Leaderboard

From the LDS Christian standpoint: Yes. All things that testify of Truth are testaments from God. Speaking personally, I have a good friend whom grew up in the USSR without any exposure to faith, except for some light Buddism. Throughout our friendship, I saw the Holy Ghost witnessing to her about Christ, and celebrated her joining a local Evangelical congregation. We had so many great conversations, and I felt truly blessed watching this amazing transformation. Now, would it have better if she decided to become an LDS Christian instead of a Evangelical Christian? Obviously. That would have been the complete package with all of the cherries on top. But that doesn't take away from the great transformation I did see take place.

It's interesting that you start with foreknowledge. Traditionally, the discussion was between pre-destination (Calvin) and free will (Armnius). Calvinists asked how God could be all-powerful if his creation were allowed to defy him. Free will advocates responded that God is all-powerful because he foreknows everything. It was God's will to let us be free. So, the foreknowledge position was a means for free will advocates to defend the doctrine of free will against the accusation that it somehow diminished God's power and authority. If he knows and wills that we be free to disobey then his power is not diminished. As for God not being a respecter of persons, I found a great illustration of this during my tour of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints temple in Langley, B.C. The guide showed us the men's locker/changing room, and pointed out that bankers and car mechanics change into the same white clothes. All are made equal in the temple. God is no respecter of persons. That truth does not restrict God from granting us free will. He may look to the banker and the mechanic with the same love and justice. He is not a distinguisher of persons--especially based on human social structures. However, He certainly will judge the just and the unjust, the repentant and the unrepentant. He will do so in pure justice, we believe, because each soul has been allowed the liberty to love or rebel.

By intensively investigating the truth claims of the Church, petitioning God with great faith that he would reveal to me by the Holy Ghost whether or not the Church is true, and thereafter receiving miraculous unmistakable answers from God that the Church is indeed his one and only true and authorized Church.

You point out something important. Those who grow up in church come to value certain traditions. When the preacher gets loud, and there are many 'amens' the people will often say, "The Holy Ghost was really present today." For some, who experienced more contemplative traditions, the experience of holy silence may feel like the kiss of God. You suggest that these feelings/sensations are not the Holy Ghost. I wonder. To use an objective example, if a Muslim--raised in the belief that Jesus Christ was a prophet of Allah--has a dream in which Jesus tells him/her that he really is the Messiah--is it not the Holy Ghost that then draws the dreamer to repentance? He's not LDS. He's not even Christian. Yet . . . Could it not be that the Holy Ghost is presenr in all encounters in which a truth drives us towards Heavenly Father?

There is a difference between how the Holy Ghost feels and talks to us and other feelings. It is distinct and yet absolute. I can feel excited, or nostalgic about things. I could go to a highly charged Baptist meeting and see the feelings of enthusiasm and excitement that are found in that meeting. These may be hard to find elsewhere, and for those who grew up in this type of arena, may even have feelings of nostalgia mixed in. They see this and feel a warm feeling of familiarity and love the feeling found. They have an excitement coursing through them...but this is NOT the Holy Ghost. One may go to a more sedate meeting and find a quietness and a peaceful setting. If they grew up in this, they may even feel it combined with nostalgia. There IS a peaceful feeling and when mixed with nostalgia can bring powerful feelings to the fore. This is NOT the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost can be hard to describe when it is faint. When it is that peaceful feeling of comfort that comes upon you, it can be hard to relate what that feels to others. The best I could describe it to someone who is not part of our Church but is Christian is to read the New Testament, especially the 4 gospels. They should feel something when they read those 4 gospels that are not really replicated by a church setting. It could be FELT in a church setting if one is teaching from those as the Holy Ghost confirms truth, but the church itself does not bring on that feeling that the words of our Lord does. Reading the teachings of our Savior, to me, often brings about the Holy Ghost to us to testify of the truth of the gospel and our Savior's role and love. In it's more powerful form, you will then feel this same feeling, but with it come words...and actual VOICE. It is not a loud voice, but a soft voice that you could easily miss if you are not listening to it. With this you will feel in your heart (once again, a hard thing to describe, some could call it a burning or a stirring, but not like heartburn, but more of an uplifting) and soul what the voice is telling you or talking to you about. You not only hear, you feel it. It is a LITERAL voice that is talking to you, and you can literally hear and understand it. It is the ability to CONSTANTLY have this feeling and voice there to guide you and help you that the Saints obtain (if they are willing and righteous) that others do not.

I believe @Jersey Boy was responding to the original question asking what fundamental difference exists between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints versus other Christian denominations. His response is that the Restored Church is "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth". I don't think he was attempting to answer why he believes that.

I am intrigued by your statement, "We just won't catch up, because G-d had an eternal head start." Does this include the possibility that we may eventually arrive at where or what G-d currently is? And of course, whatever the answer, would likely generate many more questions. I do admire and thank you for your engagement with us. The Traveler

A common criticism against your church is this reliance on "feelings," or subjective confirmation. This is a terrible mistake on their part. All Christians should come to faith through the drawing of the Holy Spirit. I fear we have too many "social converts" in our most of our churches. There is some patience--some 'tarrying' needed. Science, evidence, logic--these tools may bring me to the waters of conversion--but the witness of the Holy Spirit is essential, in my always humble opinion.

You are correct. That said, I'm waiting to hear the concession speech from one of them before I figure the final say has been had.

Dang dood, if you're going to say that, at least give us a link...

I wonder. I do expect things to get worse than most folks are imagining, maybe in the next 20 years. On the other hand: 1) One would think that an influx of cheap labor would tend to keep the cost of goods and services down. At this particular moment I’d be more worried about stagflation being triggered by a minimum wage increase than by immigration. 2) At least locally—our church leadership has been warning us, like nobody’s business, to get out of debt posthaste. That leads me to believe that whatever’s coming in the short term—society and government will at least be funcional enough that standard debt-collection processes will remain operational. I can see a depression and rising crime coming soon; but mass violence or a political collapse—that seems less likely, at least in the very short term. And the Church itself isn’t acting like the apocalypse is coming. They are building and renovating temples, and accumulating massive holdings in paper investment accounts whose value would evaporate in a second if there were no longer a government ensuring stability.

I don’t want to be overly and unnecessarily denigrating to Americans on the opposite side of the political aisle. But the answer to your question is, fundamentally, “yes”. That’s what “living constitutionalism” is—the view that (if our motives are pure enough) what we want a statute to mean is more important than what the statute’s text or historical context or commonly-accepted interpretation would dictate. An originalist (read: “conservative”, at least for most practical purposes) judge should be able to point to numerous instances where she felt compelled to rule in a way she personally disliked. A progressive judge will have a much harder time giving you examples of that having occurred; because in his eyes making good law to achieve “justice” (as he understands it) is, to some degree, a natural and legitimate part of his job. I have much more faith in a conservative court to uphold a Biden victory, than I would in a progressive court to uphold a Trump one.

My buddy Hugh often has the gift to concisely crystalize what I'm thinking.

Have faith, be kind, love others and prepare for the voice of the Holy Ghost. Pray, Serve and Ponder. We need to Strive to become God's people. I look at the "nor any manner of -ites" to mean we need to stop putting people into categories. We are all children of God and we should treat each other as such. We must strive to become the Children of Light. Be safe my friends, be sober and patient. Rely on the Lord and not to our own understanding. God will be with us if we are with Him.

You are misquoting me. I didn't say people didn't have a surplus I said that's what individuals were claiming. If you read the records of the time a common complaint from the bishops and others responsible for collecting the surpluses was that no matter how well a person was doing many said they needed everything they had or if they did contribute it was often the worst animals they had or something of that nature. Obviously there were deeper issues at play here. But I was simply making the point that this contributed to the Church's difficulty in caring for the poor which is a fundamental reason behind living the law in the first place. But to your point about the actual cause for the difficulty they experienced I have often wondered about the level of spiritual development necessary among the members for the law to be carried out successfully. Drawing from my own experience there have unfortunately been many instances in my own life where I have fulfilled assignments begrudgingly but I still did them and often in the process my attitude changed because I was at least willing even if I was initially lacking in my love of those I was called to serve. So I don't think we have to already be living the two great commandments perfectly to make it work. I think part of the intent of the law is to help us develop such qualities. But there is most certainly a level of willingness that is required with which the Lord can work. Congratulations on your daughter serving a mission. Exciting time to be sure.

This would seem to imply that we have God's permission but I don't know that it answers your question about it being wise. You would need a leader and unless it is directed by the church it would not be a priesthood position which would make it more difficult. Also, you would need to be very very picky about who can join it. Lots of potential problems. That first bolded would imply that it is based upon Church organized leadership. The second bolded brings up another valid point. The idea is that we would all live together as a family. How many of you would be able to live in the same household with everyone in your neighborhood? How about a few dozen people who are currently on (generational) welfare? We don't know how to live together as a family with people who are not blood. Thus we cannot hope to live the Order of Enoch. Here's an example of what I'm talking about: My daughter just entered the MTC. A couple weeks ago, she was able to get her endowments. She was allowed a certain number of invitations. It was enough to fill the prayer circle. It occurred to me that it was truly the first time that I could look at the faces of all those present and declare in my heart to the Lord that "Only the best of feelings existed in that circle." I've never been able to say that before. It was always strangers. Did I immediately feel the Christlike love for complete strangers such that I could make such a claim again? Sadly, no. And I'd be willing to bet that very few ever do. If we can't do that with faithful, temple attending members of the faith, can we hope to do that with others? If we can't have that kind of charity, can we hope to live the Order of Enoch?

I saw this mentioned in Doctrine and Covenants. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/119?lang=eng "The law of tithing, as understood today, had not been given to the Church previous to this revelation ... The Lord had previously given to the Church the law of consecration and stewardship of property, which members (chiefly the leading elders) entered into by a covenant that was to be everlasting. Because of failure on the part of many to abide by this covenant, the Lord withdrew it for a time and gave instead the law of tithing to the whole Church". When I read these notes, it gives me the impression the law of consecration and stewardship of properly was not a concurrent law with the law of tithing. The law of tithing seems to have been only instituted because the other law was not followed by many of the leading elders. From what I know so far, this law of consecration has not been reinstated by revelation. Did many of the Nephite elders also fail to follow the law of consecration so the law of tithing was instituted for all of the Nephite population?

The NYT is an emaciated shadow of its former self, a hideous undead creature whose very existence mocks what it once was. It should be summarily ignored in all instances.

My personal belief is that the Holy Ghost is an office that has been held by multiple beings, Michael being the first. When he received his body, it was filled by another pre-mortal spirit, maybe Enoch. So yes, I think each person who has filled that role will be born physically and receive all the ordinances they need.

Recently I saw someone reference the possibility of their being two periods of a half hour of silence. I didn't give it a second thought but now after studying Revelation 8 and Doctrine and Covenants 88 where the half hour of silence is both spoken of I am beginning to think there may be some substance to that argument. In Revelation 8 the half hour of silence appears to precede the woes poured out upon the Earth by the angels whereas in the D&C the half hour of silence appears to follow the destruction the angels bring. And then it's immediately following the second half hour of silence that the Lord appears. To me this makes sense because what's the point of scaring the inhabitants of the world half to death if we are not then allowed the chance to go preach the gospel to them? If this is correct and the half hour of silence is roughly 21 years then that means we are just now entering the period of the woes being pronounced upon the Earth. Yay for us.

All the 'signs' are there man! 1. Defensive fortresses with blast shields and bunkers now. 2. "Toilet" paper investment accounts The world needs to see what is 'really' going on!😉

Indeed. And the worst insult for an Iranian is to call him an Arab. (To really annoy him, pronounce it Ey-Rab.)

If the Second Coming is to happen in March, does that mean I don’t have to worry about replacing my septic tank?