tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post816410442851491764..comments2024-03-28T17:44:11.289+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: Mother-Father-Parents - developmental-evolution of the concept of GodBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-28116530343453873142019-06-04T20:55:58.371+01:002019-06-04T20:55:58.371+01:00An important clarification in my understanding res...An important clarification in my understanding resulting from this blog has to do with the personal aspect of the Savior. He's central and necessary in my progress to eternal life. But he's not MY husband, or MY best friend. And this has been important for me in understanding how to love those in my actual life better, more as themselves rather than as extensions of Jesus. I have a very limited imagination, and the added degree of separation sort of confused me and made love too abstract, circling back and chasing itself. <br /><br />It seems to work well for some I've known to think about loving people in their life based on their first knowledge of Jesus' love, but I've usually come to know the Savior in terms I experienced first with those in my mortal life. <br /><br />And in general I think it's why family formation traditions are legitimately such a priority to those who really want to do right. Because, properly done, it's the first and best witness of God's love for His children.Lucindahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01834799557675879450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-11282244521055960582019-06-04T18:14:24.805+01:002019-06-04T18:14:24.805+01:00@Lucinda - The 'opt in' idea is how I unde...@Lucinda - The 'opt in' idea is how I understand the different levels of Heaven - which I tend to regard in a flexible and individualised way, rather than as three subdivided categories. <br /><br />The highest level of exaltation I would assume corresponds with those who want (and make the commitments, and learn from the necessary experiences) to become fully divine; which (I take it) relates specifcially to the highest form of creation - which is the procreation of spirit children. <br /><br />It seems likely that there are some who never would want this, and would remain at lower levels of exaltation; where they also can participate in the divine work of creation, according to their abilities and motivations - but not pro-creation. <br /><br />Linking to another speculation; I think this implies that Jesus must be celestially married; and I assume this was a major aspect of his incarnation; specifically the marriage to Mary Magdalene, which (as I understanding it) is pretty clearly described in the Fourth Gospel (as I argue in my Lazarus Writes mini book). <br /><br />I'm not clear about where the recent adjustments of the CJCLDS are going (of course I am just an outside observer - albeit supportive and sympathetic); but I admit to being a bit worried. I am pretty sure that the public relations arm of the church has been, for several years, corrupted by political correctness (evidenced by some bureaucratic and deniably-dishonest/ misleading press releases, some of which I have commented on at Junior Ganymede). This *usually* is a harbinger of broader organisational corruption, so I am concerned. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-58654264251734369512019-06-04T17:50:46.483+01:002019-06-04T17:50:46.483+01:00You wrote the other day about why you are not a un...You wrote the other day about why you are not a universalist. I regard this point about the polar sexes as maybe the final opt-in of 'preferences' which leads me to not be universalist. It just seems pretty reasonable to think that some, maybe many, would rather not have to be eternally male or female (including polarized marriage, as well as parenthood), even though they enjoy having a body, and even like God and His creation in other ways. It just seems like one of those obvious personal questions posed by this life, "Is marriage and family desirable to you? or do you prefer to be 'on your own'?"<br /><br />And I also agree that the socio-political situation of feminism and 'gender fluid' ideas is very destructive of the purpose of our mortal experience. As with so many things, the appeal of the falsehood is rooted in distorted truth, but the truth had been officially disregarded for quite some time. <br /><br />I'm not sure how the recognition of the dyad of Heavenly Parents would help going forward without some kind of reset of other things. In the CJCLDS, most of the more recent adjustments have been apparently more along the lines of accommodating feminism. Though I do have hope that in actual practice the various changes will work against the anti-marriage and anti-family powers, in some kind of hobbit-from-the-shire-defeats-sauron way.Lucindahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01834799557675879450noreply@blogger.com