Connie

Hello, Graig. It's nice to meet you. I'm not sure where you have obtained your information about the Mormon church. I've been a member since age 8, and i can assure you i've never been taught that Jesus has/had wives and children. I've read a lot of speculation on the matter. But that's all it is... speculation. No where in our official doctrine is that taught. As far as Heavenly Father having wives and children. We do believe we are all spirit children of our Heavenly Father. As far as wives are concerned, that would be a point of speculation as well. The idea of a Heavenly Mother is mentioned in one of our Hymns but not much else is known about her so a lot of what you may hear would probably be speculation. No where is she mentioned in official doctrine that i am aware. As for the Holy Ghost, he is a personage of spirit. Perhaps you would like to read some links that are a little more official than what you have apparently been reading. LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Holy Ghost LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Jesus Christ LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - God the Father Enjoy.

I found this in the Book of Mormon institute manual which you can find and read here: 3 Nephi 19:10–13. Baptized Anew President Joseph Fielding Smith (1876-1972) explained why Jesus commanded the Nephites to be baptized again: “When Christ appeared to the Nephites on this continent, he commanded them to be baptized, although they had been baptized previously for the remission of their sins. . . . The Savior commanded Nephi and the people to be baptized again, because he had organized anew the Church under the gospel [see 3 Nephi 19:7–15; 26:17]. Before that it had been organized under the law [see 3 Nephi 9:15–22; 11:10–40; 12:18–19; 15:4–10]. “. . . For the same reason Joseph Smith and those who had been baptized prior to April 6, 1830, were again baptized on the day of the organization of the Church” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 2:336). (this was on page 320) I don't know of a scripture that explicitly states this particular group had already been baptized, but it was instituted among the people as MOE has already explained. I am also of the opinion that it's unlikely that all of them would have been previously baptized.

The mods on this site post a lot more than what i've seen on other sites. Mods on other sites seem to stick with actual moderating while the ones here get involved in the conversations and discussions. Which isn't a bad thing because i think they still do their job, just an observation i've made based on my own limited internet forum lurkage (did i just make up a new word?).

Happy Birthday, Ram! Hope you have a great day!

Christ and the New Covenant: The Messianic Message of the Book of Mormon by Jeffrey R. Holland

Hi harlanleyside. Nice to meet you. But please, less secrets. You should leave a certain air of mystery about yourself, after all.

But you love the cheese, right. Tell me you love the cheese at least. Ok, you don't have to love the cheese. I can love it enough for both of us. Welcome to the forums. :)

Hello MrPeanut. Welcome to the forums. Your first question i personally cannot answer. Anything i said on the subject would be mere speculation. I don't believe the LDS church as a position on this particular matter nor do i believe they are likely to state one soon. So the answer is, we don't really know (or at least i don't know). Your second question, however, according to LDS doctrine can be answered with D&C 137:10 which states, "And I also beheld that all children who die before they arrive at the years of accountability are saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven." Year of accountability in LDS theology is age 8. So anyone who dies before age 8 is saved in heaven. So the answer to your question would be they move on. I hope this information is somewhat helpful. If you have any other questions, please ask. :) Best Regards

Hi girlzof3. Welcome to the forum. I have a suggestion. Stop wearing a bra. If there's nothing there, you don't need one. And trying to put something on you don't need is obviously uncomfortable for you. If you don't need a bra, why wear one? Just be like Alice and do your own thing. "But you're not properly dressed." "Whose to say what is proper? If everyone decided that wearing a codfish on your head were proper, would you wear one? To me a corset is like a codfish." (from Alice in Wonderland) Regards

Hi again Soninme. Have you had a chance to look at the links i provided? I think they would really help you in understanding the LDS position. Based on your continued questions i think particularly the last link would help. Here it is again: http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/Inerrant.pdf God bless

Hi Maureen. I hope you are having a great day. :) "Consider the magnitude of our blessing to have the Holy Bible and some 900 additional pages of scripture, including the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. Then consider that, in addition, the words of prophets spoken as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in settings such as this, which the Lord calls scripture (see D&C 68:2–4), flow to us almost constantly by television, radio, Internet, satellite, CD, DVD, and in print. I suppose that never in history has a people been blessed with such a quantity of holy writ." This was said by Elder D. Todd Christofferson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in our last General Conference. You can read the entire thing here. Does that help? Respectfully

Take your time. It's essential to read them carefully for understanding. Feel free to ask any questions. :) Pax Vobiscum

Oh, i'm so glad this thread is still open. I thought by now it would have run its course. But i have to ask. Do you think my ward would suffer all sorts of negative effects if i got a nose job. Because i was thinking that they would support me in such a noble cause. Perhaps even donating some needed funds. What do you all think?

Hello GDKT. It's nice to meet you. Welcome to the forum. This question has been discussed on this site many times already. Please see these: http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/17588-were-adam-eve-born.html http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/27592-belly-button.html

Hello Soninme. It is very nice to meet you, and i hope you are having a great day. :) You may be interested in reading these: Bible/"Adding to" or "taking away from" - FAIRMormon 1st frame http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/Inerrant.pdf There are more if these aren't enough. :) Pax Vobiscum

Here are some links that may help: LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Jesus Christ LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Atonement of Jesus Christ

Here are some links to our beliefs on Heaven and Hell. If you have any questions, please do ask. LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Kingdoms of Glory LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Hell You may also be interested in something i said on another thread. Let me know what you think. "We are saved by grace through faith (Ephesian 2:8). And "faith, if it hath not works, is dead." (James 2:17) So if our faith is dead without works and we are saved by grace through faith, then works are a pretty important part of being saved by grace; wouldn't you say? Seems logical." Regards.

Thank you, CHowell, for taking the time to respond to my post. I really appreciate it, and i hope you have enjoyed your time on the forum so far. Excellent! Then we agree! No, actually what i’m assuming is that they had no knowledge of good or evil. They did not know what was good or what was evil. They did not know how to do good nor how to do evil. In other words, they were not self aware. I’m sure you are right and they were learning things from God. Without self awareness or a knowledge of what is good and what is evil I don’t think they had a complete understanding of what they were being taught. Do you see how many assumptions one has to make because the Bible is not always crystal clear. I just did it; as did you in the above paragraph. How do we know whose assumptions are more correct? (By the way, i do agree with your assumption here. My point is simply that one has to make assumptions when it comes to the Bible. Things are not always clearly stated.) I agree absolutely with this paragraph. Beautifully stated! So, if God gave us free will and knew we would sin, then it stands to reason that he planned on it thus providing a way back through our Savior. Okay, that didn’t really answer the question, but I’ll address it anyway. I believe he did want it to happen. If not, why did he plant that tree there in the first place? Why? If he did not want it to happen, why? I don’t think this assumes God intends for us to sin at all. What it assumes is that he knows human nature or, as you stated in your excellent paragraph above, he knew that man would sin. Therefore, it was part of the plan and he graciously allowed us a way to return through the Savior. Ahh, interesting. So we have free will. God wants us to have free will. So again, if God did not want Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit why did he permit the serpent into the garden where he knew what would happen? Knowing (as God knows everything) that Eve would not be strong enough to resist that temptation, why did he allow the serpent to be there if he did not want them to eat the fruit? I believe he did want them to eat the fruit because he knew that was how they could grow in their free will. And this brings up another interesting point. In order to have free will, we have to be allowed to face evil. So the first evil to face in the garden of Eden was the serpent. But Eve did not recognize the serpent as evil. Again, how could she with no knowledge of good or evil? Eve didn’t know the serpent was evil until after she had partaken of the fruit, and then all the sudden “the serpent beguiled me,” she figures it out. So in order to truly face evil and exercise our free will to return to God, a knowledge of good and evil was necessary. I believe God knew all this and wanted it to happen for our growth, so we could face evil and exercise our free will to accept Christ and return to Him. This is also where the idea of transgression versus sin comes into the picture. Sin requires a knowledge of good and evil. Transgression does not. Hence, Eve was transgressing the law rather than actually sinning. I’m not sure I follow. So he didn’t plan for the sin but he knew it would happen and had a response prepared. Isn’t that the definition of a plan especially when you know something will happen and have prepared for it? Could you clarify? Because it just sounded like you said he didn’t plan but he did plan. Regards.

Unfortunately, i'm going to have to agree with Wingnut's assessment here. CHowell, if you are really interested in discussion, i would appreciate it if you would address my post #40. You seem to be jumping around a lot and not really staying on topic here. Also you're responding to the most argumentative/emotional posts. This leads me to believe you are here to argue rather than discuss. Again, if you really are interested in discussion, please respond to post #40. Regards.

Hi CHowell. I hope you are having a great evening or morning or afternoon or whatever time it is where you are. :) I noticed you didn't answer my question. I would be really interested to know the answer. Do you believe as the Bible says that Adam and Eve did not receive a knowledge of good or evil until they partook of the fruit? If so, what knowledge was it they possessed that would have allowed them to procreate? If not, how do you resolve that conflict in doctrine when the Bible clearly teaches it? Also, i have some other questions based on the underlying/implied argument that God did not intend for the fall to happen. 1. How is that even possible if God knows the end from the beginning as declared in Isaiah 46:9-10? I have a hard time believing God could possibly be blindsided by that. 2. Why would God even put the tree of knowledge of good and evil there in the first place if he did not intend the fall? 3. Why did God permit the serpent to be in the garden knowing it would tempt Eve? 4. Why was Jesus foreordained as our Savior from "before the foundation of the world" as in 1 Peter 1:19-20 if the fall wasn't part of the plan? Thank you for your time and patience.

Hello again. You seem to be focused a great deal on the Evil aspect of it. Did you happen to miss the word Good? It was the knowledge of Good and Evil that was received when they partook of the fruit. So, sex being good, exactly what knowledge did they possess before that point that would have allowed them to procreate? Regards.

Hi CHowell. I hope your doing well. As you undoubtedly recall, Adam and Eve did not even know they were naked until they partook of the fruit. This implies an innocence. Is it possible to procreate without a knowledge of the significance of nudity? Just something to think about. Regards

Hello. Welcome to the forum. It would be helpful if you posted a reference (chapter and verse). :)

Hello again. I hope you have enjoyed your time here so far. I do agree with him. We are saved by grace through faith (Ephesian 2:8). And "faith, if it hath not works, is dead." (James 2:17) So if our faith is dead without works and we are saved by grace through faith, then works are a pretty important part of being saved by grace; wouldn't you say? Seems logical. Is this the only part of what Glenn said you agree with? How do you feel about the rest of what he said? Because he also talked about people "working the system" by saying they accept the atonement and not really meaning it because they didn't do anything about it. He said, "Did you really accept that gift? Did you really unload all the stuff you had done in your life and give it to Him? That's how it works." He's talking about repentance (a work, i might add). He's talking about having an individual relationship with God, a "change of heart." He says, "You really have to have a change of heart. That's where the deeds come in" and "our work is a demonstration of our faith" and "to receive His salvation you accept His forgiveness of sins and live your life according to His will" and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you, that's what that means." He's putting faith and works together, which is how it should be. "That's biblical," is what he says. Do you agree with that? I would like to see your sources for these claims. Again, Glenn said, "to receive His salvation you accept His forgiveness of sins and live your life according to His will." Faith and works go hand in hand. This is what Mormons believe. We are saved by grace. Mormons believe this. But how are we saved by grace? Through faith according to Ephesians 2:8. And according to James, our faith is dead without works. Faith and works go hand in hand. This is what the Bible teaches. This is what Mormons believe. I think C.S. Lewis said it very well. He said, "Christians have often disputed as to whether what leads the Christian home is good actions, or Faith in Christ. ... it does seem to me like asking which blade in a pair of scissors is most necessary. ... There are two parodies of the truth which different sets of Christians have, in the past, been accused by other Christians of believing: perhaps they may make the truth clearer. One set were accused of saying, 'Good actions are all that matters. The best good action is charity. The best kind of charity is giving money. The best thing to give money to is the Church. So hand us over $10,000 and we will see you through.' The answer to that nonsense, of course, would be that good actions done for that motive, done with the idea that Heaven can be bought, would not be good actions at all, but only commercial speculations. The other set were accused of saying, 'Faith is all that matters. Consequently, if you have faith, it doesn't matter what you do. Sin away, my lad, and have a good time and Christ will see that it makes no difference in the end.' The answer to that nonsense is that, if what you call your 'faith' in Christ does not involve taking the slightest notice of what He says, then it is not Faith at all--not faith or trust in Him, but only intellectual acceptance of some theory about Him. ... In the attempt to express it different Churches say different things. But you will find that even those who insist most strongly on the importance of good actions tell you you need Faith; and even those who insist most strongly on Faith tell you to do good actions." (from Mere Christianity)

Hello. Welcome to the site. I watched that episode. Thanks for the reminder. I remember really enjoying what he had to say. He is basically parroting LDS doctrine during this segment. Everything he says theologically is in line with what the LDS church teaches. I think LDS people would agree with what he says theologically during this segment. It's when he gets into politics that many begin to disagree with him. You'll find various opinions on Mr. Beck here as far as his politics and non-religious aspects, but i doubt you'll find any LDS who will disagree with what he says here theologically. It is all basic church doctrine. Speaking of basic church doctrine, Mormon.org is a great place to go to learn more about our basic doctrines.