bytor2112

Weren't they all dressed in jogging suits and NIKE running shoes??? Hale-bop, right. I'm personally drawn to the Raelians.......

And so I now say: Come and let us reason together; let us reason as did righteous men of old that we may come to understanding. Come and hear us declare sound doctrine; let us declare it plainly and in power as do the angels of God in heaven. Come and let us testify of those things which God has made known to us; let us testify as do those whose souls are afire with the Spirit and who know by revelation of the truth and verity of their spoken word. Elder Bruce R. McConkie

I think you can be specific in a non-partisan way...the thread is after all about some of the reasons some consider us to be a cult.

From Jeff Lindsey: In condemning the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as "the Mormon Cult," the main issues used by critics to create special definitions of the word "cult" are: 1. The Trinity: LDS doctrine does not accept the standard doctrine of the Trinity. Therefore, the Church is said to be a cult. 2. Prophets and Apostles: the Church gives respect to human leaders called apostles and prophets, allegedly making us a cult. 3. New Scripture: Latter-day Saints have new scriptures not in the old canon. Therefore, we are said to belong to a cult. 4. New Doctrines: Latter-day Saints have had a variety of doctrines and teachings differing from older practices. Anyone departing from Christian tradition must belong to a cult. 5. Commandment Keeping: Latter-day Saints are said to think that we must keep the commandments to be saved instead of relying on the grace of Christ, thus making us a cult. 6. Divine Potential of Human Beings: Latter-day Saints are said to believe that they may eventually become "gods," thus making their church a non-Christian cult. Indeed, any group is said to be a cult if they teach that man has divine potential or that man can become like Christ, glorified with Christ, or "joint heirs" with Christ. 7. Close Social Ties: "Cults" are often described as close-knit groups with strong social ties and influence from fellow believers, a definition which would seem to fit Latter-day Saints. 8. Polygamy: Plural marriages were practiced by some early Latter-day Saints and were encouraged by the Church for a period of time in the nineteenth century (from about 1840 to 1890), so Latter-day Saints are said to be a cult for having once had such an abhorrent practice. 9. Departure from Tradition: Mormons are said to be a cult because we depart from much of established Christian tradition. These special definitions of cults are used to label us as "cultists" and to exclude members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from the ranks of Christianity, regardless of our belief in and acceptance of Christ as our Savior and as the Son of God who died to free us from our sins and from death. Naturally, the critics usually call the Church by any name (Mormon Church, Mormonism, Church of Latter-day Saints, etc.) other than it's official and correct name, lest their audience wonder why a non-Christian group calls itself after the name of Christ. Curiously, most of the special definitions listed above would also have condemned Christ and His New Testament church as non-Christian cultists. Was Christ a Christian? I should think so - but the logic of popular "cult slayers" would suggest otherwise, if their logic were applied to Him. Let's consider each of these charges in light of New Testament teachings of Christ and His Apostles to see if they were also "cultists."

Funny....the Savior and his followers would fit the definition of a cult......seems we are in good company.

With all due respect.....we could be as arrogant and ignorant as the rest of Christendom and say, well....I don't think the Baptists are a cult, but I'm not sure I would call them Christian either!!! It is so audacious of you or anyone else to assume that you have the right to determine who is and who is not a Christian. Have you considered the possibility that your doctrine is wrong? That your interpretation of things is incorrect, that your understanding of God is wrong? I mean, really............ It is so absolutely insulting and inconsiderate and really just plain ignorance of our beliefs to say....well I am not sure I would call them Christian either. We are absolutely Christians, in the most devout sense of the word. The thread is not about making heretical charges toward a people that strive to live the example that Christ taught in both word and deed. So please, though we disagree on theology, I believe you and those of other faiths to be sincere Christians, please accord us the same respect.

I don't think that the Prophet and Apostles immediately stopped the practice either. I have read a bit about the Reed-Smoot hearings............

Exactly! I don't understand the big deal about Joseph Smith and polygamy. We readily accept Brigham Young and other Prophets and Apostles and plural marriage. It is surprising how few even know that he practiced plural marriage. My best friend is an inactive, life long member and thought I was joking when I mentioned it...he didn't have a clue. But, really, when you read the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church manuals....like the Brigham Young manual, you would never know that BY had more than one wife. I haved read...and I don't know how reliable this is, that BY and other Prophets also divorced some of their wives?? Hmm....

It does seem difficult for some to swallow..... but it makes perfect sense...to me at least. Most of the world doesn't have a clue about sealings, but know what polygamy is.......I think that is the point President Hinkley was stressing.

What do believe you will be doing in Heaven? Do you think that you will remain the same forever?

Are we always seeking Christ? That is an interesting question. I am not sure that I could honestly answer yes. I try to live the Gospel as I understand it....but I fall short in alot of ways. Will the Savior view my efforts as sufficient or as feeble attempts? Am I really a different and better person today than I was three and a half years ago when I started this spiritual journey......yes I think so. But, what about weaknesses? What about the seemingly small temptations that I sometimes give in to... all to frequently. How will the Savior view that, will he still embrace me and plead for me before the Father? Was my Stake President right when he said that the Lord had accepted my repentance? Have I truely had a "might change of heart?" Or do the chinks in my armour suggest otherwise? I often worry about these questions and more. I have ebbs and flows and peaks in valleys in my passion for the Gospel. Sometimes I am on fire and so resolute and sometimes I am a bit complacent......not commiting major trangressions mind you, but just not as sure footed on the climb. When I watch conference I am usually affected in a couple of different ways......the first is the thought that I am doomed, I am never going to be like these guys and then finally the realization that I don't have to be and then I resolve to try harder, to be better, to love more, to pray more, to be a better friend, to resist and defeat the last of the sins and temptations that I seem to cling to....most of which are in the theater of the mind. In the end, will the Savior see the fight I have fought, the momentus struggles and battles I have waged, the efforts filled with victories and defeats as a measure of how hard I have tried to come unto him and recieve of his love and mercy? I have faith that it is so.........I think this is how we grow and it must be this way.

Ceeboo, Ordinances performed in Temples like sealings unite families together for eternity...if they remain worthy and keep the saced covenants that are made. It is such an awesome blessing. I can't imagine not being with my wife and children in eternity and not sure if I would want to be there without them.

Funkeymonkey, I wasn't trying to be condescending with my question......if I came off that way, please accept my apology.:) I know that this is a sensitive subject. My comments are my personal opinions based on my understanding of things and not intended to be viewed as an official church position or doctrine. In the book, Doctrines of Salvation, volume II, written by President Joseph Fielding Smith, he briefly writes about this subject and mentions specifically that he will be with his wives that he has been sealed to. In Mormon Doctrine, written by Elder Bruce R. McConkie, under plural marriage he writes, "Obviously the holy practice will commence again after the second coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium." Check out Isaiah Chapter 4, it mentions this as well. Now these are not official church declarations, but they are the opinions and views of men who were sustained as Prophets, Seers and Revelators. Elder McConkie also writes that plural marriage is not essential to salvation or exaltation. I know that Elder Oaks, Elder Perry and Elder Nelson have all remarried in the Temple. Elder Nelson remarried in 2006 and President Joseph Fielding Smith was married in the Temple at least three times. I do think it is probably more common to remarry for time only. That being said, plural marriages were only abandoned because of the law enacted by Congress banning plural marriage. President Woodruff said he saw in vision the calamities that would befall the church if the church did not discontinue the practice. My view is that it was a holy and sacred practice ordained by God and would probably still exist today but for the US laws forbidding it and in my opinion it will be practiced again in the eternal worlds.... perhaps not by everyone and probably depending on one's personal choices and preferences and doubtless with the permission of the first wife...again just my opinions.

Pretty sure the preceding wife must be deceased........

If plural marriages were sealed for time and eternity....then there will be plural marriages in the Celestial worlds. My wife attended Time out for Women earlier this summer. One of the speakers was Wendy L. Watson.....now Wendy L. Nelson....Elder Nelson's new wife. According to my wife, some of the ladies did not know that plural marriages or sealings to more than one woman occured. This was clearly explained to them by a BYU Professor that was also speaking. He explained that since Elder Nelson's firt wife had passed that he was able to be sealed to his new wife..... I am curious to know why you doubt or don't believe this is true. It is pretty logical ......if God allowed plural marriages and sealings then he obviously intends for them to continue in the eternal realms.

Are you doubting that members of the church have been sealed to more than one woman? Surely not........that is pretty well known. One of the controversies surrounding Joseph was whether his plural marriages were Celestial marriages or were they also consumated. Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants states very plainly, "And verily, verily, I say unto you, that whatsoever you seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever you bind on earth, in my name and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the heavens." This would apply to ALL marriages sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise in the Temple....including plural marriages. Families are forever......including the ones that we don't understand. :)

Ceeboo, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints practiced plural marriage once upon a time.......as you know. Today a man may be sealed to more than one woman. For example if my wife predeceases me, I can be sealed to another in this life. Those early Saints, members and Prophets and Apostles who practiced plural marriage and were sealed to these women and had children with them will be united with them as families in the eternal worlds. Else why would they have been sealed to them to begin with..........?? As for the JS thing being creepy.......no comment. The Holy Spirit testifies of truth....... I can't deny what I have experienced.

I am pretty sure that Elder Russell M. Nelson was sealed in the Temple recently to his second wife.......

Reflection....as in mirror? Man, I hope not.

They believe in everything..........

Plural marriage is still practiced today in that a man may be sealed to more than one woman in this life. What do you think.......all of the Saints who practiced plural marriage and were sealed in Temples will not be married in the eternities? If that is this case, why then were they sealed for time and eternity? Of course, there will be plural marriage in eternity. Will every worthy Priesthood holder have more than one eternal companion...maybe. I submit that we have no concept of what we will have progressed to in the Eternal realms and our understanding of things like this will be so much different.

That's what is so awesome about the Sacrament each Sunday, we renew......:)

For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. I think that Heavenly Father's work is mercy and it will roll forward. His love is boundless and as such we will all receive life everlasting, whether we deserve it or not. For the more valiant, the rewards are Eternal life in the celestial worlds. I think he will be loving to all. I can't imagine how anyone could love more than I love my two sons or my wife, yet Heavenly Father does........

Yes....I have read that on some anti-sites......not sure how that applies to LDS doctrine really. Some say that Joseph borrowed this belief from them and adopted it to make plural marriage more pallitable.

A Health Savings Account allows you to set aside money for future use if you are in a high deductible health insurance plan. As a family you can contribute up to $5650.00 per year. If your husband company offers a salary reduction plan...then it would be pre-tax dollars. If not salary reduction, then you can contribute and it is considered an "above the line tax deduction." In other words, if you earn $100,000 per year and you contribute $5650.00, your taxable income is reduced by that amount.