Islander

Yeah, once you build a door, no matter how many locks you put on it and no matter how much you specify it is for life or death emergencies; it will be open. By accident first, then on occasion and last as a matter of course when things change and "need arises." It happened before.

Good deal. Let me know if there are any questions you may have. A suggestion I have for you. I understand your urgency and diligence in trying to reach God and the truth. Do it systematically and do not rush or overwhelm yourself. Take it slow, read and pray and the Spirit will open your eyes and show you the way. Look forward to hearing from you about your search. Take care my brother.

Friend - At the end, the cross and whether you wear it or not is not truly the reason why you are having problems in the church. I am not necessarily a diplomat and as much as I try, I have very little skill when it comes to unfolding the truth. I ask for your fogiveness beforehand if anything of what I am about to say here offends you. It is really not my intent or purpose. Your discontent with the church about the cross or any other teaching (and by the way, we do not teach against the cross) are rather evidence of other underlying conflict and issues. You have not elaborated much in that regard so I could not speculate. I could however point to the fact that it is likely that you are not converted fully to the Gospel. You may be quite young and are trying perhaps to develop you own sense of self, space and cognitive awareness. One of the challenges of being a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints is that we have a living prophet, we have modern revelation and a current doctrinal position that removes the ambiguity out of the canonical texts and the interpretation thereof. So it places you in a very interesting and unique position. The revelation is before you and it is up to you to inquire of God thru the Spirit if it is true or not. What you think you know and whatever preconceived notions and ideas become irrelevant at that point. If you insist in holding on to your own position then you find yourself in clear opposition to the teachings and doctrine as revealed by the prophets of this dispensation. That has to create interna tension. Beyond that, I suggest that there may be other issues in your life of great importance to you where you find yourself also at odds with the doctrine or even the social norms values and life in the church in general. Ultimately, you are free to choose and act for yourself independently and away from the revelation of the latter days. Some comfort themselves with the notion that they can worship God their own way and go seeking after associations more to their liking an in synch with their own views. I suggest that you are rejecting the doctrine because it interferes with the desires of your heart, whatever those are. I would encourage you to seek, in humility, guidance from the Spirit about what direction to take. You have no idea of the consequences of rejecting the Gospel and the doctrine of the kingdom after it has been given to you. I pray that you would consider seeking counsel from your bishop and others that love you and care for you. To inquire and to question is of the Lord and truth is the fruit of those who wrestle in the Spirit to reach and understand Him. To have questions in your heart is the first step in the road to full communion with God and understanding the Atonement of the Savior. My prayers are with you.

NY - Did you get to meet with the missionaries?

A lot of the dissenting opinions are part of the traditions inherited from the Nicaean council and not necessarily from the description on the NT. For the uninitiated and without any help from the theologians, the NT offers multiple opportunities to believe that the Father and the Son are two distinct and different personages. The scriptures are sufficiently transparent to discern that Jesus proclaims himself the Son of God, the Messiah, the Lamb of God and working and preaching/teaching the kingdom on behalf of his Father. Further along, Paul and others describe the Lamb sitting at the right hand of God. They felt FORCED to come up with a theological explanation for the trinity because of the monotheistic nature of the OT and the absolute mandate of YHW for Israel not to worship any other gods. Now, in the same OT, YHW proclaims that he is the Savior, the Redeemer, the Creator. The same attributes and claims that were made by Jesus later in the NT. So, they HAD to come up with a theological rather than natural explanation and the claim of a mystery. But that is not how the scriptures read. I suggest that the Spirit would lead most (without exposure to prejudicial theological theories) to believe that the trinity is made out of 3 distinct personages rather than 1 mysterious God that requires a PhD in divinity to explain itself. I grew up in an island in the middle of nowhere without teachers of religion of any kind. Over my dinner table and without any help and reading an old tattered bible, my grandmother said "YHW is Jesus and, Jesus is the Son of God-the-Father-of-ALL spirits. And the Holy Ghost speaks the truth to our hearts when man won't." I think the academic debate was put to rest with the testimony of Joseph. but friends, you are free to believe as you wish.

People often neglect to understand that although Israel has about 15,000 square miles of surface, we are still trying to figure out where such and such cities were location. Archaeologists and historian continue to fight about it with no end in sight even with a record that spans 10,000 years. Central and South America have 12 million square miles. There is no coherent recorded history of the region but fragments from the inhabitants at the time of the conquest just over 500 years ago.

MaidservantX: I hate to burst your bubble, but unfortunately you suffer from the often times well intended but blind humanistic idealism and utopic view of society that permeates the Western world. I am not going to make a dissertation about Islam here. I just want to point to the fact that Islamic societies are some of the most repressive, most violent, most abusive, most backwards, less developed and economic deprived societies in the world. Beyond fossil fuels, nothing is being made in teh Middle East. As much money as the monarchies make in the oil market, ALL of it is invested outside in the west. Most of the Arab Emirates are virtually welfare states. At the core of this is Islam and the interpretation and application of the Qur'an, including their legal system. I am sure that there are good, pacific and loving people in Islamic societies. but they are the very small minority and they do not yield the political power to affect change in the societies they live in. I submit that the evidence that Sharia law and more specif Islam has not delivered as a religion and socio-political system is the current state of affair of the Middle East after 1300 years. To reject our systems of laws to accommodate the wishful thinking of utopic (inclusive and accommodating) societies is a very dangerous exercise with consequences you can not possible imagine.

This is where reason together with Elvis has left the building. Why would you institute a failed socio-political system in your own country? Before the 7th century the Arabia peninsula was a collection of chieftains and tribal groups. There was NO law. Muhammad gave the Muslim people Sharia law which is Islamic law. You will not be happy with it or the interpretation thereof. Not only that, I think it's simply honoring stupidity to surrender sovereignty to a foreign religion and form of government. By the way, under Sharia the top UK judge would be demoted and fired. In order to be qualified a sharia judge has to be able to read the Koran and the kitab kuning, or the classical canon books of Islamic law. Beyond the fact that MANY aspects of Muslim law allow for things considered crimes under the law in the West. I think this is an example of PC run a mock. PS: To surrender one's contitution and form of government to a foreign interest was considered treason not too long ago. What happened?

LOL....Oh, that episode was priceless. Yes, I get stares that if they could kill I would be cadaver by now when I talk about PC and my low tolerance for it. I have learned to assess ALL issues and consider them carefully before I speak. I organize my thoughts and I state the facts as demonstrated by the evidence. Opinions I usually keep to my self. But if you haven't seen me or know any thing about me and my family, you may not like very much what I have to say. I am obviously not politically correct and I find the attempt of some to force such on me quite upsetting. Oh, and guess what? Once they see me in person they say things like "you of ALL people should not be saying stuff like that"....that is when I break out my loud and irreverent island-style laughter. Bunch of moronic, sidewalk-cafe intellectuals. They live in a sanitized glass jar and they think they understand the universe. I laugh at them lot. My wife is beginning to suspect I may be using "something." I tell her if I don't I would have lost a my mind long time ago. She is not at all convinced.

My apologies if anyone took offense. However, I do maintain that it was a "copy and paste job." The inquiry was verbatim from other sites. Maybe his intent was not to argue and antagonize and if I jumped to that conclusion prematurely I apologize. I just have very little time to argue with those that make of it a sport. Look forward to contribute and share in the right spirit. Inquiry is of God and I will honor all that truly seek to know the truth with full intent.

I totally agree with you. Some time ago I had a few words with a pastor and thought, while he was chatting non-stop about how God wanted me to be rich, that a lightening strike right then and there would have been well deserved. I went home and repented of my thoughts. I kept looking and 2 years later I found the church. I find it disgusting and offensive for someone to preach the gospel as a mean of achieving material prosperity. The apostles walked away from prosperity to endure a life of hardship and privation for the sake of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, paying with their lives for the privilege of discipleship. I should drop it. I can feel my blood pressure beginning to inch up

You have the right to remain in silence. You are not compelled to answer that question without due process. Besides, they (next door) may have converted an hour before after realizing that they had been wrong for a long time. And you are in no position to accuse your neighbors without being sure you are not baring false witness. I would honestly answer "I do not know." You are still within the bounds of the law.

In the West we have grown fat and apathetic about just everything. We keep seeking and coming out with more bizarre, morbid and brazen games and entertainment. We do not fear anything, we feel not dependent on anything (certainly not God) and we are apparently ale to carry out our sorry lives with no help from deity, or so we thing. We are not aware of all the enemies we have. The billions that hate us with a passion that conumes their souls. The ones that are willing to die themselves as long as they can kill a few of us in the process. The wants that hate everything we are and all we stand for. Those that pray every day that the hand of (their) god would sweep us fromt eh faith of the earth. Wealth and prosperity will be our downfall. This land will be overrun as promised in the scriptures because our unbelief and stiffneckedness (I just made that up) of our people. A very sad tale. That is why the church will grow outside of the US. The simple the humble, the meek of the earth have a soft and willing heart and the blessings will go to them. They may remember the long captivity of their fathers under communism and savage regimes. As long as they retain that memory they will prosper and flourish the work of the Lord.

That was not an honest question. That was a well rehearsed, extensively debated and highly contentious argument. I have been looking at these forums long enough to spot a "copy and paste job" from somebody whose ONLY intention is mto bait people into a debate. When I have a question I research the issue on my own. I read the available sources and information and I make up my mind about it without going to a place where ALL would have to go to the SAME sources I just visited in order to engage. He is citing dozens of sources in the post. Whether he actually read and research them all is a different story. In summary; plural marriage is a subject and doctrine that IS NO LONGER taught in the church. Marriage and divorce and marriage is not polygamy. Otherwise 50% of the US population has to be considered polygamist. The subject has no baring in our current lives, is not relevant to living the Gospel and the covenants of the kingdom as they have been revealed for us now in these last days. We should just move on to a more constructive and spiritually edifying subject.

:):):):)

Men will be judged for what they know at the time of their mortal fall or time of death. They will be accountable for how much light they received in this life and the opportunities they had. But it is clear from the scriptures this is the time to repent and work on attaining truth, knowledge and the covenants of the kingdom as they have been revealed: Alma 42: 4, 10, 13 1 Ne. 10: 21 1 Ne. 15: 32 2 Ne. 9: 27 Hel. 13: 38 Just like on the earth and inspite of much effort and sacrifice, some of our brothers and sisters seem unable to progress, such will be in the celestial kingdom. D&C 130: 18-19 18 Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection. 19 And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.

I can see you are surprised at the sight of a strong and well formulated opinion. :)

Why is it that a bold affirmation of the truth is offensive? Why is it that I must temper my speech in regards to the things that I know to be absolutely true? I claim the right to be politically incorrect on account of declaring that I know what I know and stating without ambiguity or fear that is it an absolute fact. That some may not agree, it is their prerogative and I acknowledge that. Should they take offense on me direct and precise about what I know and believe is also their choice. They are free to do and believe as they please. I am entitled to my opinion just like anyone else in regards to what I see and I make no apology for that.

I am sory to hear that you have some issues that have not been resolved that is causing your testimony to faulter. I sicerely wish you could find the faith, strength and courage to read, ponder and inquire of the Lord as to understand the questions in your heart. I think in our country we hold wikipedia too high up for our own good and spend very little time truly studying. We are commanded to study and serch as to be prepared to go forth and do the Lord's work. The word "cross" does not appear in the original greek of the NT. During the first two centuries of Christianity, the cross may have been rare in Christian lore, as it depicts a painful and gruesome method of public execution. The Ichthys, or fish symbol, was used by early Christians. The Chi-Rho monogram, which was adopted by Constantine in the 4th century as his banner, was another Early Christian symbol. In fact the cross appears since the early bronze age in several pagan symbols of the equinox, the sun and the east-west paradigm. The cross takes relevance away from the roman empire where people were not familiar with this method of execution and Christians begin to carve and represent to converts in texts, walls, fabric and other media the story of the crucifixion of Christ. There you have it. For the rest, those who would like to follow the counsel of the prophets of this dispensation in regards to the issue at hand will do so. Those who don't I guess they can do as they please.

Oh, no question that some of that stuff is real. Where I come from folks are into that stuff big time. My grandmother did not know much about it but she felt they were "disobedient spirits" entrenched in remaining on the earth trying to deal with humans when "their time was already up and their ticket called". In her eyes that was rebellion against The Father and we should stay away from that as far as we can. If you give Satan audience you give him power over you. In the OT God commanded Israel to put away from the camp those witches and if they insisted on their craft to put them to death. I think God is serious about the issue. I do not pay any atention to those programs. I prefer The History Channel.

Sister, you received your recommend recently but you demonstrate a limited understanding of the Gospel, the revelation of this dispensation and the doctrine of the kingdom. It will take some time for you to be able to understand and comprehend many important things. It will be thru obedience, faith, study and prayer that you will get there. If you went to the temple recently I think you did not hear, understood or remember much of what was said there. Go back and try to concentrate. Also, did you notice that the sisters DO absolutely the same and officiate as the brethren do on their side of the endowment session? I hope you would pause and reflect on what has been posted here. Perhaps words alone can not convey the love and concern we feel for you. The endowment is a beautiful thing and carries great promises but also great responsibilities. Words also fail to convey the urgency and our heartfelt desire for you to grasp that it is much you risk should you fail to understand and live up to you temple covenant. I hope you would consider these things and continue to study, ponder and pray that the Spirit may reveal to you what you need to give your heart certainty and rest. My wife and I send our love to you and your family.

You should check your sources. I am a convert to the church, I happen to be black and I have researched the issue in significant detail. Vaghn is right. The priesthood was withheld to men of African descent for very specific reasons. You should study the issue if you are interested. In the other hand, the issue before us is quite simple; --either Joseph saw the God of the universe and His Son or not. Did he received revelation or not as a prophet? Was the priesthood restored thru him or not? Until and unless you find answers to these questions you are putting forth just your opinion. When it comes to the things of God our opinion is not worth much and we run the risk of finding ourself on the wrong side of the truth. I think you must consider these issues prayerfully and sincerely. I suggest you seek an interview with your bishop and raise all the questions you have and avoid listening to the echo inside your head. We usually have a very difficult time discerning what is fact and what is opinion when we do not understand the doctrine of the kingdom. Confusion and doubt often constitute a sure way to open the door to the enemy.

I agree with BussyMom. With no intent to hurt or criticize, I would also like to point out that we must teach our young girls how to dress since a very early age. I have 4 girls (do not tease me about the drama in my house...hehehehe) and since they were born they have always dressed the way they will dress when they marry at the temple. My oldest is 11 and she understand perfectly why we do this. My wife is a young 32 and quite hot I might add, but she has dressed modernly but modestly since becoming a member of the church. My girls all know what garments look like and they know that although others may dress as they wish, that is not the way WE dress. On the appointed day, I hope that they will go to the temple to receive their covenants and it is going to be second nature to slip into the garment of the priesthood. I have seen some of my friends' daughters marry and make this transition without a glitch. I suggested talking to the sisters at the temple. It may be a good place to start also. I would go for the "younger" ones since it may be easier to empathize and relate to on these issues.:)

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard!!! I am trying so hard not to laugh. Not only that, why are we spending so much time discussing a principle that is not currently taught in the church, it has no baring in our current lives and that we do not fully comprehend? There is no such thing as celestial sex!!! That is just silly. Can we just move on to a more spiritually uplifting, less contentious and more productive topic, now?