Chrisberockin

Sticking with the prophets is always the right call. The quote you shared is fantastic. I have found a list of other statements like it. Here are just a couple of the good ones. Joseph Smith: “It has been the design of Jehovah, from the commencement of the world, and is His purpose now, to regulate the affairs of the world in His own time, to stand as a head of the universe, and take the reins of government in His own hand.” (Teachings, p. 250.) Bruce R. McConkie: “Let’s get a concept instilled in our mind that God is omnipotent, that He is above all things, that the very universe itself is his creation and is subject to Him, that He upholds and preserves and governs it. ...that God is Almighty; that there is no power that He does not possess, no wisdom that does not reside in Him, no infinite expanse of space or duration of time where His influence and power is not felt….” (“The Lord God of Joseph Smith,” BYU devotional, Jan 4, 1972.) Thomas S. Monson, President: “Thou art the great Elohim, Creator and Ruler of the universe.” (Rexburg Temple dedicatory prayer, Feb 10, 2008.) Henry B. Eyring: “Thou art the great Elohim, the Almighty, the Governor of the universe who rules over all.” (Payson Temple Dedicatory Prayer, June 7, 2015.) Henry B. Eyring: “We are mindful that Thou art God, the Father of our spirits, the Almighty Governor of the universe.” (Philadelphia Pennsylvania Temple dedicatory prayer, Sep 18, 2016.) M. Russell Ballard: “...I know councils are the Lord’s way and that He created all things in the universe through a heavenly council, as mentioned in the holy scripture.” (“Family Councils,” GC Apr 2016.) Also there is an Ensign article on the subject: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/04/i-have-a-question/is-jesus-the-creator-and-redeemer-of-other-worlds-besides-this-one?lang=eng Even still, I feel like there is some room for the galaxy interpretation. In the instances where it is stated that God is creator of the whole universe, there are multiple definitions of the word universe, one of which is "a particular sphere of activity, interest, or experience." So we can only guess about the boundaries of God's universe. In the instance of Elder Scott's statement that the Virgo supercluster doesn't even begin to approach the limits of "God the Father’s creations," he is still implying that there is a limit. Or maybe in such instances we need to understand the term "God" as a general title applying to all perfected beings, each one working separately in their own universe or sphere of influence, but bound together by a similar cause. Am I straining at gnats? Perhaps. You are definitely justified in not sharing the galaxy view. I myself do not claim to know whether it is true or not, but I view it as a possibility. I also view it as a possibility that the whole observable universe is within our Father's grasp. It's not possible according to science, but that's not necessarily an important factor to consider.

Lots going on in this discussion, I love the enthusiasm we all share for striving to know the Savior and his atoning sacrifice. I just wanted to briefly give my two cents about Skousen's talk. I love it, for the most part. It makes sense, for the most part. But I will never believe that an individual can lose their individuality by being broken down into minuscule bits of intelligence. That just doesn't seem like a justifiable interpretation to me. It's an interesting take on what intelligence is, but I don't think it has been defined by revelation what exactly we are dealing with when it comes to intelligence. Until it is properly revealed through the Lord's authorized servants, I will not accept that an individual can be dissembled, erasing that person's consciousness, and then rebuilt into a new individual. If you ask me, that is no different than reincarnation, which I hope we all agree is a false doctrine.

The galaxy makes sense to me. I mean, sure, a God is all-powerful so I guess it doesn't matter if he lives 50,000 light years away or 1700 billion trillion light years away, but for my mortal mind it makes more sense that his children are in the same galaxy as Him. His creations are "without number" in the sense that we cannot grasp the number, but they are numbered to God. The Milky Way galaxy has enough worlds to fit this description, in my book. I assume that the universe is endless and that one God can't be the author of all galaxies therein, since there are innumerable gods. So being the creator and ruler of a galaxy is mind-blowingly amazing enough to fit the God I know, and yet it's not so ludicrously limitless that it defies all logic. The structure of our galaxy shows gradation of glory as you move out from the center, the center being the place where the greatest stars reside, and the outskirts being a place of darkness. In this way the structure of our galaxy seems to fit what God showed Abraham. But I'm not Abraham or God, so I'm a poor judge of what He is capable of. I'm just saying, it makes sense to me.

I always thought that "the heavens" or even sometimes "heaven" means the sky in general, so all of outer space. So obviously God was never outside of the heavens. Unless there is something less obvious going on, like more than three dimensions of space, so God came from another universe and created a new universe (insert a big BANG here), thus the heavens in general were part of his creation. I'm not a big fan of the multiverse interpretation. I'm more a fan of the theory that the milky way galaxy is God's kingdom, and other gods rule other galaxies. But who's to say? Getting back to the creation story, it is a fairly common interpretation I have heard that when God said "let the heavens appear" it was not the moment that all stars in the night sky were born, but it was the moment that they became visible to the earth, since the earth had hitherto been blanketed by dense clouds of volcanic debris and whatnot. Sticking to the purpose of this discussion, here's a possible spiritual implication. God our Father has so many wonderful things to show us, if we will have eyes to see. What is obstructing our view? In my experience, when I have trouble making a life decision, I need to lay aside my personal agenda built around prideful and selfish desires in order for God to be able to show me his will. He is the creature of the universe, and he has the power to work wonders in our lives if we can filter out the distractions and humbly seek his direction. A beautifully grand design emerges when we can clear the clouds away.

The ordinance work that is done vicariously for the dead in the temple is a well established interpretation of what it means to be a "savior on Mount Zion" as mentioned in Obadiah 1:21. Joseph smith taught: “How are they to become saviors on Mount Zion? By building their temples, erecting their baptismal fonts, and going forth and receiving all the ordinances … in behalf of all their progenitors who are dead.” (See Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, Chapter 41, "Becoming Saviors on Mount Zion.") https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-41?lang=eng The Lord's work is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man, and we help accomplish that goal by our efforts in the temple. So this is one of the possible meanings of your friend's patriarchal blessing. But I would say that there are plenty of other ways to help Jesus Christ in his work, and that each of us is meant to help in a unique way. Your friend is the only one who can find out for himself what work the Lord wants him to do. Temple work is one, missionary work is another. Helping living people come unto Christ is just as important as helping dead people. My patriarchal blessing says that I will become a savior on Mount Zion by teaching the gospel to others, so I view teaching as a sensible way in which we might help further the work of the Lord. Thanks to my mission (state-side) I have a very strong testimony that each of us is sent by God to touch the lives of certain individuals. I believe that by following the personal guidance received from the Holy Ghost, your friend will fulfill God's work in a way that no one else can, which will be fulfilling this part of his or her patriarchal blessing. Ultimately though, patriarchal blessings are meant to be understood and interpreted only by the recipient. Even the patriarch is not authorized to give any binding interpretation about the blessing. He is simply an instrument in delivering the blessing to the individual from God. I hope this makes sense and is helpful in some way!

clbent04, Thank you for sharing these thoughts of yours in such a well-composed manner. Reading your post, I really could sympathize. I have had many of these same thoughts. Life can be frustrating, that's for sure. The only words of encouragement I would offer is that life isn't always frustrating. I'm sure that you, like me, have certain relationships and certain fond memories and experiences that you are grateful to have had, even if it meant having to come struggle along in a dog-eat-dog world. A lot of these good things for me came from the Church. Most of my closest friends I met during my mission, or in my wards, etc. This is a testimony to me that all good things do come from God. Those negative, despair-inducing realities that you are speaking of are not really from God. God's creation was "good," and mankind has used agency in ways which have brought negative effects that we get to deal with at the present time, but I take comfort in knowing that this life is just a blip in eternity, and we will get to live in a paradise where we don't have to struggle to survive, and I believe that we will have the time to meet and enjoy all of the delightful members of the human family and it will be wonderful. As someone else has already mentioned, sealings bind families together like links in a chain, and so in theory all of the human race can be together in celestial glory. So... You're not crazy to feel discouraged by the things you talked about. But in my experience, that kind of feeling comes in waves. I'm sure you've had more joyful periods of life, and I'm sure you will have such periods in the future, although that is hard to see during the bad times. This life can be hard, and sucky, and so many people are wrapped up in selfishness, and it is discouraging to have no choice but to take part in the rat race for the sake of your own preservation, but there is also good in everybody, and there are blessings from God to be grateful for, and there is a bright eternity to look forward to. Overall, life is definitely worth it.

Somebody else already quoted it, but here's the link to President Lee's thing that I mentioned. https://www.lds.org/ensign/1972/12/find-the-answers-in-the-scriptures?lang=eng

Yes! Good stuff. Of course it was very strongly in favor of evolution. The thing that makes it interesting is that since it's BYU they are allowed to bring religion into the mix. I can't say they were totally accurate with their presentation of the church's history of the evolution issue, but they tried. The teacher said that the Encyclopedia of Mormonism's article on evolution was written by the First Presidency, and that's what he hinged everything on in telling us that there is no church doctrine against evolution. I have also taken an evolution course at BYU-Idaho. That professor started out the course by trying to invalidate any doctrinal argument against evolution. He had us read the standard packet, which isn't really enough to settle the issue one way or the other. Then he used one of the two President McKay's letters as the end-all doctrinal document that there is no church doctrine on evolution. Only after I was done with that class did I find out that a personal letter, even from the prophet, cannot be taken as doctrinally binding. Basically, there's much more to it than the professors of evolution like to admit.

I love this stuff. So many people have provided insightful contractions. I just thought I would share this important tidbit from Joseph Smith: "In the translation 'without form and void' it should read, 'empty and desolate.' " (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,pg. 181.) To me, the word empty makes me picture outer space. Space is never truly empty, but matter can be so disorganized and spread apart that it becomes what we would call empty space or without form. But we will assume that God is able to manipulate the universe counter to the 2nd law of thermodynamics and is able to cause the universe to become more organized. The word "desolate" suggests to me that "void" is referring to "void of life." God used his powers to form a place where he could live which could not have been possible without his divine intervention. It is not hard to see personal, everyday application of this concept. We are born without blemish but left to our own power we slowly become more wicked unless we turn to that divine power which is able to create order in our lives. Brigham Young taught that life means organization. Eternal life is enjoying complete organization, while spiritual death means becoming relatively less organized. The other concept that I am keenly interested in is Christ being called the Word. This always struck me as unnecessarily confusing for those who don't understand that Christ is a separate individual from the Father. But for those of us who do know the correct nature of the Godhead, I think it is very instructive to know that Jesus is referred to as the word of God or the power of God's word. We know that what made Christ stand out from the rest of us in the preexistence as well as in mortality was his perfect obedience. Because of this aptitude for obedience, he is able to be one with his father. They are one in mind, one in purpose, etc. Other great ones also showed this trait (Adam, for example, had a natural desire to keep all of God's commandments) but aside from Jesus we all need to work on obedience. With obedience comes oneness with God, and this brings power and knowledge.

I have a lot of respect for all that has been shared here. It's a topic I've been intensely interested in studying. I'm currently studying biology at BYU. I could go on for months about all of the actual church teachings behind the doctrines that LDS evolutionists claim aren't doctrines. But it definitely depends in large part on what counts as doctrine to you. To make a long story short, I believe what revelation teaches over what man teaches. Learning what man has hypothesized does not equate to "learning the means and methods of God's creation" or "learning the unrevealed details of Genesis" as LDS evolutionists claim. Yes, there are wonderful, beautiful truths that Science has given us that do help us to understand life. But where man's "wisdom" begins to conflict with what has been revealed, I would hope that we would all be willing to depart from what the world tells us to believe. From what has been shared by others on this page, there should be no doubt that Adam was the first human on earth. His mortal life began ~6000 years ago. Lehi teaches that before the Fall, all life on Earth was in an unchanging state. No death, no reproduction, therefore definitely no evolution. Clearly there has been a mindblowing amount of evolution, extinction, etc. since that time. As for Pre-Adamites, y'all seriously need to be made aware that PRESIDENT Lee told the church that it is definitely a false theory. I'm barely touching the tip of the iceberg with this topic. It's such a big can of worms that it's hard to address in a meaningful way. But I just wanted to chip in as another voice on the side that is brave enough to go against the grain of the world. One more thing. There is a certain argument that really bugs me. LDS evolutionists often say, in a sad attempt to reconcile religion and science, "the human bodies could have been formed for Adam and Eve through evolution, and then God could have breathed souls into them, making them children of God." Please just think about this. All animals already have spirits. Read the book of Moses. Please don't think that we humans have animal bodies that sprouted up spontaneously through natural processes and that the thing that sets us apart from animals is that we have souls. This is just such an inconsistent idea. We all have souls, or spirits, and the spirit is in the image of the body, and the body in the image of the spirit. Pardon the rant, but this particular thing just really gets me going.

Very interesting topic! Although we don't get much direct information about heavenly mother, I like to think that the Father and Mother are inseparably connected in their work. For example, God said let us make male and female in our image. So we can assume that it is more or less always a divine partnership working together in unity. In the spirit of that idea, it's fun to consider the female aspect of things. It doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when she shall appear, we shall be like her; for we shall see her as he is.