What is doctrine and what is not?

[omegaseamaster75]

On 9/18/2017 at 12:17 PM, anatess2 said:

Unlike the Catholic Church, the LDS Church do not have an official process of canonization.  This is because of the inherent structure of a church built upon modern revelation.  The teachings of the modern prophets is what modern people follow more so than the prophets of different dispensations or even different generations.  The Catholic Church, on the other hand, believe in a closed canon, therefore, the structure of instruction revolves around a fixed point.

In this sense, for me, it is futile to the dispensation of the restoration to put up fixed boundaries around doctrine.  Yes, I do understand that one of the main effects of the apostasy was bishops teaching their own version of doctrine to their churches.  But, with the keys of the priesthood restored and the Church organized according to the House of the Lord, it will be harder for this kind of apostasy to spread too far.  Follow your prophet.  That's where doctrine is.

I disagree, 

Since 1830 new doctrine has been accepted six times. They have followed a three step process to add Official Doctrine:  

1. It requires the approval of the First Presidency,

2.The concurrence of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles,

3.It must be accepted in a sustaining vote of the entire membership.

1. 1830, Bible and Book of Mormon were officially accepted with the organization of the Church
2. 1835, Doctrine and Covenants, first 103 sections were officially accepted
3. 1880, Doctrine and Covenants additional 32 sections were accepted along with the Pearl of Great Price
4. 1890, Polygamy was repealed (Official Declaration)
5. 1976, D&C sections 137 & 138 were officially accepted
6. 1978, The priesthood was made available to all worthy males regardless of race (Official Declaration 2)

Everything else is policy subject to change if needed via current revelation to our leaders. My favorite example is the WOW.  Our current practice of it is a matter of policy not doctrine.  The Doctrine about the WOW we find in Doctrine and Covenants, the policy of how to practice it is subject to leadership inspiration. 

[wenglund]

On 9/12/2017 at 8:57 AM, zil said:

IMO, your title and text don't match up.  "Doctrine" is not the same thing as "true".  Doctrine is always true, but not all truth is doctrine (especially when "true" is used as a synonym for "factual").  For example: It is true that I'm wearing shoes right now.  This is not related to doctrine in any way, shape, or form.

To muddy the waters even further, there is "doctrine", and then there is individual interpretation of the "doctrine." The former may be "true," while the latter may not.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

On 10/23/2017 at 3:38 PM, Traveler said:

 

It remains obvious to me that doctrine is not the measure of a disciple of Christ.  Not that doctrine has no place - but the place of doctrine is not the place of prominence.  I know someone will quote scripture thinking otherwise but I do not believe that even the main purpose of scripture is for doctrine but rather to bring us to Christ.  Devils know that Christ is G-d and they know what is true doctrine but it does them no good and they remain evil and damned.

 

The Traveler

I agree. Put in proper perspective, "doctrine," or "truth" and knowledge, are but several of many means to the end, and not the end in itself. Elder Oaks makes this clear when he said: 

"Attaining what the Apostle Paul described as 'the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ' (Ephesians 4:13) requires far more than acquiring knowledge [and doctrine and truth). It is not even enough for us to be convinced of the gospel [i.e. have faith and testimony]; we must act and think so that we are converted by it. In contrast to the institutions of the world, which teach us to know something, the plan of salvation and the gospel of Jesus Christ challenge us to become something." (see HERE)

Too often we forget that "doctrines" are merely tools, and we inadvertently end up arguing over whether a given tool is "doctrine" or not or even whether the tool is "true" or not, etc, and this at the expense of remaining mindful of what the tools are intended to build--and this when the verity and authoritative value of the tool is made manifest in the building. A spiritual hammer is "doctrinal" and "true" only in so far as it enables fulfillment of the 4-fold mission of the Church and construction of God's kingdom on earth.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Blossom76]

Hi, I'm new so forgive my naivety but how can the issue of doctrine be such an up in the air topic, based on peoples personal experiences and beliefs.  I mean if its Doctrine shouldn't that be clear to the members?  Isn't there a book of official doctrine that someone new like me could read to know exactly what the church teaches and believes in?

I really dont understand?

Edited November 2, 2017 by Blossom76

[Jane_Doe]

11 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

Hi, I'm new so forgive my naivety but how can the issue of doctrine be such an up in the air topic, based on peoples personal experiences and beliefs.  I mean if its Doctrine shouldn't that be clear to the members?  Isn't there a book of official doctrine that someone new like me could read to know exactly what the church teaches and believes in?

I really dont understand?

(I'm going to address this big-picture style first, then focus on your specific question)

A fundamental difference between LDS and Catholic approaches to things is LDS very active belief in continuing revelation, versus the Catholic tradition of ceasing of public revelation.  You can very well get a LDS book about fundamental doctrine and teachings therein, like the "Gospel Principles" but, which I'm assuming you already have.  Those are firmly laid out and explained.  And of course we have God's word in the scripture to diligently and regularly study.  And the words/teachings of His current prophets.  

But you can't get an LDS book which contains very single Gospel Truth, because such a book has not yet been written, because God still has many great any marvelous things to reveal to us (see Article of Faith #9).  Furthermore, we each study God's individually, and He reveals things to us individually-- which understanding can vary from individual to individuals because it's individual.  (wow that was a mouthful ugly sentence).  There's also a difference in how leaders are viewed compared to Catholic teachings.

I have never been Catholic, so my comparison here is probably flawed (I just have studied/visited it intensely for a number of years).  But from my limited understanding is that Catholics believe public revelations are closed and all that will be taught is already taught.  The Papacy and Tradition serve to clarify/guide teachings, rather than reveal new ones.  The CCC does serve as a "learn about Catholicism book".  But in my studies I was actually told there wasn't a list of Infallible Teachings-- much to my surprise/frustration trying to study RCC.  

[Blossom76]

Thanks, that sort of helps! If you want to learn about Catholic Doctrine and teachings they are all in the Catechism so I don't know who told you there wasn't a definite list of doctrinal beliefs because that's just not true.  And the Pope can give new teachings if he is guided to by the spirit, which from what I understand is the same as the President of the LDS Church

Edited November 2, 2017 by Blossom76

[Jane_Doe]

7 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

Thanks, that sort of helps! If you want to learn about Catholic Doctrine and teachings they are all in the Catechism.  

With all due respect, I find the CCC to be an excellent cure for insomnia.  Nothing against the faith inside, just the writing style is not my taste at all.  I much preferred learning about Catholicism by attending Mass and chatting with various Catholics about their faith.  I attended Holy Week festivities for over a decade, various other masses and festivities, visiting an numerable amount of Catholic churches along the way, and did a deep-deep study of the faith for a year.  And of course had a ridiculous number of conversations with a ridiculous number of people.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Jane_Doe

[Blossom76]

Just now, Jane_Doe said:

With all due respect, I find the CCC to be an excellent cure for insomnia.  Nothing against the faith inside, just the writing style is not my taste at all.  I much preferred learning about Catholicism by attending Mass and chatting with various Catholics about their faith.  I attended Holy Week festivities for over a decade, various other masses and festivities, visiting an numerable amount of Catholic churches along the way, and did a deep-deep study of the faith for a year.  

LOL I'm sure most Catholics feel the same! Unfortunately most Catholics don't even really know their faith that well, that's why we have Catechism School - which most Catholics don't attend!

[Jane_Doe]

1 minute ago, Blossom76 said:

LOL I'm sure most Catholics feel the same! Unfortunately most Catholics don't even really know their faith that well, that's why we have Catechism School - which most Catholics don't attend!

My best friend was Catholic at that age-- she and I chatted for like 2 hours about every one of her 1 hour classes .  I very much enjoyed attending her Confirmation, brother's First Communion, and helping out with her other brother's sacramental wedding.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Jane_Doe

[Blossom76]

Well if you ever have any questions I'd be happy to answer them for you if I can.  And Catechism classes are not exclusively for younger members.  Adults are very much encouraged to take them as well.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Blossom76

[Jane_Doe]

7 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

Well if you ever have any questions I'd be happy to answer them for you if I can.  And Catechism classes are not exclusively for younger members.  Adults are very much encouraged to take them as well.

Yes, I was offered repeatedly to formally attend RCIA, but alas the scheduling never worked about.

[anatess2]

52 minutes ago, Blossom76 said:

Hi, I'm new so forgive my naivety but how can the issue of doctrine be such an up in the air topic, based on peoples personal experiences and beliefs.  I mean if its Doctrine shouldn't that be clear to the members?  Isn't there a book of official doctrine that someone new like me could read to know exactly what the church teaches and believes in?

I really dont understand?

Yes, it is very clear for members.  All doctrine is encompassed in the Scriptures (Book of Mormon, Holy Bible, Doctrine & Covenants, Pearl of Great Price).

The difference between Catholic and LDS is that the Catholic Church has the Magesterium which is in charge of teaching the doctrines from Scriptures and Sacred Tradition and nothing can veer outside of this authority.  This developed in reaction to the schisms when bishops in one church would teach different interpretations of the gospel from other bishops causing people to apostatize and the Church to splinter.   When I was in Catholic School nuns and priests discouraged self-study of scriptures to prevent apostasy.

The LDS Church, on the other hand, teaches correct principles and leaves people to govern themselves.  This leaves things open to personal revelation in addition to new revelation given to the prophets.  Doctrine is, therefore, seen as more malleable because personal revelation sometimes creeps into Church teachings.  But authority prevents false teachings from becoming set in doctrine.  A bishop only has authority over their own ward.  They do not have authority for other wards, let alone the entire church.  Apostles hold the keys to the entire Church but they are a quorum - they don't usually teach without the agreement of the others.

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by anatess2

[Blossom76]

2 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Yes, I was offered repeatedly to formally attend RCIA, but alas the scheduling never worked about.

I present to you - the online study option!

Don't drink the coolaid!

https://www.catechismclass.com/catholic-rcia-classes.php

[Traveler]

On ‎11‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 8:33 PM, Blossom76 said:

Hi, I'm new so forgive my naivety but how can the issue of doctrine be such an up in the air topic, based on peoples personal experiences and beliefs.  I mean if its Doctrine shouldn't that be clear to the members?  Isn't there a book of official doctrine that someone new like me could read to know exactly what the church teaches and believes in?

I really dont understand?

 

There is a misconception – there are principles of truth – doctrine is always a matter of philosophy and interpretation.  For example, Jesus never suggested that his disciples are to be identified by the doctrine they believe – rather he said that his disciples will love one another.  Some try to make this in to doctrine.

The truth is that disciples of Christ live by covenant rather than by doctrine.  Most important is a covenant to love one another.  The next important principle of covenant is the acceptance of ordinances. But that is another discussion.  

It is my personal observation that many overshadow covenant with doctrine as an excuse for not being loyal and obedient to covenant.  Isaiah prophesied and taught that it is impossible to believe what is true if one is disloyal or disobedient to their covenant with G-d.

 

The Traveler

[wenglund]

On 11/1/2017 at 8:33 PM, Blossom76 said:

Hi, I'm new so forgive my naivety but how can the issue of doctrine be such an up in the air topic, based on peoples personal experiences and beliefs.  I mean if its Doctrine shouldn't that be clear to the members?  Isn't there a book of official doctrine that someone new like me could read to know exactly what the church teaches and believes in?

I really dont understand?

To me, the somewhat ambiguous and fluid nature of LDS doctrine is divinely intentional. It helps avoid the stifling rigidity of dogma and creedalism that inadvertently impede spiritual development.  It is God's way of discouraging mankind from cementing Him in box  of their own limited and relatively undeveloped understanding.

It also disrupts the retarding human inclination to make doctrine the end objective of spirituality, rather than a useful means to the end of becoming like Christ.

Thanks, -Wade Englund- 

[Rob Osborn]

On 11/1/2017 at 9:26 PM, anatess2 said:

Yes, it is very clear for members.  All doctrine is encompassed in the Scriptures (Book of Mormon, Holy Bible, Doctrine & Covenants, Pearl of Great Price).

The difference between Catholic and LDS is that the Catholic Church has the Magesterium which is in charge of teaching the doctrines from Scriptures and Sacred Tradition and nothing can veer outside of this authority.  This developed in reaction to the schisms when bishops in one church would teach different interpretations of the gospel from other bishops causing people to apostatize and the Church to splinter.   When I was in Catholic School nuns and priests discouraged self-study of scriptures to prevent apostasy.

The LDS Church, on the other hand, teaches correct principles and leaves people to govern themselves.  This leaves things open to personal revelation in addition to new revelation given to the prophets.  Doctrine is, therefore, seen as more malleable because personal revelation sometimes creeps into Church teachings.  But authority prevents false teachings from becoming set in doctrine.  A bishop only has authority over their own ward.  They do not have authority for other wards, let alone the entire church.  Apostles hold the keys to the entire Church but they are a quorum - they don't usually teach without the agreement of the others.

 

It is a better system in our church for sure. But even over the years we can see how the process of recieving doctrine has evolved. We are not completely immune from false doctrines in the church. In due time all of the issues will be resolved line upon line and we will have a more perfect doctrine. It doesnt bother me we have inconsistant and misleading doctrines because I do have a witness that the true authority and power of the priesthood is in our church. Through that authority all of those issues with doctrine can and will be sorted out.

[omegaseamaster75]

20 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

It is a better system in our church for sure. But even over the years we can see how the process of recieving doctrine has evolved. We are not completely immune from false doctrines in the church. In due time all of the issues will be resolved line upon line and we will have a more perfect doctrine. It doesnt bother me we have inconsistant and misleading doctrines because I do have a witness that the true authority and power of the priesthood is in our church. Through that authority all of those issues with doctrine can and will be sorted out.

We don't have inconsistent and misleading doctrines. Frankly I am not sure why you would think that, are you able to point to some examples for me?

[Rob Osborn]

Just now, omegaseamaster75 said:

We don't have inconsistent and misleading doctrines. Frankly I am not sure why you would think that, are you able to point to some examples for me?

We actually do have misleading doctrines.

For example- we teach in our manuals that one can be saved from hell eventually without repenting and accepting baptism-

"Also in the spirit prison are those who rejected the gospel after it was preached to them either on earth or in the spirit prison. These spirits suffer in a condition known as hell. They have removed themselves from the mercy of Jesus Christ, who said, “Behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; but if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit” (D&C 19:16–18). After suffering for their sins, they will be allowed, through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, to inherit the lowest degree of glory, which is the telestial kingdom." (Gospel Principles manual, chapter 41)

But, in the scriptures it teaches that one can never be saved from the eternal hell without repentance and baptism.-

43 And thus did I, the Lord God, appoint unto man the days of his probation—that by his natural death he might be raised in immortality unto eternal life, even as many as would believe;
            44 And they that believe not unto eternal damnation; for they cannot be redeemed from their spiritual fall, because they repent not;
            45 For they love darkness rather than light, and their deeds are evil, and they receive their wages of whom they list to obey. (D&C 29:43-45)

[omegaseamaster75]

27 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

We actually do have misleading doctrines.

For example- we teach in our manuals that one can be saved from hell eventually without repenting and accepting baptism-

"Also in the spirit prison are those who rejected the gospel after it was preached to them either on earth or in the spirit prison. These spirits suffer in a condition known as hell. They have removed themselves from the mercy of Jesus Christ, who said, “Behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; but if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit” (D&C 19:16–18). After suffering for their sins, they will be allowed, through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, to inherit the lowest degree of glory, which is the telestial kingdom." (Gospel Principles manual, chapter 41)

But, in the scriptures it teaches that one can never be saved from the eternal hell without repentance and baptism.-

43 And thus did I, the Lord God, appoint unto man the days of his probation—that by his natural death he might be raised in immortality unto eternal life, even as many as would believe;
            44 And they that believe not unto eternal damnation; for they cannot be redeemed from their spiritual fall, because they repent not;
            45 For they love darkness rather than light, and their deeds are evil, and they receive their wages of whom they list to obey. (D&C 29:43-45)

I think you are reading to much in to it.  We can have a whole discussion on the particulars of D&C and who it was written for and why we accept it as cannon, I look at it as glimpses into the past and revelation given specifically to Joseph (mostly) for others. While we take gospel truths from these revelations we need to read them in context.

We will all be resurrected 1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. There is no baptism requirement for the telestial kingdom, I am not sure how you get that from D&C 29

From D&C 76:

89 And thus we saw, in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial, which surpasses all understanding;

90 And no man knows it except him to whom God has revealed it.

91 And thus we saw the glory of the terrestrial which excels in all things the glory of the telestial, even in glory, and in power, and in might, and in dominion.

98 And the glory of the telestial is one, even as the glory of the stars is one; for as one star differs from another star in glory, even so differs one from another in glory in the telestial world;

99 For these are they who are of Paul, and of Apollos, and of Cephas.

100 These are they who say they are some of one and some of another—some of Christ and some of John, and some of Moses, and some of Elias, and some of Esaias, and some of Isaiah, and some of Enoch;

101 But received not the gospel, neither the testimony of Jesus, neither the prophets, neither the everlasting covenant.

102 Last of all, these all are they who will not be gathered with the saints, to be caught up unto the church of the Firstborn, and received into the cloud.

103 These are they who are liars, and sorcerers, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie.

104 These are they who suffer the wrath of God on earth.

105 These are they who suffer the vengeance of eternal fire.

106 These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times, when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work;

Edited November 7, 2017 by omegaseamaster75

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

I think you are reading to much in to it.  We can have a whole discussion on the particulars of D&C and who it was written for and why we accept it as cannon, I look at it as glimpses into the past and revelation given specifically to Joseph (mostly) for others. While we take gospel truths from these revelations we need to read them in context.

We will all be resurrected 1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. There is no baptism requirement for the telestial kingdom, I am not sure how you get that from D&C 29

From D&C 76:

89 And thus we saw, in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial, which surpasses all understanding;

90 And no man knows it except him to whom God has revealed it.

91 And thus we saw the glory of the terrestrial which excels in all things the glory of the telestial, even in glory, and in power, and in might, and in dominion.

98 And the glory of the telestial is one, even as the glory of the stars is one; for as one star differs from another star in glory, even so differs one from another in glory in the telestial world;

99 For these are they who are of Paul, and of Apollos, and of Cephas.

100 These are they who say they are some of one and some of another—some of Christ and some of John, and some of Moses, and some of Elias, and some of Esaias, and some of Isaiah, and some of Enoch;

101 But received not the gospel, neither the testimony of Jesus, neither the prophets, neither the everlasting covenant.

102 Last of all, these all are they who will not be gathered with the saints, to be caught up unto the church of the Firstborn, and received into the cloud.

103 These are they who are liars, and sorcerers, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie.

104 These are they who suffer the wrath of God on earth.

105 These are they who suffer the vengeance of eternal fire.

106 These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times, when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work;

Let me thus ask- Do you believe the telestial kingdom is a place of salvation and not hell?

[Vort]

12 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Let me thus ask- Do you believe the telestial kingdom is a place of salvation and not hell?

Of course. Not only are those in the telestial kingdom saved from physical death, they are saved from spiritual death to the extent that they still have access to God to some degree. But they are "damned" in the sense that they do not inherit eternal life, as defined in scripture. In short, they receive what they are willing to receive, because they are not willing to receive what they might have.

Rob, your doctrine of "Everybody gets eternal life!" is not merely unscriptural, it is antiscriptural. It is the very doctrine warned about by Jacob:

Quote

And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God.

Jacob was not the only one to testify of such false and dangerous doctrines. Mormon recounted the existence of one Nehor and the doctrines he taught, which doctrines eventually destroyed the Nephite nation:

Quote

And he also testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble, but that they might lift up their heads and rejoice; for the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.

I know I have given you a bit of a hard time about this in the past. But seriously, Rob, you need to get off this particular gospel hobby horse. Believe what you will, but don't teach against the doctrines of the Church. Even if you were factually correct, that's a dangerous thing to do. And in this case, you are factually mistaken, to a dangerous degree.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Vort

[Rob Osborn]

8 minutes ago, Vort said:

Of course. Not only are those in the telestial kingdom saved from physical death, they are saved from spiritual death to the extent that they still have access to God to some degree. But they are "damned" in the sense that they do not inherit eternal life, as defined in scripture. In short, they receive what they are willing to receive, because they are not willing to receive what they might have.

Rob, your doctrine of "Everybody gets eternal life!" is not merely unscriptural, it is antiscriptural. It is the very doctrine warned about by Jacob:

Jacob was not the only one to testify of such false and dangerous doctrines. Mormon recounted the existence of one Nehor and the doctrines he taught, which doctrines eventually destroyed the Nephite nation:

I know I have given you a bit of a hard time about this in the past. But seriously, Rob, you need to get off this particular gospel hobby horse. Believe what you will, but don't teach against the doctrines of the Church. Even if you were factually correct, that's a dangerous thing to do. And in this case, you are factually mistaken, to a dangerous degree.

Well, you can certainly have your own opinion but one cannot be both saved from hell and damned at the same time. Thats a grand oxymoron! To be "damned" means to be condemned to hell. If one is "saved" from spiritual death they cannot be in a state of damnation. In the end we will receive either eternal life or spiritual death (eternal death). 

[Rob Osborn]

27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.
28 And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit;
29 And not choose eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom. (2Nephi 2:27-29)

[The Folk Prophet]

I haven't much involved myself in this thread because of the following answer to the title question:

Who cares?

Are we really intent on doing only those things we have established and unquestionable doctrine? If not, then what, exactly, is the objective of cloistering the definition?

Edited November 7, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[JohnsonJones]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Let me thus ask- Do you believe the telestial kingdom is a place of salvation and not hell?

That is actually a VERY deep question, though it may not appear so on the surface.  I know many decades ago (far too many for me to reveal just how many, plus you may see how old I am then  )I had a Mission President.  He said if he was anywhere without his spouse in the hereafter, it would be Hell to him. 

When we think about spiritual death, it is the separation of man from his Father (and the Lord).  This can have several different meanings.  One could see it as the inability to see and be with the Lord.  One could see it as a separation from the Kingdom of the Lord.  One could also see it as several ideas.  Pertaining to the two I just mentioned though...

If it is the first, we know that in the Telestial Kingdom man are not visited by the Lord or the Father, but may be visitied with angelic messengers.  In that light, one could postulate under at least one definition of spiritual death, that idea continues.

However, as we believe the Telestial Kingdom is also part of the Kingdom of the Lord (as I believe this earth is also, at least I think it fall in that definition, but a fallen world rather than one raised in any glory), in that light it is salvation from hell.

Edit: Such postulations could go on and one I think.  However, when thinking about such things, normally these are NOT doctrine specifically, or doctrine as specifically pointed out by the LDS church.  AS such, what I said above is my own ponderings, rather than the set doctrine of the LDS church. This is also why there may be such great deviations among members as to what different things mean or what various things in this life or the next hold.

Edited November 7, 2017 by JohnsonJones