Islander

I would, in principle, be in favor of non-embryonic (sourced) stem cell research. In terms of promise, that is quite an optimistic position. In theory, stem cell based pharmaco-therapies could lead to treatment of certain degenerative conditions. That is a view, quite a long view, thru a pbc pipe. There are lots of pieces of the jigsaw puzzle still missing. I would not jump on the wagon so soon. There are conditions of which we know etiologically a lot more, like diabetes, asthma, arthritis, among others; and we still don't have a cure or even truly effective treatments for them. Manufacturing "replacement" organs in a petri dish in the lab using stem cells as a source material is still Star trek material.

I believe you are done. The specific details of what transpired during a sexually charged episode are not relevant. Although the description you offer is somewhat vague I think you should concentrate now in following the course laid down by your bishop.

An interesting issue here is that the word "hell" in hebrew and greek are several different words and they were translated at different times by different people also in diverse ways. So, it is either a specif place currently lacking a ZIP code and other identifying/location data, or a generic term used to identify a series of locations with a common denominator: a place of obscurity and punishment , darkness, cold (no light, no homely warmth), distance/separation from God, loneliness and fear. Now whether hot or freezer-burn cold, there are other words also translated "hell" in the NT. I think it matters very little what part of town you are going and the particulars if the WHOLE town is called and fells like HELL.

It is suggested that because we are physical, tri-dimensional beings, we are constantly seeking to harmonize that portion of our own material existence. As we believe to be the offspring of God, we tend to inquire and question as to validate the assertion that God, the Father has a body. Not enough information is available. We do know that in Exodus 24:10 it speaking that "And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone..." Ex 33 contain very interesting passages related to the "physical" nature of the body of God. Beyond that, we do know that man was created after the image of God. Moses, Jacob and Joshua describe anthropomorphic experiences with God. The scriptures do not detail much, but the brother of Jared saw the finger of the Lord. So, all this points to the fact that indeed God (YHW/pre-mortal Jesus) had corporeal form before his mortal minitry upon the earth. ALL the description of God the Father in the Book of Revelation point to a physical deity separate from the Lamb/Jesus who sits or stands on His (the father's) right hand. I am not a theologian and these issues of deep, reflective doctrine do not intrigue me much, thus I tend to ignore them most of the time. I thought it would be fund for a change to think and research a bit on the subject. .

Moderator....moderator? Can we be done with this non-sense?

People, you are not listening. Just drop the argument and the contention. Ktfords already showed his colors and is just here to breed anger and discord. I pointed that to him a week or so ago and he has ignored every posting. Let him move on to other things. Who says we are to debate our faith? Someone raises an argument we respond in writing that is where FAIRS and others come in. The forum is not designed for that. He has no questions, he is not an investigator he is not interested in learning, so we should not waste our time with him. Pleae wrap the thread up.

The Greek word describing Joseph's trade was "tekton" which included a builder, mason, and one skilled in wood and metal working. It is likely that Joseph and his son Jesus were "handymen" of sorts. Fixing and repairing an assortment of things like fences, wells, roofs, etc. In the north of Israel those that lived there tended to their own land or fished for a living. Fishing required a franchise and tax arrangements with the rules which required money. Joseph no longer tended to his land (inheritance) which implies they no longer had possession of it. Contrary to what happens in the modern world, as recently as 100 years in most of our own country, you'd hire yourself out as a last resort to make money. That implied that yo had no tools, means or ability to support yourself any other way off the land as it was customary. It is thus very likely that the family of the Savior was of very little economic means.

KT: I clearly understood your intentions several days ago my friend. I have posted to you also several times and you have not answered my posts, not ONCE. I certainly understand you do not believe the church is true. I can see you do not have a testimony of the call to prophesy of Joseph. You have made that point abundantly clear. I do wish you well. I hope you find elsewhere what you are looking for and be happy. I no longer desire to continue this very contentious exchange since the Spirit can not assist us under such circumstances. You have studied LDS teachings and doctrine long enough and have made your mind also long ago. So, do move on to other more productive activities for you. Seek to associate with those that hold views more in synch with your belief system and understanding of the world. I would urge the moderators to wrap up the thread. It has run its course, it evidenced positions on all sides and because of contention is has ceased to be profitable to all involved. Best wishes

That is one of my favorite scriptures!! We do not know why the Spirit moved Nephi in such a way. I have my own theories, however. It is recorded just after his father Lehi dies. Nephi being younger had been appointed a prophet and a ruler above his older brothers. That in itself was a petri dish for contention. I can surely imagine his two older, wicked brother trying to harass him, verbally and even physically abusing him. That would have taxed Nephi beyond belief. He is trying to grieve the death of his father and his brothers jockeying for position within the family group. Nephi would have experienced juxtaposed emotions under such circumstances. It is certainly beautiful and quite touching the way he expresses so many different emotions and the overarching faith that sustained him thru his trials and tribulations. It is quite a poetic piece.

I love how PC our friend PC(the poster) is. He says things like: "the divisiveness he [Joseph}saw", "in his view" and then of course, questioning or rather the non-committal statement about whether Joseph actually saw God and His messengers. PC, I know you are trying to be fair and to moderate to the best of your abilities. But, my dear friend, if you can not bring yourself to say that Joseph was a prophet and that he DID see the Father and the Son and other messengers sent from the presence of God, as a moderator you should not question it either. Let others respond to those questions if you can not do so in the affirmative. Just a friendly suggestion. :)

Ktfords: Why your resistance? WE are telling you that how YOU interpret the passage YOU are misreading it. Now if you believe to understand better than us as members I guess we should just stop and move onto something else here. It seems to me that you made up your mind about 5 1/2 years ago about LDS doctrine and teachings. So my friend I suggest we end the argument here since it stopped being profitable a long time ago.. I have read ALL your posts and again and again you go to other websites and copy/paste paraphrase argumentative responses while trying to respond to our explanations. Sincerely, I do not get your point. If you have been "studying Mormonism" for six years you should understand the doctrine better. Or, you should have arrived to a conclusion about the BoM. Whatever the outcome, to be still engaged in this argument seem futile. My wholehearted suggestion is for you to move on onto other perhaps more fullfilling activities, my friend. I do wish you the very best and hope you will find in place and time where you can worship as you see fit and according to the dictate of your own conscience.

I think the argument is so strident that it destroys the opportunity to discuss the issue (the BoM origin) on its own merits. David was a disobedient prophet, a murderer and a fornicator but God forgave him and made him great among the nations. There are quite a few pages in the OT with his Psalms and the Savior descended from his loins. So, we can go and argue the historical David all we want but if our belief in the OT hinges on being able to reconcile such things I would have left Christianity a long time ago. The key here is the message. Without reading the BoM cover to cover, making notes and THEN asking questions all other arguments are just that; empty, exhausted and more or less meaningless arguments. Those Catholic should remember that a thousand years ago the Roman Church split in two never to be reconciled again over doctrine and practice. So, who was right and who was wrong? That depends on who you ask. The same principle applies here. I would start with the true intent of the "seeker."

I think the word "discriminating" has negative connotations. I would say there is nothing wrong with being selective. Our belief in God, the things that He has revealed and the ordinance required for eternal life and exaltation are just too important to leave to chance or luck. Much heartache and long years of pain and loneliness come from marrying outside of one's faith. Many here in the forum can attest to that truth. Ultimately, people are free to choose what they will, but not the consequences thereof. And that is where things get hairy. The apostle Paul cautions us "not to be unequally joked" and is referring precisely to that. A few months of marital bliss and an eternity of loneliness. I think the trade off is just to great.

It is obvious that across the world people worship different kinds of gods. The old testament is somewhat difficult to grasp because God seem so exacting and demanding, almost ruthless but that is only because we tend to look at the text with 21st century eyes. The BoM illustrates better some of those reasons as when Nephi is commanded to kill Laban. The OT is not that explicit. Beyond that, the reasons why some today kill in the name of God is because they believe themselves justified in doing so according to their own interpretation of their scriptures. Most however, are violent of their own right because of social traditions and not necessarily religion.

This is a very delicate issue. I would not venture to offer beyond what I have already shared. Whatever the choice, she must be ready for a very long (3-5 years or more) and difficult road that also may lead to nowhere thru no fault of her own. Thus my position that ONLY the Lord knows what is best for her and she should gather ALL the facts, fast and pray earnestly since a significant part of her life depends on it. My prayers are with her.

Ktfords: You are misunderstanding the text. I think our own use and interpretations of words goes a long distance in making sense of the scriptures. If you are addicted to drugs (for example) and do drugs every day and repent every day but actually DO nothing to free your self from the addiction it is quite a useless exercise and indeed not pleasing to God. For it is empty of true repentance and what is required to abandon the behavior. So indeed repentance is incomplete. In the other hand, there are things we do every day, sometimes without intent that are contrary to the nature and commandments of God. Short temper, not helpful, not trying hard enough, ignoring our responsibility, being distracted by the physical attributes of another woman, for example. God expects us to recognize these trespasses, to gain insight and repent as to demonstrate our humility and dependency on him for strength to overcome. On a side note, and please do not take offense but if you desire to understand LDS doctrine you MUST read for your self what is readily available on the church website. Please do not go to other non-LDS sites (Mormonism Research Ministry) to seek information that you do not even understand but serves as ammunition to contend. They ALREADY made up their mind and it is pointless to argue with them. If you have as well then perhaps you can utilize your time in activities that would be more profitable for you.

You go boy! It is a blessing beyond measure and thus the Lord expects us to uphold our end of the bargain. Indeed, search on the church's website read all you can find. Congratulations

I agree. I was just pointing to the fact that we should not stress so much when others call attention to our choices that deviate from the norms and cultural expectations.

True MorningStar: I agree with you in that some are quite insensitive and nosy that way. But is it part of the cultural milieu of the church. Just like any other set of social/cultural expectations. In most countries away from the West and the US girls are expected to marry young, for example. You are expected to have children within 2 years or so, to remain close to your family and not move away 2000 miles, girls should not be too skinny or people may think they are sick and too weak to bear children, young men should revere their mothers-in-law for she gave you a beautiful wife (in my case/country for example). These are "unspoken" tenets of the social group and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, I think. If we break away from the norms then WE experience some tension because of the questions. But we can't blame people for having certain expectations. I am a convert so I am stretching the situation a bit just to make a point/example, but, If I was a young guy, RM, faithful and true to my covenants. And begin to date a young girl, that grew up in the Gospel, propose and marry in the temple. If on my wedding night I find out she has not kept her chastity and did not tell me and kept that issue from me, I have the right to be disappointed. I had certain expectations based on shared values and histories, primarily obedience to the Gospel. So, yes people sometimes are too nosy and issue value judgments on others based on those cultural expectations. But we should not be too hard on them. They are not being malicious (I hope). They are just being human and LDS in the worst case scenario.:)

My heart goes out to you. I am truly at a loss for words that may offer you some comfort. I hope you will find solace and peace while at the temple. I also hope the Spirit may be able to whisper some tokens of wisdom for these very trying times while there. This is a very personal and quite painful situation. Only your Father in Heaven knows exactly what you must do going forward. You must be careful and not succum to your pain and despair but seek the Spirit thru fasting and prayer. Some counseling for YOU will also help you gain some perspective and help you explore your own thoughts and emotions at this time. It will also help you gain some professional insight into this very complex and deep rooted issue of pornography. I wish we had a way to archive the threads by topic. This issue has been discussed at length in the forum before but I will share briefly some thoughts as I did previously with another poster. Your husband has been struggling with this addiction likely for many years before you married him. It is an extremely pernicious and psychologically entrenched condition with a very high percentage of recidivism and relapse. Treatment and intervention also require radical environmental changes in employment, work hours, computer access and use, marital behavior and others. It is a very long and protracted battle with a guarded prognosis, at best. All that said, ALL things are possible in the Lord. For your husband, this his Jericho. A monumental battle in which he will need all of his strength, commitment, himility and support if he is to overcome his addiction. Only the Lord knows what is best for you at this junction. Seek Him with all your might and He will surely let you know what you are to do. My prayers are with you.

I think I would have to disagree with you there. The Priesthood is received by oath and covenant. It is not a benchmark or a simple appointment tied to longevity or seniority. One must be willing and desirous to enter into this covenant. f we— 1. Are faithful 2. Are worthy to receive the priesthood 3. Magnify our calling 4. Receive Heavenly Father’s servants—the prophets Then Heavenly Father covenants to— 1. Give us the priesthood. 2. Sanctify us by the Spirit. 3. Renew our bodies. 4. Make us his elect or chosen. 5. Share all that he has with us. The appointment to receive the priesthood was made an ion ago (see Alma 13) and it was on account of the faith and willingness to heed to the call. On D&C 107:99-100 it points to our responsibility to magnify our calling. Abraham sought for the “blessings of the fathers” and the right to administer the same (see Abr. 1:1–3). But because his father, Terah, was an idolater, the particular blessings that Abraham sought could not come to him in father-to-son fashion. He therefore looked to Melchizedek, the great high priest of that day, for counsel, direction, and authority. In summary, the teachings of the brethren points to a commitment that is necessary and a desire must be present to receive the priesthood. After all, it is the power and authority onto God to administer, to act and officiate in His name upon the earth. And that is not a small thing.

My HT companion's name is T. Shoemaker. The T stands for Tanner. He does not know I am aware of his name. He is a Border Patrol agent but his father retired from Macy's. He was a shoe salesman :)

Mama I am sorry that your son-in-law has stalled in his progress. I am not sure where you live and what does the church look like in general in your area. In most places the priesthood is in desperate need of more hands to do the work. The laborers are always few. So after a few months of faithful membership he should have declared his desire to receive the priesthood. I think it took about 8- months for me. A few months later and I went to the temple for my endowment. In the other hand, the priesthood of God must be desired. Most priesthood leaders will not offer the ordination unless the brethren shows that he wants to partake of it. One has to search the scriptures and study, seek after the things of God, His knowledge and His power and a desire to receive this endowment that only God can give. I am not sure about him, obviously since I do not know him, but he does not seem interested in a temple marriage either, I gather. It is a vocation of service and an instrument in our hands to do God's work, bless those in need and our families. It is, God's power and authority delegated to His sons and a sign of royalty upon the earth. He needs to overcome his thoughts and perceptions about what the Elders Quorum is or not. The Priesthood is God's and if he (your son) came into the covenant, he has been foreordained to receive it from the foundation of the world and thus he has to step up and claim it. He needs to open his mouth and declare his intent to meet the challenge to receive it.

The most unfortunately and delicate situation. I would not ad to the chastising you have already received from some of the members of the forum. I would rather concentrate on the question at hand. Disclosure of transgressions of any kind kind has to meet a number of conditions: one that the situation at hand has the potential of hurting/injuring physically the offended party. Two: that the offense had the potential to destroy the marriage on account of the transgression being grounds to dissolve the sealing. Three that the offended party is required to be involved for monitoring, support, encouragement, treatment and/or accountability. I suggest that although your wife will be extremely unhappy, upset and incensed about this kind of behavior, I doubt seriously she will run to the court house and file for divorce. Again, I am in no way minimizing or exonerating you from your disloyalty. However, I am suggesting that it may actually be quite toxic and counter productive to share something that happened 2 years ago with no further repercussions. It is the kind of information that can push a marriage into a coma when the affliction was actually a very bad cold. I would be inclined to keep it quiet and put this behind you. I would feel much better if you would have gone to counseling to understand (truly) the root cause of your affair. A "rough patch" is not insight. You could be referring to several days of indigestion for all I know. I think some professional intervention would provide the level of understanding as to hedge against further "rough patches" leading to kissing or something worse. You should be brave and humble and consult with your bishop. It may illicit the kind of repentance sometimes needed to close forever this "escape hatch" built out of weakness. He is also the most indicated to suggest after all if you should or not share this with your wife. Just my two cents. More like three, I thought.

I would not excuse unkind or disrespectful behavior. Missionaries are teenagers with a few week's training about how to search the bible and the BoM, how to organize teaching classes and nothing else. They are as socially inept and clumsy as when they were in highschool. Please accept my sicere apology on behalf of those less than sensitive elders. I hope you can share my apology with your wife and hope that no harm was done. I take it you are happy with you religious affiliation and that the incident will not affect you or your wife in any other way. It was a less than pleasant encounter but I hope with no other repercussion. Sincerely