mikbone

my scriptures are wore torn and battle scarred. While I was on my mission Chile circa 1987 I was asked why I would desecrate my scriptures. I pulled out Exodus 34:1 and explained that Moses actually destroyed the original 10 commandments in a fit of anger to make a point to the Israelites. The Lord was not upset. He just made another copy. We can reproduce the scriptures at will, stone, paper, digital... What is more important the medium upon which the words are written, or if the words are written upon our hearts?

Here are some direct quotes from the article that I found. Journal of Medical Ethics Paper: 'After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?' | NewsBusters.org Abstract Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled. ... An examination of 18 European registries reveals that between 2005 and 2009 only the 64% of Down's syndrome cases were diagnosed through prenatal testing. This percentage indicates that, considering only the European areas under examination, about 1700 infants were born with Down's syndrome without parents being aware of it before birth. ... to bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care. On these grounds, the fact that a fetus has the potential to become a person who will have an (at least) acceptable life is no reason for prohibiting abortion. Therefore, we argue that, when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. In spite of the oxymoron in the expression, we propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide’, to emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. ... The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual. ... Although fetuses and newborns are not persons, they are potential persons because they can develop, thanks to their own biological mechanisms, those properties which will make them ‘persons’ in the sense of ‘subjects of a moral right to life’: that is, the point at which they will be able to make aims and appreciate their own life. ... The alleged right of individuals (such as fetuses and newborns) to develop their potentiality, which someone defends, is over-ridden by the interests of actual people (parents, family, society) to pursue their own well-being because, as we have just argued, merely potential people cannot be harmed by not being brought into existence. I have had 9 newborns. They were all people. The nerve. Reminds me of the Nazi dehumanizing Jews.

Thank you. See it wasn't that hard. You know it is wrong. Black and white is easy. You and I both know that the authors of this article are trying to put forth the idea that black is white. That it is OK to kill infants if they are (sickly, unwanted, etc... who knows). And I wouldn't be suprised if this article sets a precident and becomes quoted in future medical ethic articles and abortion proponent arguements. Your comments about adding a grey area just confuse the issue. Those 4 options that you described happen many many times daily in our country. If you want to have a discusion about medical grey areas and ethics about spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a overweight poorly controlled diabetic who wants to have a re-do re-do cardiac bypass surgery lets do it. But this article is about infanticide. It is wrong. Equally sinful as abortion.

The issue is the KILLING. The infanticide. I know pornography when I see it. Do you? Would you feel comfortable administering a lethal injection to a sickly infant. I would not.

I took medical ethics in medical school too. Your original 4 options have nothing to do with the article in question. The article is obviously about killing infants. Not pallative care. Not admistering drugs to hasten death. Those of us who are in the medical profession should stand up and decry this as wrong.

Your coments make a travesty of the actual issue. The authors of the article are justifying killing infants. Not any of your 4 options. Stick to the topic. These are the kind of mental exercises that let the devil slowly drag us down to hell. D&C 10:25-26

Disgusting. And anyone who can justify the decision to print this garbage in an 'Ethics' Journal should re-evaluate their personal ethics. Ethics - also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. The concept is clearly unethical. reminds me of the scripture. Isaiah 5:20-21 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! It is much like our judicial system calling the Constitution a living document so that they can re-interpret outdated material to mean anything they so desire. My wife graduated from J Ruben Clark Law School at BYU. When she took the legal ethics she figured out how to answer the questions correctly. Simply ask yourself what would Jesus Christ do in the same situation and then pick the opposite answer. The Earth is ripening...

If you are an endowed member, you may want to go back to a temple session and pay attention to the creation narrative. Also very interesting concerning science / LDS religion and the creation. "Earth Will Go Back to God This earth will be rolled back in to the presence of God and crowned with Celestial Glory." (Joseph Smith Jr., Instructions delivered at the opening of the "Lyceum" at Smith homestead, Nauvoo, Ill., January 5, 1841, as recorded in the Clayton Record.) Compare to 2 Nephi 23:10 -13 “When the earth was framed and brought into existence and man was placed upon it, it was near the throne of our Father in heaven. … But when man fell, the earth fell into space, and took up its abode in this planetary system. … This is the glory the earth came from, and when it is glorified it will return again unto the presence of the Father, and it will dwell there, and these intelligent beings that I am looking at, if they live worthy of it, will dwell upon this earth.” Brigham Young Journal of Discourses, 17:143. All three of these passages describe the Earth traveling from the presence of God (Presumably near Kolob) after its creation and settling into its current orbit around our sun. And that it will do the same trip in reverse after the millennium. Personally I think that Brigham Young heard Joseph Smith talking about this transit and embellished the story stating that it occurred after the fall when in all likely hood it occurred prior to the creation of Adam and Eve. This concept is pretty amazing. If it is true. It would explain the first few days of creation. Day 1 - The planet Earth is created near Kolob. Its rotation is started producing Day and Night. Day 2 - The Earth's Atmosphere is created. Day 3 - The Earth is moved from Kolob's presence and is placed into our current solar system. After Earth enters into an orbit around our sun, it is impacted by Theia. Giant impact hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia From this event The Sun, Moon, and Stars are created...

I am not familiar with any Joseph Smith revelations or teachings that are contrary to well accepted scientific theories. The prophet was amazingly insightful.

I agree. I wish that some of the latter day prophets had not made 'off the cuff' comments on issues for which they had not received revelation. But, in my opinion, Joseph Smith Jr. (Moses, Abraham, Brother of Jared, etc) were give visions of the universe and basic science. "The only way to obtain truth and wisdom, is not to ask it from books, but to go to God in prayer and obtain divine teaching." Joseph Smith Jr. Sermon delivered at General Conference of the Church in Nauvoo, Ill. on October 3, 1841.

Perhaps, but one will make you a buck, while the other will get you entrance into heaven... If you follow the truth that you find.

I agree. My problem is with 'scientist' who refuse to even consider the position of religion because religion cannot be tested via the scientific method. When in reality the most basic of science (physics) essentially is invoking faith in the concepts of dark energy and dark matter. It is a hypocrytical stance. It is reassuring to see scientist like John Widtsoe, your father, etc...

The character was Satan or Lucifer. The same individual that tested Moses in Moses chapter 1, and Joseph Smith prior to the first vision.

Orthopaedics. Thanks for the link. Some of that was over my head... Especially the math. It's great that we have members of the church in all areas of study. We need more men like Widtsoe. But yeah Joseph Smith was all over it. I was wondering if spooky action at a distance (entanglement) could have applications for instantaneous communications over vast distances...

I picked up a new habit of listening to science podcasts during my daily jogs and wanted to comment / get feedback on a topic that I find interesting. One particular podcast had Janeane Garofalo (an actor with ultra-liberal political views) wherein she basically stated that any people that believe in God are mentally unstable. She was particularity slanderous of Tea Party members... The concept that people make their decisions based upon their faith, was a concept that she could not understand. She kept stating that she required evidence to make any decision. Well, personally I find her absolutely uninformed, uneducated and shortsighted. During another jog-podcast I was learning about energy, matter, dark matter and dark energy. And I learned something quite interesting. HubbleSite - Dark Energy - What Is Dark Energy? According to the current model accepted by physicist our universe is composed of 2 different substances matter and energy. Einstein was the first to recognize that matter and energy are one in the same via the equation E=MC^2. But according to recent study our universe is a bit more complicated than we originally assumed. All of the material that we can physically see and study which scientist define as visible matter (stars, planets, space, light, gravity, atoms, etc...) only add up to 4% of the material that we think compose the Universe as we know it. Dark matter is a currently undetermined substance which is thought to cause galaxies to rotate in their current fashion and can be inferred by gravitational lensing, (it is quite complicated) anyway this dark matter is thought to compose another 22% of the matter / energy of our universe. Dark energy is even less understood, it is hypothesized that Dark energy is the stuff that is causing our universe (space itself) to expand. This dark energy is thought to compose the remaining 74% of the matter / energy of our universe. Thus according to physics (our most basic science) we can currently only study / experiment with 4% of the cosmos. So 96% of the matter / energy of the universe is TOTALLY UNKNOWN. I find it absolutely infuriating that these pseudo intellectuals condemn people of faith for basing our judgments on something that cannot be experimented upon using the scientific method. Joseph Smith (who died 35 years before Einstein was born) made the following statements: Speaking of eternal duration of matter he said. There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter but is more fine or pure and can only be discerned by purer eyes. We cant see it but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter. (Joseph Smith Jr. Sermons delivered at Ramus, Ill. May 17, 1843, Source: William Clayton diary) Now I ask all the learned men who hear me, why the learned men who are preaching salvation say, that God created the heavens and the earth out of nothing, and the reason is they are unlearned; they account it blasphemy to contradict the idea, they will call you a fool.--- I know more than all the world put together and the Holy Ghost within me comprehends more than all the world, and I will associate with it. The word create came from the word baurau; it does not mean so; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize a ship. Hence we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos; chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time he had. The pure principles of element, are principles that can never be destroyed. They may be organized and re-organized; but not destroyed. (Joseph Smith Jr., General Conference of the Church at Nauvoo, Ill. on Sunday Afternoon April 7, 1844 as recorded in the Times and Seasons Minutes) I am also disheartened when members of the Church stumble upon 'higher learning' and lose their testimonies. As a M.D. I occasionally think of myself as a scientist. And I'll tell you what I know. Although many will try to convince you that we are living in a time of enlightenment and of vast increase in scientific knowledge. We know next to nothing. We continually make mistakes. We have a long way to go. Moses statement still holds true, “Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed.” Moses 1:10

Satan cannot hang out with Jehovah in Heaven, but Jehovah could come down to Earth where Satan was cast.

I've been where you are. I have come to a conclusion that I have found to be satisfactory, as well as agreeable with scripture and latter day teachings. Check out one of my earlier posts... http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/19807-what-type-body-did-jehovah-show-unto-brother-jared.html you may find it interesting.

What you are discussing is not new. Its been around a long time, but it is NOT doctrine. check out New Cool Thang Multiple Mortal Probations — Why I Tend To Agree With Heber C. Kimball and Friends This site does a good job of philosphical debate. You may notice that they are very careful in the way that they discuss the various theories. Lots of words like may, perhaps, suggests... You have recieved good advice from the above posters.

Interesting that you titled your post fulness of the gospel... As you are quite aware keeping the commandments only gets us entrance into the Terrestrial kingdom. Perhaps you hear everyone else speaking in your local meetings about things like tithing, temple worship, fasting, prayer, home teaching, service because they are shooting for the Celestial Kingdom???

I'm going to start referring to myself as a biblical Christian.

The Pearl of Great Price is 2 books, Moses and Abraham. The book of Moses is Genesis 1.0 Genesis in its current versions has been watered down over the years with mis-translations etc. Moses chapter 1 didn't even make it into the current version of Genesis. It is a great read. Satan probally had a hand in making sure that Moses chapter one did not make it into the current version of Genesis. Abraham is a very small book of only 5 chapters and 3 drawings. The first 2 chapters are an account of Abraham's life from his personal perspective. Chapter 3 discusses the Universe (astronomy) and the pre-mortal existence. Chapter 4 & 5 recount the Spiritual creation of the Earth I love the Pearl of Great Price. The name is fitting. The material is short but of great worth.

Id like to address the original question in this thread. It does appear that God and Lucifer do have some sort of agreement. God allows Lucifer to stay here on Earth to temp mankind. God could have exiled Satan to some other location but He didn't. Lucifer was allowed to enter into the Garden of Eden which was in a paradisical state much like the Terrestrial Kingdom. The temple narrative displays interaction between God and Satan. We have excellent records from both Joseph Smith and Moses that they each were tempted/visited by Lucifer prior to having the direct revelation from God. Even Jesus Christ was temped face to face directly by Lucifer. It is obvious to me that Lucifer has a role to play that was set forth during the pre-mortal existence. There must be rules that were agreed upon by both God and Lucifer concerning direct interaction between the Gods, Lucifer, and man. Lucifer is a conundrum in my mind. I cannot understand his motivation. Does he have a mentor? Is there any possibility of redemption for him. Is He a good guy playing a difficult role??? I don't know. And every time I consider him I come up confused.

I guess you just proved that God is an abstract number!

“The brethren direct me to say that the Church has never announced a definite doctrine upon this point. Some of the brethren have held the view that it was possible in the course of progression to advance from one glory to another, invoking the principle of eternal progression; others of the brethren have taken the opposite view. But as stated, the Church has never announced a definite doctrine on this point.” -Secretary to the First Presidency in a 1952 letter; and again in 1965 “None would inherit this earth when it became celestial and translated into the presence of God but those who would be crowned as Gods — all others would have to inherit another kingdom — they would eventually have the privilege of proving themselves worthy and advancing to a celestial kingdom but it would be a slow process [progress?].” -Brigham Young, in Wilford Woodruff Journal, 5 Aug 1855 “Once a person enters these glories there will be eternal progress in the line of each of these particular glories, but the privilege of passing from one to another (though this may be possible for especially gifted and faithful characters) is not provided for.” -Joseph F. Smith, Improvement Era 14:87 [November 1910] “I am not a strict constructionalist, believing that we seal our eternal progress by what we do here. It is my belief that God will save all of His children that he can: and while, if we live unrighteously here, we shall not go to the other side in the same status, so to speak, as those who lived righteously; nevertheless, the unrighteous will have their chance, and in the eons of the eternities that are to follow, they, too, may climb to the destinies to which they who are righteous and serve God, have climbed to those eternities that are to come.” -J. Reuben Clark, Church News, 23 April 1960, p. 3 “It is reasonable to believe, in the absence of direct revelation by which alone absolute knowledge of the matter could be acquired, that, in accordance with God’s plan of eternal progression, advancement from grade to grade within any kingdom, and from kingdom to kingdom, will be provided for. But if the recipients of a lower glory be enabled to advance, surely the intelligences of higher rank will not be stopped in their progress; and thus we may conclude, that degrees and grades will ever characterize the kingdoms of our God. Eternity is progressive; perfection is relative; the essential feature of God’s living purpose is its associated power of eternal increase.” -James E. Talmage, The Articles of Faith [1899 edition] pp. 420-421 The question of advancement within the great divisions of glory celestial, terrestrial, and telestial; as also the question of advancement from one sphere of glory to another remains to be considered. In the revelation from which we have summarized what has been written here, in respect to the different degrees of glory, it is said that those of the terrestrial glory will be ministered unto by those of the celestial; and those of the telestial will be ministered unto by those of the terrestrial—that is, those of the higher glory minister to those of a lesser glory. I can conceive of no reason for all this administration of the higher to the lower, unless it be for the purpose of advancing our Father’s children along the lines of eternal progression. Whether or not in the great future, full of so many possibilities now hidden from us, they of the lesser glories after education and advancement within those spheres may at last emerge from them and make their way to the higher degrees of glory until at last they attain to the highest, is not revealed in the revelations of God, and any statement made on the subject must partake more or less of the nature of conjecture. But if it be granted that such a thing is possible, they who at the first entered into the celestial glory—having before them the privilege also of eternal progress—have been moving onward, so that the relative distance between them and those who have fought their way up from the lesser glories may be as great when the latter have come into the degrees of celestial glory in which the righteous at first stood, as it was at the commencement. Thus: Those whose faith and works are such only as to enable them to inherit a telestial glory, may arrive at last where those whose works in this life were such as to enable them to entrance into the celestial kingdom—they may arrive where these were, but never where they are.” B. H. Roberts, New Witnesses for God 1:391-392. “There is never a time,” the Prophet Joseph Smith taught, “when the spirit is too old to approach God. All are within the reach of pardoning mercy, who have not committed the unpardonable sin.” 23 Boyd K. Packer, “The Brilliant Morning of Forgiveness,” Ensign, Nov. 1995, 18

You can die at childbirth and be a celestial cantidate. Moroni was part of society. He was well educated. Had access to multiple records from the Nephite society as well as the brass plates from an other society. He was a captain of 10,000 men during the last battle at Cumorah (Mormon 6:12). Daniel Boone was also a strong member of a society. Books were written about him. He was an officer during the Revolutionary War and an elected official of Virginia. Did Daniel make his own firearms, and tools with which he used to build his cabin? I seriously doubt it. I am an Orthopaedic surgeon. My profession is so specialized that if I were sent back in time to a bronze age society my skills and education would be a total waste. Without stainless steel and titanium hardware, let alone X-rays, my options of healing are severly limited. But today if you break your hip I am your guy. 200 years ago I could do nothing for you except possibly put you into a 20-30 pound hip spika cast that would cause lots of other problems... That's assuming that I could make casting materials, plaster of paris from scratch which I have never done... and was never taught to me during my medical education of 9 years...