estradling75

In 3rd Nephi we read of the Savior's visit to the Nephites. During this event he looks through their scriptures, and finds that they did not record the fulfillment of a prophecy made by Samuel the Lamanite. Christ instructs them to record it. From this we see that the Lord documents both the prophecy and the fulfillment of prophecies. In the Prophecy you quoted we have a clear case of the first part of the prophecy's fulfillment being documented. But fulfillment the second part is not documented. This means we can only speculate. Speculating that Joseph Smith was this prophet poses certain problems. You already addressed the problem of trying to figure out what he might have "presume to speak " that got him destroyed. (assuming that is what happened). But none of our later prophets have been moved to document that Joseph Smith fulfilled this prophecy. Thus it kinda calls in our whole line of succession. For the Lord to have a prophecy be fulfilled and not document it runs counter to his prior behavior. It seems more likely that this is a prophecy yet to be fulfilled... which puts your last bit spot on.

Ahh yes... a classic parenting minefield... A parent has two daughters... One gets called 'smart' the other called 'pretty'. Nothing bad or negative there... But what they hear is "I'm Ugly" and "I'm Stupid"

This... exactly this... Lets give an example. We have a business that makes widgets. We want to prosper the business so we hold a meeting on how to make better widgets. If during that meeting we do not have a bunch of diverse idea on how to make better widgets... Then chances are we will probably not have end up with the best ideas. But on the same hand if we have alot of diversity, but one person wants to make gizmos, an another wants to build thingermobobs, and another wants to talk about coloring hair... well we are not going to get the best ideas on how to make better widgets either but we have lots of diversity. Diversity should not be an end in and of itself because it will distract and divert. Diversity that has a common focus or goal is where its power truly rests.

In the New Testament Christ is asked about marriage and divorce. He was very clear that (Matthew 19:8) "... because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so." This is an example of God allowing something wrong to continue and even be dealt with administratively... It does not make it right or correct... it just means God works with us were we are. In the example others have given and even in the one being asked about in the OP the answer "... Because of the Hardness of your hearts..." seems to be enough of a reason.

No success in life can compensate for failure in the home. No matter how much a pillar or "successful" the parents are... if at that age the kids are "Sharks" as described.. then parents are in failure mode and need a serious wake up call. If I was teaching that class I would tell the kids simply that their behavior is not acceptable and if it continues they would be removed from the class. Then I would follow through. And if I needed to remove them I would. After such removal (or maybe even before) I would undoubtedly have some discussions with the Sunday School president, parents, and maybe even bishop. My side would go something like this. "I am called to teach... not to discipline. Discipline is the parents job. When the child can sit without disrupting the class (or whatever the behavioral issue is) they are welcome to return." I mean it is a really low bar for someone of that age. And I would be willing to work with the Parents but I would not be taking over their responsibilities.

The Right to Free Speech has coexisted with the various Slander and Libel Laws here in the USA for a very long time. They do need to be held in balance with each other but there is no reason to say we can only have one or another. The courts are the place were such balances are weighed and determinations made. "Free" Speech is not and has never been... "No one can ever hold you accountable for the Harm you cause" Speech.

Sigh... If I am walking down the street I might be inspired by God to turn Right... This would be the Mind and Will of God. The Next day I could be walking down the Street and he inspires me to turn Left... This also would be the Mind and Will of God. Just because what I was inspired to do at different times was different does not mean that one of them was not inspired. Claiming that is just being simple minded. It would be like Nephi declaring that Moses was not inspired in giving the 10 commandments... Because they say "Thou shall not kill" and the Nephi knew that the Lord clearly inspired him to kill Laban

I think this case is a perfect example of why choosing to be of good character is important. (While there can be some very hard circumstances it is still a choice) Truth is important... facts are important... But sadly we do not always have knowledge of truth and facts... and that leaves the character of those making the claim. I do not know why she is the way she is. I do not know what is the truth of her claims. I do find her to be of questionable character due to her past choices... which hurts her... her claims... and everyone connected to her... and even others unconnected by anything but a similar claim.

I tend to agree for a simple reason... God Named the church and expects it to be called the Church of Jesus Christ. There is a whole set of verses about the Name of the Church to be found in the Book of Mormon. Thus getting us to call ourselves by the Name of Christ... Is a call to repentance. The Book of Mormon is called by God as "The Book of Mormon" that is what he has repeatedly called it. It no more needs to be changed then the Bible needs to have its name changed. Or to put it in other words calling us Mormon is like calling other Christians.... Biblians

While certain addictions might not cost you your recommend... Can you honesty read and study the Word of Wisdom and come away with the idea that God is approving of us having them? It is one thing for God to tolerate our weakness (which are many) and quite another to say he is OK with them and want us to have them and not even try to overcome them.

Welcome Galatians617.. The answer depends on exactly how far you want to go... and the circumstance surrounding your removal. Details we do not have (and you do not need to give us) So lets talk about the levels you can do. (Please note the Levels designations are arbitrary assignments by me for this conversation) On the outside of every church building is the Sign "Visitors Welcome" Any one can go and sit down and attend the services. Hopefully your local ward will not make that sign a lie... but if they do then that shows their weaknesses and really has nothing to do with you. If we are willing to let total strangers join us... why would we not allow a potentially returning prodigal? At this level you do not really have to share anything. You are a non member and we are just happy that you are there for as much or as little as you want. Come Join with us and have a seat. This is level 1 Now... assuming you want to become a member again.. that involves talking to the Bishop. That involves having Faith in Christ... A Testimony of Joseph Smith and the Restored Church.. That involves the Bishop requesting your old records and getting resolved any unresolved issues of Church discipline (assuming you have any). If you had some issues and they involved your marriage.. then yeah that might need to happen. With out more details (Which you do not have to give us) we can't answer it for this level. It may or may not be need. This is level 2 Assuming you get your membership back... without any need to contact your former spouse then the next level would be if you want to be Sealed to your current spouse. (Which means they need to be a member and desire it as well) There would be no avoiding it here. To clear you for a second Sealing they would need to know what happened with the first. And that means reaching out to your ex and giving them a chance to respond. This would be level 3

I'll admit that I do not know much about rumspringa.. But I thought it was more about the Amish cultural restrictions being removed... Not about saying Sin is OK.. Or to put it in our context... We have kids born into the church they are raised in the church and taught... then when they come of age then they are told "You are no longer a member unless you choose to be." If they are not a member then the church can't do much about any sinful behavior... which is wildly different then saying that behavior is not sinful. If they engage sinful behavior for awhile but then choose to stop and return... Well that is Repentance and Repentance is Good. They are not getting away with Sin or being given a free Pass to Sin. They are being given a very clear chance to make a choice on which Master they are going to Serve and the framework that service will be against. That setup strikes me a being reasonably wise if not entirely workable with our cultural set up.

So you know the consequences of you telling the bishop not to ask anymore... So you have a choice to make... Tell him to stuff it and remain restricted... Or you continue to work the issue even if you find the bishop to be unhelpful... until you find a way that works. The choice of which set of consequences you take on are yours

You are not a mind washed zombie.... You can say or do whatever you want. There can however be consequences. If you are talking with the bishop then one of you is trying to accomplish something. If you choose not to cooperate then that goal might not happen. If it appears that the Bishop is asking things not related to whatever is trying to be done you can always ask how it is relevant to the goal at hand.

Which is fine... We all can have different likes and thing enjoy. But if you want to play that card you have to accept and let others be different instead of trying to show that they are wrong and how your interpretation is the correct one. My whole post was about seeing both side being presented yet you focus your effort on one side was wrong and yours was right. I have not seen the movie. When I do I will probably enjoy it without thinking to much about any kind of agendas they may or may not have. But for those that do have an agenda... They can't call for equality and place someone as a Role Model who perform an action that would be universally wrong had it been gender swapped. Or at least they can't do it without it being part of the growth arc of them repenting and becoming better (aka Spider Man and Uncle Ben, Tony Stark's weapon business etc etc)

And if the press was a third party then yeah you could say that. But if that press was JRR Tolkien himself and he was telling you that Lord of the The Rings was a love story about vampires. And you went to see it based on his words "A love story about Vampires" and you got LoTR instead. You'd have every reason to feel defrauded, to question his motives for such a deception.

Did you miss watching trailer? The whole HER ... O thing? I am not talking about what she may or may not do in the movie... because I can not... I have not seen it yet. I am talking about the press and how she is being presented and advertised. She is being put forth as a hero and a role model. If she is on a hero's journey where she learns how and what it means to be a hero then great... Otherwise this scene is a power fantasy

It kind of reminds me of one of the first parts of the first Terminator movie. The Terminator had just come back in time and is naked... He enters a biker bar and takes clothes and a bike from them. Now in movies bikers are generally portrayed as the "bad" guys. But the Terminator is never presented (at least in the first movie) as an any other then amoral killing machine. And the whole scene is set to establish just how dangerous and amoral the terminator is against a group (bikers) that is not all that good anyways but reasonably tough. Captain Marvel is not suppose to be a amoral killing machine... She is presented as a Hero. Now if you want to make the case that she was journeying to become a Hero and learned from and over come her mistakes... Then great... Where in the movie does she show that she learned from her mistakes? (This is a genuine question I have not seen the movie yet... I am waiting for it to be on Netflick or Redbox) If the movie shows her learning and growing (and regretting) this action, then the context justifies it(like Tony Stark regrets his). Otherwise it is just a female power fantasy playing out on the screen. Now guys have had plenty of power fantasies played out on the screen. Those are quite rightly condemned.

This is laughably and demonstratively wrong. If it were true there would not be any other Christian faiths... Catholic oppose Methodists and Baptists, Methodists oppose Catholics and Baptists, Baptists oppose Catholics and Methodists... Yet everyone of those groups claim scriptural support for their beliefs. Yet their critics (aka all the other faiths) will tell them they are wrong... that they have the wrong understanding of what the scriptures are saying... Therefore is clearly repeatedly historically demonstrated that the "Must be Scripturally Supported" argument is really a "You must agree with my interpretation of scripture or you are wrong" argument and that is just a fallacy.

Oh... then to help with pondering... take any one of the 10 commandments... and ponder what the world would be like if everyone obey just that one command.

I am not sure you can clear you mind of biases... Which is why I think the Lord's way is better... He tells us to study, ponder, pray, and then make a decision. Then we go to the Lord and ask... "Is this the right decision." Or in other words tell the Lord "I am going to do this thing... If it is right open up the way.... if it is wrong block it, hedge it, stupor it, etc" When I do this I find out pretty quickly if the Lord is helping or hindering and I respond accordingly. My biases do not matter and this way the Lord can fully support my agency.

Sigh... Once again some one asks questions but does not listen to the answers... An inherent problem in any all Share-like system is what to do with those that do not want and will not (Not can not... will not) Work or Share. This group is a cancer that will destroy it every time In the scriptures we have three real examples of the church living the Law of Consecration... And we might benefit from example of how they got set up. First was the City of Enoch. Enoch was moving mountains and smiting armies... Clearly the Lord was with Enoch in a very powerful and clear manor. The second was the early Church with Peter. The story of Ananias and Sapphira show that the Lord was not allowing anyone to play the system. Then we have the third. The Nephites after Christ comes. This was after the Lord acted to the destruction of the wicked. In two out of three cases where it worked we have the Lord clearly smiting the faithless and fraudulent. We do not have direct indication of that in the third case but we do have clear indication that God is operating powerfully and directly. Last I checked God holds the right to judge and smite solely in his own hand. Which means he has to act to set it up that way. The only option we have when dealing with the faithless and fraudulent is to try to convert them. To help them repent, to help them gain faith. Something the church is spending a great deal of time, money, and energy doing. If you want to know what you can do? ...Strengthen your own faith and testimony, help other strengthen theirs... help people become converted.... Exactly the things the Church has been encouraging forever and ever. The rest is in the Lord's hands and always has been.

I find that to be a fundamentally flawed thought. In the scriptures Joseph was told by God that he would have not strength in Temporal matters (D&C 24:9) He was a hard worker but he just would not prevail in that area because God wanted him focused on other things. So he was supported by the membership of the church. Or in other words people like me and @NeuroTypical and @LineUponLine had to work hard temporally to support not only ourselves but also the prophet. If we were in the United Order that would be part and partial of our Calling, that is a Fundamental aspect of Consecration. Thus our temporal labors become a fundamental part of building up the Kingdom of God... If we can not gain spiritual growth and enlightenment from that... well we are going to fail. (And that is what happened historically)

For the Lord there is no such thing as a physical or temporal command or blessing... all things are spiritual. Sadly many of us only see the physical and not the spiritual sides of thing. In the Law of Consecration many will have to do things that are highly temporal to support themselves and others... Unless they can learn to see the spiritual in their efforts to meet the temporal needs they will fail to truly consecrate and miss the joy that is promised... Take the following example... a group of stone masons are hard at work... You ask few of them what they are doing.. and you get the following responses. "I'm cutting stone." "I'm earning money to support my family." "I'm helping build a temple of God." Each of them was doing exactly the same work yet they were clearly getting different spiritual experience. One day the Lord will command another "United Order" Until then all of those of us who are under covenant to live the Law of Consecration need to be working on changing our hearts, minds, thoughts (Or as President Nelson said in this last conference "Repent") on how we view and approach the labor God has given us to perform each and every day.

Only if you are being clueless about how they are responding... While I grant there are clueless people... clueless people should not make entire topics forbidden. 'Getting to know you conversations' are give and take events...If you ask someone "Do you have kids" They respond. Usually they will respond in great detail with what they are comfortable with, and then your response is based on their response. If you start hitting monosyllabic responses "Yes", "No" etc you are losing them. (either a sensitive area or lack of interest) and you should adjust accordingly.