Hard Class I Just Taught

[Anonymous]

So, a while ago the new EQ President and a counselor came over to my house to get to know me. Followed up with an email asking me to serve in the quorum and to teach EQ regularly. I agreed to quarterly teaching of the quorum. But I asked to be given generic topics like Love, Faith, etcetera and to steer clear of really doctrinal topics.

Well, they assigned me my first topic for today — D&C 76. I can’t think of a more doctrinal topic than the doctrine of the telestial, terrestrial, celestial kingdoms. I was nervous about it in spite of being a teacher for a living — because I like to teach what I know. I ordered Mormon Doctrine so I could get a more expansive view of what happens after the second coming. That helped. I prepared all week.

How it went — I felt I was breaking new ground for many members of the quorum.

But I screwed up in explaining the difference between being saved and being exalted. Perhaps someone reading this can explain the difference. I understand it now but it was only after I taught the lesson and got it wrong.

The Stake President was there. Great, I thought. He brought the whole lesson to a soft landing with a spiritual approach to the whole thing, which was the note on which I ended. In a way he kind of saved me from myself because I ended with a topic for personal study and reflection. It was this scripture:

Quote:

The Lord explains that “every man must repent or suffer, for I, God, am endless. …

“Nevertheless, 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.

“Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles. …

“For, 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 19:4–12.)

The stake president said he took this to mean that some will experience great regret in not being able to make the highest level of the celestial kingdom — at first — but we will get used to it and eventually not experience that kind of suffering. In that sense, the eternal punishment is temporary. But it definitely doesn’t mean we are released from one kingdom and can go to the next kingdom. Or that we will eventually have celestial glory even if we are originally assigned Terrestrial glory.

This is different than the interpretation we discuss here.

Thoughts on the meaning of endless punishment, and what do you consider the difference between being saved and exhalted?

[Anonymous]

The classic orthodox definitions:

Salvation – saved from death (freebie) and sin (inherit a kingdom of glory)

Exaltation – also salvation but when you obtain the highest kingdom of glory

Maybe another way of looking at it is that you can be released from jail (saved) but just because you were released from jail doesn’t mean you were knighted by the Queen (exalted).

I think the classic orthodox view is that people can’t progress from kingdom to kingdom. That belief may be rooted in a mortal concept of fairness. I.e. it wouldn’t be “fair” if I worked my tail off in this life and “earned” the celestial kingdom and some slacker went to the telestial kingdom when they died but later worked their way up through the kingdoms to get the same reward. It probably also addresses the fairness concern where some may think that progression from kingdom to kingdom will cause people to adopt an eat, drink, and be merry attitude in this life because they can just progress through kingdoms in the next life. Maybe a way of closing a loophole in the teachings.

My views aren’t classic orthodox. I lean more towards universal salvation, in the LDS paradigm that would mean people could progress from kingdom to kingdom. In my opinion there’s room for that interpretation in the fairness model; time seems like it would be immaterial in the eternities and if you put in the work, you put in the work.

[Anonymous]

Like Nibbler, I like the “progression between kingdoms” interpretation the best as well. I was careful to present the temporariness of suffering depicted in the scripture above as a question. My comment was that the scripture “seems to suggest” suffering is temporary, and that I am not quite sure how it fits in the with overall plan of salvation. Did anyone have any insights to give on that question? — That was my approach, as I was pretty sure someone would have called me out as teaching false doctrine if I said there was a progression through the kingdoms.

I had never heard the SP’s interpretation of that scripture before, but I was glad that he gave it as it provides another angle from which to view eternal judgment.

Regarding Salvation and Exaltation. The difference seems to be this. If you are assigned to the Celestial Kingdom you are saved from spiritual death because you are in the presence of God. Spiritual death means life without God, so if in the Celestial Kingdom you are with him and forgo spiritual death. However, you are not necessarily exalted if you are assigned to the celestial kingdom. You have to hit the highest level of the celestial kingdom to have eternal increase, which is what is meant by exhaltation.

The following concept applies:

Quote:

From another revelation to the Prophet Joseph, we learn that there are three degrees within the celestial kingdom. To be exalted in the highest degree and continue eternally in family relationships, we must enter into “the new and everlasting covenant of marriage” and be true to that covenant. In other words, temple marriage is a requirement for obtaining the highest degree of celestial glory. (See Doctrine and Covenants 131:1–4.) All who are worthy to enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage will have that opportunity, whether in this life or the next.

Source: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/kingdoms-of-glory?lang=eng

[Anonymous]

First, Mormon Doctrine? Really? I’m not in favor of burning books, but that one and MoF are exceptions. I’m glad they’re both out of print and wish they’d go away. For the record, most of Mormon Doctrine is anything but doctrine.

nibbler wrote:

I think the classic orthodox view is that people can’t progress from kingdom to kingdom. That belief may be rooted in a mortal concept of fairness. I.e. it wouldn’t be “fair” if I worked my tail off in this life and “earned” the celestial kingdom and some slacker went to the telestial kingdom when they died but later worked their way up through the kingdoms to get the same reward. It probably also addresses the fairness concern where some may think that progression from kingdom to kingdom will cause people to adopt an eat, drink, and be merry attitude in this life because they can just progress through kingdoms in the next life. Maybe a way of closing a loophole in the teachings.

My views aren’t classic orthodox. I lean more towards universal salvation, in the LDS paradigm that would mean people could progress from kingdom to kingdom. In my opinion there’s room for that interpretation in the fairness model; time seems like it would be immaterial in the eternities and if you put in the work, you put in the work.

I guess it depends on what is meant by “classic” orthodox. Pre-McConkie/JFieldingS/Clark et al and their ultra-conservative/hide history/lets-not-talk-about-grace stance the idea that we could progress through kingdoms was widely taught and widely accepted as doctrine. While many of my beliefs and practices are more heterodox, my view on the whole kingdoms thing is very unorthodox. I am a universalist (Joseph was too, BTW) and believe we will all end up in “heaven.” I generally believe we know very little about the afterlife and what we do know tends to be quite vague (through a glass dimly), so how and when we all end up there is a question. I believe the differences between salvation and exaltation are inventions of the church, and I think they’re inaccurate. The Bible (and BoM) only directly talk about salvation.

[Anonymous]

You’re right, views about progression from kingdom to kingdom have changed significantly over the years. I guess by “classic orthodox” I mean what most people at church would say if you asked them?

Church gets kinda boring because we’re stuck talking about the same finite number of things over and over so I there’s a temptation to hyperfocus to extract new meanings, stuff like “special witness” vs. “especial witness”, getting pedantic about what PH keys are, salvation vs. exaltation, etc., etc. We gotta find some way to entertain ourselves.

I was curious, it looks like D&C section 132 (everyone’s favorite) is the only place in scripture that uses the word exaltation… with one exception, D&C 124:9 mentions exaltation but in a different context.

D&C 132:17 – makes it sound like exaltation is becoming little-g god and other mentions in the section are more related to “a continuation of the seeds”, presumably organizing intelligences and starting the premortal→mortal→post mortal ball rolling all over again with a new crop.

In my opinion, in our limited view we make (one of many very large) assumptions that organizing intelligences requires a male sealed/married to female(s) and that having a spirit “baby” requires a process that’s similar to having a physical baby.

[Anonymous]

My own views, not representative of the Church, BRM, JFS or any other, though I draw a lot of my thoughts from Paul:

Saved – this comes from the latin Salvatus, which is the past participle form of Salvare, like Saved is to Save. And note the connection to Christ. We are “saved” by the “Savior” to achieve “salvation“. Even clearer in Spanish, which I know some of you speak: Salvar, Salvado, El Salvador, Salvacion. So, whatever we get by virture of Christ via the Atonement is the act of being saved. Let the reader determine what they get from the Atonement. For me, I think of it as freeing from an earth-bound existence into a liberated spiritually-bound existence.

Exalted – The end result of a spiritual life. In LDS view, this is the crowning (literally) achievement of our existence. Since I believe there is no afterlife, I have to project this onto our present life. I don’t think there is any “end result” of our lives, but rather a sequence of successful steps toward being the kind of person we want to be. To me, I think of Exaltation as the unattainable perception of Godliness. Though we can never get there, we can approach it, and in the attempt, we cultivate our own attributes into something better than if we had never tried. Feel free to apply that concept to eternal progression in the afterlife, if that suits you.

I liked the out-of-jail / knighted analogy. I would also say, being saved is like getting accepted to college in spite of bad grades in high school, being exalted is like then graduating Suma Cum Laude with a PhD.

As for the passage you referenced in D&C 19 regarding “endless punishment” I think all it’s trying to say is that punishment is from God, but it doesn’t go on forever. We don’t burn in hell with no end. I don’t think that specifically supports the idea of eternal progression from one kingdom of glory to another, but it can be interpreted that way, if you like. I would say it’s akin to JS’s view of repentance and forgiveness. You might have to go through a lot of anguish during repentance, but once completed, it is forgotten. JS was a very forgiving fella. He wasn’t someone to hold a grudge against the penitent. See his interactions with WWPhelps. (Phelps betrayed JS, and his actions were part of what sent JS to Liberty Jail. Yet, when Phelps had a change of heart, JS welcomed him back, saying, “Believing your confession to be real, and your repentance genuine, I shall be happy once again to give you the right hand of fellowship, and rejoice over the returning prodigal. …‘Come on, dear brother, since the war is past, For friends at first, are friends again at last.’ Yours as ever, Joseph Smith, Jun.”)

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

Regarding Salvation and Exaltation. The difference seems to be this. If you are assigned to the Celestial Kingdom you are saved from spiritual death because you are in the presence of God. Spiritual death means life without God, so if in the Celestial Kingdom you are with him and forgo spiritual death. However, you are not necessarily exalted if you are assigned to the celestial kingdom. You have to hit the highest level of the celestial kingdom to have eternal increase, which is what is meant by exhaltation.

Interesting. I see what you’re saying and this definition is probably very close to what most members probably believe. However, I’m not really sure it’s completely aligned with “church teachings” on the subject. From the study helps section on the church website (emphasis added):

Quote:

Salvation: To be saved from both physical and spiritual death. All people will be saved from physical death by the grace of God, through the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Each individual can also be saved from spiritual death by the grace of God, through faith in Jesus Christ. This faith is manifested in a life of obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel and service to Christ.

It is likely that the last line is referring to temple marriage as “obedience” but it doesn’t say so and only implies general obedience, throwing in the ordinances. I disagree and believe salvation is solely by the grace of God for everybody who believes in Christ as stated by Jesus.

There is a vague definition of exaltation there as well:

Quote:

The highest state of happiness and glory in the celestial kingdom.

[Anonymous]

A key question regarding ‘saved’: What, exactly, are we saved from?

Christianity from about the third century onward (including in our Church) would answer this as ‘saved from judgment’. Jesus suffered in place of us. We can avoid punishment by His Atonement. We are fixing something wrong about us in order to be accepted by God.

Christianity in the first century would say ‘saved from the corruption of the world’. Jesus’ death and resurrection leads the way for putting away our nature and embracing spirituality. We can become spiritual children of God through Jesus’ Atonement. We are leaving behind stuff that doesn’t matter and embracing something good in order to become closer to God.

In the modern doctrine, it is God’s view of us that we are trying to change.

In the original doctrine, it is our view of God we are trying to change.

[Anonymous]

I remember having a hard time with the three degrees because they seem to be antithetical to grace and mercy. If we are avoiding the punishment that we deserve and receiving the reward that we do not deserve then how does it track that some of these rewards will be bigger than others?

For this reason I tend to look at the different kingdoms as heavens that are perfectly suited to where you belong. Death is just one big Hogwarts’ sorting hat to send you to the place where you will be most happy. I do not covet someone else’s kingdom. If I trust God to know me and actively pursue what is best for me then he will place me exactly where I need to be.

I also do not love “saved” vs. “exalted”. It makes it sound like there is a very exclusive club out there somewhere and the exclusiveness is defined by how many people do not get to partake.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

I also do not love “saved” vs. “exalted”. It makes it sound like there is a very exclusive club out there somewhere and the exclusiveness is defined by how many people do not get to partake.

It was a question in Come Follow Me. As a full time educator, I love “difference between” questions of any kind because it’s getting narrow and deep into the two concepts, which promotes learning. Whether the distinction is meaningful, or elitist is another question.

[Anonymous]

I am a word aficionado myself. I sometimes look up the word origins to learn more about a word and its meaning.

I think if I would find pretty significant value and interest in comparing two words with similar meanings. Last night I had a good discussion with my son about the word “indoctrination” which is often used negatively and the word “brainwashing” which is always used negatively.

I suppose in looking at comparing the words “salvation” and “exaltation” they mean very different things – like not even close. In my mind the word exaltation has elitist meanings baked in. Exalted above what? Other people of course!

I am much, much less interested in how the church may define a word. My favorite example is how JS and now the church defines the word “evangelist” as a synonym for patriarch. 🙄

P.S. The BOM says that little children that die are “saved.” In Mormon Doctrine, BRM has a discussion about whether that means exalted in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom with godhood status or something else. BRM makes the case that receiving a fullness of salvation is synonymous with exaltation. So that makes it tricky. Salvation and exaltation mean different things … except when they mean the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Roy — if you look at it from a purely definitional perspective, then being saved means overcoming the second death. This second death refers to spiritual death. Spiritual death is referred to as being absent from the presence of God. For example, we are all spiritually dead for the moment because we are not in the presence of God.

So, if you accept this definition, then anyone who is saved in the celestial kingdom (even people baptized but not endowed, which kept their baptismal covenants) will have overcome spiritual death as they will be literally in the presence of God. Anyone who achieved the highest level within the celestial kingdom (entered into and kept the new and everlasting covenant of marriage) would be exhalted.

[Anonymous]

We covered this when I taught seminary.

Well, we covered the phrase “endless punishment.”

The seminary manual suggests that Endless is another name for the Savior.

In that sense, we could say that “endless punishment” is “the Savior’s punishment.”

What that looks like is not entirely clear, but we have quotes from church leaders that suggest that the Savior will not punish for a second longer than is necessary.

He will also push for the most reward that we can get.

I’ll try to find the quotes and come back to share them.

I don’t know if this helps you at all, but I thought I would mention what the manual says.

[Anonymous]

Elder James E. Talmage of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles explained: “To hell there is an exit as well as an entrance. Hell is no place to which a vindictive judge sends prisoners to suffer and to be punished principally for his glory; but it is a place prepared for the teaching, the disciplining of those who failed to learn here upon the earth what they should have learned. True, we read of everlasting punishment, unending suffering, eternal damnation. That is a direful expression; but in his mercy the Lord has made plain what those words mean. ‘Eternal punishment,’ he says, is God’s punishment, for he is eternal; and that condition or state or possibility will ever exist for the sinner who deserves and really needs such condemnation; but this does not mean that the individual sufferer or sinner is to be eternally and everlastingly made to endure and suffer. No man will be kept in hell longer than is necessary to bring him to a fitness for something better. When he reaches that stage the prison doors will open and there will be rejoicing among the hosts who welcome him into a better state. The Lord has not abated in the least what he has said in earlier dispensations concerning the operation of his law and his gospel, but he has made clear unto us his goodness and mercy through it all, for it is his glory and his work to bring about the immortality and eternal life of man” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1930, 97.)

President Joseph Fielding Smith gave this insight: “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, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 2:228).

“I cannot subscribe to the modern doctrine that God does not punish, because I cannot throw away all of the scriptures there are in order to reach that conclusion[, but] I have a feeling that when the Lord comes to give us our reward … and our punishment … that he will give that punishment which is the very least that our transgression will justify. I believe that he will bring into his justice all of the infinite love and blessing and mercy and kindness and understanding which he has. …

“And on the other hand, I believe that when it comes to making the rewards for our good conduct, he will give us the maximum that it is possible to give, having in mind the offense which we have committed” (“As Ye Sow … ,” Brigham Young University Speeches of the Year [May 3, 1955], 6–7).

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

So, if you accept this definition, then anyone who is saved in the celestial kingdom (even people baptized but not endowed, which kept their baptismal covenants) will have overcome spiritual death as they will be literally in the presence of God. Anyone who achieved the highest level within the celestial kingdom (entered into and kept the new and everlasting covenant of marriage) would be exhalted.

I once saw a comparison between Mercy and Grace. It said Mercy is when a punishment that we deserve is withheld. Grace is when a reward that we do not deserve is bestowed. I really like this explanation.

[Author]

Posts