Kishkumen_Called

The premise of this thread makes me chuckle, mostly because I have the same disposition. I will happily accept one impossibility and question or rationalize another. I guess that's part of what makes us human - we are living paradoxes! We all have a choice - trust man with his crude instruments and immature theories or trust God and His infinite wisdom and power. One thing I am grateful for is that the things that really matter (the Atonement, plan of salvation, etc.) are explored and explained over and over, repeatedly, that I may understand Heavenly Father's plan for me and how to apply it. Cheers

I'm glad we can have a fun discussion. It certainly clarifies my reasoning. I'm unsure if the Nephites were Hebrew speaking - they were not Jews (they were from the tribe of Joseph, Manassah). I'm not sure their language was Hebrew, as Nephi opens the Book of Mormon with the statement: And finally, the plates of the Jaredites were translated in much the same way as Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon - thru the gift and power of God. The term Christ did make it into the Book of Mormon before He was born (see 2 Ne. 10:3). However, I will concede that these terms could still be Hebrew in origin - although I've got to run, so I'll finish my thought later. Sorry!! Cheers

Hey y'all, Thought I'd take a minute and introduce myself. My mom and I joined the church when I was a child. I have been more or less brought up in the Gospel, raised by a single mom. Paraphrasing Nephi - Life has been good to me. I've had the privilege of serving a mission to South America, marriage to a beautiful and caring wife, awesome children, more education (and incumbent debt) than I know what to do with, a good job, and an enduring testimony. Lived in CA, UT, MI, and AL. Not to say that my life isn't without it's challenges - I tend to see the negative side, I'm critical (which is not always bad when you're a scientist, but it is an occupational hazard!!), faith doesn't come easy; need I go on?? What keeps me going is that I am learning to trust my Savior. He really does make all things possible!! More importantly, He cares about me specifically - which has/is taking me effort to include myself in His "Circle of Friends." As for my nom de plume, while running by the phone at home, my friend saw a message, stopped abruptly (I ran into his back, I was following so closely), and returned to the desk. His brain had "seen" the note as saying "Kishkumen called." Still makes me laugh to remember that moment. Cheers

On a more serious note, you state: I think one of the reasons this point does require prophetic elucidation is that other cultures dine differently (European (thinking British & tea), hobbit, etc.); also, brunch could be thought of a meal by some - ya never know. That was something I hadn't really given much thought to before. Thanks. Cheers

You crack me up. I can just see the apple flying over the bushes and bonking Pippin in the head!! Cheers

You know, as a scientist, I find it interesting that there isn't (as far as I'm aware) any archeological records of horses or elephants in the New World (I'm picking the ones we can identify). Not that this shakes my testimony; I'll just be excited when science catches up (in a very small, insignificant way) to religious history. Thanks for the great thread, thekabilist! Cheers

While this might not be considered doctrine by some, Gospel Principles, Fasting states: I've seen it in conference talks, I just can't remember where. Cheers

Your assumption has foundation: Cheers

Hemidakota & Stormwitch, You both bring up a good point - we really don't know what, if anything, Jesus had to eat or drink. A look at ancient fasting rituals/practices might shed some light (thekabalist??). My understanding was that Jesus was both God & Man - He suffered as a man might suffer but did not have all the human constraints (i.e., bleeding in the Garden would have killed anyone but Him). My feeling is that He had neither food nor water while fasting, as He did not need them to survive. I'm not saying that Jesus didn't need to eat or drink because I don't know that. But my belief is that during His time in the desert, He didn't. Beliefs don't need to make sense, do they?? Cheers

I take back my earlier post - the writings of Ether were hundreds, if not thousands of years after the tower of Babel. Even if it were Hebrew, it would have been significantly altered/morphed after so much time (from Shakespear to today). Also remember that regardless of the language of creation, the languages were confounded at Babel. It's unlikely that given the confounding, the physical and temporal isolation between the Jaredites and Jews, and the language drift, that the etymology would be Hebrew. Can you tell, I'm not giving up this point?? No, it's mine it tell you, ALL MINE!!! BUWWHHHAAAHHHAA! Sorry! Cheers

Can you blame an institution for acting as an individual? Even if you are forthright and honest about incidents in your life where you were ___ (pick a negative adjective that references your judgement or actions), how often do you want to bring it up, much less take it on Oprah? It may be a learning point for a select few you choose to share it with, but other than that, what purpose does it serve? I'm not advocating nor suggesting that we stop searching in history, but please keep in mind that history, who ever it's written by, always has an agenda (be it positive or negative). As a part of my professional life, I have had many people open up to me about things that had nothing to do with my services. While there is professional ethos to consider, I rarely have an encounter where sharing negative experiences with others would benefit anyone. My 0.02 Cheers

If I may digress slightly, I've been reading a wonderful book that makes the distinction between sin and weakness and how they are entirely different, with different causes, different cures, and different outcomes. It's entitled: Weakness Is Not Sin: The Liberating Distinction That Awakens Our Strengths by Wendy Ulrich (amazon or deseretbook). I highly recommend it. The reason I bring this up is because the posts thus far encompass both sins and weaknesses. Sins we're commanded to overcome thru the Atonement of Christ and "sin no more." Weaknesses on the other hand, are trickier and stickier - we may or may not overcome weaknesses throughout our lives, but morally, weaknesses are neutral - they don't count against us as sin. However, they still can impede progress. Cheers

Remember that the writings of Ether occurred shortly after the Tower of Babel. The words you're scrutinizing wouldn't be of Hebraic origin. The translation that Mormon gave would be, but not the proper terms/names/nouns that Ether utilizes. I always thought these were beasts of burden; or maybe edible. Mmmmm! Cureloms! Cheers

thekabalist, Thank you. Finding out other perspectives, especially from other cultures, is always welcome. I don't know if Mormonism is lumped with Evangelical Christians, but we also believe that evil does indeed serve a purpose: As an aside, I've heard people guessing that what Paul was referring to was some physical characteristic or ailment - a weakness of the mortal state, not necessarily a sin. Whether it was an inclination towards evil or some physical defect - the end outcome is the same. Come unto me and I will heal you - even if I don't remove it. Cheers

I had come to a similar conclusion, but without the wonderful encounter with the sublime. I think I will "liken the scriptures unto myself." Thanks for sharing that great experience.

I disagree. The notion that this occurred in Gethsemane is inferrential, based on knowledge found elsewhere. I'm not disputing that this doesn't refer to Gethsemane - it does. My point is that it's not explicitly stated (for lattelady's sake). Cheers

I was hoping you could supply your logic and a conclusion as well Admittedly, this was also one of the scriptures I used to "build my case," as it were.

Hey y'all, I am reading a book that was making the distinction between sin and weakness. There are two phrases in this scripture the author uses that I was wondering if anyone had suggestions on how to interpret them (the bold portions only). Context of these verses is that Paul is praying to have some unspecified weakness taken from him; it appears that the Lord did not grant his request.I have my own ideas but I'd be interested in hearing those of others. Cheers

Hey y'all, Does anyone have a Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith or History of the Church? I suspect that either of these would show that Joseph Smith was the first to expound that the Atonement started in the Garden and was not isolated to the Cross. My guess, anyways. It certainly doesn't show up on lds.org. Folks, what lattelady is looking for is a scriptural or doctrinally-based reference that states something to the effect: What is being presented in these posts is inferrential and based on a prior modern revelation. Lattelady is just looking for the first time it was stated. No need to get tchy because you're talking past her; she's honestly seeking an answer of our doctrine.Cheers

These posts have made me reflect on the purpose of forgiveness and what it has accomplished in my life. One of the areas of growth has been in my personal maturity. The more I forgive, the less things bother me. What was once offensive now rolls off my back. The unfortunate thing is that this gift waxes and wanes. Please don't misconstrue my comment as referring to anyone else's comment or post. I respect that we are in different places, have different skills, strengths and weakness. My comment refers to myself alone - that by forgiving, the Spirit acts as a lubricant to the friction of life and I am less sensitive to offense. That gives me hope. Cheers

Is God fair? Fair? I pray that He is not, because if I get what I deserve ("conforming with the established rules "), I am hosed!! I want Mercy, thank you very much!! From the Bible Dictionary, The object of prayer is not to change the will of God, but to secure for ourselves and for others blessings that God is already willing to grant, but that are made conditional on our asking for them. Blessings require some work or effort on our part before we can obtain them. Prayer is a form of work, and is an appointed means for obtaining the highest of all blessings. If you work for something and then are granted it - is that unfair? I don't see how it can be. IMHO, your questions seems to be attempting to confine a Celestial principle in a Telestial framework. Just me. Cheers

The best answer I can find to your question is Matt. 26:36 & Mark 14: 32. Mark 14:34 speaks to His suffering. I would venture that the rest of our understanding and belief is from latter-day prophets/revelation. You're right - the scriptures are thin in this area. As for Garden vs Cross - my understanding is that the Atonement started in the Garden and was completed upon the Cross. The Atonement was not completed in the Garden; it only started there. This is my understanding. Cheers

I don't think you're expected to heal anything. The Lord has stated that He will take that burden for you and heal your broken heart. "Redeemer was anointed to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that were bound" D&C 138:42. The hardest part is being patient until He does. As for trust - the 'ole rattlesnake/scorpion story - "You knew what I was when you picked me up." Charity, the love the Savior requires of us, is not blind to the faults of others. In fact, charity is very cognizant of where others are in their lives, how they should be treated, how YOU should feel safe in your interactions, etc. Life's messy - but He is abundantly good to each of us, including you. Cheers

As a physician, I share and applaud your decision. I will likely pursue the same path. However, in the spirit of full disclosure, you are cremated after the students are done with you Cheers

To me, worship is offering up my will, the only thing I truly own. As I align my will with His, I am worshipful. As I offer up my broken heart and contrite spirit, I worship. Obviously, this has more to do with the state of my mind, heart, and intentions than with actual activity I don't find contradiction in this. As I play with my child, eat a meal, interact with a co-worker - all of these things allow me the opportunity of worshipping God by obeying His commandments. However, the opposite is also true - partaking the Sacrament, attending the temple, or reading the scriptures can all be done in a non-worshipful manner. I think the activity has less to do with worship than the spirit in which it is done (outside the obvious no-no's). Cheers