Celestial dating satterfield

23-Jan-2018 03:04 by 8 Comments

Celestial dating satterfield - Chatrandom cifler

Sometimes things aren't just meant to be, we learn form the experience and we move on.

celestial dating satterfield-11celestial dating satterfield-71

Even though I am going through a divorce, and will not be doing any dating for quite some time, I found the article to be very uplifting and full of hope and promise.But there has never been further “revelation” on the topic, only “logical” conclusion, which is based off of a potentially faulty understanding of the passage.Lets look at the first verse a little differently; “In the celestial glory…” To correctly understand we first need to understand a common fallacy which is “presentism”, presentism is the act of applying current understanding and word meanings to historic events.When I met my wife it was in the most unusual manner, (we both come from different countries) but it is something that I prayed for based on my circumstances - so what is the end theme here?Prayer can grant you miracles if you apply it with faith and works. And what wonderful youth we have when they Desire to do good and keep themselves morally clean.Name: Deseret Country: Comments: You're not supposed to be "dating" anyone who is on a mission and I think you need to be honest with him and explain how you feel, don't take too long otherwise he may feel you two are serious when in fact you don't feel the same way.

The best thing to do is to be honest with him, just write him a letter and tell him everything that's the least you can do.

Also, if he was referring to the specific kingdom JS would have used the same language as he did in every other mentioning of it, “celestial kingdom”, not “celestial glory”.

“there are three heavens or degrees;” With the understanding of word usage and presentism, we can now clearly see JS usage of “three heavens or degrees”. “In the celestial glory (the plan of salvation, this universal creation) there are three heavens or degrees (God created three degrees of heaven/glory);” Furthermore, if there were “subdivision” and it was important enough to not only mention it. JS says there is a strict condition to obtain the “highest” degree with in the celestial kingdom.

In other words, words don’t have the same meaning throughout history.

It’s a logical fallacy to read this scripture, specifically “celestial glory” with its NOW concrete definition, as though JS also had that same definition. “Celestial glory” was an expression of what we now refer to as the universe or all the space above.

The traditional reading of D&C 131, would suggest the only way for one to obtain the celestial kingdom, would be dependent on the choice of a future spouse.