Finrock

Good Afternoon selek! I hope you are doing well. :) selek, you aren't qualified to make this judgement, particularly because you are basing your judgement on a snapshot of a person's life on a discussion forum. I totally disagree with your characterization of the OP and your personal attack towards the OP is unnecessary and useless. Regards, Finrock

I was born with my parents being members of the church, but neither of my parents have been or were particularly active in the Church. However, I have been and was influenced greatly by the Church growing up. I am grateful for that. I have also made many, many, mistakes. Some horrible mistakes and sins. Others not so horrible but still sins. I have a hard time forgiving myself too and all I can say is that hang on to what you know is true even when you don't feel it. There are times when I've had to just hang on with my intellectual nails through the storms of life because my heart has failed me. What I'm trying to say is that even if you might feel like the path is hopeless and that it is easier to give up and you don't feel that spiritual power lifting you up, even in those times, just hang on and keep plugging away at living the gospel. Relief will come. Hope will come. God loves you and He wants you to be happy. He is there even when we think that He is not. And don't use other members to judge your life or yourself by. Use the scriptures and the words of the prophets as a standard by which you judge yourself. Don't believe the lies of Satan who would have you to believe false and destructive things about yourself. Regards, Finrock

I am pointing out that if it was sarcasm then she didn't actually call the LDS Church a cult. She was, in fact, saying the opposite; that the Church is NOT a cult. :) Regards, Finrock

Good Morning beefche! I hope you are doing well. :) I believe that was sarcasm. She had just mentioned that her family is being very critical of her decision to join the Church and she was looking forward to speaking with fellow "cult" members . My guess is that her family is telling her that we are cult members. Regards, Finrock

Good Morning ScullyItsMe! It is a pleasure to meet you. :) There are many problems with this persons thinking. They are relying on falsehoods to draw a conclusion that is also false. Problems With "Somebody's" argument: 1. The Freemasons are not in league with Satan 2. What Freemasons do is irrelevant to what Mormons do 3. We don't use deceit and lies to heighten ourselves (neither do the Freemaons, FYI) 4. And other issues that I won't get in to... Think about this for a second. Is God good? Yes, He is good. Does God do everything that is good? Yes, He does. So, if I want to become like God then aren't I really just wanting to become someone who is good and does good? Everybody on this earth should desire with all of their hearts to become like God, to be like Him in every way. We don't do it through lies and deceit (that's impossible since God is good), but we are able to accomplish this by exercising faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ (which includes living the gospel of Jesus Christ). Respectfully, Finrock

Good Morning Vort. I hope you're having a good day! :) In your view, what were you and what was your condition before God formed you spiritually or provided a spirit body? Regards, Finrock

Good evening Anddenex! Thanks for your posts, by-the-way. I hope you've been well. :) I can't be sure I know what you mean exactly, but your post has helped me by leading me to consider something that I have not considered before. Thank you. Regards, Finrock

I think it denotes it only if we are talking about creation out of nothing. When I see the word "create" in a religious context, I generally think "organize, form." Man was not created out of nothing. God did not create us in the sense you are using the word. As I understand the gospel, we (intelligences) are co-eternal with God. Regards, Finrock

Thank you. The logic makes sense given that your propositions are true. I'm not sure if I agree with all of your propositions. And when I say I am not sure, I actually mean that I am not sure. I think I want to explore what it means for God to grant us agency. I'll have to think about this for a bit before I respond further (in case you care). Regards, Finrock

Good Afternoon knitwit. I hope you are happy and well! :) No matter what, you just keep paying. Regards, Finrock

Good Afternoon Vort! I hope you are having a good day. :) I don't believe we have sufficient knowledge to say that we did or did not agree with being created spiritually. What causes you to believe that God created man spiritually without man requesting this creation? Respectfully, Finrock

Another thought came to my mind. Lehi states explicitly: "For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things." Isn't it true that we are all born with the light of Christ which leads us to goodness? Further, isn't it true that God sends his angels and the Holy Ghost to help us? Perhaps the natural man is in opposition to the light of Christ while a devil adversary would serve as an opposition to the angels and the Holy Ghost God sends to help us do good? Regards, Finrock

The chapter as a whole speaks to this idea. It is speaking about the Plan of Salvation and it identifies the actors, the conditions of our test, and the solution (the atonement). Starting with verse 11 in this chapter Lehi identifies that in order for there to be righteousness, there must be sin. So, this is one obstacle of mortality for us to overcome. Sin, or evil. There must be an opposition. Then, later in verse 17, Lehi identifies something different. He speaks about the devil. Although the devil tempts us to sin, the devil is not the same as sin. Lehi teaches us that we must also overcome tempation from the devil. Finally, consider these verses from Chapter 2: "28 And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit; "29 And not choose eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom." I want to emphasize verse 29 because this has the notion of us needing to overcome sin and devil adversaries. Taken in context Lehi is teaching in essence that in mortality we must purge from us the natural man while we are also being tempted to give in to our lusts (natural man) by the devil. Regards, Finrock

During mortality Jesus Christ was subject to the same conditions as we were. He learned wisdom while in mortality, like we do. He experienced mortality like all experience the general conditions of mortality. "And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man" (Luke 2:52). Regards, Finrock

Take a look at 2 Nephi Chapter 2. Our test requires us to overcome evil and devil adversaries. The reality is that God allows all of the conditions that we experience in this life. Good or bad, God allows it. It is necessary. The conditions we have are the conditions that must exist in order for us to be able to have the experiences necessary in order to qualify for eternal life. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon ZionsRodeVos! :) I have found this article on Devils from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism to be helpful in finding answers to these questions. Satan only has those powers given to him by God and can only do what God has specifically allowed him to do (D&C 121:4). Further, it is not necessary for there to be a devil in order for us to do evil. "People could not demonstrate their love of God and their willingness to do the work of righteousness sufficiently to qualify them for exaltation unless they were subject to, and able to overcome, evil and devil adversaries, such as Satan and his hosts (2 Ne. 2:11-22)." And, this final point I want to quote from the article because I think it is really important but not often understood: "When Satan tempts a person to do evil, there are limits to what Satan can accomplish. He can put before a person any kind of evil opportunity, but that evil is enticing only if the person tempted already desires that thing. When people are tempted, it is actually by their own lusts (James 1:12-15)." Regards, Finrock

I'm doing good, thank you. You're welcome. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon Tough Grits! I hope you have been well. :) I think this is a personal choice. That's just it, you don't know what they really did and how they really worshipped. We don't know why people call themselves something. We can only assume that it has some meaning or significance to them. If you are a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and you want to call yourself a Mormon you should. I don't believe there is anything daring in that. I don't think you need to live up to every covenant, principle, and doctrine in order to be called a Mormon. I believe that stating you are a member of the LDS church is the same thing as labelling yourself a Mormon. In my view and in my understanding of the world and based on what I understand words to mean, I do not distinguish between the label "Mormon" and the label "member of the LDS church". To me, they mean the same thing. Regards, Finrock

Good evening Vort. I hope you are well! :) I believe that the plan for us is individualized. This quote from President Monson speaks to the idea of Heavenly Father being individually involved in directing our life: “I bear my testimony to you that this work is true, that our Savior lives, and that He guides and directs His Church here upon the earth. I leave with you my witness and my testimony that God our Eternal Father lives and loves us. He is indeed our Father, and He is personal and real. May we realize and understand how close to us He is willing to come, how far He is willing to go to help us, how much He loves us, and how much He does and is willing to do for us.” To me this is telling me that Heavenly Father's plan for me is more individualized and personal than I realize. He is willing to be personal and close with me. I understand this to mean that in addition to my general adherence to the plan of salvation, God does and is willing to show me personally what I need to do in life to become pure. Also, President Monson's words seem to be telling me that just as we can expect to have a close and personal relationship with our mortal father, we should also expect that God the Father wants to be and is willing to be as close and as personal with Him as we are ready to stand. The Plan of Salvation encompasses the truth that our Father in Heaven wants to, can, and does personally direct and guide our lives because He has "A" plan for each of His diverse children. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon madhats! I hope you are doing well. :) In my experience and from hearing others' stories this is what I have learned: Meanings and blessings of a patriarchal blessing become clear over time as you regularly refer to the blessing with faith. On a side note, I think the implied blessing from what you have shared is wonderful. If fulfilled, it means you will be free from your anxieties and you will be able to enjoy all of what the gospel of Jesus Christ has to offer us in mortality. Temple marriage also ultimately implies exaltation. I think those are marvelous and wonderful blessings! Regards, Finrock

Good evening Vort! :) Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon Anddenex. I hope you've been well! :) I think the point is that Jesus, unlike us, had a choice to suffer or not to suffer. He had the power to make that choice. We don't have a choice while in mortality. We will suffer. And here is the part that is incomprehensible: Jesus chose to suffer like us (meaning He never spared Himself, not even a little), even though He didn't have to ever suffer. Regards, Finrock

In fact, starting on page 31 Joseph Smith attends the sixth meeting of the Relief Society and specifically addresses the concern of women laying on hands for healing and he sanctions it: "Prest. Smith continued the subject by adverting to the commission given to the ancient apostles “Go ye into all the world” &c.— no matter who believeth; these signs, such as healing the sick, casting out devils &c. should follow all that believe whether male or female. He ask’d the Society if they could not see by this sweeping stroke, that wherein they are ordained, it is the privilege of those set apart to administer in that authority which is confer’d on them— and if the sisters should have faith to heal the sick, let all hold their tongues, and let every thing roll on" (p. 33). A side note, pages 31 - 34 are fascinating. It appears on page 34 that Joseph Smith is prophesying about his death. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon Vort! =) I started reading the Nauvoo Relief Society Minute book after seeing this thread. I don't know what rameumptom is specifically speaking about, but I did find something that might lend support to rameumptom's assertion that the Relief Society exercised more power and authority when it was first organized then they do now, on page 28 and 29 (emphasis added): "Mrs. [Elizabeth Davis] Durfee bore testimony to the great blessing she received when administered to after the close of the last meeting, by Prest. E. Smith & Councillors Cleveland and Whitney. she said she never realized more benefit thro’ any administration— that she was heal’d, and thought the sisters had more faith than the brethren" (p. 28). "Mrs. Sessions arose and gave the interpretation of what Councillor C. had spoken in an unknown tongue, and said that God was well pleas’d with this Society, that if we would be humble and faithful the Lord would pour out upon the members generally the gift of prophecy — that when the speaker laid her hand on the head of Sister Snow, she said that not only she should have the spirit but that all should have it also— that the speaker then address’d herself to Mother Smith saying that the prayers of father Smith were now answered upon the members of the Society— that the days of Mother S. should be prolong’d and she should meet many times with the Society, should enjoy much in the society..." (p. 29) Regards, Finrock

Good evening anatess. I hope you've been doing well! :) I concede that I don't know the details here and so I am responding based solely on what I've read in this thread. Further, I'm not making a claim as to whether the student was right or wrong. I am looking for clarification because I can't see the distinction that you are making. You can object to something with the use of an ad hominem. In context, by attacking the professor's character, the student was clearly indicating that he objected to the activity. Are you saying that the student can object to the activity in some other way, but they cannot object to the activity by attacking the professor's character? Regards, Finrock