Third Hour Forum Rules - Please be familiar with these rules before posting

mdfxdb

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    712

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by mdfxdb

  1. mdfxdb
    Please. We were all taught he translated the Book of Mormon, and as such most of if not all members assume a traditional translation process where he used the Urim and Thummim to "read" the golden plates while he dictated the words to his scribe. The fact is what we were taught is not congruent with the pictoral depictions, nor the sunday school descriptions. The image shown is what I was taught in sunday school. It is currently not in the body of pictoral references if you purchase the new approved book.
  2. mdfxdb
    Kimball wrote Miracle of Forgiveness in 1969, at that time he was an Apostle. aka: prophet, seer, and revelator.
  3. mdfxdb
    For the record. I spoke with my bishop tonight. He stated that doctrine does not change. Doctrine is revealed and is not "new". The ban on blacks holding the priesthood was a Policy, not doctrine. Prophets are men just like the rest of us and they make mistakes. waiting for the accolades of my correctness..... :-/
  4. mdfxdb
    There may be doctrine which is yet to be revealed, or we may have current doctrine which is incomplete, and is to be added upon. This can only come through revelation.
  5. mdfxdb
    I find that in these discussions about "grace" I almost always turn the discussion to faith. Many other Christians do not fully understand what faith is, and what it means to have faith, to demonstrate faith. This discussion of faith leads to a greater understanding of the doctrine of grace.
  6. mdfxdb
    I do believe that doctrine does not change. There are no new doctrines. Doctrine has not changed, nor does it change. We however are incapable of fully comprehending complete doctrine, and it therefore needs to be revealed to us little by little. We consider these bits and pieces "new", but in fact they are not. Our implementations of doctrine are subject to policy, such policy is often divinely inspired. I do think that previous prophets have stated their opinions as doctrine, or have used the words doctrine and policy interchangeably. Because prophets put their pants on one leg at a time just like me, they are prone to mistakes. They are responsible for those mistakes.
  7. mdfxdb
    Omega = wrong. I am with you up to this point. Policy as promulgated in the handbooks is indeed inspired. We are not always given the provenience of those policies, but they are church policy, and approved by the prophet, and the twelve. Sometimes they require divine inspiration/intervention to change sometimes not. However those policies are not doctrine. There was indeed a policy to prevent blacks from holding the priesthood. It was not doctrine. Current church statements point to the fact that it was indeed a policy. Past statements to the effect that it was doctrine, or because some perceived that it was taught as doctrine does not make it doctrine.
  8. mdfxdb
    I see I must expand as you clearly don't understand. It has never been doctrine to teach that blacks can't hold the priesthood because of Cain, or "fence sitting" It has also not been "doctrine" / is not doctrine of the church that Blacks could not receive the priesthood. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/race-church I will quote from earlier in the statement referenced above: "It is not known precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the Church, but it has ended. Church leaders sought divine guidance regarding the issue and more than three decades ago extended the priesthood to all worthy male members." If revelation was never received making doctrine, how could it be doctrine. And not just because some prophet voiced their opinion.
  9. mdfxdb
    I will go out on a limb and say that George Albert Smith statements are opinion. My prior post and link from the lds news room is pretty clear about all those previous statements regarding the doctrinal validity of blacks and the priesthood as being incorrect and opinion only. I think the church has been clear on this point. Those that say it was doctrine are incorrect.
  10. mdfxdb
    I will, to give the benefit of the doubt to our fearless leaders that they were using the words "policy" and "doctrine" interchangeably. But of course we know that they are not interchangeable.
  11. mdfxdb
    Sounds like the personal opinions of the church leaders on this one. Turns out they were wrong..... http://www.mormonnew...cle/race-church “The origins of priesthood availability are not entirely clear. Some explanations with respect to this matter were made in the absence of direct revelation and references to these explanations are sometimes cited in publications. These previous personal statements do not represent Church doctrine.”
  12. mdfxdb
    https://www.lds.org/manual/basic-doctrines/basic-doctrines?lang=eng Reference to doctrine. If the restriction on blacks having the priesthood ever was doctrine, then it must have changed. From the LDS Newsroom: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/race-church “The origins of priesthood availability are not entirely clear. Some explanations with respect to this matter were made in the absence of direct revelation and references to these explanations are sometimes cited in publications. These previous personal statements do not represent Church doctrine.”
  13. mdfxdb
    Nobody leaves just because of arguing. What are the real reasons? A list 1, 2, 3... would help immensely. You can't pray the problem away. Recognize what the problems are, address the problems. Work toward desired results.
  14. mdfxdb
    This year..... Smithmas!!
  15. mdfxdb
    I'm sure they prayed, then felt good, which is a common feeling to have after prayer...... I would have called the cops. You do not need an apology to move forward. If you decide to let him continue with the relationship then you need to make the conscious decision to let that happen. You need to set boundaries, and hold him to them. You need to realize who he is and decide for yourself if it is worth having him in your life or not. If the answer is no, then divorce.
  16. mdfxdb
    OP Have you tried apologizing to your husband? And, yes I think you are unreasonable in light of what you have so far disclosed.
  17. mdfxdb
    You saw her personality flaws, and then married her anyways? Time to follow some of the advice given previously here. Don't be so shocked she isn't a perfect person, guess what..you're not perfect either.
  18. mdfxdb
    ......... Fact: No one who posts on this thread will have any knowledge, or share further knowledge other than what has been previously discussed about the Holy Ghost.
  19. mdfxdb
    How can you possibly know that they do? You prove the positive, and I'll prove the negative.
  20. mdfxdb
    Regardless of birth, people in first world countries can choose to rise up. Those that hold them down are those around them. Nobody in the USA goes hungry unless they want to. It is a contentious decision. Food is so cheap in our country, and so available that there is no excuse to be hungry.
  21. mdfxdb
    nothing secret. The fact is that no one knows. From Mormon Doctrine (Bruce R McConkie): "Because he is a Spirit Personage, he has power - according to the eternal laws ordained by the Father - to perform essential and unique functions for men. In this dispensation at least, nothing has been revealed as to his origin or destiny; expressions on these matters are both speculative and fruitless."
  22. mdfxdb
    Well, now you are talking nonsense. If we gave each person in the world $38,000 there would be just as many "hungry" people as there are now. You clearly do not understand human nature. Poverty, and hunger in first world countries is a choice. In fact in the USA the "fight against poverty" is it's own industry with rich politicians who have no real motivation to help poor people. They redistribute wealth in the form of food stamps, and rent assistance, and yet our poverty numbers never seem to go down...... Your naivete is astounding.
  23. mdfxdb
    except she never said he watched porn regularly.... she only said he watched porn.
  24. mdfxdb
    no. You mentioned in subsequent post your bishop wanted follow up. You should have taken responsibility for those follow up visits. It is your repentance, not the bishops. Go see the bishop. Make it right, don't worry about the current consequences. Worry about the eternal consequences. Your bishop will guide you on the path to make everything right.
  25. mdfxdb
    At no point did silhouette state that her husband was a porn addict. She stated he watched porn.