Multiple mortalities?

[Davka]

Believe as you will, Rick Grimes. You obviously have the eternities figured out.

Quite a coincidence that the Father AND the Savior were both “firstborns” considering the odds of being born first is like one is billions and billions. Perhaps there is more to becoming a first born than just magically being the first spirit child your heavenly parents “created...”

Which makes me wonder, if procreation is eternal, that would mean HF and HM will continue to have spirit babies, right? So that must mean Jesus, as their firstborn spirit child (you can only have one) will save their children forever and ever, right?

*deadpan*

But you seem to believe you have the eternities figured out, and you've put yourself in the same level as god and christ, believing that you'll be a christ one day. I say let's wait and find out when we have the capacity to comprehend. Nutcase lori vallow thinks she's been reincarnated many times, and thinks she's a god and even a translated being. It gives her power I guess, and it apparently makes her think rules don't apply to her. I think we should be humble, do the things christ has asked us to and worry about becoming gods and what that entails when we actually have completed this earthly test. Don't put the cart before the horse.

Whoever Lori Vallow is, that's a strawman attack - taking the most absurd, extreme example and attacking it.

Firstly, believing you can one day become as God is with your own spirit children doesn't mean you've put yourself on the level of with God and Christ now but acknowledge the ends to which we were created.

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

"Let's wait and find out" is in line with "we have enough" which attitude the scriptures strongly warn us against. We must always be seeking and learning or we begin to lose that which we have - and if we don't change course eventually the adversary wraps his binding chains around us. (2 Nephi 28 / Alma 12.)

Believing we can be as Heavenly Father is nothing new, so it's curious why so many folks take issue at being as Jesus. Jesus clearly taught that His Father is Greater than he. Davka wasn't the first person to teach that we will do Jesus' works some day -- Jesus Himself did.

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

He's basically saying "you'll do my works and then heavenly father's works after that." It means what it means. And his audience is important. Jesus taught the general-audience Gospel on the mount, but the above scriptures were aimed at His Apostles who were walking at Jesus' side to learn His works.

Knowing there is a horse in front of the cart and one day we'll be the horse is not putting the cart ahead of the horse. The proper perspective of the plan of exaltation (like Davka said - different than the plan of salvation) and knowing who you are and where you are on your eternal path is extremely important. Without that perspective we get these folks who beat themselves up to the point of eating disorders where general authorities like Elder Holland have to speak to the fact that God doesn't expect you to be perfect in this life.

MMP is both in the scriptures and there is much evidence Joseph Smith taught it. Brigham Young taught it. He told the women of his audience they would one day be Eves of their own worlds.

The temple shows us where we are in relation to the tokens and show that Adam and Eve have already progressed through these tokens. This is the significance of names of who we were, are, and what comes next. The fourth token aligns to kings and queens - Adam and Eve. There is one path to Godhood.


Joseph the Seer taught the following principle that the God & father of our Lord Jesus Christ was once the same as the Son or Holy Ghost but having redeemed a world he had a son Jesus Christ who redeemed this earth the same as his father had a world which made them equal & the Holy Ghost would to the same when in his turn & so would all the Saints who inherited a Celestial glory so their would be Gods many & Lords many their were many mansions even 12 from the abode of Devils to the Celestial glory. ~ Wilford Woodruff, Book of Revelations.

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

Why would Satan bother making up a new doctrine? As with all he does, he simply takes truth and twists it. In my mind, the fact that people who are so clearly off the path believe this stuff is validation of its truthfulness.

I appreciate your concern —if that’s what it indeed is — for what you consider my wayward beliefs. What I can promise you is that I haven’t come to these conclusions on me own, not without *significant* amounts of thought, study, prayer. I am the first to admit that I may be incorrect in my thinking, but I can never go back to only seeing the scriptures and the eternities in the way I used to. There is so much more for us to learn and know. The Lord wouldn’t bother telling us about mysteries if they didn’t exist, and they wouldn’t be mysteries if they were taught in Sunday School manuals.

To deny that mysteries exist, that we can and should seek to understand them and that the Lord can make such mysteries known to us is to deny the scriptures.

[jmack]

If this is true, there's no point in temple work. So, I think you gotta choose. Either you believe in this multiple lives belief or lds doctrine, because they aren't compatible.

Temple ordinances are symbols which point to real experiences with the divine, so I don’t think it has to be so black and white.

We're taught that these ordinances are necessary for salvation. You are suggesting they have no valud power but are inly symbols. If that's true, the doctrine of salvation for the dead is false. You can't have it both ways,

The only things required for salvation are what is taught in Christ’s Doctrine (faith, hope, charity, repentance, baptism of water, baptism of fire, endure to the end).
As I understand it, The baptisms for the dead are to prepare our family members who are close to us to receive their baptism of fire, which can be received in the next life, but not without baptism. We have to be close to the people receiving, or the ordinance will not work. As we are sealed to Eternal Life and given Higher Priesthood we can bind those family units together. There is sealing between us and the Savior, Father and Mother, our spouse and children, but it is all done directly with the Lord, not in earthly temples. The temple’s purpose is to point us toward the real thing.

Your understanding of baptism for the dead is nothing like what is my understanding or what we teach, it's very odd. I'm certain that's not what you were taught at church. Are these your own thoughts?

[jmack]

But you seem to believe you have the eternities figured out, and you've put yourself in the same level as god and christ, believing that you'll be a christ one day. I say let's wait and find out when we have the capacity to comprehend. Nutcase lori vallow thinks she's been reincarnated many times, and thinks she's a god and even a translated being. It gives her power I guess, and it apparently makes her think rules don't apply to her. I think we should be humble, do the things christ has asked us to and worry about becoming gods and what that entails when we actually have completed this earthly test. Don't put the cart before the horse.

Whoever Lori Vallow is, that's a strawman attack - taking the most absurd, extreme example and attacking it.

Firstly, believing you can one day become as God is with your own spirit children doesn't mean you've put yourself on the level of with God and Christ now but acknowledge the ends to which we were created.

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

"Let's wait and find out" is in line with "we have enough" which attitude the scriptures strongly warn us against. We must always be seeking and learning or we begin to lose that which we have - and if we don't change course eventually the adversary wraps his binding chains around us. (2 Nephi 28 / Alma 12.)

Believing we can be as Heavenly Father is nothing new, so it's curious why so many folks take issue at being as Jesus. Jesus clearly taught that His Father is Greater than he. Davka wasn't the first person to teach that we will do Jesus' works some day -- Jesus Himself did.

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

He's basically saying "you'll do my works and then heavenly father's works after that." It means what it means. And his audience is important. Jesus taught the general-audience Gospel on the mount, but the above scriptures were aimed at His Apostles who were walking at Jesus' side to learn His works.

Knowing there is a horse in front of the cart and one day we'll be the horse is not putting the cart ahead of the horse. The proper perspective of the plan of exaltation (like Davka said - different than the plan of salvation) and knowing who you are and where you are on your eternal path is extremely important. Without that perspective we get these folks who beat themselves up to the point of eating disorders where general authorities like Elder Holland have to speak to the fact that God doesn't expect you to be perfect in this life.

MMP is both in the scriptures and there is much evidence Joseph Smith taught it. Brigham Young taught it. He told the women of his audience they would one day be Eves of their own worlds.

The temple shows us where we are in relation to the tokens and show that Adam and Eve have already progressed through these tokens. This is the significance of names of who we were, are, and what comes next. The fourth token aligns to kings and queens - Adam and Eve. There is one path to Godhood.


Joseph the Seer taught the following principle that the God & father of our Lord Jesus Christ was once the same as the Son or Holy Ghost but having redeemed a world he had a son Jesus Christ who redeemed this earth the same as his father had a world which made them equal & the Holy Ghost would to the same when in his turn & so would all the Saints who inherited a Celestial glory so their would be Gods many & Lords many their were many mansions even 12 from the abode of Devils to the Celestial glory. ~ Wilford Woodruff, Book of Revelations.

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

You've hardly established cause and effect. Wilford Woodruff turned out alright. So did Heber C Kimball and Eliza R Snow. So did Joseph Smith and Jesus.

And you haven't made the case for claiming any of those people actually believed that we live more than one life here on earth. You've implied that, but their words don't say that. Jesus never said anything about reincarnation, neither did elder Kimball, Joseph Smith rejected reincarnation of the soul into another mortal body. You can't realistically claim that this church teaches and believes in multiple mortal probations because you know we don't and have never had this doctrine. We have temple proxy work precisely because these ordinances must be done in mortality so we do them for the dead. If the dead are going to be reincarnated and live again, they can do their own ordinances. Why waste time and money on something that isn't necessary.

[jmack]

But you seem to believe you have the eternities figured out, and you've put yourself in the same level as god and christ, believing that you'll be a christ one day. I say let's wait and find out when we have the capacity to comprehend. Nutcase lori vallow thinks she's been reincarnated many times, and thinks she's a god and even a translated being. It gives her power I guess, and it apparently makes her think rules don't apply to her. I think we should be humble, do the things christ has asked us to and worry about becoming gods and what that entails when we actually have completed this earthly test. Don't put the cart before the horse.

Whoever Lori Vallow is, that's a strawman attack - taking the most absurd, extreme example and attacking it.

Firstly, believing you can one day become as God is with your own spirit children doesn't mean you've put yourself on the level of with God and Christ now but acknowledge the ends to which we were created.

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

"Let's wait and find out" is in line with "we have enough" which attitude the scriptures strongly warn us against. We must always be seeking and learning or we begin to lose that which we have - and if we don't change course eventually the adversary wraps his binding chains around us. (2 Nephi 28 / Alma 12.)

Believing we can be as Heavenly Father is nothing new, so it's curious why so many folks take issue at being as Jesus. Jesus clearly taught that His Father is Greater than he. Davka wasn't the first person to teach that we will do Jesus' works some day -- Jesus Himself did.

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

He's basically saying "you'll do my works and then heavenly father's works after that." It means what it means. And his audience is important. Jesus taught the general-audience Gospel on the mount, but the above scriptures were aimed at His Apostles who were walking at Jesus' side to learn His works.

Knowing there is a horse in front of the cart and one day we'll be the horse is not putting the cart ahead of the horse. The proper perspective of the plan of exaltation (like Davka said - different than the plan of salvation) and knowing who you are and where you are on your eternal path is extremely important. Without that perspective we get these folks who beat themselves up to the point of eating disorders where general authorities like Elder Holland have to speak to the fact that God doesn't expect you to be perfect in this life.

MMP is both in the scriptures and there is much evidence Joseph Smith taught it. Brigham Young taught it. He told the women of his audience they would one day be Eves of their own worlds.

The temple shows us where we are in relation to the tokens and show that Adam and Eve have already progressed through these tokens. This is the significance of names of who we were, are, and what comes next. The fourth token aligns to kings and queens - Adam and Eve. There is one path to Godhood.


Joseph the Seer taught the following principle that the God & father of our Lord Jesus Christ was once the same as the Son or Holy Ghost but having redeemed a world he had a son Jesus Christ who redeemed this earth the same as his father had a world which made them equal & the Holy Ghost would to the same when in his turn & so would all the Saints who inherited a Celestial glory so their would be Gods many & Lords many their were many mansions even 12 from the abode of Devils to the Celestial glory. ~ Wilford Woodruff, Book of Revelations.

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

Why would Satan bother making up a new doctrine? As with all he does, he simply takes truth and twists it. In my mind, the fact that people who are so clearly off the path believe this stuff is validation of its truthfulness.

I appreciate your concern —if that’s what it indeed is — for what you consider my wayward beliefs. What I can promise you is that I haven’t come to these conclusions on me own, not without *significant* amounts of thought, study, prayer. I am the first to admit that I may be incorrect in my thinking, but I can never go back to only seeing the scriptures and the eternities in the way I used to. There is so much more for us to learn and know. The Lord wouldn’t bother telling us about mysteries if they didn’t exist, and they wouldn’t be mysteries if they were taught in Sunday School manuals.

To deny that mysteries exist, that we can and should seek to understand them and that the Lord can make such mysteries known to us is to deny the scriptures.

I dont see Satan making up new doctrine, mmp is a version of reincarnation, and there's no question that believing that when a person dies, their soul gets reborn into another mortal body, is reincarnation. Not every belief that some claim came by revelation comes from god, there are other sources. I tend to reject revelations that contradict basic lds doctrines, such as proxy ordinances for the dead (which I have a testimony that they are real and valid ), and that are not compatible with other church teachings. You are free to believe what you want, but if you know it would be rejected if you brought it up in Sunday school or talked about it in a talk, I'd be suspicious of the source.

[Alaris]

Whoever Lori Vallow is, that's a strawman attack - taking the most absurd, extreme example and attacking it.

Firstly, believing you can one day become as God is with your own spirit children doesn't mean you've put yourself on the level of with God and Christ now but acknowledge the ends to which we were created.

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

"Let's wait and find out" is in line with "we have enough" which attitude the scriptures strongly warn us against. We must always be seeking and learning or we begin to lose that which we have - and if we don't change course eventually the adversary wraps his binding chains around us. (2 Nephi 28 / Alma 12.)

Believing we can be as Heavenly Father is nothing new, so it's curious why so many folks take issue at being as Jesus. Jesus clearly taught that His Father is Greater than he. Davka wasn't the first person to teach that we will do Jesus' works some day -- Jesus Himself did.

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

He's basically saying "you'll do my works and then heavenly father's works after that." It means what it means. And his audience is important. Jesus taught the general-audience Gospel on the mount, but the above scriptures were aimed at His Apostles who were walking at Jesus' side to learn His works.

Knowing there is a horse in front of the cart and one day we'll be the horse is not putting the cart ahead of the horse. The proper perspective of the plan of exaltation (like Davka said - different than the plan of salvation) and knowing who you are and where you are on your eternal path is extremely important. Without that perspective we get these folks who beat themselves up to the point of eating disorders where general authorities like Elder Holland have to speak to the fact that God doesn't expect you to be perfect in this life.

MMP is both in the scriptures and there is much evidence Joseph Smith taught it. Brigham Young taught it. He told the women of his audience they would one day be Eves of their own worlds.

The temple shows us where we are in relation to the tokens and show that Adam and Eve have already progressed through these tokens. This is the significance of names of who we were, are, and what comes next. The fourth token aligns to kings and queens - Adam and Eve. There is one path to Godhood.


Joseph the Seer taught the following principle that the God & father of our Lord Jesus Christ was once the same as the Son or Holy Ghost but having redeemed a world he had a son Jesus Christ who redeemed this earth the same as his father had a world which made them equal & the Holy Ghost would to the same when in his turn & so would all the Saints who inherited a Celestial glory so their would be Gods many & Lords many their were many mansions even 12 from the abode of Devils to the Celestial glory. ~ Wilford Woodruff, Book of Revelations.

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

You've hardly established cause and effect. Wilford Woodruff turned out alright. So did Heber C Kimball and Eliza R Snow. So did Joseph Smith and Jesus.

And you haven't made the case for claiming any of those people actually believed that we live more than one life here on earth. You've implied that, but their words don't say that.

Brigham Young taught women could one day be Eves of their own worlds. That's not an implication - that's just coming right out and saying it. Joseph Smith taught that the Holy Ghost, if successful in his probation, would go on the same or similar course as the Son. He taught so must all saints. That's coming right out and saying it. That's not even implication.

Jesus never said anything about reincarnation, neither did elder Kimball, Joseph Smith rejected reincarnation of the soul into another mortal body.

I haven't said anything about reincarnation either. Reincarnation includes the idea of coming back as a turtle or a flower. Joseph Smith taught against a very narrow belief of the souls of ancestors ALSO inhabiting the bodies of their posterity. That would have been the perfect opportunity to make a blanket statement about any form of MMP - only he didn't. Moreover, he taught this in the early 1830s as I recall, and his teachings about this one path of Godhood that includes the office of Holy Ghost and "the office of Messiah" (his words) seem to have mostly taken place in 1843 and 1844. Line upon line.

You can't realistically claim that this church teaches and believes in multiple mortal probations because you know we don't and have never had this doctrine.

I haven't.*sigh* I'm really starting to enjoy having folks stuff words in my mouth, and thoughts (knowledge in this case) in my brain. The church doesn't teach this openly for obvious reasons. Folks get all broken up like pieces of glass in case you haven't noticed. But of all the mysteries this is soooo vanilla. Folks use "joint-heir" as a counter-argument, but the definition is clear. An heir is set to receive the same - not by some other way but by the same way. You cannot ascend above all without descending below all. You cannot be a perfect God without becoming perfect first. Jesus promised we would overcome as He overcame.

We have temple proxy work precisely because these ordinances must be done in mortality so we do them for the dead. If the dead are going to be reincarnated and live again, they can do their own ordinances. Why waste time and money on something that isn't necessary.

Whether or not bodies are laid down again for more knowledge / more progression (as Adam did) - this would have no impact on the necessity of baptism for the living or the dead. Sure, it may add different layers of symbolism - sort of like how Heber C Kimball taught that every night we go to sleep and every morning we wake up is emblematic of our probations. In that light, baptism certainly takes on new meaning as to what is needed to take upon our next probation - meaning we must be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost to continue to progress. The sabbath takes on new meaning as well - a period of rest until we resume our labors as Adam did.

So after Adam is created they rest for a "season" which aligns to the seventh day /sabbath. Did the fall happen on a Monday? If so then Heber C Kimball was really onto something.

[Davka]

Whoever Lori Vallow is, that's a strawman attack - taking the most absurd, extreme example and attacking it.

Firstly, believing you can one day become as God is with your own spirit children doesn't mean you've put yourself on the level of with God and Christ now but acknowledge the ends to which we were created.

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Philippians 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

"Let's wait and find out" is in line with "we have enough" which attitude the scriptures strongly warn us against. We must always be seeking and learning or we begin to lose that which we have - and if we don't change course eventually the adversary wraps his binding chains around us. (2 Nephi 28 / Alma 12.)

Believing we can be as Heavenly Father is nothing new, so it's curious why so many folks take issue at being as Jesus. Jesus clearly taught that His Father is Greater than he. Davka wasn't the first person to teach that we will do Jesus' works some day -- Jesus Himself did.

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

He's basically saying "you'll do my works and then heavenly father's works after that." It means what it means. And his audience is important. Jesus taught the general-audience Gospel on the mount, but the above scriptures were aimed at His Apostles who were walking at Jesus' side to learn His works.

Knowing there is a horse in front of the cart and one day we'll be the horse is not putting the cart ahead of the horse. The proper perspective of the plan of exaltation (like Davka said - different than the plan of salvation) and knowing who you are and where you are on your eternal path is extremely important. Without that perspective we get these folks who beat themselves up to the point of eating disorders where general authorities like Elder Holland have to speak to the fact that God doesn't expect you to be perfect in this life.

MMP is both in the scriptures and there is much evidence Joseph Smith taught it. Brigham Young taught it. He told the women of his audience they would one day be Eves of their own worlds.

The temple shows us where we are in relation to the tokens and show that Adam and Eve have already progressed through these tokens. This is the significance of names of who we were, are, and what comes next. The fourth token aligns to kings and queens - Adam and Eve. There is one path to Godhood.


Joseph the Seer taught the following principle that the God & father of our Lord Jesus Christ was once the same as the Son or Holy Ghost but having redeemed a world he had a son Jesus Christ who redeemed this earth the same as his father had a world which made them equal & the Holy Ghost would to the same when in his turn & so would all the Saints who inherited a Celestial glory so their would be Gods many & Lords many their were many mansions even 12 from the abode of Devils to the Celestial glory. ~ Wilford Woodruff, Book of Revelations.

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

Why would Satan bother making up a new doctrine? As with all he does, he simply takes truth and twists it. In my mind, the fact that people who are so clearly off the path believe this stuff is validation of its truthfulness.

I appreciate your concern —if that’s what it indeed is — for what you consider my wayward beliefs. What I can promise you is that I haven’t come to these conclusions on me own, not without *significant* amounts of thought, study, prayer. I am the first to admit that I may be incorrect in my thinking, but I can never go back to only seeing the scriptures and the eternities in the way I used to. There is so much more for us to learn and know. The Lord wouldn’t bother telling us about mysteries if they didn’t exist, and they wouldn’t be mysteries if they were taught in Sunday School manuals.

To deny that mysteries exist, that we can and should seek to understand them and that the Lord can make such mysteries known to us is to deny the scriptures.

I dont see Satan making up new doctrine, mmp is a version of reincarnation, and there's no question that believing that when a person dies, their soul gets reborn into another mortal body, is reincarnation. Not every belief that some claim came by revelation comes from god, there are other sources. I tend to reject revelations that contradict basic lds doctrines, such as proxy ordinances for the dead (which I have a testimony that they are real and valid ), and that are not compatible with other church teachings. You are free to believe what you want, but if you know it would be rejected if you brought it up in Sunday school or talked about it in a talk, I'd be suspicious of the source.

You know, the ancient Israelites were quite certain when the scriptures spoke of “God’s Son,” it was referring to Israel as a whole. It’s likely that any talk about God *siring* a Son to a mortal mother (gasp!) would have been considered at best extreme, at worst a blasphemous, Satanic idea had it brought up in “Sunday (Saturday?) School.” It didn’t mean it wasn’t true. It just meant that it was a bit meaty for where the Jews were currently on their path.

There are lots of things I wouldn’t bring up in Sunday School. It doesn’t mean they aren’t true.

[Alexander]

Temple ordinances are symbols which point to real experiences with the divine, so I don’t think it has to be so black and white.

We're taught that these ordinances are necessary for salvation. You are suggesting they have no valud power but are inly symbols. If that's true, the doctrine of salvation for the dead is false. You can't have it both ways,

The only things required for salvation are what is taught in Christ’s Doctrine (faith, hope, charity, repentance, baptism of water, baptism of fire, endure to the end).
As I understand it, The baptisms for the dead are to prepare our family members who are close to us to receive their baptism of fire, which can be received in the next life, but not without baptism. We have to be close to the people receiving, or the ordinance will not work. As we are sealed to Eternal Life and given Higher Priesthood we can bind those family units together. There is sealing between us and the Savior, Father and Mother, our spouse and children, but it is all done directly with the Lord, not in earthly temples. The temple’s purpose is to point us toward the real thing.

Your understanding of baptism for the dead is nothing like what is my understanding or what we teach, it's very odd. I'm certain that's not what you were taught at church. Are these your own thoughts?

Most of that statement is from others. I’ve asked for confirmation on those things and have subscribed those ideas. I don’t credit the idea or words to my own creation. I’ve heard it from others and have sought revelation on the matter

[jmack]

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

You've hardly established cause and effect. Wilford Woodruff turned out alright. So did Heber C Kimball and Eliza R Snow. So did Joseph Smith and Jesus.

And you haven't made the case for claiming any of those people actually believed that we live more than one life here on earth. You've implied that, but their words don't say that.

Brigham Young taught women could one day be Eves of their own worlds. That's not an implication - that's just coming right out and saying it. Joseph Smith taught that the Holy Ghost, if successful in his probation, would go on the same or similar course as the Son. He taught so must all saints. That's coming right out and saying it. That's not even implication.

Jesus never said anything about reincarnation, neither did elder Kimball, Joseph Smith rejected reincarnation of the soul into another mortal body.

I haven't said anything about reincarnation either. Reincarnation includes the idea of coming back as a turtle or a flower. Joseph Smith taught against a very narrow belief of the souls of ancestors ALSO inhabiting the bodies of their posterity. That would have been the perfect opportunity to make a blanket statement about any form of MMP - only he didn't. Moreover, he taught this in the early 1830s as I recall, and his teachings about this one path of Godhood that includes the office of Holy Ghost and "the office of Messiah" (his words) seem to have mostly taken place in 1843 and 1844. Line upon line.

You can't realistically claim that this church teaches and believes in multiple mortal probations because you know we don't and have never had this doctrine.

I haven't.*sigh* I'm really starting to enjoy having folks stuff words in my mouth, and thoughts (knowledge in this case) in my brain. The church doesn't teach this openly for obvious reasons. Folks get all broken up like pieces of glass in case you haven't noticed. But of all the mysteries this is soooo vanilla. Folks use "joint-heir" as a counter-argument, but the definition is clear. An heir is set to receive the same - not by some other way but by the same way. You cannot ascend above all without descending below all. You cannot be a perfect God without becoming perfect first. Jesus promised we would overcome as He overcame.

We have temple proxy work precisely because these ordinances must be done in mortality so we do them for the dead. If the dead are going to be reincarnated and live again, they can do their own ordinances. Why waste time and money on something that isn't necessary.

Whether or not bodies are laid down again for more knowledge / more progression (as Adam did) - this would have no impact on the necessity of baptism for the living or the dead. Sure, it may add different layers of symbolism - sort of like how Heber C Kimball taught that every night we go to sleep and every morning we wake up is emblematic of our probations. In that light, baptism certainly takes on new meaning as to what is needed to take upon our next probation - meaning we must be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost to continue to progress. The sabbath takes on new meaning as well - a period of rest until we resume our labors as Adam did.

So after Adam is created they rest for a "season" which aligns to the seventh day /sabbath. Did the fall happen on a Monday? If so then Heber C Kimball was really onto something.

At some point you are going to have to admit that the church doesn't teach mmp in private. They will make a statement about mmp and say it is reincarnation and false doctrine, I can guarantee that will happen. It's not just being reincarnated as an animal, it's still reincarnation to believe the soul is reborn into another mortal body after death. It's a belief to be rejected because it is not compatible with lds doctrines, not because we're closed minded or shatter like glass. It's simply false to make claims that the leaders taught this in secret and still believe it in secret. That's typical gnostic garbage, alluding to having special knowlege, mysteries that the common members can't handle and aren't worthy to recieve. You claim that Brigham Young taught mmp because he said women would be eves? Did it occur to you that he meant this metaphorically or was suggesting our roles as building our own worlds? No reincarnation to earth needed. You are pushing a belief that is way too problematic to be compatible with lds doctrine. It's your baby, I know, but you just aren't going to convince some of us that this isn't just plain old false doctrine.

[jmack]

I mention lori vallow because her family has blamed her extreme beliefs for the negative changes in her, she believes mmp, claiming to have been several women in history. Julie Rowe does too. Her beliefs took her out of the church. Those are not strawmen, they are consequences to choices that included having some particular beliefs that aren't doctrine and it's effect on choices. Mmp is not in the scriptures, it is not doctrine. It is a speculative belief of some. It isn't compatible with sound doctrines and makes temple work useless.

Why would Satan bother making up a new doctrine? As with all he does, he simply takes truth and twists it. In my mind, the fact that people who are so clearly off the path believe this stuff is validation of its truthfulness.

I appreciate your concern —if that’s what it indeed is — for what you consider my wayward beliefs. What I can promise you is that I haven’t come to these conclusions on me own, not without *significant* amounts of thought, study, prayer. I am the first to admit that I may be incorrect in my thinking, but I can never go back to only seeing the scriptures and the eternities in the way I used to. There is so much more for us to learn and know. The Lord wouldn’t bother telling us about mysteries if they didn’t exist, and they wouldn’t be mysteries if they were taught in Sunday School manuals.

To deny that mysteries exist, that we can and should seek to understand them and that the Lord can make such mysteries known to us is to deny the scriptures.

I dont see Satan making up new doctrine, mmp is a version of reincarnation, and there's no question that believing that when a person dies, their soul gets reborn into another mortal body, is reincarnation. Not every belief that some claim came by revelation comes from god, there are other sources. I tend to reject revelations that contradict basic lds doctrines, such as proxy ordinances for the dead (which I have a testimony that they are real and valid ), and that are not compatible with other church teachings. You are free to believe what you want, but if you know it would be rejected if you brought it up in Sunday school or talked about it in a talk, I'd be suspicious of the source.

You know, the ancient Israelites were quite certain when the scriptures spoke of “God’s Son,” it was referring to Israel as a whole. It’s likely that any talk about God *siring* a Son to a mortal mother (gasp!) would have been considered at best extreme, at worst a blasphemous, Satanic idea had it brought up in “Sunday (Saturday?) School.” It didn’t mean it wasn’t true. It just meant that it was a bit meaty for where the Jews were currently on their path.

There are lots of things I wouldn’t bring up in Sunday School. It doesn’t mean they aren’t true.

I'm beginning to sound like a broken record, but mmp is not compatible with lds doctrine. Mmp says that you lived on earth many different times, that makes no sense for what the gospel teaches, that we are sent here to gain a mortal body, not 100 different ones, we are sealed to a single spouse, not several different ones, we are judged for this life, not several different ones, we're sent here to be tried and tested particularly for our needs for growth, not many different lifetimes with different family, spouse, children. We seal our selves to our children, parents, ancestors, but mmp means these people don't matter, as we've got tons of different parents, children, ancestors. It's simply a mess to try to reconcile mmp to lds basic doctrines that are taught to investigators and members. To claim that the church teaches and promotes false doctrines in order to keep true doctrines in the dark and secret is truly disturbing.

[jmack]

We're taught that these ordinances are necessary for salvation. You are suggesting they have no valud power but are inly symbols. If that's true, the doctrine of salvation for the dead is false. You can't have it both ways,

The only things required for salvation are what is taught in Christ’s Doctrine (faith, hope, charity, repentance, baptism of water, baptism of fire, endure to the end).
As I understand it, The baptisms for the dead are to prepare our family members who are close to us to receive their baptism of fire, which can be received in the next life, but not without baptism. We have to be close to the people receiving, or the ordinance will not work. As we are sealed to Eternal Life and given Higher Priesthood we can bind those family units together. There is sealing between us and the Savior, Father and Mother, our spouse and children, but it is all done directly with the Lord, not in earthly temples. The temple’s purpose is to point us toward the real thing.

Your understanding of baptism for the dead is nothing like what is my understanding or what we teach, it's very odd. I'm certain that's not what you were taught at church. Are these your own thoughts?

Most of that statement is from others. I’ve asked for confirmation on those things and have subscribed those ideas. I don’t credit the idea or words to my own creation. I’ve heard it from others and have sought revelation on the matter

Maybe you need to relearn the basic beliefs of the gospel so that you can discern what isn't compatible with what you already claim to believe. That stuff you shared is not part of why we do temple work, it's strange. I'd say read up on temple work and ordinances on lds.org and books by believing members who aren't trying to tell you they have secret knowledge.

[Zathura]

The word reincarnation literally didn't exist in English until after Joseph died, so you wouldn't have seen Joseph preach against reincarnation. You'd have to use different terms like " transmigration" to find what he'd say about what we understand to be "reincarnation".

The early Apostle Orson F Whitney believed in reincarnation, and attempted to persuade the rest of the twelve that it is a true doctrine.

For people who believe the claims of women who say they were Joseph's wives, one of them, Mary Elizabeth Rollins, claims that Joseph told her they knew each other in another life. (Obviously I think she's full of it from the start, so it's easy for me to discount her claim)

Wilford Woodruff recorded Heber C Kimball as having claimed he believed in multiple probations. Heber also referenced "other probations" in his own journal.

Lorenzo Snow also apparently says that Eliza Snow says that the learned about Multiple probations and she learned about it from Joseph(About the same way everyone supposedly learned about polygamy so cool, shouldn't have a problem believing this right?)
(Lorenzo Snow statement, 8 June 1889, and statement of "Aunt Presecendia Kimball", 30 Sept 1883, both in Orson F Whitney diary, LDS archives, with photocopy in Lee Library and Marriot Library.)

There are also plenty of Brigham Young quotes that , although I don't think he was *HINTING* at this doctrine and trying to teach to "those that have ears to hear", like Alaris says, but I think these quotes do indicate that Brigham had some sort of internal belief of something that involved multiple mortal probations.

I don't necessarily believe MMP, but to pretend like multiple mortal probations isn't a doctrine that has been believed by Church leaders and taught among and theorized among them them in the past is just silly and ignorant. If you know anything about the early days of the church, you'll know that their beliefs evolved and morphed, they were still finding things out and flirting with different doctrines. Things that they condemned one year were embraced and taught or contradicted 5, 10 years later. They did not understand all that Joseph left them with, they did not understand sealing, for example, which is why Brigham sought to find an answer via prayer after Joseph's death.

The anger and disrespect directed at Alaris over this topic is unnecessary and undeserved.

[Davka]

Why would Satan bother making up a new doctrine? As with all he does, he simply takes truth and twists it. In my mind, the fact that people who are so clearly off the path believe this stuff is validation of its truthfulness.

I appreciate your concern —if that’s what it indeed is — for what you consider my wayward beliefs. What I can promise you is that I haven’t come to these conclusions on me own, not without *significant* amounts of thought, study, prayer. I am the first to admit that I may be incorrect in my thinking, but I can never go back to only seeing the scriptures and the eternities in the way I used to. There is so much more for us to learn and know. The Lord wouldn’t bother telling us about mysteries if they didn’t exist, and they wouldn’t be mysteries if they were taught in Sunday School manuals.

To deny that mysteries exist, that we can and should seek to understand them and that the Lord can make such mysteries known to us is to deny the scriptures.

I dont see Satan making up new doctrine, mmp is a version of reincarnation, and there's no question that believing that when a person dies, their soul gets reborn into another mortal body, is reincarnation. Not every belief that some claim came by revelation comes from god, there are other sources. I tend to reject revelations that contradict basic lds doctrines, such as proxy ordinances for the dead (which I have a testimony that they are real and valid ), and that are not compatible with other church teachings. You are free to believe what you want, but if you know it would be rejected if you brought it up in Sunday school or talked about it in a talk, I'd be suspicious of the source.

You know, the ancient Israelites were quite certain when the scriptures spoke of “God’s Son,” it was referring to Israel as a whole. It’s likely that any talk about God *siring* a Son to a mortal mother (gasp!) would have been considered at best extreme, at worst a blasphemous, Satanic idea had it brought up in “Sunday (Saturday?) School.” It didn’t mean it wasn’t true. It just meant that it was a bit meaty for where the Jews were currently on their path.

There are lots of things I wouldn’t bring up in Sunday School. It doesn’t mean they aren’t true.

I'm beginning to sound like a broken record, but mmp is not compatible with lds doctrine. Mmp says that you lived on earth many different times, that makes no sense for what the gospel teaches, that we are sent here to gain a mortal body, not 100 different ones, we are sealed to a single spouse, not several different ones, we are judged for this life, not several different ones, we're sent here to be tried and tested particularly for our needs for growth, not many different lifetimes with different family, spouse, children. We seal our selves to our children, parents, ancestors, but mmp means these people don't matter, as we've got tons of different parents, children, ancestors. It's simply a mess to try to reconcile mmp to lds basic doctrines that are taught to investigators and members. To claim that the church teaches and promotes false doctrines in order to keep true doctrines in the dark and secret is truly disturbing.

Okay, you convinced me, jmack...

In all seriousness, we are getting nowhere. I could argue with every point you make all day long, but this is not a productive use of my time. If you ever want to talk about it in an open minded way, I’m happy to.

Best, Davka

[Zathura]

The only things required for salvation are what is taught in Christ’s Doctrine (faith, hope, charity, repentance, baptism of water, baptism of fire, endure to the end).
As I understand it, The baptisms for the dead are to prepare our family members who are close to us to receive their baptism of fire, which can be received in the next life, but not without baptism. We have to be close to the people receiving, or the ordinance will not work. As we are sealed to Eternal Life and given Higher Priesthood we can bind those family units together. There is sealing between us and the Savior, Father and Mother, our spouse and children, but it is all done directly with the Lord, not in earthly temples. The temple’s purpose is to point us toward the real thing.

Your understanding of baptism for the dead is nothing like what is my understanding or what we teach, it's very odd. I'm certain that's not what you were taught at church. Are these your own thoughts?

Most of that statement is from others. I’ve asked for confirmation on those things and have subscribed those ideas. I don’t credit the idea or words to my own creation. I’ve heard it from others and have sought revelation on the matter

Maybe you need to relearn the basic beliefs of the gospel so that you can discern what isn't compatible with what you already claim to believe. That stuff you shared is not part of why we do temple work, it's strange. I'd say read up on temple work and ordinances on lds.org and books by believing members who aren't trying to tell you they have secret knowledge.

You might think it sounds nothing like what the church teaches, but perhaps some day you'll realize what he said sounds a lot like what we do in the temple. Just because you can't comprehend what he's saying doesn't mean it's not true. Plenty of people were outraged at what Jesus had to say, at the questions he asked, the parables he used. No doubt they too said "This sounds nothing like what the prophets teach", which is ironic because Jesus was THE REASON the prophets preached anything at all.

Maybe you need to relearn the basic belief of the gospel. Maybe most Mormons need to relearn the basic Gospel. Maybe most Mormons look beyond the mark instead of focusing on the pure doctrine of Christ.

[jmack]

The word reincarnation literally didn't exist in English until after Joseph died, so you wouldn't have seen Joseph preach against reincarnation. You'd have to use different terms like " transmigration" to find what he'd say about what we understand to be "reincarnation".

The early Apostle Orson F Whitney believed in reincarnation, and attempted to persuade the rest of the twelve that it is a true doctrine.

For people who believe the claims of women who say they were Joseph's wives, one of them, Mary Elizabeth Rollins, claims that Joseph told her they knew each other in another life. (Obviously I think she's full of it from the start, so it's easy for me to discount her claim)

Wilford Woodruff recorded Heber C Kimball as having claimed he believed in multiple probations. Heber also referenced "other probations" in his own journal.

Lorenzo Snow also apparently says that Eliza Snow says that the learned about Multiple probations and she learned about it from Joseph(About the same way everyone supposedly learned about polygamy so cool, shouldn't have a problem believing this right?)
(Lorenzo Snow statement, 8 June 1889, and statement of "Aunt Presecendia Kimball", 30 Sept 1883, both in Orson F Whitney diary, LDS archives, with photocopy in Lee Library and Marriot Library.)

There are also plenty of Brigham Young quotes that , although I don't think he was *HINTING* at this doctrine and trying to teach to "those that have ears to hear", like Alaris says, but I think these quotes do indicate that Brigham had some sort of internal belief of something that involved multiple mortal probations.

I don't necessarily believe MMP, but to pretend like multiple mortal probations isn't a doctrine that has been believed by Church leaders and taught among and theorized among them them in the past is just silly and ignorant. If you know anything about the early days of the church, you'll know that their beliefs evolved and morphed, they were still finding things out and flirting with different doctrines. Things that they condemned one year were embraced and taught or contradicted 5, 10 years later. They did not understand all that Joseph left them with, they did not understand sealing, for example, which is why Brigham sought to find an answer via prayer after Joseph's death.

The anger and disrespect directed at Alaris over this topic is unnecessary and undeserved.

I use the term reincarnation because that's what it's called these days and transmigration isnt really. Does it change my point? No, It's the same thing as what Joseph rejected, the belief that a soul would return to be born in a new body. To pretend like mmp is a valid, established doctrine of the lds church is ludicrous. I'm sure you are aware that people believed different things, but that didn't make it a doctrine of the church. I don't know what you are referring to as mistreatment of alaris, I've disagreed with him and others, but I haven't been disrespectful. I may be short with you, but seriously, you nag others about their tone etc, if they disagree with your friends on the forum, and it's tiring.

[Kingdom of ZION]

I'm not understanding how the temperature of being around God had to do with reincarnation? I've read people quote the "everlasting burnings" and such, but I'm not making the connection of this to being born on multiple worlds.

Everlasting burnings are for those who receive celestial glory. I was talking about the telestial and terrestrial glory specifically. I was saying perhaps those who inherit the telestial kingdom are given another mortal life on another telestial world. Perhaps to enter into another MMP could be a type of resurrection.

And that's just your speculation, but it's not doctrine or supported by scriptures. And progressing from kingdom to kingdom doesn't have to involve multiple mortal probations, so it's not necessary to believe in mmp to also think that progression in kingdoms is possible.

Progressing from the Telestial to the Terrestrial kingdoms is the ONLY example of Multiple Mortal Probation. The 2nd Estate is a Telestial realm where the people are mortal and it is a probationary period. The 3rd Estate is a Terrestrial realm and is another probationary period where they are mortal (they live to the age of the tree and their death is sweet and it happen in a twinkling of an eye).

The only Beings who come here are more then once are the Elect, and though they are mortal, they having received their Calling (in the Third Estate - Millennium of a previous creation, and having elected to become a Fourth Estate Being - a Celestial Probation, they come into other creations to served the Messiah as His angels, His emissaries. They are not here under a probationary period, as long as they do not commit the unforgivable sin, they will be brought back into the Father's presence. They are judged on the eternal laws they live, the example they set, and the how well they keep their covenants and mission. It is not an unlimited number of lives to accomplish what they have been commanded to do here.

That why both sides of this discussion are right to the principles expressed, not that it is understood fully or stated completely!
But is there ever MMP as in Second Estate Beings coming down here as Second Estate Beings more then once or in different creations? NO! That is a false doctrine!

[Zathura]

The word reincarnation literally didn't exist in English until after Joseph died, so you wouldn't have seen Joseph preach against reincarnation. You'd have to use different terms like " transmigration" to find what he'd say about what we understand to be "reincarnation".

The early Apostle Orson F Whitney believed in reincarnation, and attempted to persuade the rest of the twelve that it is a true doctrine.

For people who believe the claims of women who say they were Joseph's wives, one of them, Mary Elizabeth Rollins, claims that Joseph told her they knew each other in another life. (Obviously I think she's full of it from the start, so it's easy for me to discount her claim)

Wilford Woodruff recorded Heber C Kimball as having claimed he believed in multiple probations. Heber also referenced "other probations" in his own journal.

Lorenzo Snow also apparently says that Eliza Snow says that the learned about Multiple probations and she learned about it from Joseph(About the same way everyone supposedly learned about polygamy so cool, shouldn't have a problem believing this right?)
(Lorenzo Snow statement, 8 June 1889, and statement of "Aunt Presecendia Kimball", 30 Sept 1883, both in Orson F Whitney diary, LDS archives, with photocopy in Lee Library and Marriot Library.)

There are also plenty of Brigham Young quotes that , although I don't think he was *HINTING* at this doctrine and trying to teach to "those that have ears to hear", like Alaris says, but I think these quotes do indicate that Brigham had some sort of internal belief of something that involved multiple mortal probations.

I don't necessarily believe MMP, but to pretend like multiple mortal probations isn't a doctrine that has been believed by Church leaders and taught among and theorized among them them in the past is just silly and ignorant. If you know anything about the early days of the church, you'll know that their beliefs evolved and morphed, they were still finding things out and flirting with different doctrines. Things that they condemned one year were embraced and taught or contradicted 5, 10 years later. They did not understand all that Joseph left them with, they did not understand sealing, for example, which is why Brigham sought to find an answer via prayer after Joseph's death.

The anger and disrespect directed at Alaris over this topic is unnecessary and undeserved.

I use the term reincarnation because that's what it's called these days and transmigration isnt really. Does it change my point? No, It's the same thing as what Joseph rejected, the belief that a soul would return to be born in a new body. To pretend like mmp is a valid, established doctrine of the lds church is ludicrous. I'm sure you are aware that people believed different things, but that didn't make it a doctrine of the church. I don't know what you are referring to as mistreatment of alaris, I've disagreed with him and others, but I haven't been disrespectful. I may be short with you, but seriously, you nag others about their tone etc, if they disagree with your friends on the forum, and it's tiring.

You’re but one of dozens of people who have interacted with Alaris on this topic over many different threads and pages , no need to make my post about you.

You also, as usual, disregard the bulk of the post that has very relevant information. Really there’s just no need for you to engage in discussions if you don’t actually want to evaluate what others have to say.

[jmack]

Your understanding of baptism for the dead is nothing like what is my understanding or what we teach, it's very odd. I'm certain that's not what you were taught at church. Are these your own thoughts?

Most of that statement is from others. I’ve asked for confirmation on those things and have subscribed those ideas. I don’t credit the idea or words to my own creation. I’ve heard it from others and have sought revelation on the matter

Maybe you need to relearn the basic beliefs of the gospel so that you can discern what isn't compatible with what you already claim to believe. That stuff you shared is not part of why we do temple work, it's strange. I'd say read up on temple work and ordinances on lds.org and books by believing members who aren't trying to tell you they have secret knowledge.

You might think it sounds nothing like what the church teaches, but perhaps some day you'll realize what he said sounds a lot like what we do in the temple. Just because you can't comprehend what he's saying doesn't mean it's not true. Plenty of people were outraged at what Jesus had to say, at the questions he asked, the parables he used. No doubt they too said "This sounds nothing like what the prophets teach", which is ironic because Jesus was THE REASON the prophets preached anything at all.

Maybe you need to relearn the basic belief of the gospel. Maybe most Mormons need to relearn the basic Gospel. Maybe most Mormons look beyond the mark instead of focusing on the pure doctrine of Christ.

So, my problem is I just can't comprehend it? I'm learning it in the temple every time I go? I guess if I was open minded and enlightened I would see that mmp is actually a doctrine that I somehow missed in all my years studying the gospel. Surprisingly the majority of the members aren't able to see it either. I suppose the church leaders will just have to spell it out plainly for the ignorant among us. Maybe pres. Nelson will explain next gen conference. Considering how it changes the meaning of our lives and what matters most, it needs to be taught clearly.

[jmack]

The word reincarnation literally didn't exist in English until after Joseph died, so you wouldn't have seen Joseph preach against reincarnation. You'd have to use different terms like " transmigration" to find what he'd say about what we understand to be "reincarnation".

The early Apostle Orson F Whitney believed in reincarnation, and attempted to persuade the rest of the twelve that it is a true doctrine.

For people who believe the claims of women who say they were Joseph's wives, one of them, Mary Elizabeth Rollins, claims that Joseph told her they knew each other in another life. (Obviously I think she's full of it from the start, so it's easy for me to discount her claim)

Wilford Woodruff recorded Heber C Kimball as having claimed he believed in multiple probations. Heber also referenced "other probations" in his own journal.

Lorenzo Snow also apparently says that Eliza Snow says that the learned about Multiple probations and she learned about it from Joseph(About the same way everyone supposedly learned about polygamy so cool, shouldn't have a problem believing this right?)
(Lorenzo Snow statement, 8 June 1889, and statement of "Aunt Presecendia Kimball", 30 Sept 1883, both in Orson F Whitney diary, LDS archives, with photocopy in Lee Library and Marriot Library.)

There are also plenty of Brigham Young quotes that , although I don't think he was *HINTING* at this doctrine and trying to teach to "those that have ears to hear", like Alaris says, but I think these quotes do indicate that Brigham had some sort of internal belief of something that involved multiple mortal probations.

I don't necessarily believe MMP, but to pretend like multiple mortal probations isn't a doctrine that has been believed by Church leaders and taught among and theorized among them them in the past is just silly and ignorant. If you know anything about the early days of the church, you'll know that their beliefs evolved and morphed, they were still finding things out and flirting with different doctrines. Things that they condemned one year were embraced and taught or contradicted 5, 10 years later. They did not understand all that Joseph left them with, they did not understand sealing, for example, which is why Brigham sought to find an answer via prayer after Joseph's death.

The anger and disrespect directed at Alaris over this topic is unnecessary and undeserved.

I use the term reincarnation because that's what it's called these days and transmigration isnt really. Does it change my point? No, It's the same thing as what Joseph rejected, the belief that a soul would return to be born in a new body. To pretend like mmp is a valid, established doctrine of the lds church is ludicrous. I'm sure you are aware that people believed different things, but that didn't make it a doctrine of the church. I don't know what you are referring to as mistreatment of alaris, I've disagreed with him and others, but I haven't been disrespectful. I may be short with you, but seriously, you nag others about their tone etc, if they disagree with your friends on the forum, and it's tiring.

You’re but one of dozens of people who have interacted with Alaris on this topic over many different threads and pages , no need to make my post about you.

You also, as usual, disregard the bulk of the post that has very relevant information. Really there’s just no need for you to engage in discussions if you don’t actually want to evaluate what others have to say.

What is your contribution other than to criticize and accuse others?

[Alexander]

The only things required for salvation are what is taught in Christ’s Doctrine (faith, hope, charity, repentance, baptism of water, baptism of fire, endure to the end).
As I understand it, The baptisms for the dead are to prepare our family members who are close to us to receive their baptism of fire, which can be received in the next life, but not without baptism. We have to be close to the people receiving, or the ordinance will not work. As we are sealed to Eternal Life and given Higher Priesthood we can bind those family units together. There is sealing between us and the Savior, Father and Mother, our spouse and children, but it is all done directly with the Lord, not in earthly temples. The temple’s purpose is to point us toward the real thing.

Your understanding of baptism for the dead is nothing like what is my understanding or what we teach, it's very odd. I'm certain that's not what you were taught at church. Are these your own thoughts?

Most of that statement is from others. I’ve asked for confirmation on those things and have subscribed those ideas. I don’t credit the idea or words to my own creation. I’ve heard it from others and have sought revelation on the matter

Maybe you need to relearn the basic beliefs of the gospel so that you can discern what isn't compatible with what you already claim to believe. That stuff you shared is not part of why we do temple work, it's strange. I'd say read up on temple work and ordinances on lds.org and books by believing members who aren't trying to tell you they have secret knowledge.

We learn line upon line and precept upon precept. My opinion and beliefs are always subject to change, as long as I’m led by the spirit. If certain things have spiritually been confirmed to me by the lord, I believe Him.

Perhaps my views are strange. But strange doesn’t mean it’s wrong. I also don’t claim to have all truth or state everything I say is completely correct.I’m just a sinner searching for truth and asking as much questions as I can.

I believe temple ordinances symbolically point you to real encounters with God. I believe the true power of God in Jesus Christ saves us, and not temporal rites and rituals.

[Zathura]

The word reincarnation literally didn't exist in English until after Joseph died, so you wouldn't have seen Joseph preach against reincarnation. You'd have to use different terms like " transmigration" to find what he'd say about what we understand to be "reincarnation".

The early Apostle Orson F Whitney believed in reincarnation, and attempted to persuade the rest of the twelve that it is a true doctrine.

For people who believe the claims of women who say they were Joseph's wives, one of them, Mary Elizabeth Rollins, claims that Joseph told her they knew each other in another life. (Obviously I think she's full of it from the start, so it's easy for me to discount her claim)

Wilford Woodruff recorded Heber C Kimball as having claimed he believed in multiple probations. Heber also referenced "other probations" in his own journal.

Lorenzo Snow also apparently says that Eliza Snow says that the learned about Multiple probations and she learned about it from Joseph(About the same way everyone supposedly learned about polygamy so cool, shouldn't have a problem believing this right?)
(Lorenzo Snow statement, 8 June 1889, and statement of "Aunt Presecendia Kimball", 30 Sept 1883, both in Orson F Whitney diary, LDS archives, with photocopy in Lee Library and Marriot Library.)

There are also plenty of Brigham Young quotes that , although I don't think he was *HINTING* at this doctrine and trying to teach to "those that have ears to hear", like Alaris says, but I think these quotes do indicate that Brigham had some sort of internal belief of something that involved multiple mortal probations.

I don't necessarily believe MMP, but to pretend like multiple mortal probations isn't a doctrine that has been believed by Church leaders and taught among and theorized among them them in the past is just silly and ignorant. If you know anything about the early days of the church, you'll know that their beliefs evolved and morphed, they were still finding things out and flirting with different doctrines. Things that they condemned one year were embraced and taught or contradicted 5, 10 years later. They did not understand all that Joseph left them with, they did not understand sealing, for example, which is why Brigham sought to find an answer via prayer after Joseph's death.

The anger and disrespect directed at Alaris over this topic is unnecessary and undeserved.

I use the term reincarnation because that's what it's called these days and transmigration isnt really. Does it change my point? No, It's the same thing as what Joseph rejected, the belief that a soul would return to be born in a new body. To pretend like mmp is a valid, established doctrine of the lds church is ludicrous. I'm sure you are aware that people believed different things, but that didn't make it a doctrine of the church. I don't know what you are referring to as mistreatment of alaris, I've disagreed with him and others, but I haven't been disrespectful. I may be short with you, but seriously, you nag others about their tone etc, if they disagree with your friends on the forum, and it's tiring.

You’re but one of dozens of people who have interacted with Alaris on this topic over many different threads and pages , no need to make my post about you.

You also, as usual, disregard the bulk of the post that has very relevant information. Really there’s just no need for you to engage in discussions if you don’t actually want to evaluate what others have to say.

What is your contribution other than to criticize and accuse others?

Anyone else who is free of resentment towards me is able to see the contribution made. That’s your issue to work out, good luck with that.

[Zathura]

Most of that statement is from others. I’ve asked for confirmation on those things and have subscribed those ideas. I don’t credit the idea or words to my own creation. I’ve heard it from others and have sought revelation on the matter

Maybe you need to relearn the basic beliefs of the gospel so that you can discern what isn't compatible with what you already claim to believe. That stuff you shared is not part of why we do temple work, it's strange. I'd say read up on temple work and ordinances on lds.org and books by believing members who aren't trying to tell you they have secret knowledge.

You might think it sounds nothing like what the church teaches, but perhaps some day you'll realize what he said sounds a lot like what we do in the temple. Just because you can't comprehend what he's saying doesn't mean it's not true. Plenty of people were outraged at what Jesus had to say, at the questions he asked, the parables he used. No doubt they too said "This sounds nothing like what the prophets teach", which is ironic because Jesus was THE REASON the prophets preached anything at all.

Maybe you need to relearn the basic belief of the gospel. Maybe most Mormons need to relearn the basic Gospel. Maybe most Mormons look beyond the mark instead of focusing on the pure doctrine of Christ.

So, my problem is I just can't comprehend it? I'm learning it in the temple every time I go? I guess if I was open minded and enlightened I would see that mmp is actually a doctrine that I somehow missed in all my years studying the gospel. Surprisingly the majority of the members aren't able to see it either. I suppose the church leaders will just have to spell it out plainly for the ignorant among us. Maybe pres. Nelson will explain next gen conference. Considering how it changes the meaning of our lives and what matters most, it needs to be taught clearly.

You tell me dude. You tell another that they need to relearn the gospel and then take issue when someone else suggests that you should take your own advice, what does that mean to you?

[Zathura]

The word reincarnation literally didn't exist in English until after Joseph died, so you wouldn't have seen Joseph preach against reincarnation. You'd have to use different terms like " transmigration" to find what he'd say about what we understand to be "reincarnation".

The early Apostle Orson F Whitney believed in reincarnation, and attempted to persuade the rest of the twelve that it is a true doctrine.

For people who believe the claims of women who say they were Joseph's wives, one of them, Mary Elizabeth Rollins, claims that Joseph told her they knew each other in another life. (Obviously I think she's full of it from the start, so it's easy for me to discount her claim)

Wilford Woodruff recorded Heber C Kimball as having claimed he believed in multiple probations. Heber also referenced "other probations" in his own journal.

Lorenzo Snow also apparently says that Eliza Snow says that the learned about Multiple probations and she learned about it from Joseph(About the same way everyone supposedly learned about polygamy so cool, shouldn't have a problem believing this right?)
(Lorenzo Snow statement, 8 June 1889, and statement of "Aunt Presecendia Kimball", 30 Sept 1883, both in Orson F Whitney diary, LDS archives, with photocopy in Lee Library and Marriot Library.)

There are also plenty of Brigham Young quotes that , although I don't think he was *HINTING* at this doctrine and trying to teach to "those that have ears to hear", like Alaris says, but I think these quotes do indicate that Brigham had some sort of internal belief of something that involved multiple mortal probations.

I don't necessarily believe MMP, but to pretend like multiple mortal probations isn't a doctrine that has been believed by Church leaders and taught among and theorized among them them in the past is just silly and ignorant. If you know anything about the early days of the church, you'll know that their beliefs evolved and morphed, they were still finding things out and flirting with different doctrines. Things that they condemned one year were embraced and taught or contradicted 5, 10 years later. They did not understand all that Joseph left them with, they did not understand sealing, for example, which is why Brigham sought to find an answer via prayer after Joseph's death.

The anger and disrespect directed at Alaris over this topic is unnecessary and undeserved.

I use the term reincarnation because that's what it's called these days and transmigration isnt really. Does it change my point? No, It's the same thing as what Joseph rejected, the belief that a soul would return to be born in a new body. To pretend like mmp is a valid, established doctrine of the lds church is ludicrous. I'm sure you are aware that people believed different things, but that didn't make it a doctrine of the church. I don't know what you are referring to as mistreatment of alaris, I've disagreed with him and others, but I haven't been disrespectful. I may be short with you, but seriously, you nag others about their tone etc, if they disagree with your friends on the forum, and it's tiring.

You’re but one of dozens of people who have interacted with Alaris on this topic over many different threads and pages , no need to make my post about you.

You also, as usual, disregard the bulk of the post that has very relevant information. Really there’s just no need for you to engage in discussions if you don’t actually want to evaluate what others have to say.

What is your contribution other than to criticize and accuse others?

You’re here criticizing Alaris, criticizing me, you criticize plenty of people.

I’ve seen The contribution that Alaris has made, ive seen many people thank him for leading them to revelations, for opening up their mind. I have no doubt he has received many private messages thanking him.

I personally have received thanks from people for my contribution, I’ve had people create an account literally just to tell me that they appreciate the contribution I made.

I can’t tell you why you don’t see what others see, sorry.

[investigator]

If you really want to understand mmp or reincarnation and Mormonism, you need to read this.

http://www.freeread.com/22520/

[Rick Grimes]

If you really want to understand mmp or reincarnation and Mormonism, you need to read this.

http://www.freeread.com/22520/

I just read it.

There was no additional light or knowledge shared in this read. Joseph was a promised messiah as foretold in by the ancient prophets. This is the big "you dont know who I am" meaning to what Joseph was saying. NOT that he was the prophet Mormon or anybody else from antiquity. The scriptures cited do not at all establish reincarnation, but baptism. To deny this is to refute the need for baptism. Joseph didnt seek a rebirth he sought after the priesthood to be able to be baptized and to baptize others. The use of Joseph's statements about trying to convince early church members about the deeper doctrines is hardly appropriate given that he was about to reveal plural marriage, exaltation, pre existence, work for the dead, more scriptures, etc... he never taught reincarnation and it wasnt anything he was struggling to share with others. Given the nature of what he was willing to share like men becoming Gods, it is hard to argue that he chickened out at something like reincarnation, if it were a true doctrine.

Just some food for thought.

[nightlight]

I'm not understanding how the temperature of being around God had to do with reincarnation? I've read people quote the "everlasting burnings" and such, but I'm not making the connection of this to being born on multiple worlds.

They equate "everlasting burnings " as something only those who preformed the Atonement can achieve ..lol the irony is.....THIS IS THE POINT OF THE ATONMENT......

This is what is happening with MMP imo:

Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them." 3Ne 11:39-40

Okay. A. Who is “they”? It’s not like there’s an organized pro-MMP group.

B. The KFD is about exaltation, not salvation. Two different things. The atonement saves man from death and hell. There is nothing, however, that says is *exalts* us. This is, IMO, one of the major disconnects between LDS theology and mainstream Christianity. They are talking about salvation, but unaware of exaltation. Are they correct? Yes! The atonement absolutely saves us. But to what end? What is the difference between a terrestrial kingdom-ite and a celestial kingdom-ite?

Being able to endure the presence of the father is dwelling in “Everlasting burnings,” and, IMO, is a matter of exaltation more than the salvation extended to all mankind.

What do you think “grace to grace” means? I’m really curious.

To me, it is clear that “Grace” is synonymous with atonement. “From atonement to atonement.”

The Atonement is incredible, remarkable, amazing...how is it any less great if it saves us from falling so we can continue progressing versus “poof! You’re a god!” What is the difference between what you believe about the atonement and what our mainstream Christian brothers and sisters believe?

I believe the Atonment is two fold. Salvation&Exaltation are two sides to the same coin.
“to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man”
He is talking about Salvation&Exaltation ^^^

Hence my belief in kingdom progression beyond the veil. I believe our temple ordinances coupled with being Born of the Spirit, put you in the front of the line on the New Earth, hence THE MORNING... of the First Resurrection.

I believe Exaltation takes place on the millennial/terrestrial earth. This is going from Grace to Grace. I believe you will be made equal in might, power, dominon by the Atonement...not by your own works. Hence "being made"... not "making yourself"
I believe the Temple is only for people who are living celestial law. I believe the Millennium will roll with power of exaltation.

I believe unless you overcome your natural man and are born of the Spirit, receiving baptism of water&fire... you do not qualify to come forth in the first resurrection. I believe that if you are born of Fire&Water&Countine... You qualify for exaltation.

a people making temple ordinances should be a people who are ready to receive Zion from above.
We are not, hence all these dead works.

I believe Christ and the Saints WILL live on the earth for the thousand years to prepare for its/ours Celestial state. Regardless of JS saying "probably" not.

Everything is step by step. You can't go from telestial to celestial....we will enter the terrestrial and follow the mother of our bodies (earth) to celestial

Grace to Grace...to God

When the game is won...both the pawn and the king receive the same.
This is the beauty of what He did.

59 Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.

You are a women, you'll never die for the sins of a mankind...but Christ can make you equal with Him. You cannot/will not make yourself equal imo

Eve did not exalt herself by filling a role. Jesus Christ exalted Eve by her overcoming herself through Him, and by continuing in His commandments.

If you do this, sister^^^, MMP is redundant imo