mordorbund

I wonder what it was about this problem that called for an army of modeler gamers instead of just using their idle processing time.

Of all the sessions of General Conference (and you can even include the Relief Society meeting in this if you want), only the Priesthood session requires me to physically be in a church building. Any ideas why? My thoughts considered the Elders' Conference mentioned in D&C 20, but the matters of business listed there are all handled in other ways or in local conferences now. Even the solemn assembly where we sustain the new Prophet is not conducted in this meeting, but in one of the general meetings broadcasted over the radio and Internet. So, why must the body be present for the Priesthood Session?

My apologies. I concluded from your silence that you were just a flash-in-the-pan poster and took the opportunity for some levity. It looks like you're more of a weekend poster. I look forward to reading your questions and some of the answers from the helpful forum members.

Don't you mean undeadly.

Aren't you thinking about Bunnicula?

So I chatted with Investigator01 and got his list of questions. Feel free to attempt answers after wiping my gauntlet from your face. Joseph claims God the Father spoke to him in the First Vision. Joesph is now dead, so who can I ask to independently verify the event? Whoa! Really? (not a question, but) cool. Why is everyone in my wife's church so awesome? If I join, will I automatically be awesome too? Or is awesomeness a requirement for joining? I read about your degrees of glory. How great is that? There are others, but I'll wait for you to cut your teeth into these.

I've had the reverse experience. Yours may have been poor because it was with a larger group, or it could be because the counselor just reacted poorly. When I went to the LA Temple with some fellow missionaries, an Elder confided in me that he wished he could talk more openly about the ordinances so he could get some questions answered. We agreed to talk to the temple president together. We asked a whole slew of questions, from the Book of Abraham facsimiles to the significance of signs and tokens. He answered what he knew, and admitted what he didn't. I have since made it a practice that when I have a question that calls for someone who either experienced a different version of the ordinances, or has access to the text of the ordinances (or a separate Handbook of Instruction), to ponder it, take it to a member of the temple presidency, and ponder some more.

Werewolves? Vampires? Fiction? There's unicorns in the Bible. And Cumoms in the Book of Mormon. And don't forget Cureloms (a mix between Cumoms and Curelasses). In the Bible there's a red-hairy man and in LDS tradition there's a black-hairy man. Talking donkeys (no ogres), four-faced beasts, sea serpents, dragons, giants; water to wine, never-ending oil, endless bread basket; wheel-within-wheel transport, double-needle compass (who knows what that second needle is for), see-all glasses, healing hems, healing snake-sticks; I'll stop now. Are you concerned that it'll be boring? or blasphemous because the events and beings aren't attributed to God?

Those lazy Nephites also prefer to watch conference from the comfort of their own homes. For shame.

It's like the old adage, "You can leave the Church, but the Church won't leave you alone." Or something like that.

I think Paul's perspective is borne out from his life experience. How necessary are works and good deeds when you've been performing them all your life, but the real turning point is when you are called in the midst of all this zeal to worship Jesus Christ? Contrast that with the other authors who underwent traditional discipleship training.

I think we've reached an understanding. Please explain to me why a literal angel was required. Is this a logic thing or a biblical thing? If biblical, then I need to see more than Revelation because (as I've said before) so much of it is symbollic. I held this back in my comments, but angels are heavily tied to the Gospel of Repentance. Some fun scriptures to tie together: D&C 13 Hebrews 1 (keep in mind that while Paul talks about the Son being superior to Angels, he will soon segue into the Melchizedek Priesthood being greater than the Aaronic) D&C 84 (contrast this with D&C 13 - the Aaronic granting us communion with angels, the Melchizedek granting us communion with God) 2 Nephi 32 (just as John came under the direction of Peter, James, and John; angels are under the direction of the Godhead; just as the Aaronic Priesthood falls under the direction of the Melchizedek in the Church today)

When someone confides in me, I relate the following:

Not quite the same, but related:

I can concede on this (that the gospel itself is everlasting, so it's the same gospel in every dispensation). I think what I have the most problem with is actually something you stated much earlier (bolding added). I don't think that's the only meaning of this passage. Joseph revealed that Moroni's visit was only a partial fulfilment of this passage; the gospel-bearing angel was indeed an angel, but the gospel-preaching angel (the angels are the same in Revelation) is no angel at all but servants. So the onus is on God's servants to see that the rest of this passage is fulfilled. A quick search for "everlasting gospel" in the D&C shows us that this charge has been placed on the Church's missionaries from early on. I would suggest that it is still in process of being fulfilled today as missionaries testify of the gospel and invites others to turn to God. Now let's play degrees of separation. Young missionary where did you get that gospel from? <parents or missionary>. And where did <parents or missionary> get that gospel from? <parents or missionary>. ... And where did Joseph Smith get that gospel from? An angel, which in our case, is literally an angel sent from the courts of God; his charge has been passed on today to me to share this with you. The young missionary becomes a standin for an angel. Now, let's remove the doctrines of Apostasy and Restoration for a minute. Good brother, where did you get this gospel that Jesus saves and I should follow him? <parents or missionary>. And where did <parents or missionary> get that gospel from? <parents or missionary>. ... And where did Paul/Peter get that gospel from? Jesus, who (like an angel) was sent from heaven to turn us to God. His charge has been passed on today to me to share with you. The young missionary becomes a standin for an angel. The stories are very similar, but differs at whether the initial angel carrying the gospel was symbollic or literal. I see Moroni as a partial fulfillment, with more to come (I do not doubt more angels as well). I don't think the gospel has to be globally absent for this verse to be fulfilled, as we are seeing it fulfilled today with regular people standing in for the angel.

And so we come back to where I initially entered. Revelation is a highly symbollic book. To fully apply the logic that An angel carried the gospel to earth ergo I must find an angel-based religion to be saved then we will find ourselves in a world of trouble. For not only does an angel bring the gospel, but another angel holds the key to the bottomless pit and other angels carry plagues. Perhaps the lesson here is to be cautious about which angels you befriend (maybe that's what Paul was trying to get across ) So to answer your question, I think the message here is before Babylon falls there will be a strong push to turn everyone to God.

Not necessarily. The gospel is to be given specifically to "every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people". All that's being implied with this is that the Apostles' mission (to teach all nations) has not been completed. That could be because the gospel was removed, but it could also be because the gospel had not made it to every nation. Further, the context places this angel between the Jesus appearing on Mt Zion and the destruction of Bablyon. Even for the LDS, the gospel should be on the earth before this angel appears.

In what way is the gospel everlasting in this context? If the everlasting gospel disappears, in what way is it everlasting? The angel's charge doesn't mention anything of ordinances or authority (and I would point out that Moroni did not restore authority or any ordinances), it focuses on fear and worship God because "the hour of his judgment is come" (now this is similar to what Moroni taught).

Actually, there's several instances in the OT (I'm thinking Isaiah and Jeremaiah here since that's what I'm currently reading) where a specific punishment is prophecied on different lands (Big Bad kingdom will destroy Edom, Moab, Judah, etc). Just like in PrisonChaplain's reading, it is a different audience that warrants this other plague (even if it's the same plague) The gospel may be on the earth, but not everyone has it yet. It's enough to make even the most powerful of missionaries envy an angel and his gospel-bearing power. If the gospel was lost, why is the angel carrying the everlasting gospel? There should be some fine print on the bottom of the screen when selling Christianity ("Enjoy the bounty of the everlasting gospel!!! WARNING: everlasting gospel may suddenly disappear and later reappear ).

That's quite the extrapolation. Even I think that's a stretch and I already believe Moroni was a fulfillment of this prophecy. Question-begging indeed.

I like what was said earlier about finding a trusted friend and asking him his questions. We tout that it's "sacred not secret" but it practice it ends up getting treated as secret, and that's a shame. I include my trusted friends in sacred events. Until he finds someone to talk to, there are some officially-sanctioned resources he can turn to. The House of the Lord by Elder James E. Talmage The Holy Temple by Elder Boyd K. Packer and of course the temple prep classes. Hopefully there's a good teacher for that.

Let's turn off the cameras for a minute so I can take PrisonChaplain's side (not that he needs an additional voice - there's just a lot of question-begging going on). First, a lot of importance is placed on the fact that the gospel-bringer is an angel. I'd like to point out that this is a heavily symbolic book. So although Mr Divine describes the messenger as an angel, it does not have to be (The churches are also described as candlesticks - do you have candlesticks in your church?). In addition, if we are taking this to be literal, then the mission of the angel is to carry the gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. This sounds like a great reason to send an angel. He'll be able to cover a lot more territory a lot more quickly than we have. And as long as we're taking it literally, the gospel-bearing angel was flying. I missed that in the Joseph Smith-History somewhere about Moroni. The Book of Revelation can be very useful at confirming beliefs that we currently hold, but I would be very cautious about using it to validate our beliefs in mixed company due to the largely symbolic nature of the book.

Are you worried about saying you KNOW these things to be true when you just believe? or are you struggling with belief as well? "To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful." If it is the former, then there is no need to feel disparaged; your belief is sufficient.

Take a trip to the South for Model. My cousin decided it was time to move out and make his own way in life. So he moved out, bought himself his own trailor, AND PLOPPED IT RIGHT DOWN NEXT TO HIS PARENTS' TRAILOR. 3 of the four children did this.

That shouldn't matter. Surely you memorized the appropriate content following each chapter...