[Teachldsseminary] D&C 76 - Kingdom Hopping

Tue Jan 9 13:07:13 MST 2007

List,

I don't recall where or when I got hold of this paper, but fwiw here is
something else to throw into this current discussion on "kingdom hopping".
Maybe someone out there has more information on this paper itself.

---Elizabeth

DISTINGUISHING THE DOCTRINAL, NON-DOCTRINAL AND FALSE DOCTRINAL CONCEPTS OF
THE CREATION

Kenneth J.Brown. Chair, Ricks College Religion Department 1974

The identification of doctrine is a concern which confronts all of us who
teach religion. we have been given a solemn charge to teach only the
orthodox doctrines of the Church. Elder Mark E. Petersen said it this way:

As teachers in this great Church we must hold to the one and only concept of
the Gospel and in it there can be no variance. we cannot take liberties with
it, not even under the guise of academic freedom, for in teaching the Gospel
there is no academic freedom. I would like to repeat that in teaching the
Gospel there is no academic freedom. There is only fundamental orthodox
doctrine and truth.

--Address given to, Seminary and Institute teachers, BYU, June 22, 1962

I have tried to find a standard for identifying doctrine and have come up
with one of my own which may fit our purposes today. Doctrine may be
identified as "a principle, tenet, or teaching having religious or church
significance which has universal acceptance among the orthodox Latter-day
Saints as being in harmony with revealed truth." The prophets are
undoubtedly the most representative body of Orthodox that we have and so I
would say that anything which has universal acceptance among the prophets as
being doctrine is doctrine for us today.

Now the formula for identifying "false doctrine" could not be the opposite
of that for doctrine which I have just proposed. Just because the brethren
are not universally agreed on a subject does not mean it is false. It might
be that it is just nondoctrinal - does not fit into the category of
doctrine- or it may be theory; not having sufficient revealed data to be
universally accepted. (note the word theory is not used the same way here as
it is in science)

A case in point here would be the identification, of the personage who
appeared to Nephi in l Ne. 11 and explained Lehi's dream. The scriptures use
the term '"Spirit of the Lord" and say that this being spoke to Nephi as one
man speaks to another.

Dr. Talmage in his "Articles of Faith", p. 159 says that this refers to the
Holy Ghost and makes a point of doctrine that this one scripture shows the
Holy Ghost to have then a bodily form. But Joseph Fielding Smith and others
say that it is not the Holy Ghost at all because such appearing would be
contrary to the nature, and mission of the Holy Ghost but suggest rather
that it is the premortal Christ. (See Answers to Problems of the Book of
Mormon by Sidney B. Sperry for a discussion of this). What do you do when
you have two of the brethren disagreeing? well, you can conclude two things.
First, the issue is not essential to our salvation, and second there is
insufficient data revealed, otherwise there would be universal agreement. Of
course the thing we should avoid at all costs is pitting one authority
against another and saying that one represents the authoritative point of
view because of books written, positions later achieved, having the majority
on his side, etc. I believe such attempts destroy confidence.

The identification of "false doctrine" might then be "a principle, tenet, or
teaching having religious significance which has universal acceptance among
the orthodox as being contrary to revealed truth." we avoid teaching. false
doctrine whenever possible and our only assurance is being knowledgeable in
the Gospel.

The concern many of us face isn't so much that. we teach false doctrine as
it is that we teach dogmatically as doctrinethose things which have not been
clearly established as such.  It isn't a solution to simply say, " Well, I
won't  teach anything which isn't strictly doctrinal." We are still faced
with having to distinguish what is that doctrinal content.

A case in point here. While I was a student at BYU taking a class in the
Gospel we were given the assignment of identifying what were the teachings
of the Church in certain areas. It was a very revealing course because it
taught us how few are the doctrines of the Church when compared with the
vast body of nondoctrinal teachings. I worked with a committee which had the
task of finding out what were the teachings of the resurrected state of man
and the final judgment. We read the 76th section and other things and
compiled our list of absolute truths including "all men will be
resurrected," "judgment will follow the resurrection," "those who live on
earth will be assigned one of four places," etc. Then we attempted to be
more specific and concluded that there would be progression permitted within
kingdoms but not from one degree of glory to another. We felt safe in this
after studying the 88th section which-speaks of the different kinds of
bodies after the resurrection, statements in the Journal of Discourses and
other books, as well as priesthood manuals which seemed to sustain it. So we
prepared to hand in our report.

However, unbeknownst to us one of the group had disagreed and had written to
the First Presidency. He received a letter which I have since learned is a
sort of form letter which has been sent out for years to those asking the
same question, the letter reads:

Feb. 28, 1968

Dear Brother

In answer to your inquiry in letter of Feb. 15, 1968addressed to President
David O. McKay I am directed to tell you that the Church has never announced
a definite doctrine on the point of progression from one kingdom to another
after the resurrection. Some of the brethren have held the view that it was
possible in the course of progression to advance from one glory to another,
invoking the principle of eternal progression; others of the brethren have
taken an opposite view. But, as stated, the Church has never announced a
definite doctrine on this point.

Sincerely yours,

Joseph Anderson

Secretary to the First Pres.

Now I had been teaching for many years the concept of no progression between
kingdoms as doctrine. I hadn't allowed any exceptions.  I don't know that I
taught false doctrine, I rather think that I didn't, but I erred and was not
entirely honest in presenting only one point of view as doctrine when it had
not been clearly established as such. I think it behooves us as teachers to
be aware of alternatives. Now, if a student comes to me and says, " I just
have to believe there is progression from kingdom to kingdom, my sense of
eternal progression and the justice of God requires this belief," in
fairness I can say, "Well, fine. The church has no doctrine on that point.
Some believe that way, some believe the other. If you feel comfortable in
your belief and it fits your frame of reference and you can live with it, do
so and be happy."

Now this is quite different than if a student comes to me with a false
doctrinal concept then I would feel obliged to do all I could to change his
point of view.; especially if it were an error that might cause some wrong
behavior.

(The article continues on addressing other issues)

----- Original Message -----
From: "seminary mail" <seminarymail at gmail.com>
To: "Free Email list for LDS Seminary Teachers"
<teachldsseminary at latter-dayvillage.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Teachldsseminary] D&C 76 - Kingdom Hopping

> How about visiting?  I have heard that those in higher kingdoms can visit
> those in lower kingdoms, but not vice versa.  Is this true and are there
any
> references?
>
>
>
> On 1/8/07, sjagnana at mac.com <sjagnana at mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > here is one...
> >
> > No progression between kingdoms. After a person has been assigned to
> > his place in the kingdom, either in the telestial, the terrestrial,
> > or the celestial, or to his exaltation, he will never advance from
> > his assigned glory to another glory. That is eternal! That is why we
> > must make our decisions early in life and why it is imperative that
> > such decisions be right. (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p.50)
> >
> > Kathryn
> >
> >
> > On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:25 AM, debra storm wrote:
> >
> > This is taken from the book "Revelations of the Restoration" by
> > McConkie and
> > Ostler, pages 535, 539:
> >
> > *76:77* - Those of a terrestrial order will be permitted to enjoy the
> > glory
> > of Christ's presence, but will not have the privilege of becoming as
> > he is.
> > *verse 78* - The nature of our glory in the eternal worlds is
> > determined by
> > the nature of our bodies. As a celestial body is necessary to inherit
> > the
> > glories of a celestial world, so a terrestrial body is necessary to
> > enjoy
> > the glories of a terrestrial world and a telestial body those of a
> > telestial
> > world. . .
> >
> > *verse 112*: The question is often asked, Throughout the endless
> > expanses of
> > eternity will there eventually be advancement from degree to degree?
> > That
> > is, can those whose glory is telestial progress to a terrestrial order,
> > while those of a terrestrial order become celestial? Though conflicting
> > opinions have been given by men in position of authority, the
> > question is
> > answered, in the opinion of the writers, by the very nature of the
> > resurrection itself. IF the resurrection is the inseparable union of
> > body
> > and spirit (Alma 11:45; D&C 138:17), then that which is telestial
> > cannot be
> > changed so that it could endure or abide a terrestrial law, "worlds
> > without
> > end." and that which is terrestrial for the same reason could not become
> > celestial. "
> >
> > Probably the Annotated Scriptures have quotes from the prophets about
> > this
> > as well.
> >
> > Debra
> >
> >
> > On 1/8/07, sjagnana at mac.com <sjagnana at mac.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I will look for backup... but from kingdom to kingdom NO.
> > > k
> > > On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:37 AM, LITATGP at aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Good Morning to everyone!  I hope everyone is well rested and read
> > > for  the
> > > week.  Our class (24 freshmen to seniors) is discussing the
> > > qualifications and
> > > consequences of the various kingdoms.  The question of  the day is
> > > "Can we
> > > progress from kingdom to kingdom?"
> > >
> > > Thanks for any scriptural references or quotes!!!
> > >
> > > Gina
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > FREE teachldsseminary email list sponsored by Latter-dayVillage.com
> > > teachldsseminary at latter-dayvillage.com
> > > http://latter-dayvillage.com/mailman/listinfo/teachldsseminary_latter-
> > > dayvillage.com
> > > or http://tinyurl.com/bemmh
> > >
> > > List archives at http://latter-dayvillage.com/pipermail/
> > > teachldsseminary_latter-dayvillage.com/
> > > or http://tinyurl.com/7dpqf
> > >
> > > List FAQ:
> > > http://latter-dayvillage.com/support/users/kb.php?category_id=3
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > FREE teachldsseminary email list sponsored by Latter-dayVillage.com
> > > teachldsseminary at latter-dayvillage.com
> > >
> > > http://latter-dayvillage.com/mailman/listinfo/
> > > teachldsseminary_latter-dayvillage.com
> > > or http://tinyurl.com/bemmh
> > >
> > > List archives at
> > > http://latter-dayvillage.com/pipermail/teachldsseminary_latter-
> > > dayvillage.com/
> > > or http://tinyurl.com/7dpqf
> > >
> > > List FAQ:
> > > http://latter-dayvillage.com/support/users/kb.php?category_id=3
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > FREE teachldsseminary email list sponsored by Latter-dayVillage.com
> > teachldsseminary at latter-dayvillage.com
> > http://latter-dayvillage.com/mailman/listinfo/teachldsseminary_latter-
> > dayvillage.com
> > or http://tinyurl.com/bemmh
> >
> > List archives at http://latter-dayvillage.com/pipermail/
> > teachldsseminary_latter-dayvillage.com/
> > or http://tinyurl.com/7dpqf
> >
> > List FAQ:
> > http://latter-dayvillage.com/support/users/kb.php?category_id=3
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > FREE teachldsseminary email list sponsored by Latter-dayVillage.com
> > teachldsseminary at latter-dayvillage.com
> >
> >
http://latter-dayvillage.com/mailman/listinfo/teachldsseminary_latter-dayvil
lage.com
> > or http://tinyurl.com/bemmh
> >
> > List archives at
> >
http://latter-dayvillage.com/pipermail/teachldsseminary_latter-dayvillage.co
m/
> > or http://tinyurl.com/7dpqf
> >
> > List FAQ:
> > http://latter-dayvillage.com/support/users/kb.php?category_id=3
> >
> _______________________________________________
> FREE teachldsseminary email list sponsored by Latter-dayVillage.com
> teachldsseminary at latter-dayvillage.com
>
http://latter-dayvillage.com/mailman/listinfo/teachldsseminary_latter-dayvil
lage.com
> or http://tinyurl.com/bemmh
>
> List archives at
http://latter-dayvillage.com/pipermail/teachldsseminary_latter-dayvillage.co
m/
> or http://tinyurl.com/7dpqf
>
> List FAQ:
> http://latter-dayvillage.com/support/users/kb.php?category_id=3
>