My Skype recording application, Pamela, kept acting weird so this talk is three smaller files stitched together.
Some questions I have for Mormons:
- If Joseph Smith and Mormonism already believe that the only explicit post-resurrection hell, outer darknesss, is never-ending, and if the only main New Testament terms that correlate with a post-resurrection hell are Gehenna and lake of fire (and those, not Hades, are described as eternal/everlasting and “forever and ever”), then why did Smith attempt in D&C 19 to redefine the language used in the phrase “eternal damnation”, etc.? Hades, the term for the preparatory holding place of hell, is never described as eternal or everlasting or “forever and ever”, so there was no need for Smith to reorient the plain language. It seems Smith’s teaching was partly based on an ignorance of what particular hell the New Testament spoke of as eternal.
- If I heard him correctly, Ralph spoke of the bottom two heavenly kingdoms as where one experiences the “second death”, where one suffers eternal punishment, spiritual torment, and the wrath and fury of God. If that’s the case, then why even speak of these places in “heavenly” terms? That people in such hellish heavenly kingdoms are happier than those in outer darkness does not sufficiently address the incoherence.
- If, of those who come to earth to experience mortality, only a few dozen people—those who commit the unpardonable sin—will actually go to Gehenna (the only explicit post-resurrection hell; “outer darkness” in Mormonism), why does Jesus so widely warn about the threat of Gehenna for those who do not fight lust and anger, and for those who lead children astray (i.e. Matthew 5:22,29-30)? Why does he so widely warn people to “fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna” (Matthew 10:28). Why does he denounce the general groups of the scribes and Pharisees, “How will you escape being condemned to Gehenna?” (Matthew 23:33) Modern Mormonism, contra Jesus, seems to teach that nearly all Pharisees and the scribes will end up in a heavenly kingdom, not Gehenna.
- Some modern Mormons believe that the Celestial kingdom has three partitions, only the top of which, “Church of the Firstborn”, entails the fullness of progression and exaltation. The bottom two Celestial kingdom-partitions seem to entail a cessation of progression and a lack of participation in enjoyments that the more privileged Celestial partition has. If this is the case, and if “damnation” is correctly defined by Mormons as the cessation of progression, then how are the bottom two partitions of the top Celestial Kingdom not a form of damnation? Again, isn’t it odd to speak of people in heaven being damned forever, especially when those people are in the highest of the three general heavenly kingdoms?
Addendum 1
Ralph argues that D&C 19 is intended to reinforce and undergird the everlasting duration of hell, but I disagree. On an experiential note, I have simply never heard this kind of Mormon approach to D&C 19. In all my years of interacting with Mormons it has always been used to argue for the temporality of pre-resurrection spirit prison hell.
Notice how George Q. Cannon speaks in Journal of Discourses, v. 24, p. 374, alluding to D&C 19:
“Joseph Smith taught a different doctrine even before the Church was organized. He taught the doctrine, in a revelation given to Martin Harris—it had to be given with great care, because it was entirely different to what was generally believed—that ‘eternal punishment is God’s punishment;’ but it does not follow that those who come under God’s punishment are to be punished throughout the endless ages of eternity. He taught that grand truth in the year 1829. Then it was followed up by the Vision, which explained in the most wonderful manner the goodness of our God, and showed Him to be the being that He is described to be by all the holy Prophets—a being just and merciful, a being who labored to save His children, and had their salvation at heart continually.”
He also alludes to the language of D&C 19 in Journal of Discourses, v. 22, p. 182:
Persecutors generally believe that those whom they persecute are doomed to spend the endless ages of eternity in hell fire, unless they can be made to repent of their errors. Persecution becomes, therefore, with them, in many instances, a highly justifiable and meritorious method of saving souls. This has been the feeling which has impelled many persecutors in every age—a holy, burning zeal to snatch souls from perdition. The men who have been most zealous in hailing men to prison and inflicting torment, have been as a rule, men zealous and sincere in their religion. They thought it better to destroy the body than that the soul should be consigned to hell; they thought it better for heretics to burn an hour or too on earth than that they should burn eternally. But the Latter-day Saints have no such views respecting future punishment? We believe there is an endless hell. We do not, however, believe that human beings are consigned to it eternally. The hell may be endless and the punishment endless, but it does not follow that they who are consigned there are to remain in it eternally. We believe men will be rewarded for the deeds done in the body, and we therefore can afford to be liberal in our views in this respect.
Consider how Joseph Fielding Smith’s interacts with the text:
“Eternal punishment, or endless punishment, does not mean that those who partake of it must endure it forever. ‘It is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment. Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory. . . . Behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—Eternal punishment is God’s punishment. Endless punishment is God’s punishment.’ [D&C 19:6–12.]
“The laws of God are immutable, and from this explanation we learn that the same punishment always follows the same offense, according to the laws of God who is eternal and endless, hence it is called, endless punishment, and eternal punishment, because it is the punishment which God has fixed according to unchangeable law. A man may partake of endless torment, and when he has paid the penalty for his transgression, he is released, but the punishment remains and awaits the next culprit, and so on forever” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:228).
Of all the LDS resources I have poured over (which is a lot; I only list a few), I have not found one example of a Mormon leader interpreting D&C 19 like you have, that it somehow is reinforcing the eternal duration of post-resurrection hell (outer darkness) instead of implicitly ascribing temporality to the pre-resurrection hell of spirit prison. I have even found examples of Mormons using D&C 19 to imply that outer darkness may not be truly everlasting (cf. Brigham Young’s belief that the spirits of men were recycled in outer darkness), but have found none that use the passage to reinforce the everlasting length of one’s time in outer darkness. Again, the majority of sources I have found use it to argue instead for the temporality of the pre-resurrection spirit prison hell.
All that said, I still think you need to explain the part in 19:6 which states, “it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment”. What was the point, the meaning, in writing that?
I sympathize with your desire to take the terms “everlasting” and “eternal” and “endless” at face-value, but that is not what Mormonism has traditionally done in this case. In interacting with Mormons who take the traditional position (that “eternal punishment” refers to a temporary punishment meted out by an eternal God), I wrote elsewhere recently:
It’s hard for me to take a religion seriously when they move the modifying direction of adjectives around like a magician with a ball and three stackable cups. “Eternal life” describes, directly, life. “Eternal punishment” describes, directly, punishment. Mormons (and anyone else) should tremble when garbling God’s grammar.
Take care,
Aaron
Addendum 2
GB asks, “Could you provide Biblical support for the assumption that Gehenna is a post-resurrection hell? And also that it is ‘the only main’one ‘described as eternal/everlasting and “forever and ever”.
Thanks for asking the fair question.
When the Bible uses the terms Hades or Tartaros, it never describes them with phrases translated as “eternal”, “everlasting”, “endless”, or “day and night forever and ever”, etc. Revelation 20:13-15 teaches that, after the resurrection, those negatively judged out of Hades are thrown along with Hades and Death into the lake of fire, which was described earlier in verse 10 as where people are tormented “day and night forever and ever”. Fire and burning sulfur are the content of the metaphor of Gehenna used (derived from the Valley of Hinnom; read more on the background of that here).
Also, intertestamental Jews considered Gehenna (not Sheol or Hades) as the place of final punishment for the wicked. The first century, Palestinian (somewhat Hellenized) Jewish context of the New Testament is the backdrop and context for the language and cultural categories Jesus appeals to to teach theology.
All that said, I think one is textually and historically driven to make a clear distinction between Hades and Gehenna. The only way one could begin to correlate Mormonism with this distinction is to parallel Hades/Tartaros with spirit prison and Gehenna with outer darkness. I know of no other viable alternatives. Please suggest one. Mormons need one, because correlating Gehenna with outer darkness poses all sorts of theological problems for Mormonism.
Please tell me if I’m not making sense.
Take care,
Aaron
Podcast: Play in new window | Download ()
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | RSS
Pingback: OD Today: 26 January 2009 (early edition) « Online Discernment Today
Aaron – you cut and spliced up the feed to distort my words!!!!
Oh sorry, no you didn’t.
Just to let the LDS know, the feed was cut a couple of times due to technical problems. Skype even failed us once during the discussion. So when Aaron mentioned that his recording software was acting up and he had to stitch a couple of files together, he is telling the truth.
Thanks Ralph.
Aaron,
You said “and if the only main New Testament terms that correlate with a post-resurrection hell are Gehenna and lake of fire”
Could you provide Biblical support for the assumption that Gehenna is a post-resurrection hell? And also that it is ‘the only main’one ‘described as eternal/everlasting and “forever and ever” ‘.
Chapter and verse please!
Their is no topic that this fits in, But I thought I would share this anyway.
A mormon of over 20 years left the Church, You can read his story on the Reach out Trust board, Not only does he give his story about how and why he left, but he also shows what he believes are major problems that at one time he believed to be true. His user name is, Duratexas. Rick b
Would it be fair to say that the lower two kingdoms of Mormonism are neither heaven nor hell? That seems to be what those two places are.
I think the banquet analogy (I have heard this one before) inadequately describes hell(s). Hell is far worse than not eating for three days. Also, I wish the idea of spiritual regeneration was explored in your talk. The Bible describes those who are heaven bound, and those who are hell bound, in binary terms. There are sheep and goats, wheat and tares.
God does not dole out eternal “punishment” to his children. He corrects those he loves. Like an earthly father, this “correction” is temporary (hence why many heaven/hell analogies fall short), but hell is not for correction; it is for torture. Heaven and hell are very personal things for God. People do not just end up in hell, they are cast there. No one falls through the cracks in terms of eternal destination; no one gets caught up in red tape. I think the idea that God has the capacity to hate, and that not all people are God’s children, are starting points that separate Christians from Mormons. Mormonism has a very man-centered theology hence it should be no surprise that heaven and hell are man-centered places. Heaven is not a place for man/god to keep progressing, it is merely God’s “living room” to put it crudely. It is a joy just to be there.
I think the lack of spiritual regeneration of those in the Telestial and Terrestrial kingdom presents philosophical problems for Mormons. Imagine a very nice place, almost heavenly, inhabited by the same kind of beings that brought you Treblinka, Auschwitz, and Dachau. Furthermore, in the case of the Telestial kingdom, neither God the Father nor God the Son will be there. Talk about scary. Heaven would quickly turn into hell if human history is any indicator of how we act apart from the fear, presence, and hand of God. The Telestial kingdom assumes man is good which history has shown he is not. I do not know if Mormons have postulated on what can and cannot happen in the Telestial kingdom, but if the last 5,000 years are an indicator, man would find ways to hurt his fellow man. Seriously, the best of us (who are not the ones who would make it to the Telestial) would find some way to mess up any place if God was not there to stop us. Isn’t it telling that the first sin recorded after the fall of man is murder?
I thank God that God is God enough to intervene and violate my will, your will, and that of the Devil. Human free agency, both individual and collective, has oftentimes run into the brick wall of God’s mercy. There are times he keeps us from sinning, keeps others from sinning against us, and keeps the entire race from annihilating itself.
Given that we are dealing with the institution that thinks the fall brought man “up”, I am not surprised that it has come up with a godless heaven.
David,
You said – “I think the banquet analogy (I have heard this one before) inadequately describes hell(s). Hell is far worse than not eating for three days.”
How do you know hell isn’t that bad? Have you tried not eating for 3 days? You get as hungry as hell doing it!
I know the banquet analogy is flawed but it still shows the purpose of what I was trying to say. Those sitting at the 3 tables (especially those at the last with no food) are not going to be satisfied with what they have even though for the 2 middle tables it was better than what they had outside the banquet. If you listened to the beginning of my description of this I said that I know its flawed but its the best I could come up with at the time. Maybe someone else has a better analogy than that one.
One thing to know about me – I failed the easiest level of English in my last year of high school so my English skills are not that good.
Aaron,
I still think you misunderstand Section 19 – JS is not redefining ‘everlasting punishment’ he is just explaining how and why it is everlasting.
I’ll try a different tack instead of grounding you children – lets look at political prisoners and exiles. They have been sentenced to either life in prison or life exile as punishment by the existing government. Now if that government remains in power for the life of that person, then that person will die in prison or exiled. The punishment was able to be policed and enforced because the government was in power all that time.
There have been numerous occasions around the world where a coup has overthrown a government that has imprisoned or exiled people for life. What has happened to these peole if the new government is friendly to their cause? They are freed or allowed back into their country.
Now lets look at God – He is eternal/everlasting/etc. Because the punishment is given by Him, if He says it will be forever how long do you think it will be? Why will it be that long? Could a coup remove Him from power so that the punishment can be removed? Can He die or something else happen so He cannot police and enforce the punishment for the full duration? The punishment given by God will be everlasting because nothing can remove God from power, and He is able to police and enforce the punishment forever. That is how I understand this section. But then again – I failed high school English!
Ralph,
I understand all analogies fail at some point. What the banquet analogy gets wrong is how personal hell is. In your analogy, nature takes its coarse so to speak. In the traditional Christian view hell is a place of positive punishment. One is not in some lack, like going hungry, or pinning away for what could have been. Hell is so bad demons beg for mercy at the thought of it.
Also, I think Aaron (and myself) get your point it just seems that it proves our view of hell and not your yours. The words the Bible uses to talk about eternal punishment or damnation seem to apply to the punishment and not to God, but . . . even if we were to see eternal as an adjective for God and not the punishment the fact that hell (whatever the kind) is eternal because God is eternal – that seems to support or view more (or perhaps it is ambiguous). I think Aaron was responding to what he has heard other Mormons say (that eternal describes God not the punishment) and this seems to be a softening of hell.
If the 2 lower kingdoms are still levels of glory, and are better than earth, then it seems wrong to refer to them as hell as that would make this life more “hellish” than either of those 2 levels of hell.
Ralph, please see the end of the post. I have added an addendum addressing your strange interpretation of D&C 19.
GB, thanks for asking the fair question. Please see addendum #2 to the original post for my answer.
Now I am beginning to see where you are coming from. When you first asked the question the other day I knew very little about D&C 19 so I was just answering off the cuff. It looks like I will have to do a little more reading of both the chapter and other literature about it (eg Institue manual and Sunday School manual). This may take a while as I have 3 research grants to write, one poster to make and a review of my work thus far for my funding body – all due within 2 weeks.
Fair enough. No rush. The conversation can be ongoing.
Aaron,
Tartarus and Hades are pre-existing terms from Greek and Roman mythology. Do you have any insight as to why they chose these words? Was it the closest to the concept they were trying to teach, or was it to reframe these terms with associated understandings into another context?
Sheol and gehenna appear to be of jewish origin. Sheol being the abode of the dead. Gehenna is a place where people performed sacrifices? Its my understanding that this was figurative.
It appears that other LDS scripture directly use the term ‘eternal damnation’. Hel. 12: 26 (25-26). Its possible that this and related terms were popular terms used during the time the BOM and D&C were written and that is how these made there appearance, do to ‘popular demand’.
I think it was God’s inspired way of helping people understand big theological categories by using existing cultural categories. The important interpretative and theological task is observing where scripture affirms similarities with existing cultural categories and observing where scripture is unique and distinct from existing cultural assumptions.
Since the Helaman 12 passage is talking about the “great and last day” in verse 25 I assume it’s talking about post-resurrection “everlasting damnation”, which would be outer darkness in Mormonism. Verse 26 seems to be referencing (“fulfilling the words which say…”) John 5:29 or Matthew 25:46, which seems again to point to post-final-judgment damnation, which in Mormonism can only be outer darkness. BYU professor H. Donl Peterson writes in “I Have a Question,” Ensign, Apr 1986, 36–41:
Grace and peace,
Aaron
Aaron,
Thanks for your response, BUT you didn’t answer my question, ie you didn’t provide any scripture to support your assumption that gehenna is “eternal”, “everlasting”, “endless”, or “day and night forever and ever”. And the reference you provided didn’t either.
As far as I can tell, the way you get to this assumption is to ASSUME a connection between gehenna and the “lake of fire” mentioned in Rev. You have yet to provide support for that connection.
When the Bible uses the terms hades, gehenna, and tartaroo, it NEVER describes them with phrases translated as “eternal”, “everlasting”, “endless”, or “day and night forever and ever”, etc.
Gehenna is used in 12 places in the New Testament. All 12 are translated as “hell”. Of the 12, 11 are the Greek for the Aramaic word that Christ would have used. NONE of the 12 uses indicate “eternal”, “everlasting”, “endless”, or “day and night forever and ever”, etc.
Hades is used in 11 places. 10 are translated as “hell” and 1 as “grave”. Most of these references indicate something more than just a place of the dead, but a place of the wicked dead. NONE of the 11 uses indicate “eternal”, “everlasting”, “endless”, or “day and night forever and ever”, etc.
Tartaroo is used in one place; it is also translated as “hell”. 2 Pet. 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
This usage does NOT indicate “eternal”, “everlasting”, “endless”, or “day and night forever and ever”, etc.
In LDS theology “the angels that sinned” are the 1/3 of the host of heaven that followed Satan and were cast out of heaven. They will be included with those that are cast into the lake of fire as described in Rev 20:15.
So far you have failed to support your premise with scripture. A faulty premise leads to a faulty conclusion.
Cheers!
Have been quiet for a while. Thought I would chime in on this interesting topioc.
Hell has more than one meaning.
1. It is possible for a person to experience hell in this life as a result of evil choices. A person can feel spiritual and mental torment that is worse than physical pain.
2. Hell can refer to the spirit prison to which disobedient individuals go after death and before the resurrection. Alma described this place as one of “darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them.” Again, it is the mental and spiritual tormet that “ascendeth up like a flame of fire.” This place is what sheol refers to, the prison referred to in the New Testament.
3. Hell can also refer to eternal damnation after the resurrection and judgement. This damnation is what occurs to individuals in the terrestial and telestial kingdoms. The word damnation suggests to stop something from moving forward or progressing (think river and resevoir). It is realizing that a person has given up or forfeited enormous, grand, and beautiful possibilities and will instead exist on the same plane for eternity. That is a long time my friends. It is the mental and spiritual torment resulting from a soul knowing he could have lived in the presence of God and progressed for eternity, achieving their greatest potential that will be cause their own hell.
4. The last form of hell is “outer darkness.” This is a place that our minds cannot comprehend too well at this point (hopefully never will). It is the eternal home of the devil and those who openly follow him. These are those who deny the holy ghost- those who “know” the power of God and of His character, and who fully give themselves to opposing him. I think there are not many people from this earth who will go there, at least not as many as the kingdoms of glory mentioned above.
Gotta run- more later.
fof
Thanks for chiming in. I really appreciate your write-up, as it is somewhat vindicating to me. I have long had Mormons object to my classifying the Telestial and Terrestial heavenly kingdoms as a kind of hell.
Aaron,
It is relative!
Compared to this life, both the Telestial and Terrestrial kingdoms are HEAVEN. Since the conditions there are far far better than this life.
Compared to the Celestial Kingdom, both the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms are a hell.
So it depends on your perspective.
Yet, there are things about the hellishness of Mormonism’s heavenly kingdoms which are worse than life here. According to Mormonism, as long as you haven’t committed the unpardonable sin and if you’re still living on this earth, you still have a chance of repenting and progressing unto Celestial exaltation. etc. No one like that has to suffer the torment of permanent regret here on earth. But in the hellishness of the Telestial and Terrestial kingdoms they do. Also, on this earth, people can enjoy the godly company of family, of those who are truly faithful. But in the hellishness of the Telestial and Terrestial kingdoms, Mormonism says one is banished from family who were truly faithful.
GB,
I made a minor correction in the original post over Tartaros. When the term Tartaros is used (only once in the NT), it describes a holding place for angels awaiting judgment. It correlates with Gehenna inasmuch as it is a place of punishment, but beyond that I don’t understand well it’s other correlations and discontinuities. Gehenna, however, is the definite post-final-judgment category of punishment.
You should listen to your own apologists. Barry R. Bickmore agrees that Hades is a holding place until the resurrection. Marc A. Schindler writes, “So we have two pairs of Greek/Hebrew words used in the New Testament: Sheol/Hades for the afterworld in general, and Gehenna/Tartarus for the place of eternal punishment.” He agrees with my basic distinction between Hades and Gehenna.
I did provide support that Gehenna is the category for post-resurrection, post-final-judgment (and hence eternal) punishment. I have to wonder what kind of approach to scripture your taking. I am attempting to take a holistic historical-grammatical approach. You said, “You have yet to provide support for that connection [between Gehenna and the lake of fire].” Perhaps you skimmed my response. I pointed out 1) the historical contextual usage of the term Gehenna by the Jews, 2) the correlation of post-final-judgment, and 3) the correlation of the content of the metaphor (fire, burning, sulfur, etc).
Did you read the William Crockett quote on the link provided?
If you disagree with both me and other Mormon apologists on the correlation between Gehenna and post-final-judgment hell, it begs the question of what you think Gehenna correlates with. Do you think it is equivalent to the pre-resurrection, pre-final-judgment Hades? If so, why? Do you think it is another hell that is categorically distinct from Hades or the lake of fire?
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees, too. The larger point is that the Bible affirms a pre-resurrection, pre-final-judgment hell, and a different post-resurrection, post-final-judgment hell. The former is never described, directly or indirectly, as everlasting. The latter is. Revelation 20 even says the former is thrown into the latter. Any way you look at it, there is a breaking point, a transition event that happens when people are finally judged. This makes D&C 19 problematic, because it seeks to fix something that didn’t need fixing—that is unless, of course, you want to make the case that Smith is arguing for the temporality of outer darkness.
Grace and peace,
Aaron
Aaron,
Again you are making assumptions about things that you do not know. There is nothing to preclude those of higher kingdoms from “visiting” family or friends in lower kingdoms.
The “hell” of your theology also prevents those sent there from “enjoy(ing) the godly company of family, of those who are truly faithful.”
So you are just using inflammatory language to try to show a distinction that isn’t there.
Even if those in the hellish heavenly kingdoms had family visitation rights (sounds like prison to me!), it still affirms my point. In some important ways the hellish heavenly kingdoms of Mormonism are worse than life here on earth. I don’t merely have visitation rights with my godly wife here on earth, I have more constant fellowship with her.
Right. That’s the point. Our hell is purely hellish, and our heaven is purely heavenly. We don’t make heaven hellish, or hell heavenly.
All of this (the Mormon concept of the afterlife) assumes a person wants to do right, and wants to be with Heavenly Father, but does not “get it” in this life. It assumes no one hates God.
The lower kingdoms would be heaven for someone who hates God. The Celestial Kingdom would be hell, or at least not heaven, if God was there and someone was a god-hater. I alluded in one of my other posts that in the LDS concept of the afterlife, spiritual regeneration is absent. The person in the Celestial Kingdom and the person in the Telestial Kingdom are the same “kind” of person only the location is different. Yes, the person in the higher level of heaven made better choices but this seems in contrast to the stark terms the Bible present: ox-donkey, light-darkness, sheep-goats, wheat-weeds.
Makes sense to me now, and it’s a good point that Mormons need to address.
[Here’s another reminder for those who missed this last week. Note to all commenters: Please remember our comment policy regarding long comments. While the Mormon Coffee comment length is currently managed by the honor system, comments should still stay somewhere in the neighborhood of not exceeding the previously enforced 2,000 character length. Your mods have been very lenient on this across the board, but this comment is well over 6,000 characters, and others have also pushed the limit. Please be mindful of this and break up your thoughts into multiple comments in the future. Thanks.]
People who will attain the telestial kingdom in the afterlife include those “who received not the gospel of Christ, nor the testimony of Jesus” (Doctrine and Covenants 76:82) as well as “liars, and sorcerors, and adulterers, and whoremongers, and whosoever loves and makes a lie”
Notice, According to the Bible, these people will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God or Heaven.
1Cr 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1Cr 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
1Cr 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Even the BoM never mentions these 3 different heavens or who will enter them.
Sadly the LDS build an entire doctrine around a verse or two from the BIble yet simply cannot support the view they believe from the Bible.
Do a word search on HEAVEN or HEAVEN(S) Not once in the Bible or BoM will you find a break down of these three heavens and who will go to each one. The LDS use the verses in the BIble, I Cor. 15:39-41 and teach the three degrees of glory or three heavens. But these verses do not give a definition of who goes where, only talks about three heavens. And the LDS take them out of context to build there doctrine.
1Cr 15:39 All flesh [is] not the same flesh: but [there is] one [kind of] flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, [and] another of birds.
1Cr 15:40 [There are] also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial [is] one, and the [glory] of the terrestrial [is] another.
1Cr 15:41 [There is] one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for [one] star differeth from [another] star in glory.
However, the context in I Cor. 15:35-54 is not about heavens, but about the difference between our earthly mortal body and our new immortal body given us at the resurrection. Celestial and terrestrial bodies are mentioned in v. 40, but any dictionary will show that celestial means “heavenly” and terrestrial means “earthly.”
Dictionary.com Defines Celestial as
ce·les·tial (s-lschl) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of “celestial” [P]
adj.
1. Of or relating to the sky or the heavens: Planets are celestial bodies.
2. Of or relating to heaven; divine: celestial beings.
3. Supremely good; sublime: celestial happiness.
4. Celestial Of or relating to the Chinese people or to the former Chinese Empire.
And Terrestrial as
ter·res·tri·al (t-rstr-l) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of “Terrestrial” [P]
adj.
1. Of or relating to the earth or its inhabitants.
2. Having a worldly, mundane character or quality.
3. Of, relating to, or composed of land.
4. Biology. Living or growing on land; not aquatic: a terrestrial plant or animal.
The word “telestial” is not found in I Cor. 15 because it was concived in the mind of Joseph Smith and can only be found in Mormon teachings. The glory of the sun, moon, and stars in v. 41 is used by LDS to support their beliefe of three heavens, but the context refers to “bodies,” not heavens.
Lets make things even more confusing by adding what Bruce M taught.
Apostle Bruce McConkie says, “Even those in the Celestial Kingdom, however, who do not go on to exaltation, will have immortality only and not eternal life… Salvation in its true and full meaning is synonymous with exaltation or eternal life and consists in gaining an inheritance in the highest of the three heavens within the Celestial Kingdom…. This full salvation is obtained in and through the continuation of the family unit in eternity and those who obtain it are gods” (M.D., p. 670). Latter-day apostles, prophets and scripture certainly have not helped the LDS to clarify their doctrines! The B. of M., which is the “Fulness of the gospel” (D. & C. 20:9), does not even mention the three degrees of glory, heavens or kingdoms!
And Bruce’s view does not line up and cannot be supported by the Bible.
We also read, LDS believe all will have immortality or resurrection, but only LDS can have eternal life and enter the Celestial Kingdom (G.T.A., p. 166). The very best Mormons will gain “eternal lives” or inherit the highest possible position in that celestial kingdom.
LDS believe that there are three degrees or levels within the Celestial Kingdom. While LDS “baptism is the gate to the Celestial Kingdom, Celestial Marriage is the gate to an exaltation in the highest heaven within the Celestial World” (M.D. p. 118).
Let me end with some things the BoM or the Bible does not teach, but LDS Teach or believe we must do to enter the Higest heaven. This shows how hard it will be to be saved.
According to mormonism the Temple is of the utmost importance, But they seem to forget to tell you what you must do to be able to enter.
Prophet Spencer Kimball Achieving a Celestial Marriage manual pg 30 makes it very clear we must do certain things to enter the temple to be saved. he gives a list of 6 things called (TEMPLE RECOMMEND INTERVIEW). it says When you are interviewed for a temple recommend you will be asked about,
1. Church attendance
2. Payment of tithes and offerings
3. Loyalty to Church leaders.
4. Moral cleanliness.
5. overall faithfulness and worthiness.
6. Obedience to the Word of Wisdom.
In Gospel Principles pg 125: WE MUST KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD. To make our repentance complete we must keep the commandments of the Lord (see D and C 1:32). we are not fully repentant if we do not pay tithes or keep the sabbath day holy or obey the word of wisdom. we are not repentant if we don’t sustain the authorities of the church and don’t love the lord and our fellow man.
Add to that also pg 241 Eternal marriage is ESSENTIAL FOR EXALTATION. Our exaltation depends on marriage. then over on pg 242 it says “and in order to obtain the highest, a man MUST ENTER INTO THIS ORDER OF THE PRIESTHOOD [MEANING THE NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT OF MARRIAGE];” “and if he does not, he cannot obtain it” (D and C 131:1-3) Rick B
Aaron,
I have neither agreed or disagreed with anyone. I am specifically requesting that you provide Bible scripture to support your assumption. This you have NOT done.
You can quote all of the apologist (either LDS or other) you want but you still have FAILED to show a scriptural connection.
EVERYTHING you have provided so far is OUTSIDE of the BIBLE!!!
According to your theology, if it isn’t in the BIBLE it isn’t official, but opinion only! Correct?
Now some interesting quotes from the sources you referenced.
“The Telestial Kingdom is sometimes referred to by LDS as “hell” but only in the sense that neither Christ nor the Father will be there. Its inhabitants will have to be satisfied with the ministrations of angels sent from higher kingdoms. Needless to say, this is a point that goes right over McKeever and Johnson’s head; it’s not clear they even understand our position on it, let alone, of course, agree with it. The Telestial Kingdom is never confused with Perdition in LDS teachings-another point that goes over McKeever and Johnson’s head, it seems.”
GB, you’re becoming increasingly difficult to reason with. Perhaps you’d like to join me on Skype (I’m aaronshaf) so people can hear the way you conversationally present your case.
The correlations between Gehenna and the post-resurrection, post-final-judgment lake of fire are both internal to scripture and external to scripture. A historical-grammatical approach to scripture attempts to see the meaning of the text in light of both internal evidence and external, cultural, historical context. The notion that we can better understand scripture by ignoring historical context is not something I share. External context to the Bible is subordinate to the internal text of the Bible, but it plays a necessary and vital role in helping us understand the meaning.
“Only”? That makes it sound like their absence a kind of minor disadvantage to one’s afterlife experience. As an evangelical I’m going to be strict and stubborn about this: Any “heaven” without the dwelling personal presence of the Trinity is more appropriately called a hell, and calling such a place “heaven” is blasphemy.
McKeever is quite clear that, according to Mormonism, outer darkness is, although in some important ways similar to the Telestial kingdom, still distinct from it.
I asked you some direct questions:
Do you think Gehenna is equivalent to the pre-resurrection, pre-final-judgment Hades? If so, why?
Do you think Gehenna is another hell that is categorically distinct from Hades or the lake of fire?
Our comment policy has stated for some time, “Always respond first and forthrightly to direct questions personally asked of you by a moderator.” These questions I have asked you are directly relevant to this blog post, and not answering them is not constructive in interacting with my case or in presenting your own.
Take care,
Aaron
AARON: maybe it’s the winter months, my brain hurts from connecting all (or most of) the dots from this nuanced back and forth, and then you threw this out:
Right. That’s the point. Our hell is purely hellish, and our heaven is purely heavenly. We don’t make heaven hellish, or hell heavenly.
I think even a pig-dog like myself can his teeth (the doggie ones and the piggie ones) around that. thanks.
do I understand correctly that those in both the terestial and the telestial “heavens” are away from the presence of GOD HIMSELF ??
PS to GB: I’m hoping you SKYPE it up with Mr.A…..
David,
Good questions.
First- there is a difference in the resurrection between the faithful and unfaithful. There is a difference in glory and I suspect overall nature. This is what Paul was referring to in 1 Cor. 15- “one star differeth from another star in glory.” Althought they are the same species, they will be different in this way.
Your other comment is a good one! Yes, somebody who is disobedient throughout their lives will not feel comfortable being in the presence of God. This is out of shame and embarrassment, wanting to hide. But although they will feel more comfortable in a lesser kingdom, it doesn’t necessarily mean that is what they really want- follow? At the resurrection, the veil will be removed, and we will remember living with God before this life. We will remember everything, including all of the aspirations, hopes, and desires in that pre-earth life. The hell part of all this is remembering all of that and knowing that a person forfeited all of that in this short little span called earth life.
All of us are children of God and have the same core attibutes- “in His image.” Part of this is the inherent desire to have joy and happiness. So in a sense, we all want to live with God from an eternal perspective. It is just that we become blinded on this earth and choose other paths. At the resurrection, every person will recognize God for who He really is- all He has given to us and for us. “Every knee shall bow and confess Jesus is the Christ.” We will see very clearly the nature and value of our decisions. If we have betrayed God, we will recognize that for what it is. So I really don’t think people in lower kindgoms will “hate God”- they just will feel ashamed to be in His presence.
RickB- two points:
1. Look up the definition of “fullness of the gospel” in the Doctrine of Covenants.” This is what the Book of Mormon is full of. The claim you make is not new. The BOM does not claim to contain every doctrine. Check it out.
2. Our doctrine on the afterlife is not based on the verses in 1 Corinthians. Our doctrine is based almost entirely on the revelation received and the vision seen by Joseph Smith found in Doctrine and Covenants section 76. THAT is the basis for this doctrine. We are not trying to morph some new doctrine from Pauls brief statement. His statements corroborate the revelation of Joseph, but it is not the basis for the doctrine.
The kingdom of God or Kingdom of Heaven would be the Celestial Kingdom. The terrestial and telestial kingdoms would not be considered “the kingdom of God.”
Hope this helps.
More later.
fof
David said,
This is not true, Jesus even said, you are of your father the devil. We are all Gods creation, but not all of us our Gods Children. Then the Bible tells us, He grants us the ability to be Gods Children, if we believe on Him.
1John 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
FoF said that, not David.
Rick B,
“4. Celestial Of or relating to the Chinese people or to the former Chinese Empire.”
I thought that was funny, yes that is the goal of every LDS person to marry and move to china. I just had to point that out, even though it doesn’t move the discussion along.
Yes, I noticed that ‘telestial’ is a made up word. Some have suggested it means something like ‘end’, ‘purpose’, ‘goal’, from the word telos. But that is a very odd attempt to define the word, as the LDS people say they want to aim for the celestial kingdom.
I think that only LDS people teach that marriage is essential for salvation. (being fully saved, that is reaching exhaltation) That leaves a big unknown for people who die before reaching the legal age for marriage. Although its possible in LDS doctrine to receive teaching in the spirit world, I have never heard of ‘spirit dating’ or ‘spirit marriage’ that is the sealing of two dead people who are not known to be married to each other while on earth. Thats a real interesting point I had never considered. These ordinances are believed to be essential, so at some point it has to be performed. I don’t know what LDS people might teach about something like this.
Another interesting point is that drinking green tea, black tea or coffee can keep an LDS person from entering the temple. Along with smoking or alcohol. However caffeinated soft drinks are not prohibited. This part of the temple requirement isn’t really moral, but a more cultural aspect, yet its just as effective at barring someone from the temple as what might be viewed as bigger offenses. That doesn’t make much sense to me.
Aaron,
I found some interesting information. In classic roman mythology there is Heaven, earth, pontus, and tartarus below them all. There is some commentary by Plato about the punishment of souls in tartarus, in the Gorgias(400 bc). Tartarus is a diety and a place. Hades is also a deity and a place. Hel is a nordic goddess, and a place. I was curious to understand the word ‘pontus’. And it means ‘sea’ or ‘sea-god’ one of the ‘first born’ it sounds like its also a deity and a place. I was also curious to understand Revelations 20:13-15. I had not a clue as to what ‘sea’ they were talking about.
“And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Thanatos is a personification of (non-violent)death. Kind of a spirit of death. This seems like a lot of borrowing of concepts from gentile belief. It almost sounds like the spirit of death and Hel were cast into the lake of fire. Its connection to the dead coming out of the sea is curiously close to pontus. Is there a common understanding of people going to ‘the sea’ (pontus)after death in christian belief? I have never heard of it until now.
I would agree with you that the term ‘eternal damnation’ is a bit of a problem for LDS theology, unless its a degree of damnation. I don’t know if damnation is described in degrees in the bible anywhere.
I
Interesting stuff. I’m still learning about it all. Obviously the NT borrows cultural categories for theology without adopting the polytheism associated with it.
Jesus did teach degrees of punishment. See Mark 12:40, Matthew 11:24, and this.
Aaron and Germit,
Although the idea of two uniform places- one a burning lake of fire and lava, the other a beautiful place where people eat grapes and are fanned with palm trees or some variation thereof is easy to grasp, it doesn’t seem all that equitable to me (not that God has to comply with what I think is equitable).
Here is why.
Consider somebody sent to your hell- burning, fire, utter agony for eternity. Eternity is a very long time. At some point, a person in hell would have paid the punishment for whatever they did on this earth that was bad (or what they didn’t do). This life is a very short blip on the scheme of eternity. I am not a mathematician, but at some point in eternity this will be paid in full. How is it fair for that person to continue to burn with no end ever in sight? It is not.
Also, does it seem fair for all of humanity to receive one of two rewards- either eternal burning or eternal bliss (I would love to know your view on what heaven is and what it would be like). Is it fair for the least righteous person in heaven- the biggest slacker- to receive the same reward as the greatest human in heaven (think Abraham, John the Baptist, etc.)?
How about the best person in hell who did the least amount of bad out of the whole lot- is it fair for them to receive the same punishment as Hitler, etc.?
Hopefully you get my drift. These things beg the question of justice. Do you not think God is more equitable than this and will give to each person a just reward based on what they have done with their lives? It just seems that there are more gears than drive and reverse in humanity.
Even our telestial system of justice, when it works, hands out punishments that attempt to be commensurate with the crime.
Again- much humor is made about what LDS believe about heaven, but I rarely hear anything from the other team about what it is and what people who go there will spend eternity doing (again, a long time). Any thoughts.
fof
Aaron, you’re becoming increasingly difficult to reason with. Perhaps you’d like to show me some Biblical scripture to support your assumption. That is ALL I have asked you to do. Nothing more.
You say “The correlations between Gehenna and the post-resurrection, post-final-judgment lake of fire are both INTERNAL TO SCRIPTURE . . . (EMPHASIS MINE).
AGAIN !!! PLEASE FEEL FREE TO PROVIDE THE SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR YOUR STATEMENT.
Is that to much to ask?
You say “Any “heaven” without the dwelling personal presence of the Trinity is more appropriately called a hell, and calling such a place “heaven” is blasphemy.”
Apparently you are unaware that those in the Telestial Kingdom “are they who receive not of his (Christ’s) fulness in the eternal world, but of the Holy Spirit through the ministration of the terrestrial;”
So then, those in the Telestial Kingdom apparently receive the fulness of the Holy Spirit. So according to your definition we don’t need to call it hell, since to you the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all the same.
You said “These questions I have asked you are directly relevant to this blog post, and not answering them is not constructive in interacting with my case or in presenting your own.”
My request for you to provide Biblical scripture to support your assumption is directly related to this blog post. Not providing them is not constructive in interacting with my case or in presenting your own.
Or you could admit that you don’t have any. That would be acceptable.
With regard to D&C 19, it says in verse 6 “Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment.”
A quick search of the Bible reveals that the phrase “endless torment” is NOT found anywhere. A search of the Book of Mormon reveals that the phrase is found 7 times. A search of the D&C reveals that it is found ONLY in 19:6. It is not found in the PofGP.
So clearly the Lord Jesus is referring to its usage in the Book of Mormon.
Now in D&C 19 it says in verse 7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.
A quick search of the Bible reveals that the phrase “eternal damnation” is ONLY found in Mark 3:29. A search of the Book of Mormon reveals that the phrase is NOT found. A search of the D&C reveals that it is found in 19:6 and one other place (which was written after D&C 19). It is not found in the PofGP.
So clearly the Lord, Jesus Christ is referring to its usage in Mark 3:29 (also see Matt. 12: 31; Luke 12: 10).
NOWHERE in D&C 19 does the Lord refer to “gehenna”, “hades” or “tartaros”, nor does He refer to “hell”, the English word into which they are translated.
So what we have here is a classic “strawman” argument. One of the many logical fallacies used by hyper-critics of the Church. 🙂
Cheers!!
And as Paul says “Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.”
FoF, thanks for the comment.
I reject the premise, since sin against God is sin against an infinitely holy being and is therefore all the more serious. Also, there is the secondary issue of the possibility that those in hell may continue sinning (cursing God for their punishment, etc.). But that’s just my feeble attempt at speculation.
You describe the hell we teach of as “utter agony for eternity”, but that is exactly how Revelation 20:10 describes it: “they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” Matthew 25:46 teaches of the post-final-judgment destinations, “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life”.
At the end of the day, I don’t think evangelicals are ever going to satisfy the emotional and philosophical objections to what the Bible calls “eternal punishment” and “tormented day and night forever and ever”. Exegesis comes first, then comes philosophy. If you respect the mysteries of God and leave difficult things in his good hands, but still have philosophical objections to eternal punishment, you need to lay them aside until you settle the exegetical issues first. Remember the Bereans: “Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.” (Acts 17:11)
This hits on a common stereotype that Mormonism has fed its members: that traditional Christianity doesn’t account for degrees of punishment and degrees of reward. This has been a standard belief of many traditional Christians for two thousand years. Many of the things Mormonism implicitly heralds as unique are not. The problem is that Mormonism takes varying degrees of reward and punishment and unbiblically splits up God’s one redemptive kingdom into three; it has also made heaven hellish and hell heavenly.
My general summary of heaven is this: It wll involve an everlasting process of ever-increasing knowledge and joy and power in God, in the context of the enjoyment of creation and fellowship with human community and relationships. I have written an article about this, Christianity Has a Far Greater View of Eternal Progression than Mormonism Does.
Grace and peace,
Aaron
It looks like some folks have discovered the comment-rating feature. It’s not fancy, as it doesn’t affect the order of the comments, but it might help in some way. No matter what religion you’re of, please favorably rate comments that add constructive substance to the conversation, and unfavorably rate comments that don’t. Thanks,
Aaron
How do you work the rating system? Rick b
Aaron,
Your comment had no “reply” button, so I hope you find this.
I read your article “Christianity Has a Far Greater View of Eternal Progression than Mormonism Does.” It highlighted a disagreement between Brigham Young and Orsan Pratt, but added little to the question, what will people in heaven be doing after this life. I didn’t learn anything about YOUR view of heaven.
“Ever-increasing knowledge and joy and power in God, in the context of the enjoyment of creation and fellowship with human community and relationships” isn’t very specific. I know that ultimately, we don’t know everything about what is next, but at least the LDS doctrine is a little more specific as far as the basis of progression and the context of families in the presence of God.
I think you are overstating your position when you say your view of progression is “far greater” than the LDS doctrine. How is it greater? And how is your view more “Biblical” the the LDS view, which you said is based on extra-biblical sources? Where does the Bible mention our “enjoyment of creation” after this life? I am not being nit-picky- I am totally serious.
Regarding accepting Bible statements about hell in preference over philosophical views of the hell concept: modern revelation adds light to and clarifies ancient revelation. Of course you will disagree. But my view of hell is consistent with Biblical statements AND makes sense philosophically. It seems perfectly just and sensible. I see a perfect context for interpreting verses the way I do despite the fact that you interpret them differently. From my perspective, it just seems that the LDS doctrines make more sense and are far more fair AND are consistent with ancient and modern revelation.
You said, “The problem is that Mormonism takes varying degrees of reward and punishment and unbiblically splits up God’s one redemptive kingdom into three; it has also made heaven hellish and hell heavenly.”
Could it be that we simply have received additional revelation describing additional details about our existence after this life? If your religion believes in different “degrees of punishment and degrees of reward,” how are they based and administered? Could modern revelation simply broaden the scope of our view of what God’s plan is?
Don’t get me wrong- I am not saying we believe the same things, but you are claiming that your form of Christianity believes in eternal progression and differing degrees of reward- big similarities The big differences I see are that we believe in eternal families and that man is literally the offspring of God- these are significant differences.
On that note- another philosophical question- why couldn’t or wouldn’t God want us to remain in our families after this life? Consider that life’s greatest experiences, love, and joys are based in the family relationship. Is all that merely a stepping block to some greater existence? It seems to be a universal longing and desire for a person to retain and build relationships with God and the family.
Would families get in the way of eternal progression? Does God not love us enough or is He not powerful or intelligent enough to make that happen?
Again, I know God does not have to comform to my view, but these are honest questions I have.
Any thoughts from anybody?
Thanks,
fof
You’re being a selective listener, and/or you’re simply not happy with my answer. I only want to be as general or specific as God’s testimony (scripture) is (either explicitly or by implication).
Because it 1) values and takes seriously the infinite, unreachable depth of God’s power and knowledge and 2) affirms the everlasting, ever-increasing growth of the saints’ enjoyment and knowledge of God.
The Bible speaks of a new heavens and new earth (2 Peter 3:13). That is enough evidence for me. My assumption—and you are free to attack this assumption as specious—is that the new heavens and new earth are part of God’s goodness and blessings, intended for my enjoyment, not my misery or boredom.
Only after gutting plain grammar and vocubulary and making a phrase mean the exact opposite of its natural meaning. Heck, Geoff (Mormon) over at NewCoolThang.com concludes the obvious: D&C 19 is the Mormon God’s way of speaking of false doctrine that was once divinely endorsed, “that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men”, etc. I have to admit, when I first read 19:7, that’s the impression I got too—that it was saying God before had good reasons to give the impression punishment was actually eternal, because it would positively motivate people, even though not in accordance with truth.
I don’t know why God wants to transform the entire dynamic of human relationships in his one heavenly kingdom. I trust he has good reasons in mind, pariticularly reasons that bring honor and glory to Christ and happiness to his people. As Jesus says, “For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” (Matthew 12:50)
FoF, you still have yet to show how the Bible’s wide view of what sends a person to post-final-judgment explicit hell (which in Mormonism is only outer darkness) correlates with Mormonism’s quasi-universalism. You have yet to show how D&C 19, in conjunction with the mainstream view that outer darkness is of actual eternal duration, isn’t a colossal display of Smith’s ignorance or unbelief over the NT view of the afterlife. Never once does the Bible describe pre-final-judgment, pre-resurrection hell as eternal or endless or everlasting. Yet the New Testament is clear that the post-resurrection, post-final-judgment hell is everlasting, eternal, “day and night forever and ever”. Hence Smith tried to fix something that didn’t need fixing.
Take care,
Aaron
Enki said
While it is true it does not move the talk along, I only took the entire defenation from the Dictionary, I do not want any LDS to ever say, you misquoted something. I put it all out their. My luck, while it adds nothing, some LDS would look it up in the dictionary and say, Rick forgot this part. Rick b
Click the stars below another’s comment 🙂
Concerning the meaning of D&C 19 you have already answered your own question. At least it appears that way to me. If I am understanding correctly you are asking why Joseph Smith would try and make post-ressurection hell not eternal. Correct me if I am wrong.
From what I read he is saying that the punishment is eternal, that there will always be torment and pain required to pay for certain sins. In this way it is eternal. However, even if a fire never died aperson could still walk through it and eventually come out the other side, thus it is not necessarily endless torment. You showed this yourself in your quote from Joseph F. Smith. (given here)
“Eternal punishment, or endless punishment, does not mean that those who partake of it must endure it forever. ‘It is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment. Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory. . . . Behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—Eternal punishment is God’s punishment. Endless punishment is God’s punishment.’ [D&C 19:6–12.]
While I cannot tell you where to find it right now, though I will look, it is taught that while Sons of Perdition, those who have committed the unpardonable sin, will spend eternity in Outer Darkness, there are others who will spend a limited amount of time there. These are murderers. The grossest of all sins except that which is truly unpardonable. A murderer will spend time in outer darkness, until he has paid for the sins he committed in this life. At that time he will be admitted into the lowest of the Heavenly kingdoms. It may be that others must suffer for a time in this manner, but I am not sure. I did read the words of Brigham Young where he said that those who do not have their sins paid for in this life will suffer the punishment of them in the life to come. The atonement can pay this price for us, but as it says in D&C 19: 16-18, if we do not repent we must suffer even as Christ did, which caused him to bleed at every pore. All these teach the same thing. Those who did not pay for their sins here must pay for them later, but we know that it is only those who have blasphemed the Holy Spirit that will be in this torment for all eternity, as there can be no forgiveness in any degree for their sin.
Even with all this, Hell remains eternal. It exists, and will always exist, and all those who are there will be tormented while there.
However, aside from this moving from outer darkness to the Telestial glory, one cannot progress higher (I saw an allusion to this idea). Even those They will have paid for their sins, they will not have done what is necessary to be admitted into those higher glories, and will not have an opportunity to do so in the next life.
I will also say that, while you speak of the Terrestial and Telestial as being hellish, it would cause greater torment to those there if they were admitted into the higher glory. It is not the punishment of God that keeps them in the lower kingdoms, but his mercy. He will give them all that he can without inflicting more pain. No unclean thing can dwell with God. Just as darkness cannot exist where there is light. A person of sin is a person of darkness. God is pure light. He will allow each of us to come as close to that light as we can before it begins to burn our souls, then, out of mercy, he will stop us. So, while they are refered to as a form of Hell, it is better for some people to be there than to be with God.
Also, as I understand it, God the Father dwells in the Celestial Kingdom, and only those who dwell there will see him. Christ, though he dwells in the Celestial kingdom, will, on occassion, visit the Terrestial, but the Telestial will never see him. The holy Spirit will visit the Telestial. So all people, except those in outer darkness, will be able to communicate with at least one member of the Godhead.
Aaron,
Thank you for the thoughtful input. The comments about degrees of punishment is interesting. Degrees of punishment, yet still one hell. Not quite the same thing as degrees of glory.
There was an interesting program on the radio about Preacher Carlton Pearson who came to the conclusion that eternal punishment wasn’t real. This eventually lead to people leaving his church and him receiving the brand of a heretic. Apparently people just aren’t interested in church attendence unless there is eternal punishment to avoid. He calls it the gospel of inclusion, it sounds like its Universalism. Gary A. Hand reviews some of the problems with his ideas. Its interesting.
Rick B,
No problem. I think it is better to include all possibilites for review.
I spend nearly ALL of my Bible study time with the English (KJV). The fact that three different Greek words were all translated “hell” is new to me. I have not yet had sufficient time to study the issue; therefore I don’t have an informed opinion on the matter.
So I will refrain from answering the questions you asked (“Do you think Gehenna is equivalent to the pre-resurrection, pre-final-judgment Hades? If so, why?”
And,
“Do you think Gehenna is another hell that is categorically distinct from Hades or the lake of fire?”)
Besides, my opinion on this matter is irrelevant to the exchange at hand, and you asking for it is a red herring.
Aaron, you’re becoming increasingly difficult to reason with. Perhaps you’d like to show me some Biblical scripture to support your assumption. That is ALL I have asked you to do. Nothing more.
You say “The correlations between Gehenna and the post-resurrection, post-final-judgment lake of fire are both INTERNAL TO SCRIPTURE . . . (EMPHASIS MINE).
AGAIN !!! PLEASE FEEL FREE TO PROVIDE THE SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR YOUR STATEMENT.
Is that too much to ask? I certainly would like to see these scriptures before I form an opinion.
Your (unsupported premise) makes me wonder, how could something CREATED by God (the punishment you describe) from nothing be “eternal”? Doesn’t the fact that God CREATED it from nothing make it impossible for it to be eternal? You addressing this issue would certainly help me understand and form an opinion. Thanks in advance for doing so.
You say “Any “heaven” without the dwelling personal presence of the Trinity is more appropriately called a hell, and calling such a place “heaven” is blasphemy.”
Apparently you are unaware that those in the Telestial Kingdom “are they who receive not of his (Christ’s) fulness in the eternal world, but of the Holy Spirit through the ministration of the terrestrial;”
So then, those in the Telestial Kingdom apparently receive the fulness of the Holy Spirit. So according to your definition we don’t need to call it hell, since to you the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all the same.
You said “These questions I have asked you are directly relevant to this blog post, and not answering them is not constructive in interacting with my case or in presenting your own.”
My request for you to provide Biblical scripture to support your assumption is directly related to this blog post. Not providing them is not constructive in interacting with my case or in presenting your own.
Or you could admit that you don’t have any. That would be acceptable.
With regard to D&C 19, it says in verse 6 “Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment.”
A quick search of the Bible reveals that the phrase “endless torment” is NOT found anywhere. A search of the Book of Mormon reveals that the phrase is found 7 times. A search of the D&C reveals that it is found ONLY in 19:6. It is not found in the PofGP.
So clearly the Lord Jesus is referring to its usage in the Book of Mormon.
Now in D&C 19 it says in verse 7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.
A quick search of the Bible reveals that the phrase “eternal damnation” is ONLY found in Mark 3:29. A search of the Book of Mormon reveals that the phrase is NOT found. A search of the D&C reveals that it is found in 19:6 and one other place (which was written after D&C 19). It is not found in the PofGP.
So clearly the Lord, Jesus Christ is referring to its usage in Mark 3:29 (also see Matt. 12: 31; Luke 12: 10).
NOWHERE in D&C 19 does the Lord refer to “gehenna”, “hades” or “tartaros”, nor does He refer to “hell”, the English word into which they are translated.
So what we have here is a classic “strawman” argument. One of the many logical fallacies used by hyper-critics of the Church.
Cheers!!
And as Paul says “Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.” And yes I do mean from both of Them.
Aaron,
You said “Obviously the NT borrows cultural categories for theology without adopting the polytheism associated with it.”
That is off topic for this thread, but I will address it just the same.
Shall we look at NT scriptures that separate God the Father from the Lord Jesus Christ? Here are 31 of them.
Eph. 1:2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
• • •
17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
1 Thes. 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
• • •
3 Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father;
2 Cor. 1: 2 Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
Col. 1: 2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,
1 Thes. 3:11 Now God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you.
• • •
13 To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.
2 Thes. 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, aunto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:
2 Grace unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom. 1: 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom. 15: 6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Cor. 1:3 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Cor. 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
2 Cor. 11:31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.
Gal. 1: 3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
Eph. 5:20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
Eph. 6:23 Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Philip. 1:2 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
Philip. 2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Col. 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.
2 Thes. 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
1 Tim. 1:2 Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.
2 Tim. 1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.
Titus 1:4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
Philem. 1:3 Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Pet. 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
2 Jn. 1:3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.
GB,
Amen, God the Father is Not God the Son. Now before this gets all sidetracked into a “is the Trinity Biblical thread” I would just like to say that No Christian believes that God the Father is God the Son and every Christian agrees with every single one of those passages; however we cannot do this, that is accept the Threeness of God, at the exclusion or expense of the NT passages concerning the Oneness of God, much less the OT ones. A quick list of the NT passages would include : Mark 12:29, John 1:1-3;18, Romans 3:30, 1 Corinthians 8:4-6, Galatians 3:20, James 2:19 among many others.
Grace and Peace
Lautensack
Here’s something to think about from the LDS Bible dictionary about Heaven –
This term has several meanings in the scriptures. It is first of all the place where God lives and the future home of the saints (Gen. 28: 12; Ps. 11: 4; Matt. 6: 9). It also means the expanse around the earth, as the heavens (Gen. 1: 1, 17; Ex. 24: 10). It is usually thought of as being “up,” or above the earth (cf. Alma 18: 30-32). In the sense of being God’s home and the ultimate place for the faithful, it is clearly distinguished from paradise, which is the temporary abode of the faithful spirits of persons who have lived and died on this earth. Jesus visited paradise after his death on the cross, but on the third day thereafter, he informed Mary that he had not yet been to the Father (see Luke 23: 39-44; John 20: 17).
So the only heaven this says is the Celestial Kingdom where God lives – regardless of which level in that kingdom.