User:Seanmcox/We Are Our Own Judges

There is an idea that I have heard sketched out, that, in reality, we are our own judges, and that we put ourselves in whatever kingdom we feel most comfortable in. There are various quotes and scriptures which form the framework for this idea. Generally, I will say, that it is an idea that I think has merit, but that it is not the normal way we describe the judgement day. If the idea is true, then I think that a shame.

I have not yet mapped out even a significant portion of the scriptures and quotes that give rise to this idea, but I have created this page to facilitate doing that in the future.

This quote is probably a fairly direct assertion of the idea by the Prophet Joseph Smith:

A man is his own tormentor and his own condemner. Hence the saying, They shall go into the lake that burns with fire and brimstone. The torment of disappointment in the mind is as exquisite as a lake burning with fire and brimstone. I say, so is the torment of man.
- Joseph Smith, "The King Follett Sermon"

In the Book of Mormon, we also find Mosiah asserting that the force and power of the judgement bar of God is that, in the presence of God, we are faced with our own actions, and that if our own actions have been evil, we are tormented so much by our actions that we can not stand to be there and choose to leave God's presence.

And if they be evil they are consigned to an awful view of their own guilt and abominations, which doth cause them to shrink from the presence of the Lord into a state of misery and endless torment, from whence they can no more return; therefore they have drunk damnation to their own souls.
- Joseph Smith, Mosiah 3:25

Why Might This Be Necessary

No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile
- D&C 121:41-42

The idea that the authority of God cannot be maintained by force is an idea that is both old and difficult to understand. It is not our usual experience that truth, in and of itself, is sufficient to enforce law. Generally, no matter what the law, there is always a threat of violence that acts as an ultimate resort to ensure compliance; which is not to say that it always succeeds in securing compliance, just that it is the ultimate resort; an implicit threat backing up all the demands of human law.

God asserts that the priesthood does not act in this way. If that is so, then how is order maintained in the heavens?

If the citation is to be believed, then persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness and meekness, love unfeigned, kindness, and pure knowledge, suffice to maintain order. However, the scriptures also assert that there are judges. If we take Joseph Smith seriously, then it just may be that we are our ultimate judges, and then, despite whatever wickedness may be in us, we deny ourselves the power and authority of God, in part, because we will not want it.

This is an odd idea, but it does make some intuitive sense, in that, without force, one would expect each individual to naturally go where one is most comfortable. Implicitly then, the Celestial Kingdom would be greater torment to a damned individual, than the torment to which he would naturally be resigned to.

Men and Women

"In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; And if he does not, he cannot obtain it. He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase.
- D&C 131:1-4

The Celestial Kingdom is described here as being divided into 3 degrees and it is further described that obtaining the highest degree requires marriage. What is the nature of the other two degrees? We are not told in detail, except that we are elsewhere told that those who don't obtain the highest degree will be angels to the gods, and not gods themselves. However, if the other two degrees are for men and women who are not joined, then it seems reasonable to imagine that these degrees are for the unjoined men and women; one degree for men, and one degree for women.

It has been my observation that there seem to be both men and women who are incapable of the kind of intimacy that is required to join their lives with another. They prefer to be unattached and enjoy the freedom that comes from living life uncommitted to another, and while they may feel sexual attraction, they often find the differing natures of the opposite sex to be too off-putting to be willing to sacrifice the benefits of being unattached, for those of being in a committed relationship. I speculate then, that this might form the foundation for the two differing lower degrees in the Celestial Kingdom.

It is also, of course, totally plausible that there is another basis. eg. I also observe that Upholder and Rebel personality types tend to avoid each other in real life, and so, in heaven, good Upholders and good Rebels, who haven't married, might similarly self-sort. (This idea does not appeal to me as much as the idea of separation based on gender.)

Experience with Dissociating People

Knowledge saves a man; and in the world of spirits no man can be exalted but by knowledge. So long as a man will not give heed to the commandments, he must abide without salvation. If a man has knowledge, he can be saved; although, if he has been guilty of great sins, he will be punished for them. But when he consents to obey the gospel, whether here or in the world of spirits, he is saved.
- Joseph Smith, "The King Follett Sermon"

God has been described as the God of truth, and that to rebel against God is to rebel against the God of truth, or rather to rebel against truth and reality itself. It has been my observation that a great deal of the iniquity that exists in the world comes as a consequence of this rejection of truth. The two forms by which the rejection is manifest are dishonesty and dissociation. People who are dishonest, are capable of seeing the truth for what it is, but consciously choose to lie, cheat, and steal; to dig a pit for their neighbor. People who dissociate have a similar thing happening on a subconscious level. Whether conscious or subconscious, a person who cannot overcome their antipathy for reality, it would seem, is not fit to become like God.

In my dealings with dissociative people, I have found that an effective general technique for defending ones self against their abuse, is to turn it around on them, much like the idea of using the momentum of an attacker against them. One specific technique that worked well, was to ask them how they would feel if you treated them the way they treated you. How do they want you to respond? Would they be capable of responding that way if you treated them the way they treat you? Also, when abuses are overt and obvious, it is often helpful to name them. (Hitting, name-calling, etc.) Because, often, what they accuse others of, is in fact, what they are guilty of, I would also suggest (not having tried it myself) asking them if they are guilty of the things they accuse you of. (This is only suggested when their accusation are absurd, or otherwise likely to be imagined by them because they imagine you to act like they do.) I have not found that simple denials of their false reality or assertions of what is real, do much to counter their absurd and false allegations.

In reviewing the effectiveness of these techniques in my life, I have had to conclude that reflecting reality back at a dissociating person is about as effective as standard therapies (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and Dialectical Behavioral Therapy). It can not change people who don't desire to change. They have to want the change. If they aren't willing to see reality, then what will be the reaction? Well, they will run away from it. Hence I have come to reflect that if a people comes together and truly worships the God of truth, and and the light of truth is then with them, then perhaps that means that they are perfectly capable of reflecting truth to those who come to them with a distorted light, then, perhaps that is why the wicked run away and would rather choose one degree or another of misery, than stand in the brightness of the light of truth.

Zion

I have often thought that Zion might be built by implementing the principles by which the heavens operate, and hence, if a people can be trained to reflect light and truth; to recognize abusive distortions of reality and react in a way that is in line with the oath and covenant of the priesthood, and shows the abusers that they are seen for exactly what they are, then they will flee to a distance.

It seems however, that the strongest sorting that occurs in this world is not based on acceptance of, or antipathy for, truth, but instead, based on openness to experience, where those high in openness to experience, and those low in openness to experience (Rebels v Upholders) vilify each other because they are too blind to see the value in their opposite. (Divisions based on gender are also common.) This kind of division is not helpful and cannot be the primary impetus for division in a Zion society, yet it is my sad observation that this is, in fact, the primary mode of division in Utah, where Rebels are often driven out of the church by Upholders. (In my experience, in California, the conflict between Upholder and Rebel was palpable, but not nearly so strong as in Utah. Societal divisions in California had a different flavor. It certainly wasn't truth v. error. North v. south was an issue, along with rural v. urban. There were also racial divisions, though these paled in comparison to the east coast, and class divisions.) Building a society oriented around recognizing truth is rare indeed.