jlf9999

Theosis is the Greek term but actually the LDS theological belief is that Eternal Life or exaltation, a similar but unrelated term, is to have one's spouse sealed to them forever and as a married couple be able to bring forth new spirit life. The couple continue the parenting role bringing up their spirit children in perfection. Eventually these spirit off spring grow to a point where they have to learn about sin, pain, suffering and be allowed to make decisions on their own which can't be done in the perfection of a heavenly home. They require a separate sphere or Earth. In other words, those who achieve this state of godhood (notice the small g), will follow the pattern set by God the Father. Another misconception about LDS theology which has led to confusion is the difference between salvation and exaltation. The first, salvation, is what Christ provided for all. It is resurrection and the taking up of a perfected body. Exaltation is different. It requires people to do things. It is not a free gift such as is salvation. That is what temples are for. They provide for the continuing education of members in good standing and provide a holy place where the saving ordinances can be performed by people who have the authority to perform them. These ordinannces are available for both livng and the dead who never had the opportunity to hear and accept the gospel while living. That is why we do genealogy, to find our dead family members and perform this work on thier behalf. Eventually, every person who has ever lived will have that opportunity. Much of it will occur during Christ's thousand year reign on earth especailly for those for whom there is no Earthly record.

Jesus Christ has provided for every person to hear the gospel and make the decision for themselves even after death. It is the same on Earth. Every person is entitled to discover for themselves whether what we teach is correct or not. No one is required to just accept what someone else tells them. Temples provide the place where the saving ordinances can be performed vicariously. These are Earthly in nature and can't be done in Heaven. The departed can either accept them or not. Nothing is forced on them. Forcing is not God's way.

I appreciate your comments but I am afraid there is more to the story than you may have been taught. I am pressed for time right now but just for the fun of it, go visit this site and search for the subect. Mormon.org or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or LDS FAIR Apologetics Homepage if you want to challenge yourself a bit. You are not the first person to have been told just part of the story.

If the search term was Mormons or Mormonism makes little difference or whether the number is 419 or 1088. That is beside the point. It is the number of authoritative titles by recognized LDS scholars (writers) versus the number of non-LDS writers writing about the same topic. When I ask about how the subject is treated I mean do the non-LDS writers present a respectful, honest product or is their work just another a trash-talking hit piece? A non-LDS scholar can present a respectful well-thought out and researched view of our theology, for example, without gratuitous maligning. I suggest Jan Shipps is an example of how that is done. It seems to me that, in the ND case, the paucity of recognized LDS writers writing about Mormons versus the much larger number of Non-LDS writers writing about the same topic reflects a bias.

Thanks for the response. Just to clarify, the topic I was discussing is Mormon writers, writing about Mormons. I appreciate your input. Thanks again.

Yes. But it is still up to the individual to abide by Jame's admonition. James 1:5. I can only assume that means in all things religious but feel OK in adding an implied "everything" to it too. If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. I don't read anything in that about it being OK to just take another man's word for it.

Clarity. In some circles there is more to this than is immediately evident.

http://www.bkstr.com/CategoryDisplay/10001-9604-10900-1?demoKey=d. As of this post it is down. 1900 mst.

Yes. I appointed myself. Thank you. You might want to consider easing up a bit. Learn to see tongue-in-cheek stuff when you come across it.

My friend, I am going to take a pass on this one for now. Honestly I have heard the statement repeated for years but I can't find it without some effort. It is likely in some that stuff from the 1970's that I have not gone through in a while. I believe Jude quoted from it too but yet it (the book of Enoch) was excluded - I suggest for political reasons i.e. man made reasons, not God's.

My grandmother, my former supervisor and several of my previous co-workers. Half the congregations in the Southern Baptist Convention. Most of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

By that do you mean the priesthood holder is the master of his own destiny?

Sorry folks. I guess I lost my previous post that went into detail. My fault. Here it is again: I went to the Notre Dame university bookstore website and entered the search term Mormon. I got 419 results. Most could only be described as anti-Mormon. They were the typical anti-Mormon junk we see a lot of. I did a quick search of the books looking for the writers and I found four who were recognized LDS writers but none were recent. B.H. Roberts was represented in two of them. One or two other commenters say they found more but not many - half a dozen maybe. I contend the number of titles sold by the bookstore, not merely found in the library, indicate the interest level and importance of the subject to the university. The way the writers of these books treat the subject tells us how the administration views the subject. That is, they will devote shelf space to works they believe are important, honest, fair, accurate and comport to their thinking on the matter. The paucity of titles by LDS scholars tells us they do not respect what LDS writers have to say about Mormons, a subject LDS writers in all likelihood know more about that non-LDS writers. That would be different if the titles on hand were scholarly, peer reviewed and honest. They are not. They are primarily the garden variety anti-Mormon hit pieces by the same people we see over and over again trashing the church. One commenter suggests the university library is an important place to search too. I suggest it is not. Libraries are about history, are operated differently and have different goals and objectives. Librarians take pride in providing a more complete set of titles. University administrators have a particular agenda. Another commenter said the BYU bookstore had but one title on Catholicism and by my standard was biased against Catholics. I suggest the single title means BYU is essentially not interested in Catholicism. If BYU administrators had a Catholic agenda (pro or con) the bookstore would have more titles available. Given they offer the one, there can be only one conclusion. Now, for those folks who think I have an anti-Catholic agenda, let me say that is not the case. I used ND because of its reputation as a world class Christian institution and had the only bookstore I could search. Some commenters say I must conduct a wider search to make my point. They think my data is invalid because of the limited breadth and depth. If I was doing a college paper they would be correct. I am not. My intent is just to spark a conversation. I make the point that LDS writers are given short shrift , that I believe it is because of their religious beliefs and that ND is a classic case of one school where that occurs. I believe bias is worse at other more conservative Christian universities. I think if I could do a similar search of their bookstores I would find even more egregious results. Another commenter suggests I have a persecution complex. I thank her for her studied comment but remind her that even paranoid people have enemies. (A little humor there)

My premise was based on searching the search term Mormon.

I understand but which version is accurate? Your side says to trust 2000 year old traditions. You demand adherents trust man. Our take is to seriously ask God for His affirmation of what is right. All you have to do is be teachable, sincere and have faith He will answer. It is the opposite of trusting man to do the right thing.

Suzie, don't get bogged down in the he-said she-said stuff. Either you agree or don't for your own reasons.

I beg to differ. I made my point. Go back and re-read my posting about why. If you disagree OK. I can live with your disappointment.

The point is to look at college bookstores not libraries. History is different from current thinking which bookstores represent. Libraries are collections of what people donate or what thinking was in the past. Libraries represent a different time and different thinking. Librarians have a different mindset. A college administration's mindset is better represented in the bookstore. The number of titles tells us the importance of the subject matter. The writers of these titles tell us who the administration likes. The manner in which the titles present the subject tells us what the administrators believe is important and accurate. I used Notre Dame university as my example. I found 419 titles when I searched for Mormon. It makes sense that if you want to know about Mormons you would certainly ask a few. Well, few is the operative word in this case - very few. My search found four LDS writers and none were recent. A couple of other commenters say there are more but not many. The point is not whether it 4 or 12, it is the number of LDS versus non-LDS authors. Apparently, ND thinks 400 non-LDS writers know more about us than we do. That could be accurate depending on how the subject is treated. If these were all peer reviewed scholarly works that would be one thing. However, the titles on the ND bookstore site are not all peer reviewed scholarly works. They are, principly, your typical garden variety anti-Mormon propaganda hit pieces. The fact that there are 400 or so of them indicates the importance the university places on the subject. The book content is evidence of the administrations thinking. If the administration thinks the content is wrong, ill advised or unfair do you suppose they would allocate so much shelf space to them? If they thought LDS writers had important things to contribute to the subject would they not have more scholarly LDS titles? I have not made an exhaustive effort to research important universities to make my point. I think I did that well enough for conversations sake here. However, for some, it seems that nothing short of such an exhaustive project would be sufficient. That is not going to happen. I made an observation, I provided a well respected university as my example and I made my point. Maybe others disagree. I can live with that.

Getting back on the church moving in a new direction theme, I suppose that is correct. From strictly my perception and what I have read from knowledgeable LDS figures, Church practice (as opposed to doctrine) is a living thing. They are not the same critter. As we grow world wide we have to give up on many of the things that kept us together when we were small and struggling to maintain cohesion. The persecutions and the aftermath helped keep us together to be sure. However that doesn't work well for members outside our original membership and the follow-on generations. It is time to move on. We seek to embrace others not stay in a protected shell so to speak. We even have a name for those first few generations after the move west. They are known as siege Mormons. The wariness of outsiders is diminishing as older generations die. Maybe it is time to loose some of the reminders of those times too. Just a few.

I can tell you what my PB says regarding that. I was told my children were assigned to me but it said I should look for a suitable wife. In the case of the OP, that seems to explain why the boy does not go with the mother. Don't ask me where that can be confirmed elsewhere but I am given to understand it that way. I don't know if that is the same with everyone. But when you take in to account the doctrine that the wife holds the priesthood through her husband, that would tend to make a little more sense. The family is a patriarchal order not a matriarchal one. I won't get into the reasoning because women would likely take some exception to it. But it has something to do with men needing to be developed more and therefore they have to take on more accountability and that female's need to be more humble... OK, I added that last one.

Even taking your "niceness" approach into account, you are correct at least according to my understanding of the remark. I understand President Hinckley made the it too. However the intent is different I think. When some EV's make it, I think it is intended to be more tongue-in-cheek among the wittier types and more wide-eyed and fanatical among the nastier one's. Maybe the way to differentiate which type is talking is that one displays the boney finger of indignation and the other a silly grin.

I am thinking about re-thinking every thing I have thought about you. Thenk yew!

I recognized that but was too dumb to know how to edit the title - so the tag line. Not very effective so far though was it?

Well sir, that isn't LDS teaching. There is a very definite hell and it is eternal and earthly affiliation or accident of birth has nothing to do with it. People earn a spot. They don't get an invitation without knowing full well what the consequences of their choices are and yet they make the choice anyway. There is no literal fire and brimstone but confinement there has the same effect. It is not God choosing certain people for a ticket in advance of their birth as some speculate.

Not to get too far into the weeds but the last line of my post is "Your place of employment is not important."