron. Then a wise teacher taught me the joy of repentance and all was well.

Most of the problems with the Plan of Salvation discussed here is a problem with absolutes. They're foreign to us. Here there are no good guys. Just a lot of bad guys, some repenting and forgiving. In the end we are left with what we are. With our feel-good culture we've become immune to the teaching that we're all sinners, all falling short, and all not able to enter heaven. We'd ruin it in seconds. The thing that hit me hardest in the apocryphal Enoch ascension accounts is the reaction of people in heaven to his coming. "What is he doing here?" or perhaps, more exactly, "What is THAT doing here?" We don't belong. When the greatest people tell me that they're sinners and wicked, I believe them. Only someone who is good knows anything about good and evil. The more wicked lead sheltered lives and can't tell the difference. Most of their piety is parrot-talk. Luckily in God's mercy some graduate and move on.

Some people are evil and will always choose to be evil. Saying that you won't be happy till they're with you....when only they can choose to be with you is a nasty indulgence. It leads evil veto hell. It allows the evil to deny happiness to others until they are allowed to be happy....on their terms.

Post by **_Doctor Steuss** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:47 pm

Who Knows wrote:
Doctor Steuss wrote:It was a "third part," not 1/3.

Huh. I've never heard it described like that before. Even LDS.org has a ton of stuff saying it was 'one third'.

I like this site better than LDS.org: http://scriptures.LDS.org/ ;)

Also Rev. 8 may be paralleling this event in heaven... maybe. I've never seen anyone else draw the comparison, so it might just be some worthless thing with no merit.

------------
Does anyone have an Anchor Bible Dictionary handy (preferably in CD form as it might be impossible to find in the actual books)? If you do, can search for something along the lines of "angels, war, heaven, satan, third part"?

Post by **_Who Knows** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:50 pm

Doctor Steuss wrote:I like this site better than LDS.org: http://scriptures.LDS.org/ ;)

Does that mean LDS.org is now an anti-mormon site?

Post by **_The Nehor** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:58 pm

Who Knows wrote:
Doctor Steuss wrote:I like this site better than LDS.org: http://scriptures.LDS.org/ ;)

Does that mean LDS.org is now an anti-mormon site?

We were warned that Secret Combinations might root in the Church....DUN, DUN DUN. I suspect they already control the Building Committee, the Young Womens Program, the Daughters of the American Revolution, and Professional Wrestling.

Post by **_Doctor Steuss** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:00 pm

Who Knows wrote:
Doctor Steuss wrote:I like this site better than LDS.org: http://scriptures.LDS.org/ ;)

Does that mean LDS.org is now an anti-mormon site?

Nah. It's just an anti-Steuss'-heretical-views site. They seem to spring up quite often from within the Church.

Post by **_truth dancer** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:10 pm

Hi Steuss...

Do you agree that it is an "upgrade" though?

Not necessarily... without exception the mainstream Christians I have spoken with believe nearly everyone will be in heaven... only the really, REALLY horrible people (smile) will be in hell.

In the LDS version of the afterlife, seems very few will end up with God in the CKHL...

So who knows which plan will allow more folks to be with God? Or which heaven is nicer? I suppose it depends on what you like.

Personally, I think it is all nonsense! :-) Or rather various men trying to come up with a place they think is fabulous for them. ;-)

~dancer~

Post by **_truth dancer** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:21 pm

Hi Nehor...

Some people are evil and will always choose to be evil. Saying that you won't be happy till they're with you....when only they can choose to be with you is a nasty indulgence. It leads evil veto hell. It allows the evil to deny happiness to others until they are allowed to be happy....on their terms.

This is your opinion... you see it a certain way but why is your way better than anyone else's view/revelation/insight/inspriation/vision?

Personally I do not think anyone is evil or chooses to be evil. And, how anyone can imagine heaven without loved one's is beyond me. Well, unless heaven is a place where you forget all those who did not make it to the CKHL! ICK!

The whole human invention of heaven just so doesn't work for me! Maybe God made the really great people he wants back to believe the CKHL is a great place, and made them want to be Queens and Kings so they would join the church?

Further, if there is some sort of heaven/place/ to go to (which I highly doubt), I think the judgments we have among us will have nothing to do with how it is... my guess, we will see a whole new experience that is much more unbelievable than this little blink in the history of existence.

Just this morning, I had a Muslim man or woman comment on my blog responding to a post, "I do not like heaven." He/she "bore testimony" that heaven is as it states in the Quran. His/her belief is every bit as strong as is yours, or Joseph Smith's, or anyone else...

Everyone seems to want to believe heaven is as they envision it.. .I guess that is OK since we really have no idea! :-)

~dancer~

Post by **_Doctor Steuss** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:29 pm

truth dancer wrote:Hi Steuss...

Do you agree that it is an "upgrade" though?

Not necessarily... without exception the mainstream Christians I have spoken with believe nearly everyone will be in heaven... only the really, REALLY horrible people (smile) will be in hell.
[...]

~dancer~

*Singing* Hold me closer, tiny dancer... (Don't know why that's in my head right now).

Your above comment is interesting to me. Without exception, the mainstream Christians I have spoken with interpret Matt. 7: 14 to mean the complete opposite of what they've told you.

I guess I just see the LDS paradigm as being much more universalistic. Perhaps I misunderstand it though (or maybe it's just wishful thinking... which is very, very, very possible).

But, I’m one of those kooky people that doesn’t necessarily rule out the possibility for progression between kingdoms (eternal progression to me would seem to not rule out such). Although I admittedly have to overlook a few statements by GAs to maintain that opinion.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:33 pm

truth dancer wrote:This is your opinion... you see it a certain way but why is your way better than anyone else's view/revelation/insight/inspriation/vision?

Personally I do not think anyone is evil or chooses to be evil. And, how anyone can imagine heaven without loved one's is beyond me. Well, unless heaven is a place where you forget all those who did not make it to the CKHL! ICK!

The whole human invention of heaven just so doesn't work for me! Maybe God made the really great people he wants back to believe the CKHL is a great place, and made them want to be Queens and Kings so they would join the church?

Further, if there is some sort of heaven/place/ to go to (which I highly doubt), I think the judgments we have among us will have nothing to do with how it is... my guess, we will see a whole new experience that is much more unbelievable than this little blink in the history of existence.

Just this morning, I had a Muslim man or woman comment on my blog responding to a post, "I do not like heaven." He/she "bore testimony" that heaven is as it states in the Quran. His/her belief is every bit as strong as is yours, or Joseph Smith's, or anyone else...

Everyone seems to want to believe heaven is as they envision it.. .I guess that is OK since we really have no idea! :-)

~dancer~

Heaven is weird that way. It's not just what I want, it is me. When I get there I expect it to fit me perfectly as it was made for me. It's not unbelievable, it is awe-inspiring.

People choose to be evil all the time. It's rarely a concious, "I'm going to be evil." It's just that the person is weak and unwilling to take the time, thought, and energy to make the right decision.

Post by **_Hoops** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 3:55 am

beastie wrote:
I find this ineresting and I am NOT picking a fight here. Just curious. Even if the LDS position is true - which most thinking people know is not - despite that you would rather not be a adherent based on your feelings? Isn't this what many find is the primary difficulty with Mormonism to begin with?

You would have a point if TD were saying that her negative feelings about the plan of salvation was some sort of viable "proof" of its falseness. That does not appear to be what she is doing, and in fact stated that IF it were true, she would rather be in a lower kingdom.

The critics' argument against "feelings" as used in the LDS paradigm, is often misrepresented by believers. Critics that I know of never argue that feelings have no purpose in life, but rather that feelings cannot represent some viable proof of some external reality, such as whether or not the Book of Mormon is an ancient historical document.

Okay, do I have this correct then? She would rather be in a lower kingdom because the "plan" just doesn't feel right? IF so, then how does one quantify the differences between the kingdoms to determine whether this view is rational. I am, of course, not saying TD is irrational, just trying to understand the point.