Bensalem

However the list came to be and whether or not the story is completely accurate, anyone who disputes it needs to confront the scriptural justifications given for each point, not just argue with the poster 'LetsJam'. The major comment here is that scriptures describe a church and that the LDS Church matches that description.

Yes. There are many more believers and saints who are obedient to the laws of the gospel which bring salvation and exaltation, than those who are prepared for the great tribulation with stores of food and water, debt management, or greater works of charity and good will. By connecting the two more fully, President Uchtdorf, seems to be saying our spiritual perfection falls short when we under-perform our temporal requirements. Many are spiritually ready to die; fewer are prepared to go on living.

Have you considered being a foster parent? In spite of it being more problematic, I'm told it can be very rewarding (and certainly beneficial for the child).

You are very kind. Thank you.

I don't think I said adding your own doctrine is appropriate. I spoke of testifying boldly according to the Spirit of God in you. Early in my conversion I was prompted by the Spirit to testify that Mary (the mother of Jesus) was my mother also. When I left the stage the bishop took the microphone and said, no one knows for certain their celestial mother. Nothing else was ever said, so I was left to contemplate why I had ever said such a thing. Over time I began to understand how it could be so. My faith in the spirit of my testimony led me to this: Jesus assigned his mother to John at the cross; my own journey from Catholicism to the LDS Church paralleled my march from salvation, symbolized by the cross, to exaltation, symbolized by the love John had for Jesus. I was leaving the cross and entering a love for the Word and obedience to the gospel. My testimony was further reinforced when I went to the temple to receive my endowments and learned that Peter, James, and John are grouped together as messengers of our Lord at various dispensations. Of course, Peter presided over the first Church and James was key to the restoration of that church, taking the form of the LDS Church today. John being the author of the Book of Revelation ushers in the final resolution in the end times. As I learned more about the exaltation of families in Israel, of eternal families, and of the creation of spirit children by exalted pairs, my testimony of Mary was magnified. As I learned of how we join the family of Abraham by adoption in Christ, I accepted Abraham as my father in heaven. Of course, I was begotten of my earthly parents not of Abraham or Mary, so I had to make one more connection. My earthly mother, who was obedient to the law of chastity, was of the spirit of Mary. And my earthly father, also obedient to the law of chastity, was of the spirit of Abraham. I was born of a humble earthly pair who were the begotten spirit children of Abraham and Mary. Now that both my parents have died, it is only a formality of temple work to offer them a fatherhood the likes of Abraham's and a motherhood the likes of Mary's. Their glorification in Christ glorifies me in Christ as I am sealed to them as an eternal family. Being born of baptism in the LDS Church makes me part of the spirit of John in my love of Christ demonstrated by obedience to His gospel. I belong to Mary even as John became her son at the command of Jesus. I do not claim any of this to be the doctrine of the Church; I only share it as my testimony.

Assuming your worthiness to benefit from the gift of the Holy Ghost is not impaired, I think the best way to gain a testimony is to serve. Go out with the missionaries on their rounds to investigator's homes (with the bishops permission). Serve or bless the sacrament. Do charity work. Do the genealogical research for your family and do the temple work for them. Witness to your faith at fast and testimony meeting. Continue to ask and you shall receive.

"Begotten", in the sense of fertilization of an egg or placement of a fertilized egg into the womb. "Only", to signify that the miracle will not be preformed again; no one can claim to be begotten of the seed of God. We are all the children of God begotten of His Spirit, not of His flesh. In the resurrection we will be His children in the flesh united in Spirit. LDS doctrine makes a distinction between our "flesh and blood" form in mortality and our "flesh and bone" form in eternity.

Thanks JudoMinja for the wise counsel. I suppose having been warned of pride I should demonstrate some humility by admitting that I am surely flawed in words and deeds. I do not imagine that I know more than the Church leaders or any other member on any specific topic, with the exception of my own testimony. Even as Joseph Smith dealt with the uniqueness of his personal testimony, so too must I. Be assured, I share it judiciously as my own knowledge grows of what my brothers and sisters may be willing to accept or otherwise contemplate of my presentations. Neither do I wish to fall short of total disclosure of all that was shown to me during the time of my conversion to the LDS Church when I walked with the Spirit and He with me. In my defense, I can only remind you of the confidence Paul testified of: "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God;" (Timothy 1:6-8) As for a disclaimer, I should parrot that which Bruce R. McConkie left us in his book Mormon Doctrine. For my work and my words, I assume sole and full responsibility.

Seriously, I would never think to be so rigid. Still, I believe I present correct doctrine.

I do not seek to overturn the hierarchical order of our Lord's house. When I speak or write I bind nothing to the Church or in heaven, but I seek to bind the Spirit of God to the listener or reader. And since I am teaching them, I consider it doctrine. This Church has given me the gift of the Holy Ghost, it has called me to preach and to testify of Christ, it has made me a priest of the Melchizedek order, and it has commanded me to magnify my calling. I communicate the doctrine of the Church as I understand it by the Spirit in me. Am I responsible for my actions or words when I act or speak in the name of Jesus Christ or is it the Spirit of God in me whose burden it is? Or is it the Church's fault for giving me His authority? I throw caution to the wind in favor of breathing His truth to any who would listen.

The difference between inheritance and birthright in gospel terms is the difference between salvation and exaltation. In salvation we are joint heirs in Christ, we share in His inheritance. In exaltation we have the birthright of Israel as passed down from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob through Joseph to his sons Ephraim and Manasseh. In the LDS Church the birthright is obtained through the ordinances of the gospel of Christ (we become the descendants of Abraham in Israel) plus a patriarchal blessing, which would specify one's lineage to a tribe of Israel (the majority of LDS receiving a patriarchal blessing are placed in the lineage of Ephraim or Manasseh). It is probably not just a coincident that Jacob's son Joseph and the LDS Church's first prophet Joseph Smith had the same first name. After all the LDS Church is the restoration of Israel, the name given to Jacob by God. The biblical triad of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob example and foretell of our God as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost manifested today in the Priesthood, the Anointed One, and His Church.

I'm a bit curious too. As I understand, the Jewish faith recognizes only the Cohen sir name to be the lineage of the Levite priesthood. How could anyone prove their lineage outside of that perimeter?

Fine, I won't derail your topic. But I see a legitimate source of doctrine as the Spirit spoken from the mouth of the priest.

Why dismiss it before you've heard it? It applies to you if you recognize the Word of God in it. It is doctrine if it speaks to the Spirit of God. When my brothers in the Elders quorum speak the truth, it is doctrine to me. And I don't just mean the assigned teacher, but also the round table discussion that goes on. It is all edification...teaching...doctrine.

Then the gift of the Holy Ghost and the Priesthood are a hokes. Christ spoke the words of His Father in heaven. We in the priesthood speak for Christ. Paul shared his testimony and preached of Christ before getting approval for his teaching from the twelve apostles. How do you square these truths with today's LDS Church, which claims to be the restoration of the first church?

You left out personal testimony and personal revelation available to all who have the gift of the Holy Ghost or who hold the Melchizedek priesthood. Are we not to open our mouths and preach the truth of Christ? Doesn't the power of the HG and the authority of the priesthood speak to doctrine?

I like your perceptive on this and the outcome of the LDS doctrine you describe seems sound. So too is the Evangelical perspective backed up by scripture. But I do not see why the two cannot exist together. I see it this way. The evangelical view describes what happens to all those souls who ever existed here on earth. What happens here can be finite in numbers and determination yet eternal in outcome. The exaltation doctrine of the LDS can be viewed as universal and not local to earth since we also have a doctrine which foretells of exalted pairs colonizing other worlds. The universe is a void of space populated with solar systems. The OT teaches that our God is a nomad. Our solar system is as an oasis to our God. What He created here is like unto innumerable places in the universe. Those who reach exaltation will have dominion over these places and will populate them with spirit and with body. The same thing that happened here will happen on other worlds. The promises received by the LDS related to exaltation do not replace the promises made in the Bible regarding salvation, damnation, or anything else. The revelation of prophets add clarity. It is up to others to accept that clarity or not.

Reread my post. I didn't relieve men of all responsibility. The law of chastity applies to both men and women. If a pair chooses not to abide by the law, the responsibility of contraception is both the man's and the woman's. But the responsibility to conceive and give birth to a child is the woman's burden, so too her unique responsibility. It remains the responsibility of the man to make the family whole, preferably by marriage but certainly through financial support. The OP raises the question of a woman's choice to have a baby out-of-wedlock (because irresponsible men are not marriageable). No child should be conceived under those conditions. To do so would be irresponsible of the woman.

Wow, I think I'm in love.

Wow, I think I'm in love.

Women have sex to gain the intimacy they grave; men play intimate to gain the sex they grave. Children are the innocent by-product of this lack of responsibility on both sides.Men well become more responsible when easy sex is less available. Women hold the key; just say no! First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes the baby in the baby carriage.

To know someone is to love them. We can show our love for God by obeying Him. Too many of the faithful profess a love of Christ but fail to demonstrate it through obedience to His gospel. Faith must lead us to repentance. Repentance to the waters of baptism. Baptism to a conversion to righteousness. I believe the passage you quote is a warning to many ministries who think they are doing His work but only enrich themselves either financially or egotistically. In other words, they are using His name to benefit themselves.

In one simple and clear sentence this statement stands as a powerful replacement to the Nicene Creed adopted by most other Christian churches.

Sounds very Christian to me. The BOM speaks more of the Atonement than does the Bible. This Article of Faith clearly bases salvation on the act of Atonement, which was the mission of Christ. He did not come to earth to offer us grace. The free gift of the Atonement is His offering to us. But salvation does not come to all unconditionally. It requires action. Likewise, He did not cure all of those with aliments; He cured only those whose faith brought them to Him (or to the waters of baptism). Repentance brings us to the forgiveness earned by Christ's Atonement for man's sin. Faith alone is died without the work of obedience. This revelation corrects and clarifies the misplaced emphasis by other churches on salvation by grace, which minimizes Christ's emphasis on a baptism of repentance and a continued change of heart and the importance of good works.

I think the 3-hour block is just right (as well as, inspired). Goldilocks