LionHeart

My personal belief on this subject, which idea I get from the teachings of Brigham Young, is this: As was discussed in another thread, Jesus attained to a state of Godhood before He came to this world. I also beleive that the role Adam had to play as the father of humanity in the flesh was also a very important role; one that could not be carried out by just anyone. Therefore, I believe that Adam also attained to a state of Godhood before He came to this world. And since there was never a time when there was a chicken without the egg, or an egg without the chicken, as the universe is one eternal round, Adam must have had a body before He came to this Earth. It was not created from the dust of the Earth, but sustained by the dust of another Earth. He had already received a body and earned His salvation on another world and then agreed to come here and commence human kind on this one. Since His body was in a Celestial condition, He had to partake of the fruit to transform it back to a mortal condition. This particular task of being the first man, had to be carried out by someone who had a knowledge of how to get back to the presence of the Father as there were no scriptures or stories of great prophets who went before; only Adam and the knowledge He had. This is what He had to teach His children with. That is my belief on the subject. I couldn't say how many LDS agree with it. L.H.

Yes, when they first came to the garden, they were in a state of immortality. They did not actually become mortal until they ate the fruit. L.H.

I beleive the thing that destroys more people than any other principle is the fact that after someone commits a sin, they feel condemned for it. At this point, satan creeps and and convinces that person that it's too late for them. They just as well quit striving to earn a celestial glory because they already blew that opportunity, or that they can never be worthy of it now. Whenever we allow ourselves to fall into temptation, we must repent, recieve forgiveness, forget about it, and move on. We must not let it weigh on our minds to the point that it causes our downfall. Remeber, all sins can be forgiven except the sin against the Holy Ghost. L.H.

Based on what evidence do you think Joseph Smith had a snowballs chance in you know where of being elected President of the US? I don't beleive there really is a whole lot of evidence regarding Joseph Smith and the presidency except that he was actually running for it. The likelyhood of him winning it was an assessment made by Samuel W. Taylor, which he expresses in his book called 'The Kingdom Or Nothing.' L.H.

You see Ray, you can't plant peas and get carrots. In order to get mortal offspring, two mortals must come together and....I won't go into details. They had to acquire mortal bodies in order to actually be fruitful and multiply. Regardless of how much they may have known about it. Knowing how to fix a car won't do a mechanic any good if he doesn't have the tools to actually do it. L.H.

Excellent question. Let me see if I can explain this. First of all, I beleive the term "perfection" is not absolute. For example, things that might be considered perfect so far as this wolrd is concerned, might be mediocre on another, more perfected world. I think the pursuit to perfection is an eternal pursuit. As far as what the Lord expects from us before we will be allowed into His kingdom, (being the highest degree within the Celestial Kingdom) I beleive we are expected to "Live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God." In other words, we are ecpected to live His commandments without slipping up. Joseph Smith taught that it was possible to attain to perfection in this lifetime, however it was unlikely that very many people would reach it. This is how I define perfection; being able to live God's commandments completely. And when one reaches to that point, they are granted a certain amount of freedom to act on their own. "Whomsoever you curse, I will curse, whomsoever you bless I will bless" This is the point when God trusts them enough to know that it is not a part of their character to do anything contrary to His will. This is when one knows for certain that he has made the grade. I also beleive that if one is making good progress in this life, they will be granted the opportunity to continue that progress in the next life. However, I believe it will be much more difficult to progress over there. I am out of time though, so if you would like more explaining on this, just make it known, and I will do my best. L.H.

That is YOUR interpretation of those scriptures. The person who wrote those scriptures didn't say the fruit was the very thing that transformed them, so where are you getting that idea? They could have been transformed from immortal beings into mortal beings simply by the power of God, or because they couldn't have any more of the fruit from the tree of life, which they did have permission to eat from. Be careful when making assumptions, LionHeart. That could easily make an ___ out of you. This is actually not an assumption. This is what Brigham Young taught. He said that their condition was a more fine state of matter. The forbidden fruit was more course. Upon eating the fruit, the courseness of it flowed through their veins, transforming their state of matter into a more course one. I will now quote your own phrase: "Be careful when making assumptions, Ray. That could easily make an ___ out of you." Knowing how to be fruitful and multiply (a good thing) was something they needed to know. They didn't have to become mortal to know how to have children... they could have asked God for that knowledge. They still wouldn't have had knowledge of evil, though, and I think they had to learn the hard way. True, they didn't have to become mortal to know how to create offspring, but they had to be mortal to actually do it. L.H.

This is why we ask for what we desire and then we say "nevertheless, thy will be done". Otherwise all our prayers would consist of would be getting on our knees and saying "Our Father in Heaven may thy will be done. Amen." But as far as that goes, why not, as soon as we turn eight years old, just pray and say "thy will be done forever" and be finished with it, taking comfort in knowing that the Lord's will will be accomplished for us all of our days.

and I was trying to show that there is in fact a judgment in the "what we have made of ourselves" also you said, I know you are trying to separate them but I'm having a hard time seeing how that works. My difficulty comes from the fact that a "measuring stick" is used as a judgment of length or symbolically as degree. Again, I think they both are focused on measuring/judging the deeds. Is that correct? You then said, Again, my difficulty is that measuring this "evidence" and "progress to godliness" is a form of judgment and being measured against some standard. That's all I was saying. Hope I didn't frustrate you. Maybe we are comparing apples and oranges. Please let me know.Thanks, Dr. T I believe I see what you are saying. Look at it this way: Say for example, back in 1990, I was low enough that I robbed a bank. I later repented, and improved my character, so now I'm a good guy but not quite at the point of Godliness. So then tomorrow, I go out for a walk, and a rabid dog comes up and tears off my arm. I then chase after the dog to retrieve my arm, and he runs out into the street. I carelessly follow, which action causes me to get hit by a semi truck moving 60 miles per hour. I get launched into the air, and hit a nearby power line. Sparks fly everywhere, as my charred black body rolls down an embankment; at the bottom of which, I am backed over by a bulldozer. Okay, I am dead. As dead as they get. (reader discretion is advised) So I go to the other side, where I am met by the creator. He takes me at face value. If I am worthy, at that point, to enter His kingdom, He invites me in. Not because of my past actions, but because of who I am now. The whole point of this is to ensure that I will not defile the Lord's kingdom. If I have submitted myself to the laws of that Kingdom, I will be allowed to enter. But in this case however, I have not progressed far enough so He says "I can see by this "record" that you were making good progress. Taking that into consideration, along with your untimely demise, you may enter into this kingdom where you will have further opportunity to progress. Here, keep this for your records. I will check back with you after, oh, say a million years and see where you're at." I can see how one might understand it to mean that our actions in the past are what God refers to when passing judgment, which, I believe is actually the case, however, only the actions in our immediate past. Our actions thirty years ago would say nothing about who we are today. But when it comes to the actual sin, I don't believe He says: "Well, let's see, you committed such and such outrageous atrocities thirty years before you died. For this, you must be punished; enter ye into eternal torment." This is what I meant by saying that our sins have nothing to do with our judgement. Or to word it better: The Lord will not condemn us for our sins. Even though we might condemn ourselves. There is one other concept I have failed to mention, however. That is that when we sin against God, those sins will be forgiven so long as we repent. But when we sin against our neighbor, although we may be forgiven by God, we still must be forgiven by our neighbor. At this point, our neghbor might have a little bit of say so as to where we end up in the afterlife. However, Jesus says that we must forgive everyone or we will not be forgiven. This would give our neighbor a pretty good incentive to forgive us. But if we were to murder someone, that would be a bit harder to let go of. Therefore, someone might be willing to burn in hell if it means they get to watch their murderer suffer the same fate. L.H.

does not seem to follow. You are saying that "we are not judged by our deeds" but then go on to describe how our "deeds" as evidenced by "growth" is what we are held to. Those, in fact, seem like deeds, sir. Please clear up my misunderstanding if I'm misrepresenting what you are saying. :) Thank you sir, Dr. T Here's the way I see it: Our deeds are more of a measuring stick rather than what we are judged by. If it is in our character to commit a certain sin, our past will be evidence of it. Our acts, whether good or bad, will be evidence of how well we did in this life; not what we are judged by, but as a way to track our progress to Godliness. L.H.

The more I think about it, the more I believe that almost everything in the book of Genesis is to be considered symbolically rather than literally. The forbidden fruit, for example, may not have been fruit at all. It may have been the act of reading from a certain book perhaps. And the garden of Eden may have been a condition, or a state of mind rather than a place. The book of Genesis says that man was created out of dust of the ground, but Brigham Young said that was symbolic. Moses (being the writer of Genesis) only used that phrase to give the people of Israel something they could understand. Brigham Young taught that Adam and Eve were actually moved to his world from another world. Since all life is essentially sustained from the dust of the Earth, for example, all plants grow from the ground; man and animals eat plants, and man also eats animals which eat plants, etc. One could say that man was created from the dust of the Earth. L.H. The forbidden friut was more than just knowledge of good and evil; it is the very thing that transformed them into mortal beings from immortal beings. This is what was required in order to fulfill the first commandment; to be fruitful and multiply. L.H.

You are right Des. The very first commandment given them was to be fruitful and multiply. How could they fulfill this commandment without mortal bodies? They needed to eat the fruit in order to gain mortal bodies. They knew this. And God knew this as well. But there are rules in Heaven. God's house is a house of order. I will liken it to a story about my grandfather. His parents split up and his mother received legal custody of him. His father moved down to central Utah while he and his mother stayed in Salt Lake. He wanted to go live with his father so he wrote his father a letter asking if he could come live with him. His father wrote back, "No, stay with your mother." So he wrote another letter; same answer. Unwilling to accept this answer, he decided to go anyways. He hitch-hiked down to where his father lived and upon arriving, he found that his father had already prepared a place for him to live, and his father asked him: "What took you so long?" You see, because of legal resons, his father could not tell him to come down, and had to tell him to stay with his mother, but at the same time he wanted him to come down. The lord's house is a house of order. They have to go by the rules. So when Adam fell from a state of immortality to mortality, he had to go by the rules for such an incident to take place; which, in this case, was acting contrary to the Lord's commandments. What better way to get "kicked out of Heaven" than to disobey instructions. But at the same time, all those involved could see that was neccesary in order to put in motion the plan of salvation, therefore, they all wanted it to happen. At least that is how I understand it. L.H.

Something I found ironic, the woman who spearheaded getting prayer out of school started a little athiest club. She had a couple of members and they started to build a fund for the further growth of their club. The man who was second to the leader, ended up murdering her and emtying the booty cache. Coincidence or divine intervention? I'm going to go with the latter. L.H.

But you see, it's not the sin that matters, it's the capacity to sin that truly matters. Like I have posted on other threads, we are not judged by our deeds, but by what we have made of ourselves. One who has attained to a state of Godliness, is way above the capacity to commit murder. And down the ladder a little: someone who might swipe a candy bar out of a convenience store, will not neccesarily have the capacity to murder someone. That being the case, he would be on a higher level of perfection than a murderer; thus gaining a higher exaltation in the after life. So yes, Jesus does cover all of them, meaning that they are saved from outer darkness, but they still enter into the kingdom that they are worthy of. Some have said that money is the root of all crime. I challenge that notion. I say that selfishness is the root of all crime. Why would someone murder someone else? Because the victim in some way, stood in the way of some selfish desire which the murderer had; money, love, jealosy, etc. Same with the child who stole the cany bar. He was thinking of himself. He was not thinking of the work put forth by someone else to be able to acquire that candy bar. On the other hand, however, Godliness is a complete lack of selfishness. They are completely opposite. The best way to get close to God is by serving our fellow man. L.H.

A personal belief which I have is that the Holy Ghost is not one single personage, but an office held by many personages. A person's guardian angel would be the Holy Ghost assigned to that person. L.H.

There is one incident I heard about. This took place back in the 1930s. A man was passing through an indian reservation and attended a sunday service there. These indians were all converted to the Church however, only one or two of them spoke english. There were also a few caucasion people there. So this man was called on to speak because he was an elder. He gave the speech he was impressed to give and then sat down. After the meeting, one of the indians talked to him and told him that those indians there who could not speak english, heard the talk in their own language; and that he, even though he could speak english, also heard it in his native language. While those whose native language was english, heard it in english. L.H.

Dr.T, here is one way to look at it: perhaps the reason murderes cannot gain salvation is not because the Lord denies it but because of their own state of perfection. We are put here on this Earth to be put to the ultimate test. This is the most ideal place to work out our salvation. To murder someone, is to rob them of that opportunity; as well rob them of all of their earthly joys -- family, friends, cars, houses, etc. It is quite a serious thing when considered in full perspective. For someone to be low enough to commit such an atrocity, they would likely be so low, that they would be out of reach of forgiveness. In other words, though they may repent of the murder, they would likely never repent of many lesser sins before they die; which, if one knows they have sinned, and they don't repent while in this life, that is the sin against the Holy Ghost; for which there is no forgiveness. Just a thought. L.H.

Hi Des, I agree, we go to church to learn how to keep the spirit with us, but we also go there to get a spiritual recharge. Regardless of one's ability to keep the spirit with them, it is a big benefit for some, to be able to go to church and partake of the spirit in such an abundance. It's kind of hard to explain, but if you constantly worked around immoral, foul mouthed scum o'the Earth, (believe me, it can wear you pretty thin) you would understand how great it feels to partake of the spirit as abundantly as it concentrates during church; and how much it refreshes the soul. L.H.

I would probably feel like doing so, but truthfully, I probably wouldn't. I usually try not to spank other people's children. :) I just get very stern with them, and they usually get in line. The point I am trying to make, is that if this behaviour continues, and everyone just looks the other way and says "Oh we shouldn't judge" then it will continue on down to the eventual degradation of the Church. There is a difference between passing judgment and taking corrective actions. The corrective actions, however need to go through the proper channels. It is doing an injustice to the teacher for the parents to raise a pack of hoodlums and expect a sunday school teacher to be required to deal with them. Again, if the parent are trying to do a good job, then I'm fine with them; but if they don't really care, then it gets under my skin. And moreover, if no corrective actions are ever taken, then eventually the main body of the Church will be a bunch of dilinquents. There are those who try to uphold the standards, but I'll bet there is a higher percentage who will try to get away with everything they can. If the standard of acceptable conduct keeps getting lower and lower, then the people's standards, for the most part, will fall accordingly. I know for a fact that this sort of behaviour would not have been allowed in first days of the Church. L.H.

Look, I'm sorry if some people disagree; that is your right, but for crying out loud, we're talking about video games in church. That, in my books, is unacceptable. I'll admit that some people have more of knack for parenting than others, and I realize that nobody is perfect; and I have no problems with those who are trying. The ones that get under my skin are the ones who have children that run amuck and all they do about it is shrug it off and say "Oh he's just really rambunxious." This accomplishes nothing. But the video games are outrageous. L.H.

Actually, on the contrary, people can get so involved with their weekly activities that their spirits need to recharge. Especially if they work around people who have low morals. It is times like this that someone needs to attend a service of some type to renew their spirit. True, the Holy Ghost is a huge help, but I think everyone can agree that if you fall in a mud hole, you will get muddy. L.H.

I've discovered that I am more inspired by reading the teachings of the prophets, for example the Doctrine and Covenants, than I am by reading church history; even if it's a historical event about a very spiritual experience that happened to a specific person. I wondered why this was, and the answer came to me: for example, D&C 76:94 which reads: They who dwell in his presence are the church of the first born; and they see as they are seen, and know as they are known,having recieved a fulness and of His grace. What does it mean to see as you are seen and to know as you are known? Exactly!! I didn't know either. But I wondered about it. It bothered me. When you read history, you read it and move on. When you read the teachings, there are many things to be understood that don't surface immediately, so those who seek understanding, will think about it, and ponder on it; which causes something good to be on their mind constantly, and keeping them full of the Lord's spirit. L.H.

The thing is, if the standards by which people are held to are lowered, then the people will lower with them. That is just a fact of life. If these things are allowed then people will most certainly do it. Then the result will be that nobody goes to church because they can't feel the spirit anyway, which is one of the reasons for going. If things are allowed in the church that will chase away the spirit, how can people come to renew their spirit? These are the lines I'm thinking on. L.H.

13 is a bit too old to administer a sound beating, isn't it? If it were me, I would prescribe a consequence which he has no control over; for example, no dessert for a week, or no friends coming over for a while, etc. This would continue until he submits to the original prescribed consequence. And perhaps he will need some time to think it over to fully realize the hole he's digging underneath himself; so be sure and give him that. L.H.

Yes she can, that's part of being a human parent. I do it all the time! If I see misbehaved kids, I definitely blame the parents for the children's actions, because it's usually the parents fault. It's just a normal parenting thing to do. IMO, all parents compare their parenting skills to other parents - and some parents are better at parenting than others. M. Maybe it's just my age showing here but I am of the opinion that I will judge anothers parenting by the same measuring stick I would expect them to measure mine. I have walked the high road and the low road and what I have discovered is that most people want the same thing in life for their children. How they get there doesn't seem to be as important as the end result. Our children will never remember everything we even said to them but they will remember how we make them feel. Back to the gameboy issue. I personally find it hard to believe that any parent would allow it to be played in Sacrament meeting with the sound on as she describes. I still feel that we are better off not judging something like this. All it would take is for her, Sabran, to give him a bad time about playing the game in church and the teenager might never come back. I am quite sure that a unknowing do-gooder can do more damage in a time like this then what they think is justified. Go ahead and judge the parents you come in contact with and see what kind of emotions fester within you. If I was teaching a class and the children were being this disrespectful, their parents would not be informed, their parents would be warned. And if it continued, there might be a few kids who have a hard time sitting down for a while. If the parents quit sending them, it's all good. It's their responsiblity to raise their children; not mine. If the child won't be reverent in the house of the Lord, he can't come in. If the parents want their children to be worthy to enter, they had better teach them to be reverent. As for the game boy issue, perhaps giving this kid a hard time about it might chase him off, or it might get him to stop. The point is, it's not the action, it's the attitude. If he continues with this attitude, he most likely won't be around much longer anyway. I know if I saw a kid playing a game boy in church, he would defenitely know that I strongly disagree, and that the church is the house of the Lord, not a place where kids can come to play video games. Especially given the nature of the average video game nowdays. VERY un-Godly!! L.H.