- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The story of the third of the host of heaven in the pre-mortal life who were cast off for following Lucifer has not made sense to me for quite awhile. First, we should put in perspective just how evil this third of the host of heaven had to be. Adolph Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, Joseph Stalin, Atilla the Hun, and Ted Bundy all were good enough to qualify to come to Earth and receive bodies, so it seems that this third who did not receive bodies were more evil than any of these men. What would it have been like to live in a pre-mortal life where every third person you met was an Adolph Hitler, a Joseph Stalin, or a Ted Bundy? And what kind of parent is God if a third of his children turn out to be Hitlers, Stalins, and Bundys?
Here’s where things get really sticky for me. The third of the host of heaven who followed Lucifer are part of the plan of salvation as well: they provide us with the opposition and temptation we need to give us strength and to prove ourselves worthy of exaltation. Without opposition, we can’t be exalted, so without this third who followed Lucifer to provide us with opposition, we couldn’t be exalted. This brings me to the most unsettling part of the story. The true sacrificial lamb of the plan of salvation is not Jesus: the true sacrifice is the third of the host heaven who sacrificed their chance at salvation so that we could have a chance at salvation. That third of the host of heaven- billions upon billions of God’s spirit children- will suffer eternal damnation with no hope of redemption so that they can provide us with the opposition we need to be tested and be found worth of exaltation. If the story is true, then we need Satan and his followers nearly as much as we need Jesus. Satan’s role in providing us with opposition is nearly as important as Jesus’ role in providing us with a way to overcome opposition. If this is the case, we owe a great debt of gratitude to that third of the host of heaven who sacrificed their chance at exaltation and will spend eternity in misery so that we can have a chance at exaltation.
And why would God create billions of spirit children with the knowledge that they would spend eternity in misery?
So the story isn’t making sense to me. Do you believe that the story is literally true? Or is it a morality play? Or is it a fairy tale? Or is it something else?
Some thoughts. –
Evil or Rebellious. I don’t look at the story as the third most evil characters and bad guys were cast out, but rather that that third chose to break away from God and follow Lucifer. They were rebels, not grades of evil. Their punishment is associated with their rebellion. Just because someone else went with the majority doesn’t mean that they were stellar spirits. Consider the American Civil War, where Robert E. Lee fought for the South, while George Custer fought for the North. –
Evilness of people on the earth. I think evil is manifested by our actions in the face of opposition and opportunities. According to the gospel as I understand it, part of coming here and taking on a body is to be given the real opportunity to act in free will. Taking a non-LDS view for a second, I don’t think Hitler thought of himself as evil… quite the opposite, actually. Stalin studied to become a priest in the Eastern Orthodox Church, before his faith transition. Like Hitler, he was an ideologue who allowed his ends to justify his means. Unchecked, these men became the two most destructive individuals in the history of mankind (to date). But I would say that the capacity to do evil, along with the capacity to do good is inherently in each of us… and we can’t really know who we are until we demonstrate it through our actions. –
Tormenters, demons, evil spirits. This one is pretty simple for me. “The Devil made me do it” is a bit like “Santa Claus is coming to town”. These are the kinds of concepts that earthly fathers tell their children, or that church fathers tell their followers. LDS theology, in my opinion, does not require evil spirits in order for there to be opposition. Opposition exists in and of itself. The natural man, we are told, is an enemy to God. Yes, LDS theology says that Lucifer and his minions strive to tempt us and keep us away from God. That doesn’t mean that we couldn’t keep ourselves away from God if Satan happens to be concentrating on someone else for a couple of weeks. InquiringMind, IMO, Most, if not all scriptures are spiritual lessons (like symbolic parables) not history lessons.
I never thought of Satan/evil as saviors, but I see your point & it makes sense, since “there must be opposition in all things.”
I believe in eternal progression & although contradictions, I’ve heard eternal progression repeated many times in church.
I don’t think it’s essential to understand how the progression works (reincarnation, etc.) – but I do think it’s good to keep an open mind, especially when realizing we will all die having never “arrived” at perfection. (And also other cognitive dissonance relating to scape-goat human sacrifice.)
To me, evil is whatever my weakness is. To some, a bag of chips is potentially evil because it challenges a life-damaging weakness, but to others it’s no big deal. Good & evil seem to be subjective – at least to an extent. Of course, we have laws & general societal understandings of what is good & bad for individuals & as a group. Yet, we all have “buttons” that really tick us off beyond what might affect others. Some call this “shadow self” – that which is unconscious – but negatively affecting us when certain circumstances arise. This shadow self is probably the cause of evil.
OnOwnNow mentioned, “The natural man, we are told, is an enemy to God.”
Yet we are also “children of God.” Just as “the kingdom of God is within you” – so is how you resonate with “evil” (ignor-ance, bad feelings & motives) within you.
What I wonder is if true joy is possible without its opposite.
Is opposition necessary just for this world of temporary illusions (with the veil), or does it apply in the eternal perspective of truth/God?
InquiringMind wrote:Do you believe that the story is literally true?
No. I think the scriptures really aren’t reliable on the numbers, for the most part, the stories in the scriptures come from generations of oral history…not likely to be literally accurate. Also, other cultures haven’t had the mindset we have of being so accurate with data and details and often authors never intended things be taken so literally…so Creation in 6 days could really mean any time frame where there were different periods, it has nothing to do with days. 100,000s slain in Lamanite and Nephite battles in North America somewhere around Hill Cumorah in upstate New York…not likely literally true with regard to numbers or locations or factual events. 1/3 of the hosts of heaven lost … not likely literally true to me, but more likely the point made that there was a conflict on the plan and many were involved. There is symbolism in the story that can provide meaning to me. But the literal stuff of all these invisible spirits tempting us on the earth….I’m not sure that means anything to me literally.
I’m with you…the story doesn’t seem to make sense. Unless I look for the teaching points I think were meant to be conveyed in these stories.
When I hear things in the scriptures like “1/3 of all the hosts of heaven” … I translate to “a lot”.
I don’t think we know much about the pre-existence or the post-mortal world to see things any more clear, or take things too literal.
No, not literal to me. 3 was a powerful number in that society, and 1/3 is the equivalent of saying “the minorty” or “a smaller part”, while 2/3 is the equivalent of saying “the majority” or “the larger part”.
So, I take it to mean that some people reject God, but most follow God – when faced with a choice between good and evil.
I think that fits our theology very well – and it also informs how I view the 3 degrees of glory. It makes my view different than most members’, but it’s how I see it – figuratively and “numeralogically”.
Quote:First, we should put in perspective just how evil this third of the host of heaven had to be. Adolph Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, Joseph Stalin, Atilla the Hun, and Ted Bundy all were good enough to qualify to come to Earth and receive bodies, so it seems that this third who did not receive bodies were more evil than any of these men. What would it have been like to live in a pre-mortal life where every third person you met was an Adolph Hitler, a Joseph Stalin, or a Ted Bundy? And what kind of parent is God if a third of his children turn out to be Hitlers, Stalins, and Bundys?
Well, if we take this literally we might see it other ways.
Stalin, Hitler etc may have got through for other reasons –
* They were not easily led, but were leaders.
* They were ditherers, and didn’t think Lucifer was on to a winner at the time.
* They changed sides at the right moment.
* Lucifer needed agents with bodies and didn’t directly recruit them.
* Some evil needed to get through for the plan to work.
On the other hand, the third might have got caught, because…
* They were easily led.
* They were deceived.
* They were weak.
* They had their own personal grievances with God.
* They changed sides at the wrong moment.
Interestingly, I believe that in the American war of independence, the population was roughly divided into thirds.
What if it is just the first chapter of the story, and we have the wrong idea about how it will turn? What if we need to follow the teachings of Christ to experience the mighty change of heart that will prompt us to say out of love for our brothers: “let him take my place in the kingdom, I could not bear to live in glory when this my brother is out in the dark.”
What if our truly following Christ and becoming perfectly loving selfless beings will save all men in the end?
Very cool idea, Orson. What a paradigm shift that would be. I’m scratching my head over this story, as it is related to some other stories I remember learning, but for the life of me don’t know their source. As I recall, Lucifer and his 1/3 is banished to earth, and his influence is limited to inhabitants on this planets. He cannot tempt people on other planets, even though Christ’s atonement covers them, too. But as a result earth is the most wicked of all among God’s creation. If this story is true then other inhabitants on planets are able to live out their mortality in rather challenging conditions. I am forced to wonder why we then got stuck with a raw deal. Does this story ring a bell with anyone?
Heber13 wrote:Very cool idea, Orson. What a paradigm shift that would be.
Thanks, I love to muse on simple yet penetrating ideals. I love how Pres. McKay stressed agency (the divine plan of choice) and that our understanding of Satan’s plan to force obedience does not lead to real personal change. When I combine that with “charity is the greatest of all” I try to imagine where a godly drive for selflessness may intersect with pure agency and I end up making wacky comments like the above.
Q: But what of “God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance?”
My response to this is simply what if we are misunderstanding by some small degree what this instance of “sin” is referring to? What if the greater sin lies in our finding comfort or satisfaction in “justice” over the salvation of our brother?
What if love really does conquer all?
Quote:Moroni 7:47
But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and
whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him. Orson wrote:What if it is just the first chapter of the story, and we have the wrong idea about how it will turn?
What if we need to follow the teachings of Christ to experience the mighty change of heart that will prompt us to say out of love for our brothers: “let him take my place in the kingdom, I could not bear to live in glory when this my brother is out in the dark.”
What if our truly following Christ and becoming perfectly loving selfless beings will save all men in the end?
I love this concept. Is the “quote” your own?
Regarding endless torment. I particularly like the message in D&C 19:6-12:
Quote:6 Nevertheless,
it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment. 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. 8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles.
9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest.
10 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—
11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment.
12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment.
So first, we’ve no need to worry about people in endless torment. It doesn’t mean that there will be no end to it. Maybe this also applies to the 1/3rd.
More interesting than just this application is the clear statement in 6-7 that the Lord says that we should stop taking everything so literally. Just because he said something that we think we can measure in actual terms (in this case ‘endless’) doesn’t mean we were supposed to. He also suggests (with what sounds like a wry smile) that He doesn’t always mean exactly what we think He means… but doesn’t mind if our misunderstanding leads to His desired outcome for us.
These verses give us the licence to liberate ourselves from literalists in LDS lessons.I love that Mackay11, thanks for that! mackay11 wrote:These verses give us the licence to liberate ourselves from literalists in LDS lessons.
To quote Beethoven, “Hallelujah, amen, amen, Hallelujah, amen!”This one kind of bothers me too….. Spirit in Pre-existence, have no experience with earth, physical bodies, etc.
Given a choice, some think “70 years with Lucidork and I can come home again…compared to eternity thats nothing”
Now you say …it wasn’t just a choice…they rebelled against god and there was a war in heaven! I say…how bad a war could it be? They have no physical bodies, can’t feel pain, can’t hurt each other….maybe they can call each other names, maybe write nasty things about each other using really lightweight crayons?
So…eternal damnation for disagreement….for what sounds like their first ever disagreement…seems a little harsh for a loving god. So I think this is more of a parable….at least I hope it is because I can’t think of anything they can do there that has not been done way worse here…and the folks here get to rock the telestial kingdom no matter what.
My heart tells me that if there are a third who were cast out that a loving father will find a way to help all who have learned their lesson to come back….at least that is my hope.
johnh wrote:So…eternal damnation for disagreement….for what sounds like their first ever disagreement…seems a little harsh for a loving god. So I think this is more of a parable….at least I hope it is because I can’t think of anything they can do there that has not been done way worse here…and the folks here get to rock the telestial kingdom no matter what.
My heart tells me that if there are a third who were cast out that a loving father will find a way to help all who have learned their lesson to come back….at least that is my hope.
Faced with the narrowness of our scriptural worldview, we can:1. invent a new narrative that helps us deal with it, or
2. bend our minds into twisted pretzels to justify it as do apologists, or
3. recognize that it all scripture is simply human expression as it grapples with the divine using the primitive worldview of the prophet that revealed a given scripture.
I choose (3). And in so doing, I have had to deconstruct my faith — the narratives that I have grown up with — to recognize that all the stories are just simply somebody’s guess about the nature of the cosmos. The fact that the guess got written down and canonized as scripture does not change the fact that it is speculation, and very likely wrong.
Institutionalized fictional stories have their place — they create a mythical fabric to teach us things. But when we discover that what they teach: racism, genocide, slavery, exclusivity, bigotry, and a host of other primitive ways to deal with the unknown, we need to start setting aside those aspects of the myth that don’t work any longer. It isn’t like we can continue to believe that white skin equates to righteousness and dark skin to cursing. Most LDS reject that belief, yet the Book of Mormon — the most correct book — and as Tad Callister says, the word of god in every verse and sentence — continues to say exactly that.
There is no middle ground in saying that our mythical stories are entirely and literally ‘true’ when they contain false things we MUST reject. Defense of bigotry is to be a bigot oneself. No amount of apologetic reasoning can justify the idea that a ‘loving god’, whatever that may mean, is happy to relegate 1/3 of his children to a permanent existence of incorporeal exclusion: the principle is simply false — it is a mythical account meant to teach that we are favored children of god, that we chose righteousness against an artificial tableau of good versus evil. That is the tableau of the book of mormon, as it is the book of abraham and the entire first-estate/second-estate mythical framework. Using the idea that god can selectively decide to exclude 1/3 of his children, withhold priesthood from black people, justify wars against lamanites on the idea that they are loathsome due to their skin color, or command the genocide of the amalekites just because they are archtypes of the evil ‘other’ — this is entirely uninspired teaching and false doctrine — yet that is what scripture contains.
To me, the answer to the idea that all scripture is a result of a mix of the divine with the very human worldview of the mind and heart prophet is that all scripture must be taken non-literally. Spiritual discernment is always necessary, and the discerning mind should not make up new stuff the justify the scripture, but rather, we should simply set aside scriptural fallacies as if they were dross. A walnut requires me to break open the shell and pick out the fruit from the inedible stuff. Then I can enjoy the taste of the walnut. Consuming the walnut whole is not possible, and mixing in with the dross leaves a most bitter taste in my mouth.
Scripture is no different.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.