lattelady

I'm sorry, that didn't really answer the question I had in regard to the comments being made about the "2 commandments": 1)do not eat from the tree and 2) be fruitful and multiply. It is being asserted that in order to keep commandment number 2, commandment number one had to be broken. I just wanted an answer as to why. Did God not create man and woman with an inborn, natural ability to have sex, procreate? Didn't he create the animals with that ability?

You start it and I'll put on the apple cider...

Why did they have to eat from the tree in order to have sex?

Justice, I know the text doesn't say, verbatim, "Adam sinned, and through his sin, sin entered the world." But when you look at the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden, God gave them only one rule: you can eat of any tree in the Garden, but do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil--for when you eat of it, you will surely die. Their choice was not a mistake; it was not an accident; it wasn't a lack of understanding either, because God made it clear what the boundary was. Their choice was deliberate disobedience (sin); and He told them the consequence--death. So when you look at that passage in Romans and it says sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, we know exactly what it's talking about--Adam's sin, and it's consequence.

Sorry I said the wrong name...I got moderators messed up...:)

I tell my kids that they are SO precious in God's sight that He sent His only Son Jesus to come to this fallen world to die for the bad things we have done, do, and will do, so that we could spend forever with Him--so they must be, and I must be more special than we can even conceive! He thinks we're worth a whole lot. I guess that's the message I've been trying to get through my head my entire life--apart from God, I can do nothing, but in Him, and because of Him, I am worthwhile, priceless, loveable, loved, accepted, beautiful. That's why I adore Him.

How much information did I get from the end of the show? Just enough to know that a couple who live in SLC area and owned a business for years left the church and said that patrons were encouraged not to give their store business. It didn't take too much time to say about that much. Salt Lake City was in the background and there was music playing. What is it that you're confused about? I'm really not making it up...

Is that what you believe, Moksha? that there is no sin, only mistakes?

Pam, thanks for that--wow, that was enlightening! I was definitely ignorant of that teaching. Now that I'm clear on that, and understand the Catholic perspective--thanks, HiJolly, for that, I have to make it clear (you might have already understood this already) that Evangelical Christians don't believe "immaculate conception" is in reference to Mary. We believe that Jesus was conceived "immaculately", without a sexual relationship, and through the overshadowing and power of the Holy Spirit. Immaculate, to us, just means there was no physical union between Joseph and Mary, or God and Mary, since we believe that God is spirit. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit.

Moksha: Nope, no one introduced that thought--we were taught strictly from the Bible.

I've already mentioned, I'm pretty sure, in a couple of posts that I don't have the name of the show or the name of the couple, or the name of their business or the particulars that you're looking for. If you're looking for that information in order to prove me wrong or discount the story, you are welcome to discount it altogether; but I was actually telling you that story to say that when my husband and I saw the show (we caught the very end), it started a conversation in which he relayed to me the confirmable event of a friend here in Utah that this happened to. It happened. The details are undebatable. I'm not blaming an entire church. John Doe said the same thing happens in his area with Baptists. I know some Baptists. Not all baptists do that. The fact that some do is sad, angering, appalling--even embarrassing.

HiJolly, are you sure that the Catholic church's teaching on the immaculate conception is in regards to the conception of Mary? That has never been my understanding of Catholic teaching or Evangelic teaching either. It has to do with Jesus' immaculate conception. If you have references from Catholic teaching in that regard, I would like to see them. This is one of the ways in which mainstream Christianity differs so much from what the LDS church teaches--the issue of the depravity of man. And I take what the Bible says on this subject to be the only teaching. I do understand that the LDS church teaches the addition of modern revelation which would shed a different light on what the Bible has said. It is difficult to accept that man is born with a sin nature and that the Bible teaches that the heart is deceitful "above all things" and desperately wicked. But I believe that this is why the message of the gospel really is such "good news." It can transform hearts.

Misshalfway, when you say that Adam and Eve's choice to eat from the tree that God told them not to eat from (disobedience) was not completely sinful, what are your thoughts on Romans 5:12 "Therefore, just as SIN entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned..." That verse calls their choice "sin." What is the difference between a sin and a transgression?

Snow, A couple questions I have from your post: Are you saying that you believe that Jesus did have a degenerate nature as a result of being born of flesh here on earth? If so, how did he get that? What was the procedure? Many of the people on this Board seem to believe in an immaculate conception. Also, what is your proof for man existed and "sinned" for a hundred thousand years before the Fall?

We've focused mainly on the business owners in SLC that I know nothing about except for what they said on the t.v., but what about the personal aquaintance of ours who people refused to buy from and sell to? Why would people (in general)--not a person here and there--do that? Fear? Anger? A desire to keep a community one religion only? I'm sure this DOES happen in other places and with other religious organizations and it is sad. REALLY sad!

Nowhere in the Bible do I find any indication that the Fall--Adam and Eve's sin was a Fall into something good. Nowhere do I see that it benefitted them in any way, as indicated in post #33! They were cursed because of it, an every generation after them! They lived in a perfect environment, they knew NO SHAME (I can't even imagine that!), they never had to hide from God because they'd done something wrong, they didn't know sorrow or pain or death or hate...and all that was stripped from them because of their sin. How could that be seen as a beneficial thing?

There have been some varied thoughts on this, but in light of prophets and modern revelation, and even more the fact that Joseph Smith is not just A prophet but the FOUNDING prophet of the LDS church, it seems that it would be almost impossible to say that you have a testimony of the Church but no testimony of Joseph Smith. He founded the church. To have trouble with him as a prophet of the Church would seem to cast some doubts on much of what the church was founded on.

That would be a difference in beliefs...I believe we are born sinners: therefore it would be correct to say (in my belief system) I sin because I'm a sinner--NOT, "I'm a sinner because I sin." If "I'm-a-sinner-because-I-sin" were true, then we would not be considered a sinner until we commit the first sin and are held accountable for it. I believe that the Bible teaches we are sinners at birth--even before we COMMIT a sin. We have a sin NATURE. Through one man (ADAM) sin entered the world and the whole human race, so that from Adam on, all generations would be under the curse of sin. This is why it was necessary for God to send Jesus to a fallen world. So it wasn't meant to be a trick question, or one that is like 1+1+2 and 2=1+1; they are two polar opposite thoughts. Two totally different belief systems.

Joker, I was actually trying to say that I understand, to a point, what you're saying (or part of what you're saying): that sometimes children go with the flow and do things in the church because it is expected and because their family does those things--and not necessarily because of a real, genuine heart-belief. I was saying that I believe I did that for a time; I did what I thought was right, but I don't think I fully understood. I DO believe, however, that there are children who absolutely understand the gospel at a very young age and their faith is REAL. I was just trying to validate some of where you're coming from, that's all... :)

Here's a question we batted around when I was in Bible College: Do we sin because we're sinners, or are we sinners because we sin?

Joker, I kinda see where you're coming from. I understood what the gospel was at a VERY young age, but I think I "accepted" it then because of a fear of hell rather than a true heart belief. That came later and then my faith was my OWN and something I truly took to heart rather than believing because it was what I felt I SHOULD do.

I do acknowledge your beliefs and "listen" through the computer to what you're saying. I don't agree with everything you believe, just as you don't agree with everything I believe. I hope I've never been disrespectful.

Other than the sentence that you took issue with, Beefche, what do you think of the rest of my post? Do you understand where I'm coming from? It's totally okay of you don't...

Beefche, I have gained an understanding since I've been on this forum of what you believe about modern revelation. I still wanted to know where to find a reference for that teaching. Pam gave it a few posts ago (thanks Pam). I wanted to know if it was a scriptural reference you were looking at (in the Bible or the BOM that I hadn't seen before (Bible) or understood (BOM); but I understand now that it's from the D&C--I assume that's part of your canonized scripture. THanks for explaining your point of view; I explained mine, too, because you asked me too.

SOME of you have already concluded that you might stop giving your business to them if they left the Church. That would be more accurate, I guess. I apologize.