Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8960 total)
136 online now:
Tangle (1 member, 135 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,695 Year: 1,443/23,288 Month: 1,443/1,851 Week: 83/484 Day: 6/77 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Sin
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 47 of 185 (515286)
07-17-2009 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Phage0070
07-16-2009 11:22 PM


Re: Telestial Kingdom
Hi, Phage.

Phage writes:

1) It says they are burned with "eternal fire".

Yet it juxtaposes it with a clear statement of the chronological constraint (an "until" clause): it can't be forever, yet have an end.

"Eternal" is not taken to mean "it won't end": it is taken to mean "from God" (D&C:6-12).

-----

Phage writes:

2) It says this burning is "vengeance", like punishment.

This is anthropomorphization of nature.

-----

Phage writes:

3) It says they are put in this "Hell" by Almighty God.

No, it doesn't: read it again.

It says, "will be thrust down to hell," in passive tense: it says nothing about who or what will do the thrusting. You're reading into it what you want to see.

-----

Phage writes:

4) It says that they are put there specifically to "suffer the wrath... until the fulness of times"

Well, you're right there. One point for you.

-----

Phage writes:

5) This "fulness of times" is defined as "when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work" which is to say it is directly under the control of Christ.

-----

Also, given that Christ is almighty there isn't any reason why this should take 1000 years, so the best we can conclude is that he does not care at all about the suffering and is just taking his time.

Mormons do not believe "almighty" to mean "unlimited."

D&C 138: 28-30 explains that Christ is unable to visit the people suffering in the spirit prison in person, so He sends others (from the good side of the spirit world, where He can go) to do the work for Him. This is why it will take 1000 years: because Christ is not the limiting factor (how could He be when we have free will?).

Edited by Bluejay, : No reason given.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Phage0070, posted 07-16-2009 11:22 PM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Phage0070, posted 07-17-2009 12:26 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 48 of 185 (515288)
07-17-2009 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by ICANT
07-15-2009 12:33 PM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, ICANT.

ICANT writes:

Sin is an offence.

Disobedience to God's command was the offence that separated all mankind from fellowship with God.

So, in your opinion, sin is disobeying God's commandments.

Why did God make these commandments?
Because He wanted to?
Or, because He was required to do so by the laws of the universe?

-----

Running score:

Sin defined by God: 1
Deterministic Sin: 1


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by ICANT, posted 07-15-2009 12:33 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by ICANT, posted 07-17-2009 12:53 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 49 of 185 (515290)
07-17-2009 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Thugpreacha
07-15-2009 8:32 AM


Re: On Topic Joke
Hi, Phat.

Phat writes:

...this whole idea that we don't need a God because we would rather do it ourselves is part of what makes sin sin.

What does this have to do with Cain's sacrifice?

And, how are "wanting to do it ourselves" and "sin" correlated? I don't understand what you're saying.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Thugpreacha, posted 07-15-2009 8:32 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Thugpreacha, posted 12-21-2015 3:37 AM Blue Jay has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 51 of 185 (515293)
07-17-2009 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Perdition
07-16-2009 12:11 PM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, Perdition.

Perdition writes:

ex. "Without a God, you could do anything you want because there would be no Hell for you to be worried about." This is a fallacious argument, but it is made with regularity, so I felt the need to mention it here.

As kind of an aside, I'm rather surprised at how common this viewpoint is among Christians. I feel it myself sometimes. There's something really scary about always being reared with something else telling you what's right and what's wrong, but you only realize it when you stop blindly following and try to figure out what's right and what's wrong for yourself.

Life-long Christians who lose their religion almost invariably go through a phase where they are not responsible atheists, but callous nihilists. I go through this periodically myself as I'm dealing with my current confusion over religion, and it can get frightening.

When a long-trusted moral compass is lost, it feels like there is no hope of ever having a direction; just like, when you lose your girlfriend, it feels like there is no hope of ever finding love again. You almost have to go relive all your mistakes and regrets in order to callibrate your new compass.

It's very scary.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Perdition, posted 07-16-2009 12:11 PM Perdition has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Perdition, posted 07-17-2009 10:52 AM Blue Jay has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 56 of 185 (515320)
07-17-2009 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Phage0070
07-17-2009 12:26 AM


Re: Telestial Kingdom
Hi, Phage.

Phage writes:

Bluejay writes:

This is anthropomorphization of nature.

quote:
...and suffer the wrath of Almighty God...

It does not really seem like an anthropomorphization, it seems like it is the wrath of Almighty God.

As much as it hurts me to do so, I have to admit that religion is not in the business of helping people understand the reality of things, but is only in the business of getting a point across.

Let me try another approach (which I still have mixed feelings about, but which I have been taught by other Mormons before):

It's like having a child: I don't really want my 2-year-old to understand the pain of being zapped by an electrical outlet, and he wouldn't understand it if I tried anyway, so the only thing I can teach him is, "I will slap your fingers if you touch that." And that (generally) helps to prevent electrical shock.

It's the same with God: He doesn't want us to have to suffer the real torment of spirit prison, so He threatens us with His own punishment (which we can understand) to get the point across that we're not supposed to do it.

We understand wrath, we understand fire and we understand vengeance: so, these are the terms that God uses to explain it to us.

There are a few inconsistencies I see with this viewpoint, but I would be a bit remiss if I only shared the interpretation of Mormon doctrine that I personally subscribe to (especially since my brand has been less than convincing to you).


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Phage0070, posted 07-17-2009 12:26 AM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Phage0070, posted 07-17-2009 11:27 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 57 of 185 (515321)
07-17-2009 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by ICANT
07-17-2009 12:53 AM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, ICANT.

ICANT writes:

God did not command the man not to eat. He gave man a choice. Don't eat and live. Eat and die.

Just as man has a choice today.
Spend eternity in the lake of fire as he is already condemned. John 3:18.

Or

Accept the free full pardon offered by God to spend eternity with Him.

You're still just dabbling on the surface and not contributing to the discussion.

Why does the choice exist?
Is it because God made it exist?
Or is it because it exists inherently?


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by ICANT, posted 07-17-2009 12:53 AM ICANT has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 58 of 185 (515322)
07-17-2009 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Stile
07-17-2009 8:08 AM


Re: Must it be a property of the whole universe?
Hi, Stile.

Stile writes:

So, I'm not saying that sin is a basic or inherent function of the universe so much as it is a basic or inherent function of being human.

It's probably a useful distinction you're making.

It's probably a pretty silly idea to think that rocks can sin because sin is a natural part of the universe (although some Mormon scripture seems to anthropomorphize the earth ).

Animals and plants are not held to the same concept of sin as humans are, so sin is clearly not a universal, uniform phenomenon.

When I talked about it being an innate part of the universe, I was thinking more along the lines of God being unable to design a universe where sin doesn't exist. Maybe, as you say, it would be better for me to characterize sin as an innate part of intelligence, human nature or spirituality, than as an innate part of the universe itself.

-----

This is at least the third time I've posted three or more messages in quick succession on this thread: I had to double-check to make sure my screen name hadn't changed to "Rrhain.:


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Stile, posted 07-17-2009 8:08 AM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Stile, posted 07-17-2009 9:55 AM Blue Jay has not yet responded
 Message 61 by Perdition, posted 07-17-2009 11:00 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 74 of 185 (515427)
07-17-2009 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Phage0070
07-17-2009 11:27 AM


Re: Telestial Kingdom
Hi, Phage.

Phage writes:

I would just like to point out how I see our exchange has gone so we can get some perspective:

Wow.

So, what you see is that you have been a calm, rational, model citizen with a Platonic dedication to honest understanding, and I have been a rude, inconsiderate, babbling idiot?

Phage, you have read all of three verses of Mormon scripture, and you are now asserting the position that you understand the beliefs of the religion better than two of its practitioners.
And, not only that, but you are criticizing my arrogance.

Many Christians and creationists have claimed to understand science better than scientists after hearing one sermon or reading one book.
Do you really think that your approach so far is any different from that?
Why does the methodology suddenly become valid when you use it for your purposes?

Scripture is not intended to be read as literal words and semantics, but as principles and bottom lines with lots of emphatic, flowery language and inspirational gems to drive the point home.

This may sound like a cop-out to you (it does to me). But, I have already pointed out one instance in which a word (“eternal”) is used in a non-conventional way in the scriptures. Note that, in this case, the precedent for the non-conventional usage of “eternal” was established 2 years before it was used in the scripture you quoted (D&C 19 was written in 1830, and D&C 76 was written in 1832).

You didn’t know that “eternal” and “endless” had a non-conventional meaning in the scriptures when you posted your argument, and, consequently, your argument was wrong. Yet, you persist in asserting that your literal reading of a bunch of religious terms is superior to the lifetime of study that Michamus and I have put into it.

Like it or not, this is just the way things are. Lots of religious writings contain this kind of language. Religious texts can say, “wrath of God,” when neither God nor anybody’s temper is involved, and still be teaching a correct principle. Religion is not science, and was never meant to be: scriptures are not scholarly textbooks, but practical handbooks designed for average people, who don’t care about scientific technicalities.

By way of analogy, the average person does not care what the difference between a wasp and a bee is, and knowing the difference does absolutely nothing to help the average person prevent being stung by either. So, if God’s purpose is to prevent stings, does it really matter if He uses the terms “wasp” and “bee” incorrectly?

You can argue that it’s unfair, or that it makes it too hard to understand, and you’ll get no complaint from me: I agree with those sentiments, and I struggle through my scripture study for it. But, discuss it with any Mormon, and you’re most likely going to hear the same things as what Michamus and I are saying.

Mormons believe that sin is an eternal (i.e. deterministic, out-of-God’s-control) principle.
Mormons believe that the torment and suffering we will feel is the direct result of our own actions, not something that God does to us.

Here is a link to D&C 76. And, here is a link to D&C 138, which explains how the spirit prison (i.e. Hell) fits into the LDS Plan of Salvation.

Edited by Bluejay, : No reason given.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Phage0070, posted 07-17-2009 11:27 AM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by themasterdebator, posted 07-17-2009 9:02 PM Blue Jay has responded
 Message 76 by Phage0070, posted 07-17-2009 9:39 PM Blue Jay has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 77 of 185 (515452)
07-18-2009 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by themasterdebator
07-17-2009 9:02 PM


Re: Telestial Kingdom
Hi, Master Debator.

themasterdebator writes:

If you leave texts open to interpretation, people will interpret it the way they want, not necessarily the correct way. And there is no reason to favor one interpretation over another(other than personal preference).

This is why we meet together to discuss the doctrines, rather than let everybody go their own way and believe their own thing. The LDS Church is a worldwide organization, like the Catholic Church (but obviously smaller).


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by themasterdebator, posted 07-17-2009 9:02 PM themasterdebator has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 81 of 185 (515521)
07-18-2009 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Michamus
07-18-2009 2:04 PM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, Michamus.

Michamus writes:

You ever hear of this buddhist proverb? When you point a finger at another, 5 more point back at you.

This one only works on that guy from the Princess Bride: the rest of us only have 4 pointing back at us.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Michamus, posted 07-18-2009 2:04 PM Michamus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Michamus, posted 07-18-2009 8:24 PM Blue Jay has not yet responded
 Message 88 by ICANT, posted 07-18-2009 9:47 PM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 89 of 185 (515592)
07-19-2009 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Phage0070
07-17-2009 5:44 PM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, Phage.

I’ve been a bit busy this weekend: I apologize for the wait.

Okay, from the beginning, the Mormon doctrine is that sin prevents the attainment of full glory. It makes us “filthy,” in the words of the scriptures (1 Nephi 15:33-34; sorry, I don’t know how to link directly to individual verses: you’ll have to scroll down).

Filthiness results in “spiritual death,” which basically means separation from God, or separation from righteousness (2 Nephi 9:12).

quote:
And this death of which I have spoken, which is the spiritual death, shall deliver up its dead; which spiritual death is hell...

We are technically all spiritually dead on Earth, because we are separated from God, but this separation is only temporary, and isn’t actually complete (because we can feel the Spirit and get revelations, etc.). But, spiritual death is also encountered two more times. Note that, in the verse quoted above, spiritual death is equated with hell, which we have already explained is in the spirit world, before Judgment.

The other time that spiritual death is encountered is when it is made permanent for the Sons of Perdition, as Michamus explained earlier.

-----

Okay, none of that was really new, but it was important background.

What is new is the issue of culpability for the torment and suffering we feel. The prophet Joseph Smith:

quote:
A man is his own tormenter and his own condemner. Hence the saying, They shall go into the lake that burns with fire and brimstone. The torment of disappointment in the mind of man is as exquisite as a lake burning with fire and brimstone.

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, compiled 1938 by Joseph Fielding Smith


Looks like I found the brimstone for you!

The fire and brimstone is, as Michamus and I have been saying, of our own making. It is, quite literally, our own sense of guilt and failure that torments us.

-----

It is a generally-accepted tenet of Mormonism that God is subject to the same eternal law of justice that we are.

Alma 42:13:

quote:
Now the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God.

Bascially, God cannot undermine justice, which requires punishment to be enacted.

Now, there are two ways of looking at this:

  1. The most common viewpoint of Mormons is, like Joseph Smith said above, we bring our own torment upon ourselves, and God is not capable of preventing the suffering because He cannot interfere with justice. In this view, God’s “punishment” is His withholding aid from us (but He is required to withhold it by eternal law, so isn’t really His doing, anyway).

  2. The other view is that God metes out punishment personally because He is required to do so by eternal laws. Although the wording of the scriptures seems more in harmony with this view, my personal experience tells me that it is much less common among Mormons.

-----

Phage, post #82, writes:

Except of course that I am quoting LDS doctrine from official sources to back up my arguments.

Actually, technically, you didn’t.

The very first line, above the title of the article you quoted---“What is the meaning of the Book of Mormon scriptures on eternal hell for the wicked?”:

quote:
Questions of general gospel interest answered for guidance, not as official statements of Church policy.

The disclaimer, written by Daniel Ludlow, attached to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

quote:
Those who have written and edited [the Encyclopedia of Mormonism] have only tried to explain their understanding of Church history, doctrines, and procedures; their statements and opinions remain their own. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism is a joint product of Brigham Young University and Macmillan Publishing Company, and its contents do not necessarily represent the official position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
Daniel H. Ludlow

Your other sources (which were good, official sources) mentioned “punishment,” which I gave a good explanation for above.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Phage0070, posted 07-17-2009 5:44 PM Phage0070 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Phage0070, posted 07-20-2009 7:09 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 90 of 185 (515594)
07-19-2009 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by ICANT
07-18-2009 9:47 PM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, ICANT.

ICANT writes:

When I point my finger at my congregation I remind them I have 3 pointing back at me. Did I miss something somewhere?

ICANT, you're awesome.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by ICANT, posted 07-18-2009 9:47 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 94 of 185 (515653)
07-20-2009 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Phage0070
07-20-2009 7:09 AM


Re: What is sin?
Hi, Phage.

Phage writes:

Aha, there we go. That would have shorted discussion considerably had it been presented earlier.

Yeah, I apologize for my weird debating tactics earlier on the thread. I've just accepted it all for so long that I couldn't remember where all the relevant quotes were.

-----

Phage writes:

Does this mean God punished people previous to the announcement and it was retconned back, or that people only assumed it read like it meant before? If it is the latter, if it is changed again at some later point would it again be the latter?

I thought about this while I was writing my earlier, and the answer is that I don't know. I think most Mormons believe that God used to punish people before Christ's mission, and the Atonement brought about the new, non-punishment system.

Unfortunately, I can't tell you why the Atonement would have changed all that, so I personally tend to shy away from that viewpoint.

Things got more complicated when the Lord brought forth the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants (the "Restoration," as you've no doubt heard of before). During the Restoration, it is said that God brought in the "fullness of the Gospel," introducing some new doctrines and new covenants (hence, the name of the modern scriptures). The Lord maintains a prophet on the earth so He can continue to add greater depth to the things we already know.

The problem is that this gives the Church an excuse to rub out old doctrines that are no longer seen as positive, so it's impossible to be certain what is actually inspired and what isn't.

But, personally, I prefer a religion that is open to the idea of change over time to a religion that believes truth lies in stagnation.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Phage0070, posted 07-20-2009 7:09 AM Phage0070 has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 95 of 185 (515654)
07-20-2009 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by themasterdebator
07-17-2009 9:02 PM


Re: Telestial Kingdom
Hi, the Master Debator.

Sorry, I never gave you a full reply to this message.

themasterdebator writes:

Bluejay writes:

Religion is not science, and was never meant to be: scriptures are not scholarly textbooks, but practical handbooks designed for average people, who don’t care about scientific technicalities

First, average people do not have the ability to properly decipher the religious texts...To say the Bible was written for the average person is completely false. It was written for the elite priests and leaders in societies and even today requires in depth reading and reasoning to reach many conclusions people believe(most of which without the slightest idea how their church got there)

Well, you're right. I wasn't thinking about the Bible when I wrote that: I was thinking about the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, which were not written by scholars (at least, to the best of our current knowledge, they weren't).

My comment clearly doesn't explain the Bible: I'll try to be more careful with my wording next time.

Thanks.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by themasterdebator, posted 07-17-2009 9:02 PM themasterdebator has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 1085 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 96 of 185 (515693)
07-20-2009 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Perdition
07-17-2009 11:00 AM


Re: Must it be a property of the whole universe?
Hi, Perdition.

Perdition writes:

Rather than an innate part of intelligence, [sin] could be an innate part of free will.

That's an even better explanation.

It just seems that all Straggler, Stile and I ever talk about is free will: maybe it was my subconscious trying to avoid that road again.

Thanks.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Perdition, posted 07-17-2009 11:00 AM Perdition has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020