prisonchaplain

I believe (could be wrong) the original thread was specifically looking for LDS views on the movie/book. Winnie opened up this thread with a direct challenge to the views of most other Christians. So, I've weighed in.

Time for me to weigh in. First, by way of disclosure, I've not seen the movie or read the book. Then again, I'll only comment on some general ideas referred to in the post and in many reviews and summaries of the book. Not once does it say it was an “affair” that is the load of horse hockey the Christian nut wings want us to believe. Okay, here's an exaggeration, meant to make a point. My guess is that if Jesus did not marry, and did get a woman pregnant, then the inference is that he commited a sexual sin. However, most reviewers seem to suggest that Jesus did marry, and the gospels simply don't make note of it. The phrase "Christian nut wings" strikes me as offensive. Most Christians who have critiqued the Code have done so in intelligent, engaging manners. It's only a few "nutwings" who get the press for make rear ends out of themselves. It never ceases to amaze me that people take what one group or another say with out checking it out for them self’s. I don't expect you to read or view every critique that gets published about your church. Why should you expect more of your Catholic or evangelical friends? The Church of Rome taught and believed in marriage as Christ did until the church no longer wished to support such large families and forbad priests to marry. Doing the whole Christ married to the church line of doctrine. The Catholic Church still approves of large families--just not for the priests. And that rule goes back only the the Middle Ages--not to the time of Christ. 1. to be called a Rabi you must be a married man, Jesus was not officially a rabbi--though he taught with more authority than they did. He never claimed to be one, either. 2. under Jewish laws now and at the time, it was the custom to be betrothed by your 20th birthday. It was not Jewish LAW for men to marry by 20. It was a common practice, but hardly universal. There were a few sects that practiced celibacy at the time, and it was hardly scandalous for men not to marry young--despite Brown's assertions. 3 Jewish men did not grow beards until he they married. Did Jesus have a beard? And, even if he did, my guess is this fits under the "common-but-not-universal" response. 4 Since Jesus was a practicing Jew who taught in the Temples he had to have fallowed Jewish costumes. Again, common customs do not LAWS make--especially when there are known exceptions, such as the Essenes. It also tells that Jesus after his parents found him in the Temple conversing the elders he returned and fallowed the will of his parents. That would include a marriage arrangement. Pure speculation. The last point I like to make is that in order for Christ to be are mediator he came to earth received a body was tempted and suffered a human life. That could and most likely meant being a married. Jesus came to earth to die for our sins, not model family life. There is no New Testament reference to his marriage, to children, etc. On the other hand, single men can surely be tested by the wiles of women. Why is that so hard to wrap our brains around? Why would we so quickly assume that he was not? Because Christians believe Jesus, though fully man, remained the one and only Son of God. In essence, God would be having sex with his creation. That's frankly wierd, and has the feel of being sacreligious to most. If you read the book with the knowledge us as members have you would know full out that it was entertainment and could notice not once did it disrespect our savor or the masters of art world. Early LDS church leaders did speculate that Jesus was likely married. Many here took a natural liking to some of Brown's notions. His ideas do not ruffle LDS theology nearly as much as they do traditional Christian theology. Brown's portrayal of the Catholic Church, with its assassin-priests would like offend you a bit more, if they had been LDS priests of the Melchizedek order instead. The book by the way is well researched No, it's not. It's a fictional novel. Brown admits that his wife did most of the research, and that he merely built on some theories and tidbits of information. This was not, nor does it pretend to be, scholarly research. No matter what others may say, the author did his homework. No, I believe his wife did. And, if he'd done such a bang up job, he wouldn't be crying "It's entertainment, not theology!"

I think I heard about it. It's some kind of superman spin off, right? Sorry folks--I've just graduated from Teletubbies to Blues Clues, Dora the Explorer, and, of course, Disney Princess! We don't have cable or DSL yet, but how many families have a Disney Princess TV with VCR/DVD player combo, huh???

First, I agree that "the disciples" became "the apostles." Except Paul was also an apostle. But, here's more Scripture from the Sermon on the Mount. Matt 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. ... 28 When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, 29 because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law. NIV I don't see Jesus addressing the disciples in an aside, or a small group meeting, and then they addressing the crowd. RAther, the crowd responds to Jesus direct teaching--a discourse that began in Matt 5 and ended at the end of chapter 7.

I read this verse the other day. I wanted to point out that this instruction was given by Christ to his 12 apostles specifically. It just struck me as odd when you said the words were directed only to the Apostles. After all, this was part of the Sermon on the Mount. So, I went back and checked... Matt 5:1-2: 5:1 Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, 2 and he began to teach them, saying: ...NIV So, yes, the disciples were there--but this was a message to the crowds.

Here's another lesson I prepared a few years back--primarily about the Bible. It's ironic that many of the points relate to our discussions about Scripture, and more specifically, the Da Vinci Code. Enjoy! THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE HOLY BIBLE Introduction: Which should a church emphasize, the Bible or the move of the Holy Spirit? 1. Bible is a reliable written record of God’s Word. 2. The Spirit can deliver God’s specific word for us right now. 3. People can be led astray, in the name of the Holy Spirit. 4. People can be led astray, in the name of the Holy Bible. CONCLUSION: INSTEAD OF EITHER/OR, HOW ABOUT BOTH/AND? Proposition: We need the Bible and the leading of the Spirit, to live balanced, powerful Christian lives. Interrogative: What are the dangers of ignoring the Bible or the Spirit, and what is the benefit of living under both? Transition: First, we do need the Bible. I. We need the Bible. (2 Timothy 3:16-17) All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (NIV) A. It’s God’s Word, from Genesis to Revelation. B. It’s profitable. 1. For teaching 2. For rebuking and correcting. Note that discipline may sting, but it also heals and cleanses–much like cleaning a wound with alcohol or peroxide. 3. For training in righteousness. No more excuses for saying you didn’t no better! You should have! 4. For equipping to do good works. You say, “I’d like to do good, but I don’t know how,” or “I’m not capable.” Now you are! C. It’s objective. 1. Yes, there are different churches with different teachings and emphases. 2. However, Christian churches continue to unite around central teachings that we all share. a. God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Three persons, yet one God. The Holy Trinity. b. We are all sinners doomed to hell. However, if we believe in Jesus, and confess our sins, he will forgive us, and we will live forever with him. c. The Bible is God’s words to us. It is our final guide. d. God wants us to live good and right, and to avoid sin and evil. 3. (Acts 2:42) says, “They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. (NIV)” a. The test of proper Bible teachings is not only if the instructor can pull some verses together that seem to support his arguments. b. The test is also, “is this a teaching that has stood the test of time?” c. Obviously, any “new teaching,” is suspect. 4. So simple to learn, yet impossible to exhaust. a. A 5 year old can understand that Jesus loves him/her, and that they need to say sorry to God when they do bad things. b. Yet, scholars spend their entire lives studying the Bible, yet still find fresh wisdom. Transition: As important and powerful as the Bible is, we also need the direction of the Holy Spirit. II. We need the Holy Spirit. A. We need the power. (Acts 1:8) But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." (NIV). It will enable us to fulfill the Great Commission to go and make disciples. B. We need the gifts. 1. (Joel 2:28-29) 'And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days. (NIV) 2. It is our protection and our weaponry for living as Christians in the last days C. We need to listen. Revelation 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22 (Revelation 2:7) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God. (NIV) (Revelation 2:11) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death. (NIV) (Revelation 2:17) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it. (NIV) (Revelation 2:29) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. (NIV) (Revelation 3:6) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. (NIV) (Revelation 3:13) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. (NIV) (Revelation 3:22) He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." (NIV) 1. Seven times Jesus tells us, “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” 2. We know that when something is said in the Bible, it is important. When it is repeated, it is very important. If it is mentioned three times, it is vitally important. 3. Jesus repeats seven times that we need to hear what the Spirit is telling us. 4. We dare not ignore the Spirit’s direction and instruction for us! III. The Spirit and the Bible compliment and enhance each other. A. Bible Baptists vs. Pentecostals. “We’ve got spirit, yes we do!” “Well, we’ve got the Bible.” B. All Bible and no Spirit leads to legalism. They were righteous in the technical observance of the law, but they despised people and drove them away from God’s love. C. All Spirit and no Bible leads to heresy. Too often our own passions and opinions become baptized with the claim, “The Spirit is telling me to do this.” D. All Bible and all Spirit leads to victory. 1. We are humble enough to submit our knowledge of the Word to God’s leading. 2. We are humble enough to submit our sense of what God is doing to the discipline of his Word. CONCLUSIONS 1. Pray for the anointing and power of the Spirit. 2. (2 Timothy 2:15) Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. (NIV)

NOTE: I WROTE THIS LESSON A FEW YEARS AGO--LONG BEFORE I ENGAGED IN ANY TYPE OF THEOLOGICAL DISCUSSIONS WITH LDS. SO, WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IS A FAIRLY STANDARD EVANGELICAL, BASED UPON A PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE THAT TAKES ON DISTINCTIVE AND SPECIAL MEANING FOR LDS. CONSIDER THIS AN EXAMPLE OF MY "SHARING." THE IMAGE OF GOD IN US Tony Compalo is a Christian sociology professor. He is also an ordained Baptist minister. One day he takes a late-night flight, and the passenger next to him wants to talk. He brags about how important he is, and goes on for what seems to be an eternity. Finally, the passenger asks Compalo, “So, who are you?” “Oh, I am someone very important.” “Really, what’s your name?” “My name is Tony Compalo.” “Huh...never heard of you.” “Oh, it’s not me that’s really well-known. It’s my father.” “Yeah...well, who’s your father?” “Mister, I am the son of God!” The man looks at him as if he had just escaped from an asylum, and asks, “Are you okay?” Compalo explains that as a Christian, he is a brother of Jesus and a son of Almighty God. Likewise, brothers, we too bare the image of God in us. Genesis 1:26-27 tells us: Then God said, ‘let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air; over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. We are made in god’s image and likeness. God made us. He loves us. We are his masterpiece. Therefore, we should not worry–God will take care of us. In Matthew 6:25-27 Jesus says: Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air. They do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly father feeds them. Are you not much ore valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? Not only will God take care of us. He will redeem–or pay the price for–our wrongdoings. No matter what evil we have done, we are still creations of God. We still have hope and worth. Consider the story of Cain. Genesis 4:15-17 says: But the lord said to him, “not so; if anyone kills Cain he will suffer vengeance seven times over. Then the lord put a mark on cain so that no one who found him would kill him. So Cain went out from the lord’s presence and lived in the land of nod east of eden. Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Even though Cain murdered his own brother, God spared his life and commanded others to do likewise. There was still worth in him–still hope. That hope eventually bares fruit in his son, Enoch. From the beginning of time until now parents have tried to justify their difficult and seemingly failed lives by looking to the successes of their children. Indeed, if we look at the genealogical line of Cain we find that his descendants became raisers of livestock, musicians who played harps and flutes, and forgers of tools made out of bronze and iron. Perhaps they were not the most glamorous figures in history. Yet, most seemed to make contributions to their communities. It is wonderful to know that I can redeem my life through my children, and through God’s mercy. How do I go about obtaining God’s forgiveness? The answer is found in the Good News. The image of God is restored within us when we are saved. Ephesians 4:24 says, “And to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.” When we become part of the kingdom of God, through belief in Christ and repentance, we put on a new self–which is the image of God! Our original godly images were distorted by the poison of sin that entered humanity when Satan deceived Adam and Eve. Thank God for his pronouncement against the Devil in Genesis 3:15, “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heal.” Jesus has crushed Satan, and his curses. This means that sin and death are no longer our nature. We can once again bare the unblemished image of God in us! Leaving the theological language and imagery behind, what we have just learned is that we can succeed at being righteous–or, simpler yet, we can be good. Galations 5:22-23 lists the good characteristics we are capable of if we wear the full of the image of God: But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. The key here is that these are fruits of the Spirit, not of our labor or will power. Zecharia 4:6 says that our victories are, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit says the lord.” My prayer is that God will fill us with his Spirit, that we might live the fruits of the Spirit. Amen? Amen! Not only can we succeed in being good. We can also overcome the evil temptations that still endeavor to entice us. Romans 6:15-16 says: What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey–whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? While will power will not produce holiness, we must determine in our hearts that we want to live in obedience to God, rather than to sin. Then we can pray with confidence, “God, help me to be, say and do all that you want of me.” We can also pray as Jesus taught us to, “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.” If you are not a Christian, do you not want to have the image of God restored in your life? Ask Jesus to help you today. If you are a Christian, thank God for such a great salvation. You can be good and pure before God. Ask Jesus to help you today.

It's said that two-weeks in the Holy Land (Jerusalem, not SLC or Springfield, MO ) is like a year of theological education. I'd love to do a study tour in the Bible lands!

Traveler, in your defense of Ray did you really mean to imply that the non-LDS who come to engage in conversation here are akin to Scribes and Pharisees?

I'm not opposed to us getting control of our borders in a reasonable, consistent matter. But, to nod and wink at illegal immigrants for decades, knowing that they provide cheap labor for some businesses, and then to, every once and a while (when a vulnerable politicans decide to pull out the Nativist card), demonize them, jail them, etc.--well, me thinks we end up looking silly and vindictive. Make them clean our toilets? You have to be kidding me. Do you mean pay them more money cleaning toilets than they could ever HOPE to make in Mexico? I calculated in another thread how much a lady makes cleaning houses in my neighborhood... it was about 80K per year, and that's tax free money! Please don't pain the Mexican immigrants as being in an unfortunate situation. If it was so bad, why in the world do they risk everything to come here? 1. We wink and nod at their crossing into our land to provide labor at much cheaper wages than our own workers would make. 2. $80K--I guarantee you, despite no research, that the average Mexican illegal immigrants wages are probably under $20K. 3. What's bad is that we cannot control our borders, and then lash out with silly, Nativist-sounding meanness that usually lasts two or three years, before things get back to 'normal.'

Yeah, I seem to remember you retiring at 3000--16 posts ago. So, how was the long weekend? Bottom-line: I believe our God is the "full disclosure" type. If there are three heavenly kingdoms, everyone in them will know it. Now wait a minute! I understood that most people "of sincere religious faith" will enter the Terrestial kingdom. Now you're relegating us to the third level??? OK, now I get it. However, I thought entry into these kingdoms was dependent more on merit and sincerity than on dogma. Some people looked at how Paul went and entered into those conversations, ultimately winning "a few souls," and they say, "What a waste of time!" Others see the same account and say, "Wow! Now there's a model for engaging the culture, and presenting Christ in an intelligent, worthy manner." I side with the latter.

Traveler makes some powerful and interesting comments about the joy of sacrifice--and how it is built upon the foundation of Jesus Christ's atonement. I mostly could only respond with "Amen." To obey is better than sacrifice. We cannot say we love God if we do not love one another. If we love Christ we'll obey his commands. We are not to tire in doing good. We're love our enemies, to feed and clothe them. We're to bring healing, deliverence and salvation to a resistent and often hostile world. We're to count it joy when we are mocked and persecuted for the Name. However, we can be sincere and be sincerely wrong. Furthermore, we can give our lives to the flames, but if we have not love, it is purposeless. So, oh how we need the Holy Spirit to reside with us and in us--and even to overflow out of us. I don't want to be a 30 or 60-fold Christian--I want to produce 100-fold. I don't want to be a 1 or 2 talent Christiant. I want to be the 5-talent one that ends with 10. I don't want to be lukewarm. I want to be hot! Hunger, that sense of urgency, the fire in our bellies--the Christian that is not consumed by the things of this world. That's what I want.

When Ray and others--even including myself--speak about how we will be judged according to what we are willing to accept, the underlying truth is that the Holy Spirit will communicate truth to our hearts. The Old and New Testaments promise that whoever seeks God in sincerity will find Him. So, if the Joseph Smith's revelations and the LDS gospel are true, those who sought God and were exposed to the teachings, and did not accept them, would be assumed to have "resisted the Holy Spirit." As a counterpoint, if his revelations and the subsequent set of teaching that developed within the COJCLDS proves to have been wrong, then the assumption is that those who sought God when they heard these teachings, sensed that they should resist and turn to a traditional Christian fellowship, but did not. Of course, most people realize that they are many mitigating factors. How strong was the witness? How much understanding had the individual received? Was the failure due to blatant rebellion, spiritual pride, simple laziness, or was there a measure of honest ignorance? So, most people say--"Well, here's the general pathway for one who fails, but I'll leave the ultimate judging to God." As an example, one LDS poster at hannity.com refused to say that MANY non-LDS would get into the Celestial Kingdom. He even speculated that a majority of residents there would not have been LDS in their earthly existence. Bottom-line: Most of us here are intelligent, spiritually hungry, truth-seekers. Personally, I want to get it right in this go-around--especially since I currently believe there'll be no 2nd chances in the afterlife!

Traveler, you've struck upon a conversation I've been having here, and at the Religion (Re: Mormonism) at hannity.com. And that is: To LDS the only real heaven is the Celestial Kingdom. No matter how "glorious" or "satisfactory" the Telestial/Terrestial kingdoms may be--they lack a key ingredient--the presence of God the Father! That said, if I'm wrong about the nature of humanity and God, I, like most folk, would be "happy" to be corrected at the pearly gates, and then granted entry into the Celestial Kingdom. If you find it unreasonable that evangelicals question the orthodoxy--and by implication the salvation--of LDS, because of belief that God was once a man and that humanity can become God, I would find it equally unreasonable that I might be denied entry into the eternal presence of my heavenly Father, because I misunderstood such metaphysical concepts.

You know, there is another way. Kum by ya, my Lord. Kum by ya. Kum by ya, my Lord. Kum by ya... well you get the idea. I think the Apostle Paul put it another way: (1 Corinthians 13:13) And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity. (KJV) Now, I am sure that is how the Mexican "guests" (by the way, do other country's make their guests clean their toilets too???) will see your ideas--walls, armies, etc., but silly me--I must be blind to the you're trying to communicate to them.

We could argue that point, but it's not necessary for this issue. Rather, let me clarify: What you really mean is that God made baptism by someone with the authority to do so (i.e., someone with the priestly keys--someone with either the original gospel or the restored gospel) a requirement. In other words, those Christians who lived and died from 100 to 1840 or so will have to have a baptism for the dead done on their behalf, and they will have to accept the ceremony, before they can enter the kingdom of heaven. Correct?

She's been communicating with my wife. Yikes! I think she has a "life list" for me. GULP! You have a way of being affirming--and yet, with that eye of yours, scary at the same time. Thanks!

Quite frankly, I see nothing but truth in the content of what you say. I would only suggest that you broaden your audience to include both non-LDS AND LDS.

Although we can grasp the Godhead, the totality of it is beyond us. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are indeed three persons, yet one God. So Jesus is a distinct person, yet, when we see him we see the Father. And, he is called "Everlasting Father" by Isaiah. He relates to the Father as a dutiful Son, yet the Father says to him, "Your throne, O God, will last forever..." Likewise, the Holy Spirit is a distinct person, with his own attributes and will. Yet, He reflects and communicates the will of the Father, and yes, of the Godhead to us. So, I think I get it--and yet, we are all still getting it. And yet, we are told God will chase after us, even into the pits of hell. It is the Holy Spirit who brings conviction, and helps us to stop, repent, and turn back to the right way. Of course, our communion with the Spirit is deeper and holier when we walk in righteousness. However, when we stumble, not only does He eagerly await our repentence, he draws us to it, and holds our hand as we enter into reconcilation. Is this Ray talking, or the LDS Church? The Holy Spirit is Spirit, and can dwell with all God's people at the same time. When many souls are converted at one time, the Holy Spirit indwells each of them. And, He stays with us all the time. I walk, "not by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit." I didn't really want to repeat the whole discussion about authority, and who can receive the gift of the Spirit, in this thread. I did take note of your point, though. I am curious about this clip, though. I would argue than none are worthy of His presence, other than by the shed blood of Christ. Even Isaiah, probably the greatest of the Old Testament prophets, fell on his face, and declared himself and his people (the Jews--God's Chosen) to be unclean people with unclean lips." "It's not by works of righteousness, but according to his mercy... The fruit of the Spirit, which is love (1 Cor. 13) is available to "whosoever will may come"

1000 posts! Wow! You can't help but learn when you read and write like that. I'd like to thank all the little people who helped me to earn this great honor. Seriously, we've had some challenging, intelligent and often fun discussions here. And, you're all GIANTS in my book. I hope I've been able to share a bit of life, and offer some useful information along the way.

I'll read it with care and with a mind to get the big picture, and with anointing from the Holy Spirit.

Well, you were half right. We do believe the term "Christian" refers to someone who believes in Jesus as Saviour. However, we also believe that such faith is sufficient for entry into eternity with God. Now, if someone believes in Jesus as Savior--but does not believe that his/her faith is sufficient--that works must also be done to earn the salvation--we would label such beliefs heterodox (unacceptable). I'm not suggesting that such an approach will necessarily garner more souls, but it will clear up some of the confusion that exists between the LDS Church and the rest of us.

(Daniel 12:1) And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. (KJV) Traveler, if the name's in the book they'll be delivered. If not, a later verse suggests "others to shame and everlasting contempt." (verse 2). So, what happens to someone who's name is not found. My reading suggests verse 2. Am I misunderstanding you? Jesus observed rituals, but I would not read into that a sacramental view of salvation. Then again, perhaps He did--ultimately and finally. After all, He was the sacrificial Lamb, who died 'once and for all.' Yes, He fulfilled all righteousness. And, it is our embrace of Him--and that fulfillment--that saves us. He fulfilled all rituals. We observe two--baptism, out of obedience to his command, and the Lord's Supper, out of obedience to the apostolic example and Jesus' command "this do in rememberance of me." Yes, God gave us rituals. But, they are not prerequisites of salvation. Rather, they are part of obedient Christian living. I don't disagree. Our point of concern is whether ordinances are done out of obedient Christian living, or as the vehicle of salvation.

If I'm reading you correctly, the main advantages to investigating and embracing the LDS gospel is: 1. If it's true, you'd want to embrace God's truth, of course, and 2. You have the privilege of leading others into this truth through rituals (baptisms through the dead), mission work, and of course, raising up gospel families. Far better to find out now and get it right, of course. However, the dilemma of "What about those who don't know?" is handily solved here. Bottom-line: Without addressing the basic "is it true?" question, the teaching is nice and neat. I think so many who know little of your faith would be surprised to learn that you folk, who look and talk like rather conservative fundamentalist/evangelicals, in many ways are more akin to the Catholic Church, in your views of church offices and the spiritual power of sacraments. I say this as an observation of what I'm learning here, not a criticism. If I'm "off" on this, feel free to explain further. People will argue endlessly about what aspects of the New Testament accounts are merely descriptive, and which are proscriptive. I'll grant you that a reasonable argument could be made for your church structure, while simply saying that the emphasis on offices and the authority of leaders is foreign to my own tradition. Again, there are similarities here to Catholic practice. As a note of explanation, my movement more a less goes with the Baptist teaching of the "priesthood of all believers." Ironically, you do too--though in a more formalized way. Active men hold the priesthood, and active woman usually have callings as well.

Yeah, I was hoping to stir things up, disharmonize, bash about, but y'all were too nice. Actually, I came to share and learn. MrsS is right that some posters here are intelligent, patient, and frankly interesting. Additionally, the different backgrounds (some who've grown up in the faith, some who've come to it from no other, and others, like Ray, who come from backgrounds similar to my own). I have shared a lot, gotten some nice comments, and learned an incredible amount. Many thanks...kudos to Heather, for maintaining this unique and well-balanced forum!