This Life Is Meant to Be a Kingdom, Not Just a Cross

A belief in the afterlife can have negative effects. Some people seem to disengage from this life, banking on a promised post-mortal future to bring peace and happiness. They don't enjoy this life or attempt to make a real difference in the lives of others, because they don't see this life as anything more than a temporary test. Many of these people are instantly recognizable in church because they speak about "the world" as being an outside entity against which they are pitted in battle for their very souls. These are people clinging, white-knuckled, to the tightrope of life just inching along from one side to the other. They see the platform on the far side of the rope and that is all they see. Mortally afraid of falling, they never risk loosening their grip, and if they do slip, even a little, they are nearly paralyzed by fear that they will never reach the safety of the platform. Theirs is a constricting life. 

This view of heaven, as an escape, is a miserable degradation of what the Gospel actually teaches. The gospel is Kingdom and Cross. In other words, it isn't just about salvation from eternal hell (Cross) but about building a life now that's worth living forever (Kingdom). We are supposed to be fashioning a new garden in this lone and dreary waste. It's the sweat of our brow and the struggle to bring new life to this place that we are charged with. In this kind of gospel-centered life, the walk across the tightrope becomes a divine dance through the air. The platform on the other side, just like the platform from which we stepped out into the spotlight, is not a goal to be reached by the timid but an anchor whose existence is essential in creating the space where the most brilliant performances play out. 

This is not to suggest that I don't believe in post-mortal existence. I do. But I don't believe it's an "after" life.

It's just life.

The continuation of our divine dance.

Did We Choose Our Mortal Trials in the Pre-Existence?

I have a friend who said once:

"We are all put in the right place for the best possible outcome."  

I have thought about that idea off and on for a long time, and I both agree and disagree with it.  My main concern, however, isn't in the wording but rather in the extrapolations that are so common from it.  I hope the following makes sense as a summary of why I am conflicted about the quote above. 

Given our belief in a "veil of forgetfulness", the pre-existence is where Mormon theology gets a bit squishy, but within Mormon theology there are some things that point toward the wording above. Two of those things are:

1) In the case of a crack baby (or a child born into terrible abuse) who dies early, if we accept the idea that all children who die before being accountable inherit the Celestial Kingdom (which my heart loves, but by head has a hard time accepting due to my dislike of predestination), that baby gets the best possible reward for what s/he suffers in this life.

2) Our temple work does not require anyone to accept God or Jesus or Mormonism or the LDS Church or anything else in this life - and it leaves the final judgment completely in the hands of God. The standard really is what type of person each individual becomes, relative only to their personal effort and circumstances - and, again, that judgment is God's alone.

My problem with the quote above, as worded, also is with the phrase "in the right place" and how it can be interpreted. I have heard it used way too often in my life to justify a condescending attitude toward "the other" - that their specific situations in this life (and, by extension, our own situations) are a direct result of something about their former life, usually worthiness or valiance.  Thus, I believe the idea that every person is born into the best circumstance for that person can be viewed in such a way that it functions as a conceit of luxury. It's a way to justify one's own privileged position and rationalize others' horrible circumstances.

It's also one of the reasons I am open to the idea of multiple probationary experiences, even though I don't preach it or believe it passionately. Rather, I lean toward a structure of eternal progression that is WAY more expansive and extended than a limited focus on mortality allows. I do believe that this life is the most important stage in our eternal progression at this moment, but I also believe our previous stages were the most important at those times and that our future stages will be the most important at those times. I believe all is present unto God in the sense that the past is gone and the future will be whatever the present makes it be.

I think all we can see is the here and now, so we do the best we can to understand the stark differences all around us - and, because we see through a glass, darkly, we each end up with partial views that make sense to each of us. That's why I try to understand the best I can and allow others the same privilege, let them understand how and what they may.

I simply would say,

All who are born will receive the best possible outcome, according to the wisdom, grace and love of God. All who "keeps their first estate" will be rewarded for it to the greatest extent possible.

What Will We Do in the Next Life?

Someone once asked me what I would like to do after I die - how I would like to spend my time in the next life.  Given my sense of humor, I think I would like to do the following:

Read; play Monopoly, Rummy and Free Cell; play and listen to good music; do a million piece puzzle; sit with my wife and talk - then flirt until she slaps me and insists that I stop; invent new sports; talk with everyone for years, since time will be irrelevant; learn everything there is to know; create a universe and a few billion spirits. (without post-mortal pregnancy, since neither my wife nor I want anything to do with that)

You know, the simple things.

Eternal Progression: Possibilities of Meaning and What We Choose to Become

What we do affects who we become - or, our attitude affects what we do, which, in turn, affects who we become.

There's a difference in believing in eternal progression as I describe in the sentence above and in believing every single person who ever lives in mortality will reach the highest reward imaginable. I believe the former; I don't believe the latter. I think the quote above describes the general concept - but the extreme toward which each person drifts or runs full-speed is up to them. I just think more people will end up on the same path eventually than many other people think will be the case.

When I say:

What we do affects who we become - or, our attitude affects what we do, which, in turn, affects who we become.

I mean it to apply to movement in any and all directions. It could be argued that "everything is one eternal round" means we all end up circling back to the beginning in the end - or it could mean that the "round" is an ever climbing spiral - or it could mean that in the end we are "restored" to whatever character we were in the beginning - or it could mean everything exists in one giant arena for us to discover - or it could mean that what comes around goes around - or it could mean lots of other things.

I personally think it hints at truly eternal progression, which I personally like to characterize as the ability to progress toward whatever "godhood" to which we orient ourselves - the "godhood" of good or the "godhood" of bad. We tend to spiral toward whatever eventual end we choose - and I also believe that eventual end has very, very little to do with our publicly stated theology and our official religious affiliation. I believe God's grace and the Atonement of Christ are far more powerful than most people understand. There are saintly Mormons and devilish Mormons - as is true of every other religion in existence. I just happen to really love the officially stated direction Mormonism encourages we choose as the intended path of our spirals.

To say it differently, it's not the car you drive, and it's not even necessarily how well you drive it; rather, it's the direction you choose to drive and your determination to continue to drive until the very end of your journey. I might have said the direction in which we drive determines where we end up, with the extension that one can end up on either side of the cosmos (think a sphere cut in equal parts, not a line with two rays leaving the center point) or stall in the middle and simply refuse to drive at all (which would be three ultimate destinations as possibilities, I guess).

What I'm saying fundamentally is that I believe if we get in and drive in the right direction, we eventually will arrive at the right destination - even if that destination simply is a never-ending ride in that direction.

Mormonism: Eternal Arrogance and Eternal Separatism

I have had numerous people over the years claim that Mormonism is arrogant in the way it claims faithful people can become gods while non-faithful people can't.  This often is included with a total misunderstanding of Mormon doctrine - with claims that we believe only Mormons will receive the greatest reward.  Other than to state the obvious for most members and point out how incorrect that complaint is, I want to address in this post the general idea of rewards and punishments in the post-mortal existence and how Mormonism is decidedly NOT arrogant or "separatist" - particularly in comparison to the rest of Christianity. 

Our ultimate theology posits that almost all will be saved and resurrected and receive a degree of glory.  In my own words, only those who look God in the eye and swing their fists receive no reward and, instead, are punished.  Thus, in Mormonism, nobody really gets "punished" for being born - made worse in the end than if they hadn't been born. That is opposed diametrically to the traditional concept of Hell and God as the eternal roast master. 

Finally, the specific reward isn't tied to clear, objective rules - since God, the Father, who alone sees the heart, is the ultimate Judge and Assigner - and each person is represented in counsel, if you will, by God, the Son, who argues for mercy to whatever extent possible. Thus, in the end, religious affiliation in mortality doens't mean a thing - not even a little thing - in the determination of reward and punishment.  In Mormon theology, truly all are alike unto God. 

The distinction within Mormonism is between the level of the blessed state, if you will, but it is tied to individual judgment by God based on individual effort and integrity - unlike pretty much every other Christian construct and most theological constructs.

Everyone, Eventually, Will Stand All Amazed

My own simple description of the classic Mormon take on the here-after is that:

1) Those who try will be rewarded so generously that they will be astounded - and "stand all amazed". 

2) Those who coast along and don't really try will be rewarded in a loving and gracious manner - and "stand all amazed".

3) Those who don't try at all but revel in harmful things will be rewarded more than they appear to us to deserve - and, probably, "stand all amazed".

4) Only those who punch God in the face intentionally will be punished - and, ironically, from the other perspective, probably "stand all amazed".

5) We will be where we will be the most comfortable - including the God-punchers.

I really love that, personally.

I Will Settle Into a Kingdom When I Am Done Growing

One of my favorite concepts is summed up in the following line:

I will settle into a kingdom when I'm done growing - when I am as complete, whole and fully developed as is possible for me to be.

Symbolism: Helpers in the Temple - and After Death

I view pretty much everything in the temple as symbolic. It's much more powerful and meaningful for me that way.

I think the symbolism of the "helper" in the temple is important and profound - and far too rarely considered as a powerful symbol. I've never worried one bit about remembering anything when I die, since even someone with severe dementia could go through the temple successfully as long as they could repeat what someone was whispering in their ear. (I know that's not the purpose of the temple, and it's not the practice in the temple, but I use it strictly to illustrate a narrow point.) I LOVE that aspect of the temple.

Since I think it's all symbolic anyway, and since I believe if any of it is literal we either will have perfect recall or someone standing next to us to help us, I don't fret about memorizing anything in the slightest. I have memorized most of the presentation, at least to the extent that I can anticipate the wording and know what's coming, but it's not something I put any conscious effort into doing. I am free to attend, try to open my mind to inspiration and simply "be" - in the presence of God.

Warning: This Is a Purely Speculative Post on a Highly Controversial Topic

Russell M. Nelson said in his spring 2002 General Conference address, How Firm Our Foundation:

"Gender disorientation is poorly understood."

When discussing the topic of gender and sexual orientation, I focus on one thing first - the mathematics. We all know, hopefully, that biological sex is not determined at the moment of conception, but rather that it happens through the process of gestation. We have NO IDEA when the spirit enters the body; the prophets have been very clear about that. Therefore, even if spirits are male and female, we have no idea whatsoever when they enter the forming fetus.

So, assuming for a moment that spirits are male and female just to stay solidly within the bounds of current Mormon doctrine, what are the mathematical chances that there end up being the exact same number of male and female spirits as there are male and female mortal bodies? Why would it be against our theology in any way to say that there MIGHT be some male spirits in female bodies and female spirits in male bodies? Perhaps they enter the body prior to formal, biological sexual "assignment"; perhaps there simply is an imbalance when all is said and done and some "mixing" must occur for all spirits to be born into mortal bodies; perhaps any number of other explanations exist. My point is that there is no concrete reason of which I can think that every male spirit MUST enter a male mortal body or every female spirit MUST enter a female mortal body.

Actually, if we allow for that simple possibility, much (if not all) of our difficulty in dealing with homosexuality and inter-sex issues would disappear. As I've said elsewhere, taking mortal sexuality out of the eternal equation (leaving gender/sex alone, but removing all things dealing with actual sexual intercourse and its related activities) would open up all kinds of possibilities in the hereafter - and it would remove instantly much of our repulsion toward and problems with polygamy, as well.

I'm NOT saying this is the "right" outlook or "true". I have no clue, really, if there will be a "sexual" component to the afterlife. I personally doubt it, and there is nothing in our canon that insists there will be, but I don't know. What I'm saying is that much if not all of our angst and confusion and difficulty would vanish if we held to "gender/sex" as an eternal characteristic but let go of "sexual activity" as an eternal characteristic - and that is totally consistent with a reasonable parsing of "The Family: A Proclamation to the World". 

Elder Nelson was 100% right in his 2002 talk: This is one area where there is little concrete understanding - a MUCH more complicated topic than most people realize and accept. Therefore, I am open to lots of possibilities that would help us reconcile these things without having to lose the core framework of our theology - and I believe there are multiple ways to do so that fit solidly within the broad spectrum of Mormonism, even if we still can't reach certainty in our conclusions.

Mormonism Allows for the Ultimate 11th Hour Conversion

I think one of the core concepts of Mormonism that gets overlooked far too often is the idea that the parable of the workers in Matthew 20 can be applied just as easily to those who accept the Gospel in the hereafter (the ultimate 11th hour by human calculations) as it can be to those who are born in the Church and search faithfully all the days of their lives.

In view of the eternities, just as with our meager contribution to our joint Atonement account, however long we work in the field is inconsequential. What counts is that we sink our shovels into the sod and shoulder our load.

I Am Baffled, but Grateful

"If we acknowledge god when a child gets better, then we are also obliged to acknowledge god when the child dies."

That quote is true only if we assume God saves all who live and does not save all who die. Reality baffles me - specifically because it's not so black and white. I have a child who has been spared quite dramatically, but I also have family who have died quite traumatically.

I have an aunt who choked at the dinner table - in front of four of her kids - while two others were serving missions - while my uncle was a very faithful bishop. While one of the kids called 911, he tried to bless her to live until she could receive proper medical care. He opened his mouth and nothing came out. He broke contact, tried again, and nothing happened. He relaxed, cleared his mind and blessed her to die quickly and peacefully. She was dead before the paramedics arrived.

I have an uncle who died from a bee sting to the neck. He was given a conscious choice to remain dead or return to his family. He chose to return - having felt incredible peace and joy in death, but also having seen what would happen particularly to one of his sons.

My wife has an aunt who had seven children at home when she was killed in a car accident as she was turning into her driveway. She had been distracted and swerved into the path of an oncoming car. Her death caused ripple effects among her kids. Some people said, "It was her time; God must have called her home." I can't buy that, since I can't believe God caused her to be distracted so she could die that day and leave behind children whose lives were impacted so negatively.

So, I am left baffled and puzzled. He saves some; he binds the mouths of some as others die; he sits back while drunks and crack addicts and abusive parents kill others. It would be very easy to eliminate him completely from the picture and chalk it ALL up to nothing more than chance - but I can't eliminate what I have come to understand through the blessings in which I have participated and the real "saving" I have witnessed. I know he saves some, so I am left to wonder why He does not save others.

I don't see the big, full picture, and, ironically, it is the small glimpses I do get here and there that keep me from abandoning the idea that there is one - even when I have no real clue what those glimpses mean. Even though they leave me baffled, I am grateful for them.

Mormon Reincarnation and Universalism

I am a universalist in the Biblical sense of "as in Adam ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22) I don't see how any believing Christian can address that verse (or the entire chapter of 1 Cor. 15, actually) without being "universalist" in that way - since "all who die in Adam" means "all who ever have lived". In Mormon terms, that means I believe all who ever have lived (minus very few Sons of Perdition, who are the exception that proves the rule) will be "saved" and receive a degree of glory.

I also am universalist in that I believe exaltation is "available" for all - and I am "more universalist" than many other Mormons in that I believe we will be shocked in the end at the percentages that make up the various kingdoms. Frankly, I don't preach reincarnation, since it's not part of the Christian paradigm, but I see a "reincarnative process" in our theology that is missing completely from the rest of Christianity - that informs how we are universalist at heart.

At the very least, we teach of 5-6 distinct states of being - and one more if I am allowed to define creatively.

1) Intelligence (no idea, really, what that means);

2) pre-mortal spirit (no idea, really, what that means other than "created" by exalted parents - or what process was used in that creation);

3) Mortal human (a combination of "immortal" spirit and mortal body);

4) post-mortal spirit (a pre-mortal spirit with more memories); [*grin*]

5) post-resurrection being (which might or might not be "separated" [sorry for the pun] from);

6) post-judgment, "glorified" being (assigned to a kingdom overseen by a God [Father, Son or Holy Ghost].

7) The 7th stage would be Heavenly Parent.

It is noteworthy that the first SIX stages are universal in our theology. The only one that is not universalist in every way is #7 - Heavenly Parent. It also is instructive to note that those who accuse Mormons of being arrogant exclusionists almost "universally" are less universalist than we are. That is one of the most ironic aspects of religious debate I can imagine - and it influences my frustration with conversations with others about temple ordinances. Those discussions generally are couched in terms of the exclusionary arrogance such ordinances illuminate, when, in fact, they are the practical core of our universalism.

Acceptance of Jesus in the Next Life

I personally don’t like talking about baptisms for the dead in terms of “becoming members of the Church”. Baptism in this life leads to membership in a church; I just don’t see it as having the same connotations in the hereafter. When someone accepts a proxy baptism, I don’t see them as joining a church; I see them as giving evidence of their acceptance of their Savior and His redemption.

Perhaps it's just me, but I believe churches are mortal organizations. I just don't see "churches" existing in Heaven.

Treasures in Heaven; Blessings on Earth

I have been blogging each Saturday this month principally about not judging. I am fascinated once again at how appropriate the monthly resolutions have been on more than one occasion since I started this focus at the beginning of 2008 - and the wrap-up post for this month is a another great reminder that God knows us personally and is willing to inspire us in advance to meet circumstances that will arise in the future.

Matthew 6:19-23 was the "secondary" passage I chose to analyze and emphasize this month (Matthew 7:1-5 being the primary one). It reads:

19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:

20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:

21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

When I first crafted this resolution, I honestly didn't know why I included two very different passages for one month. I stand all amazed now, looking back and looking forward, at how inspired that decision was so long ago.

As some of you are aware, I am in the process of making a major change in my life - and, like many moments of extensive change, my immediate future has caused me to reflect on my past. This resolution (to study and consider Matthew 6:19-23) is interesting in light of my reflections this week.

For those of you who are not aware, I will be starting a new job in a brand new field next month. Among other things, I have been a classroom teacher, a training manager, an educational publishing salesman and sales manager and, most recently, a manager in the elderly care industry. For years, I have considered trying to move into college admissions, but the timing simply never seemed right. Now, it is - and I will be an entry level admissions rep for a liberal arts college in Missouri in about three weeks.

(If anyone has children, siblings or friends who are interested in a liberal arts education, especially one where they can craft their own individualized field of study, have them check out Culver-Stockton College. We are making some very exciting changes, and I am looking forward to being a part of that process.)

What struck me this week, amid the pressure of packing, purging, house hunting, etc., is that I am (yet again) starting over and taking a significant pay cut (from when I was employed) in order to pursue something I really want to do - and something I feel I have been inspired to pursue. Looking back on my life to this point, I am impressed once again by the foresight of the man who gave me my Patriarchal Blessing - when he told me that money would never be a top priority in my life. Each step along the way, from my college graduation (when I walked away from enormous economic potential to become a school teacher) to my movement away from upper level management in order to help influence my own children and a troubled young man to this mid-life career transition, I have faced multiple decisions where I had to choose between "treasures upon earth" and "treasures in heaven".

What is fascinating to me is that each time I have chosen to pursue treasures upon earth, I have ended up being burned by that choice, in obvious, undeniable ways - while each time I have pursued treasures in heaven (to "do the right thing"), I have been blessed greatly, in multiple, obvious, undeniable ways. Essentially every major, incredibly difficult financial trial I have faced has been the result of following my own instincts and understanding; essentially every major, incredibly enlightening blessing I have received (relative to my immediate family - wife and kids) has been the result of choosing something that made little sense at the time - something about which we felt inspired or something that was arranged almost without active involvement and work on my part.

My upcoming move is just the latest example of this. I know I am going to be doing what I am supposed to be doing, and this week has included direct evidence to me and my wife. Due to the overall economic situation in this area and our own situation, we are going to have to rent when we move. The issue is that, for a family of seven (at least for a few months), there are practically no available rental properties in the area to which we need to move. I felt strongly that we should try to live in the town where the college is located, but it became apparent right away that there were no housing options available for us. Instead, it appeared that we would need to look in the surrounding, larger towns - and even with that expanded search we were able to find only one option that fit both our size and cost needs. Therefore, we arranged to go out and look at that possibility on Thursday, praying it would work for us.

This Monday night, I was contacted by an agent with whom I had spoken previously. She informed me that she had talked with someone who was trying to sell his house and wasn't interested in renting. He had agreed to let us see it and talk with us about the possibility of renting for a while. When she showed me the house on-line, I almost fell out of my chair. It was the ONLY house I had seen as I initially looked on my own in the town where the college is located that I remember thinking, "I wish this house was being rented."

The bottom line is this:

We have a house we can rent, at a price we can afford, of an adequate size, in the exact location where I had felt we needed to be - and NONE of it, really, was my doing. I had reconciled myself to having to compromise, convincing myself in the process that I must have misunderstood my initial impression.

Surely, God is good - and we are blessed in this life when we lay up for ourselves treasures in heaven. The Gospel truly is full of paradoxes, and I am learning more and more to trust in Him and ignore what I want in order to do recognize and accept what He wants.