Jenda

I posted my 2-cents worth in the other thread, but I will paste it here, too. If someone is called to the priesthood who is not worthy, or who loses their worthiness through some sin committed sometime later than the ordination, I believe that God still blesses the person receiving the ordinance as long as the person who is receiving has prepared themselves properly. Like the woman who was healed by touching the hem of Jesus' garment . He told her, Thy faith hath made thee whole.

Jason, You should know full well how we justify it. We decided, ultimately, that the keys resided with the 12. Further, we, as a matter of faith, believe that the mantle of prophethood fell upon Brigham. Additionally, we believe that history has shown the decision to be the correct one. Not the same thing is it. The CoC is a splinter from the various splinters of the church of Joseph and has continued to splinter up till present. The CoJCoLDS has an unbroken line and no schisms. Sure there are individual apostacys but nothing of any import in the big scheme of things. Different deal. That is a real simplification of what happened, Snow. Very misleading. I posted in the not so distant past the truth when you made those claims before, using real historical evidence. "We decided" is squat when thousands of people saw Joseph bless and designate his son for that position.

Jason, I would hate for you to leave. I do know (believe me I know) how it feels when one gets caught up in an aspect of the journey that is not productive and may even be counterproductive. I do believe that this is all part of the journey, but when it becomes the main focus, it does indeed detract from the main part of the journey. I know that I have had a similar experience as you when I posted on the CoC board, and felt the only option was to leave. I enjoy the witnessing aspects of the board, but the constant arguments brought out the worst side of me, and left me spiritually and emotionally drained. I wish I could say that in the meantime I have found a suitable alternative, but I haven't. I rarely go back to my church's board, and when I do, it is the same old thing all over again. One of the things that I have found is that this board for me is close to a suitable alternative because even though we differ on some of the finer points of discussions, I have found allies in the LDS. And I love to discuss gospel and gospel-related issues which they do here, I don't see that they do it on the CoC board that much. Maybe you can find, here, or somewhere, a place that offers a positive change, a place that allows you to bear a positive testimony. Please don't feel you need to leave. Pray about things you post, and try to post them in loving words. Remember, each one of us is your brother or sister. That is what God calls us to do. To love one another as He loves us. Jenda

Wow! Porter, your grasp on church history is amazingly ................................. negligible.Maybe you should study up on it before offering such an enlightened opinion in the future.

John Hajicek is not a restorationist, I don't believe. I have read parts of his site, and for some reason I believe he is associated with the Church of Christ - Temple Lot. The website you referenced is the website for the Restoration Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They were restorationists who decided to unite. They organized under the high priests, or the seventies, who left the church. There is another church that organized called the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. One group organized under the seventies, the other under the high priests. Don't remember which is which. I would say that both are rather similar to the restoration branches, but we don't believe that there has been a divine order to re-reorganize, so therefore, we believe that both of those groups have forfeited their claim to be the true church.

I technically belong to, and attend, the Community of Christ. My beliefs parallel the restorationists. I cannot attend a restoration branch because there are none near me.The website to the Community of Christ is http://www.cofchrist.org A couple of websites that represents the restoration branches is http://www.centerplace.org http://www.eldersconference.org/

I wonder if that is a different organization from the Restoration Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Marcus Juby was the one who was in charge of that group, but I heard the group was having a tough go of it and wondered if it had collapsed, or anything.I don't believe that God has ordained any groups to organize new organizations. There have been too many prophesies that the RLDS church will be the one that Christ will work through to bring forth Zion. The independent restoration branches are formed in the same manner that branches were formed after JS,Jr. was killed but before JS,III came into office. These branches were later absorbed into the RLDS church with full membership, etc. That is what we expect to happen again, in the future when a true prophet is designated and ordained.

I view Grant as president of an institution, trying to lead the people the best he can under the circumstances. I believe that he is a man of God, but I do not believe that he is a prophet. The last authoritatively ordained prophet was Wallace B. Smith, great-grandson of JS,Jr.I don't know who Mark Evans is, sorry. I realize that there is a mission center out there, I was making reference to stakes. In our church, the stakes (which originally started out as large groupings of saints in the centerplace and were supposed to spread out like spokes of a wheel) and regions were replaced with mission centers. There were many stakes in the Independence, MO area and a couple in California, but the rest of the world was divided into regions. Utah was a region, as was the NE where I live. Alas, there are no stakes anymore. I take it you meant the congregation you attended, not the stake. The stake was a conglomeration of a large number (often more than 20) congregations.

No, the RLDS church started ordaining women into the priesthood in 1984. Now we have female apostles, female bishops (which have a different job description than your bishops), female evangelists.But, yes, it is a different church. Different from the one that was restored in 1830 and reorganized in 1860.

I guess you really don't know much about mormonism. At least RLDS mormonism. There is no RLDS stake in Utah. There were many in Independence, MO, and surrounding areas, and a couple in California, but none in Utah. Now, there are none at all. But, back to your point, she probably was a nice lady, even if she wasn't an authoritatively ordained priesthood member. (One of the things restorationists don't accept is women in the priesthood. We don't accept it because it has never been ordained in any of the restorations of the church, from Adam on down.)

This is what a friend of mine responded when I asked this question on another board I post on. "The scriptures are fairly clear that Judas was lost because he betrayed the fulness of Christ. D&C 76 calls those who deny both the Holy Spirit and the Son (after having had them revealed by God) the sons of perdition. Satan was called Perdition earlier in this section. 4a Thus saith the Lord, concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves, through the power of the Devil, to be overcome, and to deny the truth, and defy my power; 4b they are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say it had been better for them never to have been born; 4c for they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the Devil and his angels, in eternity, concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come; 4d having denied the Holy Spirit, after having received it, and having denied the only begotten Son of the Father; (verses 31-36 LDS) III Nephi 13:9 (3 Ne. 27: 32 LDS) states: But behold, it sorroweth me because of the fourth generation from this generation, for they are led away captive by him, even as was the son of perdition; for they will sell me for silver, and for gold, and for that which moth doth corrupt, and which thieves can break through and steal. So, it appears that there was one called "Perdition" (Lucifer), many who are called sons of perdition (those who deny the Holy Spirit after having received it), and one specific son of perdition. Who is this one son of perdition to whom the errant Nephites were compared by Christ himself? I think the answer lies in Christ's prayer for his disciples. The 17th chapter of John begins with this note: Christ prayeth to his Father to glorify him -- To keep his apostles in unity and truth, and all other believers, with him... The chapter goes on to record this prayer: I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world; thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. I pray for them; I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name; those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the Scripture might be fulfilled. So...we find that Christ prayed that his apostles might be kept as one with the Father. He declared that none of them is lost except for the son of perdition. I believe that was Judas. Judas did return the money to the priests, but he did so only after the condemnation of Jesus. Perhaps he didn't think Jesus would be condemned to die. Matthew 27:3-4 Then Judas, who had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. Both the Luke and John accounts, however, state that Satan entered into the heart of Judas. Judas, after having "known surely that I came out from thee" hearkened to Perdition, and he became his son. He could no longer be a son of God. The fact that he hanged himself instead of falling down at the feet of the Savior in repentance testifies to his spiritual destruction. I have no doubt that Judas is lost. "

This is the closest I can get. D&C 76:7g RLDS (76:89 LDS) 7g And thus we saw in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial which surpasses all understanding; and no man knows it except him to whom God has revealed it.

I have heard that, also, so it can't be a later LDS teaching.

Jason, you've done homework! B) I am one of them ex-rlds group members that adhere to the early 20th century teachings (more importantly, early 19th century (1830 to be exact)). I am a restorationist. The church lost close to a quarter of it's membership when they started stepping away from the early restoration teachings.

No.

Yeah, I can see what you mean. I probably should have just bolded the things I wanted empahasis on instead speaking in capitals (yelling) I really didn't mean the yelling. Just the emphasis. Oh well, bygones. I do find the "see a psychiatrist" thing a little ironic coming from a potential future inhabitant of the planet nearest to the star 'Kolob". On which you will share your chosen mate with about a billion sister wives. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Touché You stand corrected. I am not, and (more than likely) never will be Mormon. Sorry. You lose!

Ya know ..................... the biggest problem I see with this argument is that the person presenting it seems to believe that two wrongs make a right. The question shouldn't be, just because we allow people to get away with the sin of divorce why can't we let people get away with the sin of homosexual marriage, too? The question should be, Why are we allowing people to get away with the sin of divorce? Why aren't we taking a bigger stand against it? Then, the question of two wrongs making a right won't come up?

OK. You all know that I am into moving threads. Soooooooooo, before I do, who all really believes that this is a gospel topic and who thinks it is really supposed to be under General Discussions? Please cast your votes.

Huh????

Well, we have gotten to the meat of your post. Guess what? The same argument works in reverse! Because we are coming from such differing places, your arguments will have no effect on those of us who faithfully hold to the belief that Jesus Christ is the divine Son of God. So, tell me again why you are here? I think I need to clarify a little more about where I am coming from. I believe in God, but not an external one. I believe that I am God in every sense of the word. That Man in his natural state is not a “God in embryo” as the church implies, but is all knowing and all powerful RIGHT NOW! That when you are not in your physical body’s temporary, self-imposed limitations -You are GOD. YOU created the universe. You are here right now because it was Gods Will, meaning your OWN WILL as a God. Your every choice is God’s will/your will. Any experience you have chosen to have here on earth is Gods choice/your choice. Hence –true free will with no asterisks or small print. Mankind is operating under historical notions that are entirely incorrect. These notions are passed along generation after generation because they exist under the mistaken notion that they come from God, and are his requirements. Once labeled “Gods will”, mankind places an importance and authority on these things that cannot be questioned because it just IS. Almost everyone operates under these incorrect systems. We get them second hand from our parents and from the world. This is what Jesus was trying to get across to mankind. Jesus was not different than you or me. -And Buddha, too for that matter. They are just humans/Gods who understood their own divine nature. Naturally, they wanted to free man from the incorrect and un-necessary beliefs that stopped them from knowing and operating from their true nature. That is the PLAIN AND SIMPLE TRUTH that Jesus was trying to show, but it has become so horribly misconstrued by time and religion. Religion is merely what mankind thinks an external God requires of them verses what just is. -“Ye are GODS” already. Why am I here in LDS chat? I'm pulling the mask off "the old lone ranger" so to speak. Well, that is an ........... interesting .............. testimony. And one valid only to you. But thanks for sharing it. (Now, maybe it would be wise to go see a psychiatrist for treatment of your manic/depression. You seem to be in the manic phase right now. )

Are you sure that witnessing or participating in a miracle would give you what you need? After all, Laman and Lemuel were party to many miracles, and that did nothing for their faith. Also, Christ said, Matthew 5:1-3 IV 1 And Jesus, seeing the multitudes, went up into a mountain; and when he was set down, his disciples came unto him; 2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, 3 Blessed are they who shall believe on me; and again, more blessed are they who shall believe on your words, when ye shall testify that ye have seen me and that I am. This scripture seems to indicate that those who have faith without seeing miracles, etc., is better than those who require it.

I'd put her in the closet and lock the door till she is 21. That is what I am going to do with my daughter soon. She is too pretty to be let loose on the streets. She needs to be protected.

Doesn't it say somewhere in the scriptures that a thousand years is like a day to God? or maybe it was a twinkling of an eye. Think of how many twinklings of an eye there are in a day. That is an awfully long time.

Jesus also said that men could only divorce their wives for fornication and the woman who remarries commits adultery. That's not an entirely accurate description of what Jesus said. He said that any man who divorces his wife for any reason except for adultery causes her, and her future husband, to be caught in adultery. The fault lies in the husband who puts her away. At least, that is the way I read it.

If there are no curse words, or anything about drugs or suicide or sex or anything, they why would it be rated "explicit"?