bytebear

I feel like I am reliving Reagan vs Mondale.

Sealings of the living children to parents can be done regardless of age. All kids can participate in their own family sealing. Kids born "in the covenant", that is, born to parents who are sealed, are automatically sealed under that covenant of the parents. Adopted kids can also be sealed to their adoptive parents, regardless of age. The marriage sealing is a separate ordinance than parents to child(ren) sealings.

If you truly believe #4 "we have the full counsel of God in the bible" then there is no need for a prophet. But I don't believe that. Not for a minute. The Bible itself makes no such claim, and neither does the church claim it has the full counsel of God, at least not yet.

This is not Yoda. But a baby of the same species.

Not sure if this is spoilers or not but I will give my opinion on the film. It was decent, but it was a remake of Return of the Jedi, which was a remake of Episode IV, which was also remade in Episode I. But it was a decent remake in that they tied some visuals and completion of the circle from episode IV. I thought the final space battle was weak, and they could have done more there. I think they just ran out of ideas or time but there were some threads that were left unwoven. I missed the visuals of the other films, meaning the wipes were in a few spots but were not in the style of the original films, which is, IMHO, critical to a canon Star Wars film.

Heaven forbid an organization has a rainy day fund, combined with investments in the future. I personally believe there will be a time when certain countries become open to the gospel, and we will have a massive influx of new members, and the infrastructure to maintain such an influx would be colossal. Not really sure who said the money was being saved for the second coming, but they are right, if not totally distorting the reasoning (but what else is new?).

I do find this "scandal" a bit over stated. The church takes in 7B, and spends 6B, and has 100B in savings. Now, let's put that into household expenses. Say I make 70K a year and my expenses are 60K, and I have 1 million in a 401K. Sounds about right for a 100+ year old institution. In fact, I would call it slim.

I believe the church spends every penny with the goal of bringing people closer to Christ. That includes all of the above. As for the eyes of the law, the church, when it invests in profit making endeavors, like cattle ranches or shopping malls, they do pay taxes on those investments, just as any for-profit company. The difference is, the church, can immediately convert farms to charity endeavors with no effort, and of course they use the profits to funnel back into the process. They learned a lot from programs like the Perpetual Emigrating Fund, and how to use current funds for future endeavors. The notion that someone in the church is getting rich is the most frustrating accusation. No one is getting rich, even though I hear from message boards that apparently Prez Nelson skims 2% off for his palaces.

I want to point out one distinction here that the article and most people don't understand. The church has two distinct streams of donations. Tithes and offerings. Tithes are used for operating expenses. Offerings are spent on welfare and humanitarian aid, which is why you never see a high number in the Tithes column. And likely that 4% you mention is probably due to infrastructure costs, and not straight donations. No, that's where your fast offerings, missionary funds, Deseret Industry, etc all comes from. Most of those funds are handled locally, and never even reach the central church, but are redistributed through the bishop at his discretion. This is not part of the billions in the article. And virtually every penny goes to charity, since we know bishops are unpaid, and many of the labor in making and distributing food is done by volunteers. So, don't make the mistake of thinking the church is stingy on humanitarian efforts. They are simply not reporting that... and I believe are doing so deceptively.

A few thoughts. I find it funny the people who want to take your money and spend it "the right way" or the way they want are also the ones who have racked up trillions in debt. Heaven forbid an organization have a surplus. I also found it interesting that in the article on WaPo, it mentioned that there is a "finders fee" for those who report tax fraud. Seems like this guy has a chip in his shoulder, and is also trying to cash in.

Hinduism is more like modalism, where there is one God, but in many infinite forms, with infinite names. That is not the same oneness of the Trinity/Godhead. or the LDS nature of God the state of being. The definition give in the Doctrine and Covenants, talks about being God as a state of ever progression. And as long as we move forward, we are gods. God is not a single person, but a being with the ability to continue. Damnation is when we cease to be gods. Exaltation is our progression made eternal. But even that does not make us in the unique relationship with God the Father and God the Son, nor God the Holy Ghost. That unique relationship (combined) is our God, which is one.

I think LDS folks don't mind not being considered "orthodox" or not sharing a common baptism. For example, the church will never accept the baptism from another church, simply based on the doctrine of authority. But, where feathers are ruffled, is in the accusation that the LDS Jesus is different, or insufficient, or even evil. We fully accept your belief and commitment to Jesus Christ, and encourage it. So, no, I think the common ground is in the belief in Jesus Christ. Beyond that, we can be different.

If you keep reliving the same life, and are never able to make the commitment to achieve Celestial worthiness, isn't it the same thing, whether it happens once or a thousand times, the outcome is the same.

No, and sealings are not canceled either unless a new sealing is requested. The church always assumes things will work out, even when we mere mortals think otherwise. That's why we seal ancestors based on records and not on what we think they might want. Eventually it will be sorted out, but we want to ensure the blessings to as many as we can. Baptisms are only voided when you are excommunicated, which is a formal process. And then all church blessings are revoked. When restored, you are baptized again, and your other blessings and priesthood ordinations are restored. And remember, the weekly sacrament is a renewal of the covenant, so is a renewal of your baptism. Interesting, in the early days of the church, baptisms were redone commonly, as a renewal of the covenant. Sacrament seems far more convenient. Another interesting fact, when the church was created in 1830, baptism was already performed for the remission of sins, but those who joined the newly founded church were rebaptized as a covenant to Christ's church and received membership in the church through the laying on of hands.

I always just think of "God" being a singular noun that represents a plurality. "Family" works the same way. There is a family, but the family has distinct persons with in it.