Timpman

Make up and make woopy.

I wish you well, szorgalmasan.

Dear "changed", we might have a case of Elder McConkie not teaching official doctrine. We have a recent statement from the Church saying "For Latter-day Saints, being a Christian means being a disciple of Jesus Christ, loving and worshiping Him above all." We have the Book of Mormon stating "And now behold, I say unto you that the right way is to believe in Christ, and deny him not; and Christ is the Holy One of Israel; wherefore ye must bow down before him, and worship him with all your might, mind, and strength, and your whole soul; and if ye do this ye shall in nowise be cast out. (2 Nephi 25:29)" And the very official statement from The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles - "We testify that He will someday return to earth. 'And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together' (Isaiah 40:5). He will rule as King of Kings and reign as Lord of Lords, and every knee shall bend and every tongue shall speak in worship before Him." And then we have Elder McConkie saying "We do not worship the Son, and we do not worship the Holy Ghost. I know perfectly well what the scriptures say about worshipping Christ and Jehovah, but they are speaking in an entirely different sense--the sense of standing in awe and being reverentially grateful to him who has redeemed us. Worship in the true and saving sense is reserved for God the first, the Creator." So what's the deal? I think this is significant!

Consider the Title Page of the BoM: I think that if someone prayerfully and sincerely reads it as they would a Harry Potter book (devouring it in one or two days), then there would be onomonopias flying and a testimony would be rekindled.

I understand that we are certainly encouraged to pray for a testimony and for direction, but you seem to take it to another level. What I mean is that you seem to think we should be suspicious of what the Brethren say, as if they are politicians. That we should have no faith in their words until the Spirit sends a witness. I think that's the wrong approach.

I said one has to accept it in order to sustain the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. How could someone sustain the First Presidency and reject their proclamations at the same time? You don't get to reject doctrines or purposely and consistently disobey church rules AND continue in the faith. One can certainly use their agency to kick himself out of the Church. Do you have a reference for your statement "The prophets themselves say we should pray to find out if what they're saying is true"? I maintain that we need a conviction that what they say IS true.

Well, now I'm confused.

On the other hand, if the guy is a player, get far away from him!

If you really want to marry this guy, then GET MARRIED! Don't wait to be temple worthy because you might not get there (see the other thread about the girl who lied to go to the temple). Once a couple has already messed around, I don't see the point in trying to wait for the temple. A temple sealing after a civil wedding is just as valid.

He hits you. Get the heck out. There are no children, right? Just leave.

When an OFFICIAL declaration is made, we pretty much have to accept it in order to sustain the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. It is not a matter of asking God IF it is right, it is a matter of asking for a conviction that is IS right.

Hala, I bet the way you dress it totally fine!

Mormon Doctrine is a GREAT book! I want to know what is says about this.

Enough comments about this topic not being worth discussing! Every Priesthood lesson manual I've seen has a chapter or two about the Second Coming and the Millennium. Prophets seem to enjoy speculating about general timeframes, so it's okay to discuss that as well. I really hope this is true! I want to go to the New Jerusalem before the real wrath happens. Is there any support for this theory?

I think your bishop will be kind to you. If he recommends the Church's 12 step program, DO IT.

Challenge to the read the Book of Mormon in a week. Then BAM!@#! her testimony will be back.

I think you need to disclose a serious transgression to her. If she thinks she's superior to the Lord and won't forgive you, then you will know she's not a potential spouse. The Lord forgets our sins, but we do not forget our sins. It's nearly impossible. We need to remember our mistakes so we don't repeat them. I told my finance that I wasn't a virgin and she just shrugged. She knew me well and knew that I had repented.

And I think this DOES matter. Despite what I wrote above, anyone here could be of of the noble and great ones. And it's good to ponder that.

It doesn't seem that anyone who accepted Christ in the pre-mortal world would qualify. Not even all who were valiant enough to be born in the House of Israel qualify here. It's referring to "rulers in the Church of God".

My wife.

I support the boycott!

Darn it, I forget to write something that wanted to include: 4. When a significant change is to be made in society, the onus is on those seeking the change to make a case for it. Same-sex marriage proponents have not made a sufficient case for making the rest of society acknowledge such unions. Opponents of same-sex marriage do not have to justify the status quo until a better case is made.

I'll post a summary of my position and then go live a life: 1. Same-sex marriage is NOT a right, just as healthcare and broadband internet are not rights. No protections are being withheld by opposing same-sex marriage. Saying otherwise is twisting the Constitution into something it is not. 2. Arguments based on religious morals should CONTINUE to be admissible when considering laws of the land. 3. I would have followed Adam, Noah, Moses, John the Baptist, Peter, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, Spencer W. Kimball and I will follow President Monson and any future prophets without fear of being lead astray. That is not a sign of, nor will it cause, lower intellect. If a referendum similar to Prop 8 comes up in Utah or the whole country and we are counseled to support it, I surely will.

In a super majority of states, it would be giving them something they haven't had. People had it for a short time in California before Prop 8 came along due to some wicked judges legislating from the bench. But I really should have said that in MOST states, same-sex marriage is not an option..

I am talking about following the prophet like the members in California did (a family in my ward moved here to Utah from California after their kids were ridiculed and abused in school because their ward organized a door-to-door campaign in favor of Proposition 8). In that case, we joined the voices of many other people. I don't want to force my religion - I want to voice my opinion even if it's based on religious morals and hope that the majority of people agree.It is very true that the majority should not seek to take rights away from others, and no rights were violated by passing Prop 8! People should be able to have anyone visit them in the hospital and/or have power of attorney. People can be with anyone they choose. But they should not force us to condone their relationships. Those who want to marry another of the same sex want what they have not had previously, therefore we are not taking anything away. We are also not withholding protections as long as stupid hospital rules and tax laws are fixed.