- Jack on Black Hole Cosmology and the Book of Abraham: “Last Lemming, Actually I think there’s some truth in what you say–that is, in the sense that we’ll have the opportunity to help expand the Father’s creations–his cosmos. Yeah–the idea of getting our own planet is almost 150-200 years old. It took the saints three months to travel from the Mississippi River to the Salt Lake Valley–a trip that we make today in three hours on a Boeing 777. And so the “planet” was much larger to them than it is to us moderns. Large enough I dare say that it may have represented (in their minds) a division of the sacred cosmos. And so when they talked about inheriting a planet it was a slick way of saying a large chunk of the universe–not some little globe you could spin on your finger like a basketball.” Nov 27, 12:42
- on Black Hole Cosmology and the Book of Abraham: “Whenever somebody asks me if I hope to get my own planet in the next life (OK, that’s never actually happened), I tell them that I am holding out for a universe.” Nov 27, 07:10
- on Black Hole Cosmology and the Book of Abraham: “There’s a lot of stuff out there. I’m wondering where it all comes from when the black hole creates a “big bang.” Still, it’s fun to think about. The idea of universes “begetting” universes matches up nicely with the idea of families begetting families. Re: Abraham’s astronomy: there are the varied reckonings of time (and perhaps space) to consider. They seem to line up with varying degrees of glory, including perhaps the many degrees that may be found between individual stars–analogically speaking. And with that in mind it’s interesting to consider how black holes might be portals to realms of greater or lesser reckonings/glories–in which case some of those realms might be incomprehensible to our mortal minds.” Nov 27, 07:02
- on Latest AI Updates and the Church: “@Curtis Pew & RLD: Good point re the indexing, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Church had on of the largest corpuses (corpi?) of human-checked 19th century writing.” Nov 26, 07:15
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “LHL – look into NDEs. There are members of the church who have written/posted/vlogged about them if you dont trust just anyone’s experience. Some are very detailed and share lots of info about the afterlife.” Nov 25, 14:07
- on Latest AI Updates and the Church: “I’m also not generally a fan of the Presidents of the Church chart, but I agree Joseph Smith with anime hair makes it all worthwhile. I’m kind of impressed with the creativity of the pie chart, but as a means of communicating information it’s really bad. Curtis Pew makes an excellent point. AI indexing is now possible because of the countless hours humans spent indexing. Those hours were not wasted: the fact that their output could be used to train an AI that can now do indexing much more quickly makes them even more valuable. This applies to all generative AI, and should be remembered when we think about who should receive the rewards of AI’s “labor.”” Nov 25, 12:31
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “Jack, I do see 132:41 as referring to women being able to have multiple living and eternal husbands and think it gives context for JS marrying a number of married women. He wasn’t taking away the wives in time or eternity, it was sharing as a way for them all to be bound together. It didn’t work and DC 132 was given to change the system to polygyny. I agree with those who say that lots of 132 is pretty ugly and I see the previous system as a superior one to the polygyny that DC 132 imposed. REC, I like that formulation. I think we have a general sense that those in lower kingdoms will not be in solitary confinement (that would be pretty harsh) and thus will have the ability to interact with others. I’d imagine that a number of married couples will recognize each other and want to hang out. I can’t imagine God would send around the angel police to break up such associations. LHL, sure, but I also very much understand the those who love each other will want to be together in the next life. I really like what Plato says about that: https://juvenileinstructor.org/plato-on-deification-and-eternal-marriage/ A pretty common impulse including Death Cab for Cutie “I’ll Follow You into the Dark.” Seems to express a rejection of organized religion, but still wants to be with his love in the next life, “the dark.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iV_1ESMHaI” Nov 25, 12:09
- on How Do YOU Think Eternal Marriage/Family Should Work in the Next Life?: “Long story short – we really know nothing about the afterlife; we think we do, we convince ourselves we do….we interpret scriptures in such a way as to affirm our own personal beliefs, but (ultimately) no one knows. It’s just one grand leap into the Cosmos….” Nov 25, 11:12
