Justice

I don't think this means we lost a year. To me, all it means is that there was no year "0." Christ turned 1 on His first birthday, in the year 1 AD. 1 year previous to 1 AD was 1 BC, since there was no year 0.

In the scenario you present, there is no original. It's boggling for our brains to wrap around, but it would mean this way of life (exalting offspring) has existed forever. Therefore: no original; no beginning. The only beginnings are at the start of each cycle of life, or each eternal round. And, in my view, then, the reason we worship our Father is simple and logical. He is OUR Father; He provided for our exaltation.

Elphaba, I want you to know that today I care particularly for you. It's odd to say, since we've never met, that I love you. I hope you find what you're looking for. May God bless you with an abundance of happiness and joy.

He should have been born in the most luxurious conditions in the most grand of palaces. Mary should have had royalty knocking on her door from all countries of the earth with invitations to come and give birth under their care. Instead, we know the real story. It's just so typical of Jesus Christ. He had the knowledge and power to make Himself great among men. But, He chose to make others great. John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Christ laid His life down for even those who illegaly tried Him, who beat Him, who spat on Him, who brutally scourged Him, and for those who drove nails into His hands and feet, and mocked Him as He hung in agony. To mock Him while in agony for the very sins they committed is the epitomy of irony. Jopseph Smith was a great man, and he did lay his life down for his freinds. But, even he would not have laid his life down for his enemies. Nothing or no other person can sustain us. I don't care that it's in December or June, but I love the time of the year where I am caused to give extra attention to my Savior. It should be a voluntary part of my life to honor Him all year round, not just during one season.

Alma 41 and 42. It's not just that we "did stuff wrong," it's that we "became something" as we did. If we are not repentant then we have not changed our behavior, meaning we will continue that behavior. When we are resurrected we will be "restored" good for good and evil for evil. You cannot snap a finger and make something that that chooses evil choose good. We must make this choice with our agency. We must repent of our evil actions, AND THEN Christ's atonement can be applied because we must covenant to sin no more. That state is seldom achieved here on earh, but we must be moving in that dirtection, and have had a change of heart. Alma 41 and 42.

I think that most people outside the LDS faith, especially Christians, have a hard time seeing a "covenant relationship." They use the words, but since they don't actually enter into covenants with God its hard for them to understand our position. It really doesn't matter what you are asked to do or not to do (word of wisdom, not date until 16, etc.) if you enter into a covenant then you should feel bound. The covenant part of the LDS faith is exactly what draws me to it. God's people have always been a covenant people... and that's even Biblical. It seems most Christians feel distanced from covenants because it was so long ago, and things are just different today. They feel they needed them back then, but we don't need them today. The ironic part is that what makes covenants "real" for God's people is the presence of the God-given authortiy to make them binding. Without that God-given authority, it makes perfect sense why they have a hard time seeing this part of our faith.

That was me. :) And... I still agree.

I realize the thread was closed and the person who needs to see this no longer can, but I thought maybe someone else might read the comments made and may be wondering how the scripture quoted can be used to support the Church's stance on temple work. These verses were quoted: Alma 34: 32. For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors. 33. And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed. 34. Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world. 35. For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his; therefore, the Spirit of the Lord hath withdrawn from you, and hath no place in you, and the devil hath all power over you; and this is the final state of the wicked. The interpretation was that since this life is the time to prepare to meet God that temple work is not necessary since those who passed on can no longer work. My reply would be that this scripture describes exactly what we do. The fact that those who pass on can no longer "work," or perform ordinances, that they must be done here, in this life, by those who remian. It makes perfect sense if you simply ponder and pray about it. So, if the other thread left you pondering and curious about how that scripture can relate to temple work, I hope this helps.

I didn't say they couldn't be. Obviously I did a poor job of trying to communicate what I intended to say. Also, I don't think just because a thing is discussed in Ward Council that there isn't more that can be discussed and done in PEC that doesn't necessarily affect some members of Ward Council. It's a Priesthood Executive Committee... What else can it's purpose be than to help each Priesthood holder in the Ward become converted to Jesus Christ through ministering to them? For example, Home Teaching. The more you try to improve the program itself and take emphasis off converting your Home Teachers, the less effective your Home Teaching will become.

I think the PEC should focus on individual holders of the Priesthood, and what each one's needs and challenges are. If one is struggling or has needs they can be handled here in much more specific ways than can be in other meetings. Some situations may be difficult or awkward for the Ward Council to handle. And, even going a step further, since the Bishop is the presiding authority, this committee should focus more on the needs of the Aaronic Priesthood members in the Ward.

I would put "mormon.org on the back, after everything else. If you're trying to build someone's curiosity never give them the answer right away. And, many people will stop reading when they see mormon.org. I'd make the mormon.org much smaller than the rest. But, I would definately NOT use the name of the Church, and especially anything that looks like or resembles the offical logo. Jusy my $0.02

Thank you Wingnut for posting the link. You saved me a few minutes looking for it. I've already watched the first 3 videos in the session (was planning on watching it anyway)... looking forward to the last 3 after my nap.

According to your logic, BOMluvr, I wonder why God ever even revealed His Gospel to man? If it is possible to be saved in ignorance, then all men who remain ignorant are saved. If that were possible, the best thing God could have done was to keep His Gospel from us, thereby saving all men. Is that how you interpret the scripture you quoted about all men who had not the law when they died?

What do you want me to say, that I don't believe those verses? I've read them my whole life but never walked away thinking temple work isn't required. So, obviously our understanding of them is different. Ask me something more specific.

So, because temples aren't mentioned again, we are to assume they weren't used for their given purpose? The reason temples were not used for work for the dead before Christ was because the work wasn't needed until after He bridged the gap between Paradise and Prison, and people in the Spirit World came to accept Christ and need ordinances. So, here they have a temple, and now the gap had been bridged, what makes the most sense? That they did something not related to temple worship in the temples or that they simply changed their worship within the temple to accomodate Jesus' atonement, resurrection, and bridging the gap between Paradise and Prison? How many times did Mormon say he could only write a hundreth part of the things they did and said? How many times did they say there were things unlawful for man to utter? That points to temple ordinances. All indications are there, even if they didn't outline it step by step. I believe they performed ordinances for the dead in their temples just as we do in ours. It doesn't make sense any other way. Joseph Smith not only restored the Book of Mormon, but also restored many of the things they could not speak about because of their sacredness. We know this because we are counseled not to speak of them either. It is not lawful for us to speak of temple work outside of the temple to the degree of specificality you say is required to prove it. Why do you expect it of them when we already know we can't? I can't count the number of ways I disagree with you on this one.

You are being "technical" with my words. You know very well what I meant. You are diverting this discussion down a different path, looking for technicalities. Joseph Smith was a prophet and translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God. Joseph Smith instituted the building of temples in the latter days and restored the sacred ordinances and covenants associated with temple worship. He did both while under the influence of revelation. So, the obvious answer (that you are dodging) is that either Joseph Smith was a prophet or he wasn't. Either both are revelation from God or neither are. But, to play along for a bit, just to humor you: 2 Nephi 5: 1 And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine. Jacob 1: 17 Wherefore I, Jacob, gave unto them these words as I taught them in the temple, having first obtained mine errand from the Lord. Mosiah 2: 1-7 (I'll only post 7) 7 For the multitude being so great that king Benjamin could not teach them all within the walls of the temple, therefore he caused a tower to be erected, that thereby his people might hear the words which he should speak unto them. Alma 16: 13 And Alma and Amulek went forth preaching repentance to the people in their temples, and in their sanctuaries, and also in their synagogues, which were built after the manner of the Jews. Helaman 3: 9 And the people who were in the land northward did dwell in tents, and in houses of cement, and they did suffer whatsoever tree should spring up upon the face of the land that it should grow up, that in time they might have timber to build their houses, yea, their cities, and their temples, and their synagogues, and their sanctuaries, and all manner of their buildings. 3 Nephi 11: 1 And now it came to pass that there were a great multitude gathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple which was in the land Bountiful; and they were marveling and wondering one with another, and were showing one to another the great and marvelous change which had taken place. Here we have temples that were built and existed both before and after Christ appeared to the people. Christ appeared to the people at a temple site. According to you, we are to assume that temple work did not go on in the temple because it is not mentioned specifically by name, such as "baptism for the dead." I believe it is on your shoulders to prove temple work did not go on in the temples they built. It is silly for me to have to prove the buildings they built for temple work, called temples, were used as temples. It is understood that temples are used for temple work, even if not mentioned specifically for your benefit. You will never be able to prove that temples were built for any other purpose than for temple work. You may assume so if you like, but I will assume temples were built by the Church of God for the same purposes in all ages. The work for the dead is almost never mentioned in scripture, any scripture, because of its sacredness. But, no matter what you think of this argument, the one you must show me is that Joseph Smith was only a prophet when he translated the Book of Mormon and not when he built temples and instituted the ordinances therein. I really don't see this discussion going any where. But, in case it does, I have more evidence that I am not inclined to share right now.

The destructions that happened in the Book of Mormon were not allegory. It may be they are a symbol, but they most certainly were real.

This week in my personal reading I just finished Alma. I moved into Helaman and saw a scripture that has me deeply pondering on it's content. It's Helaman 3:35... 35 Nevertheless they did fast and pray oft, and did wax stronger and stronger in their humility, and firmer and firmer in the faith of Christ, unto the filling their souls with joy and consolation, yea, even to the purifying and the sanctification of their hearts, which sanctification cometh because of their yielding their hearts unto God. I've been thinking that we focus so much on the cycle of pride in the Book of Mormon that we seem to forget that there are those who remain faithful during these cycles. I thought about what the Book of Mormon might teach us about those who remain faithful during one of these cycles. This verse has me wanting to start the Book of Mormon over and look for just this thing. I mean, seriously look at this verse and look at what it tells us about those who remain faithful. Verse 34 makes it clear that the Nephites are beginning one of these pride cycles. But, the things in this verse (35) describe what the people did who remained faithful. What do you see in this verse, and why is it these things in particular that can help us avoid pride? And, why can some maintian these qualities while those around them give in to pride?

I agree with your dad. :)

Right now, the Church is telling us to teach with our hearts instead of our manuals. I don't think that means delve into the Adam-God theroy, but I think the Church is wanting deeper, more meaningful duscussions at church than in the recent past. Neither do I think it means abandon the manual altogether. I think it means it wants it's teaching teaching by the Spirit. If that means a brief, deeper discussion, I think it is encouraged. In a recent local leadership training session, Elder Scott said that the occasional false doctrine taught in classes won't destroy the church or it's members, he said complacency and laziness would.

Grace is so easy to misunderstand without modern revelation. Grace empowers us. Grace is a free gift, but it allows us to work harder and do more. It's not for the idle. Too many mistake grace being a free gift as menaing you don't have to do anything to get it, because, they reason, if you did then you are earning your salvation. It doesn't have to be. It can be a free gift, but that gift empowers or enables us to accomplish more than we can on our own. If you look at it that way then it makes more sense. He said: Matthew 19: 26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. Mark 10: 27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. Luke 18: 27 And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God. These verses are saying the same thing as the yoke analogy. If man strives on his own he will fall short. If man strives seeking God, putting God first, then all things become possible to that man. John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Read that verse over and over, because it isn't explained any where in the Bible more clearly.

You are stuck if you don't view the reward as a gift. There has to be a difference between those who strive to keep the commandments and those that do not. Hebrews 11: 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. No matter what we do we are not worthy of any reward He gives us. His grace is a gift to those who seek Him, not that the gift is earned by the seeking. He deems that we must seek Him in order to receive His grace. He is the judge. If one does not seek Him then that person is not privy to receive the same gifts or rewards that as one who does seek Him. Again, there must be a difference between one who seeks and one who does not.

I don't view "being converted" as "coming to know Jesus Christ. I believe the Book of Mormon teaches us that being converted to Jesus Christ is when we no longer desire to do evil and do good continually. It is when we put off the natural man and become a spiritual man. I don't think one can become fully conveted to Jesus Christ in just one interview, or the known cases of such are exremely rare... even within the scriptures. I believe you can come to know truth, like that Joseph Smith is a prophet, or that the Book of Mormon is the word of God. But, those things are very different than being converted.

You could say it that way. I'll buy it. The truth is, if you say you work to keep your salvation, or that if you don't work to keep it you lose it, then we are much closer than LDS is with most others. In fact, it would then become a matter of timing. If you can lose your salvation by not "working," then it stands to reason that the gift isn't given until after, when you have showed you have endured to the end. Otherwise, it might be a premature gift, if it is given then you fall away. Always a pleasure chatting with you PC.

And I would add that it cannot happen without the things you mention. That is the way of it. That is why Jesus gave the beattitudes. Christ yokes Himself with us to bring us to salvation. We cannot do it [for ourselves] without Him. He cannot do it [for us] without us. Both parties in the yoke is necessary; required. Both are needed to pull the load. This is why He gave us the analogy of a yoke. A yoke is attached to 2 oxen, or whatever is used to pull ONE load. If one or the other were going to pull the load then you would attach them directly to the load. A yoke is unstable without 2. 2 are required to pull it. Saying "good works are not required" is like saying "I don't have to keep His commandments." It's a dangerous place to be. Too many try to combine one's own works with Christ's. Both are for a different purpose. Our works do not apply toward answering the demands of justice for the sins we have committed. But, our works are required to show that we love Him, that we love our fellow man, and that we will do what is necessary to accept His grace when offered, and that we have truly repented of the sin we have committed. Doing nothing does not allow you to accept His grace. Therefore, good works are required.