Progressive Mormon or Orthodox LDS? Jacob’s Results May Surprise You. (Ft. Ethers Elephant)

[@EthersElephant]

This was so fun! Thanks for making it with me!

[@ItsSnagret]

Dude, this is awesome. Do you have any background in psychometrics or behavioral research? Would love to connect.

[@EthersElephant]

@@ItsSnagretI do, though not directly

[@coxrocks25]

​@EthersElephant do you now map it on the grid thing? I only got a copy of my answers

[@johndavidanderson4382]

As someone who really enjoys and agrees Jacob Hansens content, I was shocked at how different my answers were to his.

[@andrewbfrost7021]

Jacob, Section 19 gives us a scriptural definition of “eternal” and that word explicitly is not referring to time, but rather quality. Eternal punishment doesn’t mean that there is no end to it, it just means that it is God’s kind of punishment. Thus, Eternal Fatherhood does not mean in terms of time, but rather God’s kind of Fatherhood.

[@FinallyMe78]

Absolutely. If we can receive Eternal Life, then we used to not have it, and then there is a start to when we get it.

[@tylerrockwood1994]

So “Eternal God” mean’s “God’s godhood”? Words can have more than one meaning.

[@andrewbfrost7021]

@@tylerrockwood1994 in that case, I would read it as the OG God. Or in a world where lots of gods are presented to man, he is the God of true, authentic celestial nature; the one version of a God with actual divine reality. So, yes, God’s version of Godhood.

[@tylerrockwood1994]

@ couldn’t the Father be the “OG God?” D&C refers to him as the “God of all other Gods,” and Abraham calls him the “most intelligent being of all.” Even if he did take on a mortal form at some point, what reason do we have to believe that He wasn’t a possessor of the divine attributes beforehand? Jesus was God before his mortality and after it. I believe that the Father is the same. In the King Follett discourse, Joseph smith says that the Father had the power to”within himself” to lay down his life and take it up again. If he were like the rest of us mortals, he wouldn’t have that power within himself. It would have to come externally. Joseph implies that he was resurrected by his own divine power, like Jesus. This means that he was sinless. I believe that Jesus’ progression reflects that of the father. He grew in experience and gained a physical body, but he always possessed the divine attributes of perfect morality, justice, and love. But that’s just my view. At the end of the day, the most important thing is what God is now.

[@andrewbfrost7021]

@ I agree that what is important to us at this time is what He is now in relationship to us. I don’t have a problem with God having filled a messianic role in another iteration of the Eternal Round. If so, whose spirit children did he save? Yes, Jesus attained Godhood before his mortality, but does that mean that when he was organized into a spirit child of God that he possessed all of the divine attributes in their fullness from moment one? I don’t think so. I think that he moved from grace to grace until he possessed the fullness (D&C 93). That doesn’t mean he sinned, but rather that when he learned that there was a higher principle to follow, he adopted it without hesitation. One important question in all of this is, What is a God? Obviously, you can be a God without an exalted body (i.e. premortal Jesus). If God the father is “the most high God”, who are the other Gods in the council besides Jesus and Heavenly Mother? Are there any? Will he always be “more intelligent than they all”? Or is “the Most High God” a description of His role in this iteration of the Eternal Round? When the scriptures say that the elements are eternal, does that mean that all of the elements that will ever exist to form worlds without number exist now in their individuality and have forever? Or does that mean that the pattern of the organization of energy into the elements that make up the worlds is an eternal pattern used in every iteration of the plan? Lots of interesting questions that we just don’t know the answer to yet.

[@firecloud77]

6:22 I wonder what Jacob thinks of the King Follett sermon, then. From the Church History website: "Joseph taught that God “was once as one of us” and that “all the spirits that God ever sent into the world” were “susceptible of enlargement,” having the capacity to become like God in the eternities." "Since 1844, the Church has continued to teach the core doctrines that Joseph presented in the King Follett discourse and to view the plan of salvation in light of the truths Joseph Smith taught about humankind’s premortal existence, mortal experience, and divine eternal potential."

[@Eddy002]

Amen. This is a key doctrine of the plan of exaltation. The only reason why the church doesn’t publicize about it all the time is because the church focuses the majority of their efforts on the gospel of Jesus Christ. And then when we are solid on the gospel we are supposed to diligently continue in its study and increase in our knowledge of the other things too. With so many struggling with the small things, there is no need for the church to throw the big things on them. Milk before meat.

[@jonathanettinger6970]

Listen to the Keystone episode discussing King Follett. The truths IN it can basically be found in scripture, just not necessarily phrased as Joseph did it. Meanwhile, the sermon itself has never been taken as doctrine, so specifically stating "God was once a man" is more interpretive than declarative.

[@kathealey]

And the revelation of Lorenzo Snow where this phrase actually comes from.

[@tylerrockwood1994]

My opinion is that if God was “a man like us,” it was in the same way as Jesus. In the King Follett sermon, Joseph specifically compares the Father’s mortality to that of Jesus. He said that the Father, like Jesus, had the power within himself to lay down his life and take it up again. If he had the power “within himself” to be resurrected, that would mean that he was without sin and didn’t need a savior.

[@jonathanettinger6970]

@@kathealey Pres Snow wrote it, but I don't recall it being from a revelation. At any rate, it's not canonized.

[@angelamadsen416]

HEY! What happened to the Ether’s Elephant channel?! It has been TERMINATED?!?!? I subscribed just today and now I have a minute to sit down and watch some of their videos and the channel is gone!!!!

[@EthersElephant]

I’m back now!! KZbin accepted my appeal 😊

[@angelamadsen416]

@ well hooray! I’ll head on over and watch some videos!

[@jameseverett9037]

@@EthersElephant what was their problem with you?

[@EthersElephant]

@@jameseverett9037 I have no idea. They did not explain anything. They said I violated their policy? Then when I appealed they just said “your appeal has been approved”.

[@jameseverett9037]

@@EthersElephant oh...yea. I keep forgetting youtube's secret rules, which are secret so they can maintain a double standard - to censor conservatives for things they won't censor Lefties for. Same reason democrats wouldn't tell Trump what exactly he was being accused and tried for.

[@theboywhoclimbs]

I'm shocked he doesn't believe in our potential to become like God. That's core doctrine. Jesus called Himself the Son of Man and God calls Himself the Man of Holiness. D&C 132 is all about this and it's scattered all throughout the scriptures, not to mention this is an exact quote from Lorenzo Snow and the basis of an entire discourse by Joseph Smith.

[@brettacook2406]

Ether's Elephant channel terminated by Google

[@ericjohnson7950]

Good to know. I tried to find it just now and couldn't and wondered if I was doing something wrong.

[@MrsGsSewingSpace]

What happened to his channel?

[@EthersElephant]

But now I’m back!!

[@mattearl8213]

My Result: Orthodox Mercy "You landed in the ORTHODOX MERCY quardrant! This quadrant is characterized by a traditional, faithful alignment with Church teachings, combined with a strong emphasis on mercy, forgiveness, and understanding. Individuals here are likely to emphasize that while God’s laws are unchanging, His love and grace are extended to everyone. They focus on the compassionate side of doctrine, believing in a patient and merciful God who is eager to forgive and support people in their efforts to grow spiritually. They believe there is room for mistakes on the journey to becoming more Christlike."

[@ovrair6340]

How did you see your result, mine didn't show up when I'd finished?

[@mattearl8213]

@ovrair6340 Check your email.

[@jameseverett9037]

The fault line there is the lax attitude of not worrying about making "mistakes" as much because God will forgive you. This borders on, and encourages sinning with the expectation that you'll be forgiven. Reminds me of a joke I saw in a highschool year book: 'I asked God for a bicycle, but realized He doesn't work that way, so I stole one and asked for forgiveness."

[@mattearl8213]

@@jameseverett9037 No, I just know that God is a person, not a machine. Some people treat God the same way Hindus or Buddhists treat the law of karma, forgetting that you can establish a relationship with God. How does your example fit with the last sentence of my result? How do you become more Christlike if you steal?

[@jameseverett9037]

@@mattearl8213 I guess I wasn't very good at explaining my point.

[@Foe-Hammer]

I like the quiz but a huge criticism is that many of the questions were too generalized, vague or used poorly defined terms. This was exemplified by Jacob having to asking clarifying questions almost every single time

[@TrebizondMusic-cm6fp]

I was frequently dissatisfied with the answers and wished there were more of a gradient, and more qualifying statements. I kept thinking: "well, it depends."

[@bkgoulding]

Nearly ever question made me say, “that depends…” But he did say that he wanted ambiguous questions. I’m just not sure why.

[@curtlarose2563]

I would have liked a "don't know" option.

[@Vzynation]

I feel like the question should be "Should the shape and style of garments be primarily driven by culture" then you are agreeing or disagreeing if it should happen not simply observing and answering if it does or doesnt happen

[@jordan5113]

Some potential feedback, the question "In heaven, a man and a women are not required to create spirit children" This could be interpreted as asking if a couple is mandated to have kids in heaven, or if it takes a man and a woman to have kids in heaven. Anyway, rewording it slightly might be helpful

[@ldsmusician]

There were so many wording issues, IMO. Are we defining the terrestrial glory as heaven? Is having spirit children even possible there?

[@josephdouglas9685]

It would have been useful to include the country. I would be interested how people from around the world may have answered differently. For example regarding the gun question.

[@eldenscity87]

AGREE... Am Here in The Philippines... And i Don't Agree with saying it as LDS... Perhaps American LDS You Do Have Divorce, SameSex Marriage, Abortion We Don't Have it Here And As Asians We Are Strongly Family Oriented, And As Filipino - We Do Have KAPWA "Am i My Brother's Keeper?"

[@josephdouglas9685]

@@eldenscity87 I have Philippino friends and did a small work assignment up there. I'm in New Zealand. I found the Philippinos so friendly. As to your comment, I think the Catholic had a strong influence on your society.

[@philandrews2860]

I took it and my results came out fairly close to Jacob's.. just very slightly more on the mercy scale. Jacob, I absolutely love your Book of Mormon geography theory, as it matches mine 100% - I love Brant Gardner's books and am just now getting into the 6 volume '2nd witness' commentaries on the Book of Mormon. I also loved his book 'Traditions of the Fathers - The Book of Mormon as History'. I also agree with you on your theories with regards to the flood account of the Bible 😊

[@JohnWilliams-dy5dz]

About what time in the video did he talk about his opinion about the flood account. Somehow I missed that part

[@philandrews2860]

@ That was in a different video. The one where Jacob is in a live chat with questions from the viewers

[@keanuakina9014]

Cool video! Was the background music driving anyone else crazy tho?

[@coxrocks25]

How do you get it mapped on the grid? All I see is my answers

[@igoldenknight2169]

One question that should have been on there is “do you believe in Evolution, and if so did humans evolve?”

[@firecloud77]

And the distinction should be made between unguided and guided evolution. For some reason drawing that distinction is rarely done, as though few people consider the possibility for the latter.

[@natedawg2020]

@@firecloud77 A guided process? As in God influenced certain organisms to breed with others? In your scenario, would mortal agency be the driving factor of all these choices propelling evolution, or would God’s influence? Because if you say God’s influence is the primary determinant, then perhaps you have negated the free will of all organisms including pre-hominids. This seems more in line with Lucifer’s proposal in premortality. I don’t think it’s necessary to insist evolution is “guided.” If God is one with natural law, then this is already implied because all factors in the organized universe determine the scaffolding in which decisions must be made.

[@firecloud77]

@@natedawg2020 As in God introducing new developmental code into germ cells.

[@k2peek]

I took the survey, but it hasn't sent me my report yet. What am I missing?

[@curtlarose2563]

It's ok to disagree on things that God has not yet revealed.

[@amertlich]

The problem with broadcasting Jacob’s responses is not only will it influence the responses of his audience but it will also stratify the sample. It’s no longer a statistically representative sampling, but it will be interesting to see the results.

[@lochlansmith6611]

I took it before I watched the video to make sure Jacob's answers didn't alter mine. After watching the video there are definitely some questions I interpreted differently than Jacob thereby making my answers different from his. I do kind of wish I could go back and switch some of my answers because Jacob made some good points, but that's the interesting part of this quiz.

[@Charlie-xu4zh]

Not surprised. But I wonder about women and the priesthood because aren't we told in the temple that we're ordained to one day become "God's and Goddesses, Priests and Priestesses" in the kingdom of God ? So doesn't that mean that one day women will hold the priesthood and become "Priestesses" ? Maybe you could clarify this for me one day in your videos?

[@ldsmusician]

Yes I agree. Is being a priestess in heaven "holding priesthood"? We don't have direct teaching on this, and it makes this question very unclear.

[@jameseverett9037]

Every time you slow dance with your husband, you're holding the Priesthood. Hope that clears things up. 😂

[@natelf4825]

Enjoyable video. I disagreed with some of the responses and how some of the items were worded, but it is directionally desirable. I look forward to improvements on the survey. Thank you both.

[@LDaw_96]

I strongly disagree with the gun stance. It makes church sitting duck zones and me afraid to go to church.

[@jameseverett9037]

Fear of guns is only a recent thing, pushed relentlessly by the Left of course. The LDS Church has never been anti-gun, and the early saints kept guns around like we keep cell phones, but now our kids have all been indoctrinated to see them as morally beneath us all, and progressives will use the example of the converted Lamanites who burried their weapons with an oath never to use them again, as the model we should be following. But those same Lamanites sought refuge and protection from the heavily armed Nephites, and when they realized that the Nephites were in danger of losing to the unconverted lamanites, offered to break their vows. Then when forbidden to, offered their sons as armed soldiers to the Nephites. But the Left's arguments have always been based on missing the point of everything, and using lame examples that don't really say what they want them to. We don't have to be against self-defense to be against killing. Protecting our families...and country, is twisted by the Left as a desire to kill. Yet when they're upset enough at something, they have no hesitation to use, or condemnation of, weapons of any kind. Burning cities and shooting people while at it, is OK, and must be seen as just an expression of 'frustration', but you wanting to protect yourself and family from such "frustration" is one of the main things they're "frustrated" over.

[@igoldenknight2169]

Took the quiz yesterday before watching the video. Just got my results! I’m Orthodox Justice. I’m not surprised where Jacob landed and I’m not surprised where I landed even though we answered differently on a few questions. I’m just a few squares to the right and I think one down.

[@establishingzion688]

I landed in the same quadrant as Jacob, a little more orthodox and a little less justice. Thanks for doing this, it was fun.

[@tonyf8167]

that quiz is silly... there are questions on it with missing context, there were many if which my initial response was "what exactly does the question mean? and you cant truly measure a response unless you understand context.

[@jameseverett9037]

I agree, but he said it's supposed to be ambiguous. Go figure.

[@tonyf8167]

@@jameseverett9037 precisely... this allows him to assign whatever meaning he wants basically throwing objectivity out the window. so like all the other "silly" personality tests on the interwebs your getting the opinion of the author... not objective reality

[@jameseverett9037]

@@tonyf8167 yea I'm not even going to bother taking it, as it's easily skewed by lack of clarity in the questions. Even if it was intentional, it still has an unpredictable influence on the outcome, because most people will do a double take, and likely go with their 2nd or 3rd reading/interpretation of the question. Apparently he was thinking that your first interpretation is the one you will go with, and thus be a major part of what puts you where ever you end up.

[@tonyf8167]

@@jameseverett9037 the only point i wish to make is that, to some degree, it is intellectually dishonest, and maybe the "intent" is benign. IDK what world you live in, but most of the people i see around me need to be TOLD to not take something this seriously...

[@OliverJKenny]

Ethers elephant channel has been taken down.

[@sneax229]

Please tell me you did vid with Alex O’Connor 🙏

[@ethanf.237]

I so hope so!!

[@thekolobsociety]

Stay tuned

[@_Squiggle_]

Insider knowledge from Hayden??

[@benpassey6509]

I did the quiz, did not see the graph after, email also doesn't show the graph. Bummer.

[@mariedelgado1384]

Same here! My guess is that it doesn't generate an automatic response; maybe it takes a couple of days to process because he has to manually input each response. I hope I get my result soon.

[@arbitrarynumbers18]

I feel like the quiz could benefit from a "no opinion/don't know" option. Someone like me does not have enough knowledge or certainty to pick a side on "the book of mormon is historically accurate".

[@irayoung1074]

💯

[@_Squiggle_]

The one I had no opinion on was concealed carry at church

[@crispenc3511]

Very interesting. I’m a practicing member of the church and answered a lot of the questions differently. I wouldn’t argue that I’m right and he is wrong. I look forward to seeing what my test results are.

[@Eddy002]

For the “as man now is, God once was” part, this guy must have missed the entire New Testament when Jehovah became mortal as Christ and said he was just doing what he had seen his father do. 😂 the entire collection is about Christ being a man then becoming God, and also saying he can only do what he has seen his father do.

[@tylerrockwood1994]

Yeah, but I think he was probably responding to some members who think that the Father was once a sinful man like us.

[@jacobcarnese]

“As man now is.” Man on this earth is sinful, but fully mortal. The distinction Jacob makes is that he believes that our Eternal Father was never sinful, much like Christ.

[@TheGreatDadoo]

RESULT: You landed in the ORTHODOX JUSTICE quardrant! This quadrant is characterized by a firm alignment with traditional Church teachings and a strong emphasis on justice, accountability, and obedience to established doctrine. Those in this category are often deeply committed to upholding the standards of the Church and believe in a God who expects moral discipline and adherence to divine law. They see following the ‘straight and narrow’ path as essential and believe that blessings and salvation are tied to living according to clear, established principles. yeah, that seems about right.... nice test! the questions needed clarifying and are kinda vague in a lot of cases, but the questions themselves are insightful and somewhat profound. Well done, for real.

[@_Squiggle_]

I think the ambiguity is intentional to test emotions/vibes instead of very specific situations. The questions can be more general and you are less likely to get "well, I technically disagree because of this word..." and more voting based on overall feeling But idk

[@thejorgerojas]

did anyone else not get their results???

[@danjohnson8556]

My interpretation is that Jesus had to pass through the veil and “condescend” when he came to Earth. He had to grow “grace by grace” until he was able to figure out who he was (probably during the 40 days of fasting in the wilderness).

[@mikemccabe8015]

I would argue he knew who he was well before then. I forget where in the NT this story is told, but when he was 12 he went to the temple and his mortal parents didn't know where he was. When they found him, he said he was doing his father's business, referring to his eternal father. The 40 day fast certainly could've played a large part in his development as Savior though.

[@danjohnson8556]

@ Yeah, that makes sense.

[@bradleyclark8588]

The descendants of Lehi were not “refugee Jews.” They were not of the tribe of Judah. They were mostly of the tribe Manasseh. They can be described as “refugee Israelites,” however.

[@BrianTerrill]

At 14:04, Eternal Marriage was specifically revealed as a question about polygamy. I wouldn't say it is between one man and one woman because there is a law attached to it called the Law of Sarah that requires the first wife's involvement in the other marriages. It will not ever be that marriage can be between two men or two women, though. Both the Old and New Testaments are equally as harsh against homosexual behavior, and Paul leaves no room for those types entering the Kingdom of God.

[@bkgoulding]

I disagree. The first wife’s involvement in a second marriage was only meant to signal consent. She wasn’t party to some sort of group marriage. The man never married two women at the same time. There were no threesome marriages. Therefore, in polygamy the marriages are all still between one man and one woman.

[@BrianTerrill]

@bkgoulding I don't want to get too far into it because it's temple related, but Orson Pratt in his work the Seer gave a very lengthy explanation of how the ordinance was performed when a man took a second wife, and the first wife's initial involvement was part of the ordinance. The best way to explain it is by Genesis 16:3 "3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife" Sarah taking Hagar and giving her to Abraham was literally part of the ordinance and not a simple consent of approval.

[@bkgoulding]

@@BrianTerrill Right, the first wife was involved. But she was already married to the man. She wasn’t getting married to him again. Only the next wife was getting married that time. One woman to one man. There were no group weddings. No man ever married two or more women at the same time. It was always the marriage of one woman to one man, but done multiple times for the man. Here’s why this matters: Gay activists in the church are pushing for gay marriage in temples, and their rationale is that God has already changed the definition of marriage before. They say he changed it from marriage of one man to one woman to one man to many woman and back again. We have to remind those progressives that that is not true. God never changed marriage. It has always been between one man and one woman, although at times he authorized that action to be done more than once for the man. There’s a subtle but important difference, and we cannot allow activists to get away with teaching a false doctrine.

[@jameseverett9037]

​@@bkgoulding Much more to it than just "changing the definition" as far as how many spouses there can be. It's basic biology, and how procreation was designed. Gay 'sex' is not procreation, period. There is no anal procreation, nor dildoe procreation. It's quite factual that 2 women cannot have kids, nor can 2 men. We could even argue that it's technically not even sex, since sex implies 2 opposite and complimentary genders, as designed and commanded by our Creator - the ONLY kind of sex that can produce offspring. Anything else is -at least technically - a perversion of the procreative design and intent. Also, children have intrinsic psychological need of both Father [male] and Mother [female] - their opposite genders are important for balanced mental & spiritual maturing of the children. I love gay guys, but procreation IS what it is, and AIN'T what it ain't. And marriage is designed primarily for children & family, not just anyone who wants to have sex. I'm sure they can have all the male friends they want in heaven, but 2 men being sealed in a marriage mocks the whole point of celestial marriage, and renders it more fit for a novelty circus than anything else. I don't know how people can even go there, mentally. Just shows how powerful the "progressive" world's ideas are for some people, and how activist they will wax, trying to make a square peg fit a round hole, in spite of all common sense, scripture and revelation.

[@friendsinthefold]

So any leads on this? I can't find it anymore.

[@nzhawk]

Jacob Hanson and Connor Boyack should have a discussion.

[@rongustaveson4493]

Great video and fun survey! I landed very close to Jacob as well. It would be fun to see where others land.

[@TrebizondMusic-cm6fp]

It put me in the Orthodox Justice quadrant: the middle of Orthodox, barely over the line for Justice. Does this mean I'm a "raging Deznat?" This was interesting. Every time I take the Political Compass quiz it has put me in the Libertarian Left quadrant, though lately I'm barely there and within the center square. I thought I was getting conservative in my middle age, and maybe that's more in my religion than in my politics. I haven't felt like nor thought of myself as a leftist for over five years now. And I appreciate Jacob's point about modest clothing still serving a function of sexual signaling. Strongly agree!

[@bartonbagnes4605]

Okay Jacob I have some questions for you. What is the proper method of Baptism? Sprinkling or immersion in similitude of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Why would the baptism of the earth be by sprinkling instead of immersion? Does that mean when the earth is baptized by fire and the Holy Spirit it will only be in one or two small areas?

[@GarySaint-xm6tr]

The clips between the interview had me wondering if I was watching an LDS blog or a Talking Heads video

[@KevinWolz-z6w]

I thought this was a interesting thought experiment. I enjoy the discussion it created in our home. I was a little perplexed that Jacob made the statement ,which implied we should strictly follow the guidance of the brethren, and used this to justify his statement that he would not sustain a Stake President, and encourage others to do the same, for the not follow the church's policy when it come to titles/pronouns, but was perfectly okay with a Bishop going against the church's stance on not having firearms in the church building. While also encouraging a member of his ward to do the same. This made me consider what I am strict on and what I justify, and take a look at what may be motivating those justification to pick and chose what policies to follow/ agree/ disagree with.

[@awfulwaffle1341]

I figure most of Jacob’s listeners will fall into the Justice Orthodox quadrant.

[@austinfife]

This was outrageously interesting

[@davidchoate512]

As long as you’re in the purple area (upper right) , you should feel safe in your spiritual desires and way of thinking that aline with God and His servants teachings .

[@GldnClaw]

I took the quiz. The question "A person addicted to pornography should not enter the temple" was a little harder than I initially realized because I recalled a story of a bishop helping a couple get married wanted the guy to not look at any for 2 weeks beforehand. He was working with him, so *technically* the guy was in the throes of pornographic addiction, but going seemed to have helped.

[@chrisblanc663]

I agree with that. An addict is different than someone actively viewing/participating in pornography. The temple is apart of the healing process that can last a lifetime. It’s why a Bishop needs to have the spirit of discernment and be very sensitive while working with someone with any addiction that can have a strong possibility/probability of relapse.

[@BrianTerrill]

I agree, we must seek ways to use the Temple as a tool to help sinners. The best example of this would be the story of the publication and the Pharisee in Luke 18 it reads: "10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican." The Pharisee gives a prayer that seemingly sounds like he's answering good on all the temple recommend questions, but the publication: 13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." With that said, I don't think people should just run into the temple with an unrepentant attitude or be living a double life. They need to be actively engaged in repentance. For me, there were times I didn't feel worthy to go in the temple, so I stayed outside and walked the grounds, so even non recommended holders shouldn't avoid the temple. Go outside and pray at the temple. The temple is a model of advancement from our current carnal state to a state of exaltation.

[@bkgoulding]

That was another unclear question. We needed to know if the porn addict was actively involved in viewing porn. I assumed the answer was yes, and that would mean he’s sinning in a fairly serious way (worse if he’s married), and that means he needs to repent before entering the house of the Lord. In my view. But I guess it all depends on whether or not the person is trying, or rebelling and willfully sinning.

[@BrianTerrill]

@bkgoulding I'm an alcoholic but I've never drank alcohol. But the temptation is always there, and I know if I drink just one can of beer, it won't be just one can of beer. My dad and his dad, whom he never knew growing up, both had the same problem. The difference is that my dad joined the church, and I grew up in it. My dad had given it up when I was 3 but fell back into it when I was 26, so I moved back in with him. It turns out he was triggered when he was living alone or around friends who encouraged him to drink.

[@chrisblanc663]

@ how do you know your an alcoholic if you have never drank? (Sincere question, as I heard someone can only know they are an alcoholic from the experience of drinking) do you feel an impulse to drink alcohol? Or do you assume you are, based off of family history? A bit of both? Or something else I am not thinking of? Your response would be greatly appreciated, but I understand if you would rather not.

[@ChocoboSaint]

I feel like I know how the person who wrote this landed just because there are questions that we don't know, that assume answers.

[@HyperOrangeDragon]

Ambiguous questions will only lead to ambiguous answers and ambiguous result. There were some obvious alterations to some questions that would lead to easier answers and still reveal the participants views. Double negatives for example. Ambiguity is fine to start a project like this, but as obvious clarity can be had why not clarify?

[@SemisiBenLaman]

Celestial love making for eternity? Dang some of yall gonna be disappointing your wife for eternity 😂

[@danielmsz]

I took the quiz but didn’t receive the results

[@josephdouglas9685]

Same. I wonder if it was because of an ad blocker?

[@NoelFallstrom]

I liked the explanation provided on most of your answers. When I disagreed with your answer, I generally agreed with your explanation. Two examples: The prophet can lead you astray? Strongly disagree. I define that as prophetic counsel given to the church and the goal being returning back to God through Christ. Brigham Young may have been a racist, but following his teachings and example at the time would have lead you closer to God and not further away even if you were led to conclude some incorrect things about blacks and the curse of Cain. The church can fall into apostasy. Strongly disagree. We all have agency and each of us can fall into apostasy, but I define apostasy as having the priesthood removed when applied to the church. I believe the prophesies that state that the church will never again be removed from the earth. I simultaneously believe the prophecies that many people will fall away in the last days. There may be many stake presidents that reject the prophet and/or a member of the quorum of the 12 may leave the church, but the priesthood authority will remain and the president of the church will hold all the keys until the second coming of Christ.

[@davidsorensen2116]

On both of these, I interpreted a can vs will distinction that led me to avoid the strongly option. Because the prophet is fallible, he can lead us astray. Because people within the church are fallible, the church has the capability of falling into apostasy. They won't (accepting your premise about leading us closer to God even if some things are incorrect), but they have the capacity to do so.

[@Englishbob1955]

I am in the PROGRESSIVE JUSTICE quadrant. I suspect that this is partly due to me being UKLDS. I find the concept of having guns in Church obnoxious and frankly evil. This is clearly part of USLDS culture. Again, I found some of Jacob’s attitudes towards women, LGBTQ+, also worrisome. I think this is because the UK church is more balanced and equitable. I liked the idea of the questions being open to interpretation as this allowed for own reasoning. The lack of a ‘don’t know’ crucial. As we say ‘you either pee or get off the pot’!

[@laneferrin8675]

Jacob, are you aware that you have equated all mistakes with sin? That's very problematic.

[@jacobjenks9768]

Just did the quiz. Some of those questions really made think. Like was Adam and even wrong for partaking of the fruit? Well yes cuz they disobeyed God but the same time we wouldn't be here and we couldn't progress to become like God oof.

[@savsmaster4183]

2nd Nephi 2:25 Adam fell that men might be, and men are that they might have joy.

[@MonarchACE7]

He Disobeyed. That’s like Saying it’s okay to Disobey a Bishop or President or Disciple. Drink All the Coffee and Tea then

[@bkgoulding]

I disagree. All sins are transgressions, but not all transgression are sins. Not all transgressions are morally wrong. We say that Adam and Eve transgressed. We do not say that they sinned. What they chose was not wrong even though it was a transgression.

[@MonarchACE7]

@@bkgoulding The Tree of Knowledge was Bad Because it was the knowing of all. Good and Evil but the Serpent tempted them with the idea they would be like God and that they wouldn’t die… It happened sure. But it is one of the commandments you can’t break, you guys believe Adam was a God

[@MonarchACE7]

@@bkgoulding that’s a twisted dorky version of the bible

[@davidmitchell3728]

I was off by about two squares from where I thought I'd be. So I guess that means the survey accurately mirrors one's perception of their discipleship!

[@davidallred2947]

Took the test, even though it was frustrating. Too many were too open ended, or unclear. I felt many of my answers were inaccurate.

[@FaithofAbinadi]

Great stuff!

[@kathealey]

so many of my answers were surprising even to me when I sat in logic. almost all were agree or disagree and very few strongly agree or disagree.

[@michaelanderson6484]

Does anyone else find these "intentionally vague" questions frustrating? I get that they spark good conversation that can help clarify what people believe. However, the results of the quiz without explanation for the answers doesn't tell us as much as we think it does. Did two people who answered the same question with the same response do it for the same reasons? Or even similar ones? Or is too much left up to interpretation? I enjoy this video because Jacob explains how he interprets the questions, but I disagree with how he interprets many of them. That means that our answers aren't truly comparable, and the results aren't as meaningful as I would like them to be. Much like the political compass, with its vague (and sometimes blatantly leading and disingenuous) questions, the responses to these questions require explanation from the answering person to really tell us anything about their beliefs.

[@bkgoulding]

I completely agree. I don’t see the point of the ambiguity.

[@ldsmusician]

Agreed

[@jamesmorphe8003]

must rethink the sacrament question. b4 i was baptized the missionaries told me i should take the sacrament.

[@m4oni]

Who is the guy interviewing Jacob? why does he look so familiar?

[@zaneweeks6306]

I disagree tho with the notion you can’t move into kingdoms after final judgment

[@MonarchACE7]

Right! It’s like then Baptism of the Dead Doesn’t Make Sense

[@mikemccabe8015]

​@@MonarchACE7baptisms for the dead (and other saving ordinances) are done for those who reside in spirit prison, those who didn't accept the gospel during their time on earth or didn't have a chance to accept it. In that sense, it is absolutely possible to progress to spirit paradise. But once judgement has passed, I'm of the belief you either accepted the gospel or you didn't.

[@creeve401]

​@@MonarchACE7But Baptism for the dead is for spirits. Because they don't have a body, they must be baptized vicariously. Final judgement isn't until after the last resurrection, so everyone would have a body by that point. So baptism for the dead would not be necessary after everyone enters a kingdom of glory.

[@bkgoulding]

We baptize for the dead for those hearing the gospel now and in the millennium. But after the final judgment, we will all have had ample time to choose what level of glory we will abide. There won’t be any changing of kingdoms after that, surely.

[@MonarchACE7]

@@bkgoulding the Gates are Not Closed. Only yall and us Catholics believe in Purgatory which isn’t proven theologically or in the Bible. But there’s theories and it saying that with implications. But I thought Joseph smith Opened the gates until the very next person who closes it?

[@batboy12394]

17:55 this was one of the first times I saw Jacob on Twitter a few years ago when he went on about this. I agree with the idea that no unclean thing can enter the Kingdom of God. But I would definitely move away from strongly agree. I think we have a cultural understanding of sin that aligns with a sort of tally system. That through the atonement we just wipe that slate clean. Yet I try to think of sin/discipleship as a mark of our alignment with God's will or our progress in our eternal progression. If we are holding onto sin, we just haven't fully repented and our natures have not been fully transformed. I think that by nature of multiple levels of glory it inherently shows that not all mistakes are equal. Yes, if there is something about our nature that we are unwilling to let go of, we can't achieve everything God wants for us. But, not all fully unrepentant sinners receive the same reward. In a similar vein of changing our natures, I also don't strongly agree with the no movement within kingdoms. We often as members will point out that when we read "Endless" punishment, it doesn't mean without end necessarily, but it is Endless because God is Endless, therefore, it is God's punishment. What if Final has a similar reading. It is God's judgement, not literally the last. Our level of glory is continuously dependent on God-he always retains the final say. If our existence is based on growth and progress, I struggle to see how our natures were able to change in premortal life, mortal life, but never after this period. It would almost seem to me that that stance implies a removal of agency. We often talk of movement "up" the kingdoms, but I think it is easier to rationalize a decrease in glory. If we continue to retain our agency, could we not choose differently in the next life? As I type that, I can see a response being that if we are in the celestial kingdom, we have demonstrated our willingness to align our agencies with God and only act as he would, so such a fall would not happen. But for me there is just enough doubt/uncertainty that I would say I disagree with the statement that there is no movement between kingdoms.

[@kevinferrin5695]

I would say that quiz needs a lot of reworking to be even close to accurate.

[@Jsinebdjsmdbej]

7:00 collective witness model is apostate, only witness required for spoken truth is that of the spirit. How ridiculous to think that if new information is brought to light, it simply isn’t doctrine until its been preached long enough to outweigh all the time it was never mentioned in the past. It pretty much undoes the entire restoration.

[@tjkasgl]

I paused the video and took the quiz so I wouldn't be influenced 😉

[@markstimson983]

Well, I’m about 2 points towards mercy and 2 points towards progressive. But that’s assuming I categorized your questions correctly. The progressive comes out because our historical documents do not allow me to accept Brigham’s polygamy narrative whatsoever as he drove the church into such severe apostasy that it brought the church to the brink of destruction. I do believe that personal revelation trumps anything a prophet says because personal revelation is the only way to know when someone is speaking the truth. As far as anything LGBTQ, I’m strongly orthodox in every area.

[@JohnWilliams-dy5dz]

Personal revelation trumps “anything” a prophet say. Really, “anything?” Putting adjectives like “anything, possibly, will never, etc” into questionnaires causes my brain to short circuit. When I see those words my brain goes into overload with the pressure to “Consider Every Possibility” and circumstances that could affect the answer. It’s one thing to say “personal revelation trumps a prophets revelations “ But to say personal revelation “always” trumps a prophets revelation adds a whole new dimension to these types of statements. It’s crazy because those adjectives have little to no impact on the answers of people who aren’t detail oriented. And for people who are very detail oriented, those words change everything. The science behind these statements & questionnaires blows my mind.

[@justinchapman7673]

How can you say revelation from the prophet is more important than personal revelation but then say a prophet can lead you astray??

[@bkgoulding]

It’s far more likely that a person will be wrong about a “revelation” he “received” than the prophet being wrong. The prophet is the most reliable source on earth in knowing God’s will. We, on the other hand, are often deceived. But the prophet is not perfect, so we are expected to get confirmation from God when a prophet speaks. And if we find that our answer is different from what the prophet said, trust the prophet and the promise that following God’s prophet will be appreciated by God even if the prophet was wrong in that instance. Bottom line: Trust and follow the prophet more than our own feelings. And if he was wrong in one rare thing, it will be on him, not us.

[@jessicaloveridge2759]

I am orthodox mercy on the scale, but close to the middle.

[@fstaheli]

I sort of liked the quiz, but there were several that I could not find an answer that fit me. So I didn't finish it.

[@_Squiggle_]

I would have liked a neutral for some questions

[@dane_with_swag]

Uhm... I took the quizz and can see what I chose, but......... how do you see the result? 😅 (I feel old now)

[@Cblazer100]

There were MANY that I felt as Jacob probably did, where I wanted to know a definition of the question, for example, “doctrine is eternal and unchanging” I put agree, but the word doctrine really is what’s up for debate. What is doctrine? What doctrine in particular?the doctrine of the resurrection? Absolutely yes, the doctrine of men holding the priesthood office of a deacon? Idk. lol.

[@_Squiggle_]

The goal of the quiz is to get your reaction to vines instead of the specific verbage I think That's why it's not a super specific legalese language where "it depends" is less likely of an answer

[@EthersElephant]

@@_Squiggle_yes

[@_Squiggle_]

@@EthersElephant thanks for making the quiz. It was really interesting

[@jerry_phillips]

I'm barely in the Justice/Orthodox quadrant. Pretty close to dead center.

[@drakemiller2267]

I landed in the orthodox justice side but borderline mercy. Very similar to my political compass position. I wonder if anyone has similar results.

[@drakemiller2267]

As in a similar correlation

[@ldsmusician]

I found the quiz disappointing, tbh. Too many things were worded too vaguely to give an accurate answer to. Ex. Eternal marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman. Is this asking whether I believe homosexual marriage can be eternal, or polygamy can be eternal? Ex. A gay man can... was it be in the quorum of the 12? (Going by memory here.) Do we mean somebody who identifies as gay and lives a sexually active homosexual lifestyle, or somebody who experiences SSA but doesn't act on it? So many questions in this survey were vague like this, and I wasn't sure how to answer as a result, which causes me to question the relevance of the result.

[@kristinrichmond8185]

I’m not convinced abortion can be justified.

[@_Squiggle_]

A single mom with no living family who will die unless the baby is aborted? And maybe throw in that the baby has an almost 0% chance of living past a few minutes? Trying to make the most extreme example of when I think abortion is for sure justified

[@kristinrichmond8185]

@ why will she die unless aborted? I suggest caring for both mother and unborn baby for as long as possible and then deliver the baby. Sometimes babies die after delivery but that’s very very different than intentionally killing that tiny human while in uteru.

[@_Squiggle_]

@@kristinrichmond8185 Yes, sorry. Her life is in danger unless she aborts I would generally agree with caring for both as long as possible

[@josephdouglas9685]

I'm glad Jesus will be our judge. Especially at times there are medical reasons: Some people have life threatening health conditions that arise later in pregnancy. In these situations, a person may decide to end a pregnancy to preserve their own life. Life threatening conditions could include: severe preeclampsia, cancer requiring immediate treatment, intrauterine infection with premature amniotic sac rupture, just to name a few.

[@kristinrichmond8185]

@ my perspective is there is a way to end a pregnancy without the intentional killing of an innocent, human life. I think the best way to handle serious health conditions that arise in pregnancy is to deliver the baby. Delivering the baby, even if the baby dies after delivery, is is a different situation. Abortion is avoided. And I too believe our Savior is our judge, thank goodness.

[@tiffnickk]

Some of the clarification given in the video would have changed my answers. A couple questions are not just vague,but poorly written. Especially the one about procreation in heaven.

[@JIKOKALOL]

Thanks for putting it out there. Glad your open minded!

[@natedawg2020]

I don’t really believe in feminism, but I don’t understand how church members believe women will never receive the priesthood. I assume these same people believe in the potential deification of women which would involve omnipotence. Maybe it’s because they believe in the “priestesshood,” in which case sure maybe we can argue on the semantics or the definition of priesthood. I don’t think it’s defensible to believe in male-only deification and male-only omnipotence. If somebody wants to give me a rational explanation that there could exist a spectrum of Gods and inferior Gods which we call women, then go for it but it sounds ludicrous. I don’t know how everything works, but I feel like having both omnipotent men and women is the most logical conclusion of our theology. I was surprised by Jacob’s answers about women becoming apostles and getting the priesthood. They were kind of contradictory answers, but maybe it was just because of the wording.

[@bkgoulding]

It was another ambitious question. It needed to specify whether we’re taking about earth life or later. It also needed to expound on what it means to “hold.” Yes, later on men and women will be equally deified. Does that mean we will all “hold” the priesthood? Does God “hold” it? Maybe holding the priesthood is merely an earthly thing that allows men to serve others by administering in the ordinances of the gospel. In the celestial kingdom I don’t think we’ll be doing that.

[@LDaw_96]

My stake Pres would agree on not using Brother and sister

[@firecloud77]

Yikes.

[@wmjas]

Maybe reword “A man and a woman are not required to create spirit children.” When I took the test, I thought it meant “You don’t have to create spirit children if you don’t want to,” but in the video it becomes clear that you meant, “It is possible to create spirit children without the union of a man and a woman.” I know you wanted some ambiguity in the questions, but not syntactic ambiguity, I think.

[@annettecburns]

I thought the same way you did when I took the test.

[@aaronarmstrong340]

I just took the test. I dont know if it's a bug but I got literally dead center. It said I landed in the Orthodox Justice quadrant but the downloaded picture put my dot in the dead center. Just to compare my results to Jacob I am actually much more politically progressive, but I still believe in following the prophet and I am a strong believer in scriptural historical accuracy.

[@EthersElephant]

The code defaults to something if you land in the middle. So kind of a bug? More like I didn’t put in any special case logic. You are truly unique!

[@EthersElephant]

I didn’t think anyone would land dead center, guess I was wrong 😂 thanks for taking it

[@establishingzion688]

13:30- nice answer on the marriage answer

[@briannicholls2628]

I did the test BEFORE watching Jacob answer the questions. I woudl suggest it too Funny - I know why I enjoy Jacob's videos so often - he and I scored very similarly

[@_Squiggle_]

Me too! Did the test before the video and was very similar to Jacob

[@EthersElephant]

Good idea! I think it makes it more fun

[@carlose4314]

You should read Mystical City of God by Maria de Agreda.

[@americanzion1]

A lot of these responses were really cringe. What's sad is that Jacob's view is a pretty accurate representation of the all the "official stances" of the church. We have betrayed much of what Joseph and Brigham taught us.

[@MonarchACE7]

Like what

[@Hawkquill]

We are all eternal beings, D&C 93:29 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be. So we have always existed as we cannot be created, so could God once been a man? Yes, can we progress to become God's? absolutely! In the Temple it say's women will be priestesses to their husband can they be a priestess without the priesthood? Have people got to experience the world before they appreciate the church? So if you were born LDS the only way to experience and know for yourself that the church is good, is to leave for awhile? Don't you think garments are the length they are is to keep our bodies covered? Take a woman for example if she shows to much leg above the knee for a man that's not married could it bring about sexual thoughts? Or could it be sexual signalling? Very interesting, some questions were difficult to answer and gets you thinking 🤔 where can I do this test?

[@MonarchACE7]

Man Cant be God… You Take Away from Yeshua

[@Hawkquill]

@MonarchACE7 Christ said I do none other things than that which I see my Father do, He's a God for that reason as His actions are in line with the Father then He says to us come follow me if He follows God and we follow Him what will we eventually become? John 17:21 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. John 10:33-34 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? To become a God is the path we are on as we gain further light and knowledge or truth and apply it in our lives we become more and more like Christ and the Father.

[@MonarchACE7]

@@Hawkquill We Become More Loving Like God but We Dont become God or Gods… but you seek wisdom of this earth not Gods Wisdom. There Shall be no other Gods before me. It’s cute and interesting in theory but biblically and not scholarly correct. Lots of Theological conversations but far from traditional or conventional… Yet You Believe you can be Gods so then Why isn’t Mary or even Mary Magdalene or Women Goddesses that rule in the celestial kingdom? Why don’t they have women leading in the church… Fallen Angels also thought they were gods, which is why 1/3rd fell.

[@a.r.hollowayauthor7210]

At 6:30 I love you Jacob, but your stance foundationally rejects both models of a revealed doctrine, that has been preached since Joseph Smith. Since the opening of this dispensation. Every prophet of the modern era has preached this, and it is foundational to us understanding how we relate to God, and our understanding of the plan of salvation. The implications of this specific doctrine, runs right through our entire theology. And rejecting it can prove a major problem. That we are the same species as God, and are his literal spirit children "organized" from intelligences before this creation even began. This leads to one of two potential models, each with dozens of potential iterations of various kinds. Model 1: The Infinite "regress" model where there are infinite Gods going into the past, and everything the scriptures teach is only relating to this reality and existence in which God the Father is the eternal God of it and always has been. Model 2: The Savior model, where God lived a sinless life but did have a mortal experience similar in fashion to Jesus Christs mortal experience. He was always sinless, always WORTHY of the title of God, but had not yet attained it. Just like Jesus Christ his son. What Jacob is saying is not Model 2. He's rejecting the initial premise. Which I will remind everyone reading this, including Jacob, and I say this with love man, has been supported by EVERY PROPHET OF THE MODERN ERA! This doesn't make Jacob an apostate. He's just wrong on this XD Jacobs stance I think is what Blake ostler called the Eternal Sovereign model (?? someone help me, can't remember off the top of my head), and it is basically that God always was, always is, and always has been God never changing . . . except somehow he's also our same species. Those two things do not logically connect, as it is part of our fundamental nature to grow. Even Christ grew grace upon grace. Never sinning, as he learned the laws of God and Heaven.

[@_Squiggle_]

In model 2, who created the Father? Because the Father created the Son... I also think it's fair to say that prophets teaching that we can become like God doesn't mean we need to be exactly 100% the same as Him. He could have been beginningless and we could have a beginning but still end up as perfect, immortal beings

[@walkerhopkinson3989]

@@_Squiggle_Doctrinally we have no beginning and we will have no end. We’ve been eternal with the Father and the Son

[@_Squiggle_]

@@walkerhopkinson3989 Who gave God the Father a body (spiritual or physical) like He gave Christ a body? That's what I'm asking

[@walkerhopkinson3989]

@@_Squiggle_ Okay I think I understand your question. There is no source from modern prophets or the scriptures that suggest that anyone gave The Father his body. I think He gave Himself His body, and can do so because he is God. That’s just what I understand so I may be wrong in my assumptions

[@_Squiggle_]

@@walkerhopkinson3989 He was able to fashion His own body as an intelligence? Interesting

[@claudiahallmark456]

Makeup is not sexual....its for me to feel better...

[@bkgoulding]

That’s true of you, okay. But the main reason makeup is a multi-billion dollar industry is sexuality. There’s no denying that.

[@cthulhu5594]

I agree come on now. I still think modesty is important but makeup is fine.

[@caitlinwhite237]

I kind of wish a lot of the questions were more clearly defined. Like the one “can doctrine change?” Didn’t specify if it was policy doctrine or core doctrine. And a lot of the questions were things that were things we don’t have doctrinal answers for one way or another. But there was no ‘I’m not sure’ option. Only degrees of agreement or disagreement

[@_Squiggle_]

I think it's testing feelings more than strict rules. It's goal is to test what vibe you get from a question, not a strict fully agree/disagree

[@caitlinwhite237]

@ I think the main problem with that is that feelings aren’t easy to measure. And since the questions are agree or disagree they provide no insight on how the questions were being interpreted. So any data they glean from the test results aren’t going to be reliable or tell us anything useful. 🤔

[@_Squiggle_]

@@caitlinwhite237 For individual questions, maybe not, but I think the goal is to have enough questions that it kind of evens out

[@caitlinwhite237]

@ for an online personality test it’s fine. Fun for people to take. But the double barreled questions and the unclear wording definitely feels like a miss to me. Especially if they’re using it to gather statistical data. The data won’t be reliable. 🤷‍♀️

[@catherinemcdavid1533]

Um, The 13 Articles of Faith are a …. CREED! starting with “We believe”. One that you learn to recite and give to others as to what you believe as LDS. . It can be compared side by side with The Apostles Creed and each belief professed. Abortion and the topics you discussed in the video are not in either.

[@arttrumbo9496]

I did the test, but it did not give me my result.

[@_Squiggle_]

It will send it to your email

[@EthersElephant]

Let me know if you didn’t get it. Perhaps you had a typo in your email address?

[@arttrumbo9496]

@EthersElephant i recieved the email but it only showed what my answers to each question were, without the results. Nevermind, it went to my junk folder

[@jadynjc]

Just gonna say that this test is not good. The questions are written so poorly for no reason. I get that this is not really an academic study and that there was some vague reasoning there that he wants to “see how you interpret” but that’s just not the correct way to do that. Any research worth their salt could write much better questions. If you have someone being able to you can end up with the same opinion but have completely opposite reasoning, such as the abortion question, or the question about Emma Smith, it completely invalidates the survey. Also where is he getting the definitions of orthodox vs morality? Sad to see so many people getting worked up over their results thinking it means something.

[@timwrightfamily740]

You surprised me on your God wasn’t like a man comment. I thought you were sympathetic to the idea that Jesus did all things he saw the father do and that God, although never a sinner, and always perfect at some point took on mortality and was resurrected. You know like Jesus did

[@batboy12394]

I think it really depends on how far we take the statement. Is is as simple as "God was like man because he did not always have a glorified body, but now he does, and so can Man?". Even Jesus's statement of doing everything the Father did would not be taken hyper literal. Unless we think that the Father just walked exactly where Christ walked. There is a degree of ambiguity. What if the "all the Father did" is simply loving so perfectly that he is in perfect harmony with God. Therefore, he is on the way to receiving a perfected glory as the Father did. I have sometimes thought that there could be good argument that God was not ever even mortal. I understand that mortality was a product of the fall. Maybe God progressed previously to receive a glorified body without death. We saw this body as intelligences/spirits and chose to follow his plan to also receive one. In our understanding of the fall, God had created immortal bodies for Adam and Eve before they fell. Adam and Eve fell, introduced mortality, so the atonement is needed to mitigate that separation both physical and spiritual. That makes the condescension of Christ so impactful. Christ, as a member of the Godhead, was on the same divine path with God, he had the opportunity to progress to a glorified state without the mortal probation. Yet he willingly entered mortality to perform the atonement. Thus it really was a true condescension below all of his divine status. Obviously, I can't point to anything specific to say where this is explicitly taught, but it is something I've thought may fit in the understanding of the nature of God.

[@timwrightfamily740]

@ good stuff. Thank you.

[@danjohnson8556]

I was surprised his answer also.

[@fredmetcalf]

Mr Hansen does not FUNDAMENTALLY understand his religion or its Godhead.....

[@_Squiggle_]

Took the quiz. Jacob and I landed in about the same spot.

[@99blackbirds]

I grew up strict Mormon Obdeience over Love and had a mental breakdown tired of trying to be close to PERFECT and being fake. ANother Christian taught me of Gods Mercy and Grace! You don't have to earn your way. It hit me like a ton of Bricks. ALl the covenants and commandments CANNOT and will not save you. I found out I was a good person (every Mormon told me their sins.. and I'm like WHAT??? everyone was and is sinning. but we cant tell the leaders cuz it doesn't help) So God is for us not against us. Bring your sins to him he is not ashamed of them.. He is here to help you not SHAME GUILT & DICIPLINE> you see our leaders love the LAW more than the LAW GIVER aka Jesus. Obedience is more important than the well-being of the individual in the Church. the letter of the law is 100x more important than the spirit of the law... We need more Christian Grace in the LDS church. ALl the leaders need to humble themselves and REPENT!! Your all ignorant Garments and NO GRACE. any fool can wear Garments/underwear. But it takes courage to do what is right. Jesus let the Adulterer go. He did not put her on a disciplinary council or disfellowship her. (our leaders never understood his Love and Grace and at the same time STERN & JUST.. not angry or mean..) HIs Love makes you want to RUN to him. He came to SAVE us not Condemn.

[@99blackbirds]

I believe Joseph Smith was good and the Gospel was more intelligent and liberal (good liberal not like the world) He was awazing. the word of wisdom was smart and for the wise not black in white commandment. He gave blacks the priesthood. started the relief society. he was ahead of his time.. The brigham young took over and started making everything a commandment and RULE> He decided to just make everyone OBEY all the RULES. And our leaders still follow his pattern of strict ignorant obedience. And the world is slowly changing our leaders. It is so clear. OUr leaders are just a product of their time culture and "sins of the fathers". They are slowly learning... Just be patient with them. ( the devil is far more cunning than you ever knew)

[@savsmaster4183]

Unhinged rant aside, I will press X to doubt your story, and in regards to the adulterer Jesus said to her “go and sin no more”. Also define what “love and grace” is and what it means practically. From what I understand Jesus Christ expects us to follow his commandments, salvation is a transformative process, not a one time event, where God’s grace is an enabling power for us to change(repent), and become more like God, and thus one day becoming exactly like him.

[@99blackbirds]

@@savsmaster4183 I love the Mask movie. and LoKie the trickster aka "the fool" rant aside.. You are right he did say go and sin no more. But he didn't dicipline her like the churches does. can you explain that? Yes it "follow" not "Push" to obey the commandments. the Only thing I love about Pres Nelson is he did say that Repentance was a process.. and he is doing a good Job helping everyone know that repentance is GOOD.. In my youth Repentance was as very Negative thing... CHristians taught me repentance was a marvelous thing.. And I feel like the Mormons are just learning about this.

[@establishingzion688]

I'm curious what you think of these verses: John 14:15, 21, 23

[@Crikey420]

⁠@@99blackbirdshaving had a similar experience to you, i can say the problem is not the lds church. I experienced repentance and grace with Jesus Christ with help through my bishop. It was a life changing experience. You shouldn’t put up your personal experiences against the church as a whole. THAT, is entirely disingenuous.

[@kip2703]

Very interesting looking forward to seeing my results

[@EthersElephant]

Let me know if you didn’t get them

[@kip2703]

@EthersElephant got them

[@king326778]

Wait you guys DON'T carry at church?

[@_Squiggle_]

The handbook says not to

[@josephdouglas9685]

This is a very USA type of question.