bmy-
-
Posts
627 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by bmy-
-
-
"This glorious truth of celestial parentage, including specifically both a father and a mother, is heralded forth by song in one of the greatest of Latter-day saint hymns, O My Father by Eliza R. Snow, written in 1843, during the lifetime of the prophet, includes this teaching:
In the heavens are parents single?
No; the thought makes reason stare!
Truth is reason, truth eternal,
Tells me I've a Mother there.
"
This is a wonderful expression. How I would love to know and be able to communicate with mother in heaven. But I read a book one time that said Eliza Snow wasn't talking about a divine mother when she wrote those words, but about her own mother who had passed away. Can't remember who it was written by but it was one of her close family members or friends.
I haven't read through all the posts so don't know if this was addressed already.
It has been. Check Hemis posts.
-
I see what you're saying. I'm just trying to be as scriptural as possible here.
I think what you are saying is that God has flesh (organic body) and bones (calcium based framework). This sounds foreign to me. So try to understand my thought process here and help me out.
(#1) I understand that the Bible says that God is spirit John 4:24.
And (#2) in Luke 24:39 Jesus says that a spirit does not have flesh and bones.
Now we do not know what a spirit is, but we do know what it is not.
What was Jesus, then? Was he not flesh and bone.. and not God also in mainstream Christian theology? Why then did Christs physical body ascend with him into Heaven?
Adding to that, we know that God is everywhere at all times. A body would mean that He is material (matter), etc. Now time is a function of the existence of matter. Since God is outside of time, eternal, He could not be "material". Therefore, He cannot have a body because he could not be omnipresent. This logic seems both plausible and Biblical to me.
We believe that all spirit is matter. A common example.. have you ever played a game like the Sims or Spore? I'm in charge of that world.. I know (or can know) everything that is going on in it. Heck, I created it.
Could you possibly illustrate similarly how God "could" have flesh and bones Biblically and logically as seen above. I'm really just trying to understand all this and so far can only see the one side of the coin.
Well, Christ Himself ascended into Heaven with a physical body and was seated at the right hand of his Father. That just shows that a God can inhabit a physical body, unless you believe there is some extraction process for the spirit to be removed.
-
I really wish this were true.
Unfortunately, in my case, it isn't. I'm a 31 year old single returned missionary who is finishing medical school residency.
I've spent years of my life "digging" about church history to resolve my concerns. And the more I dug, the more I realized, that the church's history is really just a veritable big mess.
But yet, even to this day, I am still trying to find SOME reason to believe in the LDS faith. This whole issue has basically ruined my life. I haven't dated hardly at all as the LDS girls seem way too naive, while the non-LDS girls are just too wordly.
If the OP really wants to keep his faith, I would avise him to NOT dig. Sometimes, it seems, keeping ones head in the sand is the happiest way of living. :-(
Oh, I completely understand my friend. I'm in the same exact boat minus the dating issues and the residency. The road may be bumpy and rough.. but you're better for it. Knowledge is power. The fact that you're trying to find some reason to believe really makes me sympathize with you.. because I'm there also. I don't regret it.. because I do not believe that a loving God would punish one for earnestly seeking the truth.
The road less travelled type deal.
-
I think of God's omnipotence in this way: Omnipotence means all-knowing. He knows FAR more than we do. When we are children, our parents appear to us as omnipotent beings. They seem to know everything- until we learn enough to realize they don't. As we are all spirit children of God, our relationship with him is much the same, except if/when we ever reach an equal level as him, instead of discovering He doesn't know everything, we will discover that he does.
Except the trait of all-knowing would be omniscience and not omnipotence. I don't think people fully grasp what omnipotence is.. the common definition is to being able to do anything one chooses to do. Yes, that's right.. being able to do anything.
-
Can God know something that is unknowable? Can God make something to heavy for Him to lift?
We can do this all day.
Exactly.
-
2) Mormons believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God, with no qualifications; whereas we recognize the Bible as we know it to constitute the word of God only to the extent that it is translated correctly. Under our worldview, the Bible may have been altered in some places to become doctrinally suspect; and thus one seeking a witness of "truth" will probably get a more powerful witness of the substantially unaltered* Book of Mormon than of the potentially doctored Bible.
*Except for the standard grammatical and editorial errors that throw some of our detractors into such conniptions, naturally!
Should check out Snows thread about this very topic.
You know the one thing that really amazes me about Mormon bashers? How much time you guys have! I really wish that I had the time and the energy to try to prove other people wrong. Do you really have nothing better to do than sit around and worry about other peoples religion?
What is wrong with looking at discrepancies? I think you should probably worry more about other peoples religions, but just slightly.. a little effort perhaps. I mean.. if you don't.. how can you be sure? Feelings can't count obviously.. because every religion claims to "feel" it also. Try doing some homework and maybe it won't bug you so much :)
-
Just because you are a skillful gambler doesn't make it any less a gamble. The presence of skill has no bearing on the definition of gambling.
It has everything to do with it. There's an incredibly large difference between matching your skills against another person (or bookie) and coming away victorious.. and betting on whether or not a coin lands on heads or tails. Slots, roulette, etc. That's gambling (and there is a time, place, and attitude for it to be acceptable). Poker, sports betting, etc. are skill based and those who profit from them profit for a reason.. and it's not luck.
Okay, so why is a sports game not the same as a poker game?
Let me present this first: If the money you get from a game of poker comes from people paying you to play poker to provide entertainment to an audience, then you are not gambling. You are earning a living. The entertainment part has value that people are willing to pay for.
This would be the same as showcasing your skill at golf at a tournament. You do not play golf to wager your money that you will win the pot. You play golf to provide entertainment to an audience and you are paid the money in relation to the amount of money people pay (in advertisement or seat tickets) to watch you play. You do not win all the wagers. You get a cut of the ticket/ad sales.
Now, if what you do is put in a wager, then play poker with utmost skill to win all the wagers on the table, then that is gambling. Because, there is no inherent value to a card game. It does not provide a product or service.
It all boils down to (imo) using skills to earn money vs betting on a coin toss. When research, effort, practice, and dedication come into play.. it's sport or work.. and not gambling. I don't really see anything wrong with gambling to begin with, though. Never seen a good argument against it.
-
Things like poker, forex, sports betting, stocks.. they all take skill and hard work.
-
Sounds absolutely ridiculous.
-
Those who are saved are children “of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26) because God has “predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will” (Ephesians 1:5).
Calvinist doctrine? Unfortunately that takes a giant dump on the concept of free will. It's fine to believe -- go for it. But to bring it as scripture to an LDS based forum seems silly. Of course, you had no choice in the matter
I'm chained in to responding to you also. -
Why must God be omnipotent?
It complicates things IMO. If God is still experiencing new things.. that is new knowledge. An omnipotent being cannot learn and still be omnipotent. For example: Does God know what it is like to have more glory than he does now? -
It went from moderation -> abstinence. It took quite a while too.
-
I need to believe that just maybe I can change the world if I try hard enough and do things just right. I need to believe that agency is powerful enough to make anything possible; I don't want to believe that I am chained by prophesies. I want a world without prophesies. I want a world where anything is possible that doesn't violate laws of nature.
I struggle with the same thing. Sometimes I ask "why bother"? The end result would play out the same if this religion is really true -- every single time. You can ease their suffering. That's the only consolation I can offer you.
-
It doesn't really matter what you believe, as long as you are true to what you know. It's more important to give your neighbor a need cup of water than to disect the fine points of the Godhead vs. the Trinity. It's more important to pray for a testimony than to study the scriptures.
I frankly don't believe God really cares what you think you know.. he is absolutely only interested in what you do. I can think all the good thoughts in the world but they mean precisely nothing. Actions speak louder than words and far louder than useless thoughts.
I hate admitting it too. Cause I'm all about thoughts.
-
I was asked about the idea that we would inherit our own planet...that being called Kolob. I did reseach it on the LDS website, old (very,very old Ensigns), and found very little about Kolob. The only place I found any info was in Mormon Doctrine. I just want to understand the concept. I don't need a long disortation on it. Just the basics.
Then it led to other questions like...why didn't I learn about it in Institute, or in Sunday School. We didn't even "touch" on it in class.
It just left me scratching my head....
I'm a bit confused to where the issue is here.. Kolob is a star, not a planet. There are a ton of things you did not learn about in institute, etc. The reasoning behind that.. besides the 'milk before meat' idea.. is that people cannot teach what they do not understand.
If we aren't certain.. it should not be presented as true in a classroom setting. Unfortunately we miss out on lots of great discussions and topics that can really help people out sometimes.. (and also mess them up)
I personally suggest that you question away. Dig and dig and dig.. it will either reaffirm your belief or destroy it. If it's true it should stand the test. If you do take my advice.. make sure you dig in the right places and to dig evenly (fairly). I don't think you'll be dissapointed.
-
It's a promise given to people who read the Book of Mormon. The Lord promised that if you read the Book of Mormon with a genuine desire to know if it is true, and all that it implies, that the truth of it will be manifest to you by the power of the Holy Ghost (see Moroni 10: 3-5). The Holy Ghost works by power and feeling. The hinge here is that you read it with a real and genuine desire to know if it's true, not just read it because you enjoy reading more scripture.
The fact is, if you read the Book of Mormon and desire to know whether or not it's true, you have to make certain promises to the Lord as to what you will do with this new found truth once it's revealed to you. If your only purpose is to read it for amusement, then I doubt you will get any such feeling.
Have you ever really pondered on the significance of IF it really is true, and it really IS of God, and Joseph Smith really DID see The Father and the Son? If those things are true, and He gives you a witness of those things so that you know they are true, it has to change your life. If you are unwilling, as you read, to make any changes in your life based on whether or not it is true, you probably won't get those feelings.
There's a catch... it doesn't say when. So when nothing happens.. people can simply say "well you obviously didn't wait long enough". I felt absolutely nothing, I left it to chance. Unfortunately.. that leads to doubt down the road sometimes.
Healthy doubt though.
-
Hah.
If anything.. in todays world.. I would assume it is the opposite. Although sexual oppression in the past could lend that idea some credence. The oppressed tend to turn to religion, don't they?
-
I think the portrayal of Satan in Paradise Lost is probably the most 'accurate'. It should be mandatory reading. I have to say.. if what we believe is true.. I think Milton was inspired.
-
Why no ring ceremony? That seems a bit odd. You already have to wait a year after entering a civil marriage in order to go the temple..
Just seems like an oddity.
-
Seems to me like it is pretty clear, God can do whatever He wants to. Just because we can't understand, or explain it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Remember we are God's children, so we are still learning. Do your children understand everything you know?
God cannot do whatever he wants to do.. he obeys the same laws of physics that we do. As an example.. he cannot create something out of nothing.
-
I informed my parents about my decision but did not invite them to my ceremony. It was a mistake. I just did not want any needless drama.
-
Not at first and only if my wife was truly okay with having a sister-wife. I would not jump at the chance so to speak. I do think that once a woman was accustomed to it.. it would be fairly nice. Half the house work, half the responsibility, double the free time.. and you always have a sister to lean on even when the husband is away with work.
-
Perhaps BMY or Jimmie may want to actually ANSWER the question instead of taking jabs? Maybe we could have a productive discussion......
What do you both believe on the topic?
Taking jabs is what I do. It's usually to steer the conversation in a direction that interests me though.. but since you asked so nicely..
I believe that a loving God would not condemn his children for flunking an insignificant math test. Instead he would see it as just another teaching opportunity.. which fits nicely in with my belief that we are here to learn. After all.. what are tests useful for if not to determine how ready we are for the next "grade"..?
Tests are not meant to be pass/fail. Think of it more as data mining.
-
No, I am just trying to point out the contradiction in evangelical beliefs. They criticize our (LDS) teachings of temple work for the dead and it drives me crazy! They don't look close enough at their own doctrine. They teach that if people die without knowing Jesus here, they still have a chance at salvation. But when do these deceased learn about Jesus? Surely there won't be folks in heaven who have never heard of Jesus. So obviously there has to be some way for them to learn about Him after they are dead right? It just makes sense.
I'm not sure why this is so confusing to evangelicals......This issue was a MAJOR reason for my husband's conversion to the LDS church. He (and I) have always felt that a loving God would want all of his children to hear the wonderful message of salvation, regardless of when or where they lived.
Where.. in their doctrine does it say that if people die without knowledge of Jesus that they go to Heaven? I'm fairly sure the normal evangelical response is that "We do not know. However, we'll trust God to be just and kind."
God's Omnipotence
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted · Edited by pam
Edited out paragraph for false doctrine
I think a much simpler way of saying what you were saying was summed up by CS Lewis. He said that..
Which is great and pretty much spot on for the definition of omnipotence that we are dealing with. I guess.. the better question here is.. could God create everything we see ex nihilo? If he could not.. that is hardly omnipotence. If he could.. then how does one go about creating oneself? (He is after all.. made of matter)