Anddenex

1) This is where I like the language from Alma 13, and in particular verse 5. Our Savior was the only one of us who was perfect from the beginning, which is why he was the only one who could perform the Atonement. I agree with the principle of intelligence and exercising faith. The difference would be similar to the differences we see in our modern physical world. A person that cleaves unto light and truth and never denying will be worlds apart from an individual who cleaves unto darkness and error. I think the language of Christ being "like unto God (the Father)" is a very important principle, "And there stood one among them that was like unto God," in light of other intelligences present -- Abraham being one of them. 2) His love for God was perfect. That is what separates Him from us. If we all had the same love Christ has for his Father, we would have been able to accomplish the same feats, but our love for God was not perfect (Satan is evidence of this).

Ah, here we are dealing with two sides of a simple coin. In our scriptures, we can see both sides of the coin being taught. The side you are speaking of is as follows, "Therefore, what manner of men ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am." No one here, including myself, is arguing against this position. The other side of the coin is also in the same book of scripture, "Behold, my sons, I desire that ye should remember to keep the commandments of God; and I would that ye should declare unto the people these words. Behold, I have given unto you the names of our first parents who came out of the land of Jerusalem; and this I have done that when you remember your names ye may remember them; and when ye remember them ye may remember their works; and when ye remember their works ye may know how that it is said, and also written, that they were good. Therefore, my sons, I would that ye should do that which is good, that it may be said of you, and also written, even as it has been said and written of them." Here we have a father telling his kids to look to "fallible" people who loved God, and to follow the works they chose and to make the same decisions so that it could be said of you the same. All of these Book of Mormon prophets were individuals, disciples of Christ, whose choices and actions were worthy of emulation. President Monson shared this side of the coin also with the following, "My brethren, I reiterate that, as holders of the priesthood of God, it is our duty to live our lives in such a way that we may be examples of righteousness for others to follow." If we are living lives for others to follow, then we are living lives worthy of emulation. And another verse of scripture that is worthy of emulation is that of Captain Moroni, "Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of men." (emphasis mine) A fallible man who the Lord said if all men had been like unto him (a life worthy of emulation), the very powers of hell would have been shaken. There are two sides to this coin. Of course we want to be like Christ, and Christ has given us "fallible" men/women to be like unto so that we may be like unto Christ. If a person's life isn't worthy of emulation (and are a leader) it will be harder on faithful believers who have sacrificed to follow counsel from someone who sacrificed the counsel for their benefit. It just a factual aspect of life. And this is why the other side of the coin is most important, we remember who we are actually emulating and that is Christ, and if he is our foundation then we will continue moving forward. Because we recognize the otherside of the coin is simply to bring us to the same conclusion -- follow Christ.

Perception. When we think of leadership, at the general authority level, we are thinking of individuals who are "examples" of Christlike living. Lives we should be emulating. It's why I read the biographies of every president of the Church. Lives worth emulating. My previous comment, "Why did I make these decisions if it really doesn't matter? But it has to matter doesn't it," is the question that arises when a general authorities decisions isn't worth emulating. Saul lost the kingdom, and as a result his son's paid the price also, because he sacrificed rather than obeyed. Thank you for your response, I understand what you are seeking to say. I agree, obedience does matter. At least that is what I feel; however, with how my life has had ups and downs, many of those downs would have been avoided if I "sacrificed" rather than obeyed. So, it does cause one to consider, did it matter, but inwardly -- at the core -- as @mikbone shared -- it does matter. Just for jest... She actually has been in the labor longer than me. She isn't coming to labor after me. Her work isn't less, it would be similar to us both working in the field, the labor, and we were commanded not to use a specific tool. I obey, and she sacrifices and ends up using that tool (more financial freedom) and the tool we were supposed to use. In the end, because of the additional work done/accomplished (due to sacrificing obedience), she is lifted up as an example. This is just one of the simple ironies in the Church I don't yet fully comprehend. And I all the more realize the Lord's way are not may ways, and his thoughts are higher than my thoughts. Side note, one of the ironies I find humorous and frustrating is about Patriarchal Blessings and interpretation. We are informed only the individual who received the PB can interpret their PB -- no one else. YET! At BYU in the seminary program the Seminary teacher teaching (who has been studying the gospel as his vocation) will tell the students, "Even if you PB say you will work for the Church," it doesn't mean a seminary teacher. The irony doesn't pass me. Those who study gospel for a living, who know who can interpret a PB, give their own interpretation of the meaning of a person's PB. Just one of those ironies that puzzle me.

Thanks for your additional positive thought JAG. This hits a little harder for me due to choices my wife and I made while we were newly weds to obey. As a result, while going through school I was working a full-time swing and a part-time graveyard to keep my wife home as a primary nurturer and caregiver. This all while taking 12 -17 credits at BYU. This resulted in me also for a year working a full-time graveyard and full-time morning job due to difficulties that came upon us. This was all to obey and not to sacrifice. If I would have known this was simply "a choice" my life and mental state, anxiety, stress, etc... could have been so much better. This to me is more a kick in the jewels and then a knee to the face. Why did I make these decisions if it really doesn't matter? But it has to matter doesn't it. In saying that, I agree with your last paragraph. A hard decision will be when to have kids for our young members.

Yep, this is him. I would have loved to have seen him as a general authority. One who obeyed rather than sacrificed.

I'm late to the conversation; however, this is another one of those items that I find difficult. I brought up a similar conversation regarding keeping the Sabbath day holy and recent general authorities who played professional sports. The Church taught in seminary about the BYU player who turned down a professional career in football because he was taught by his parents to keep the Sabbath day holy. As it turns out, he should have played professional sports. This is one of those items in our day where the scripture seems to be loud and clear, "It is better to obey, than to sacrifice." Yet, it seems as though in some lives they are still lifted up even though they sacrificed rather than obeyed. This is one of the conundrums I don't understand. "Let God prevail..." means to let God prevail. It means to obey rather than to sacrifice. I can empathize with any mother who obeyed (put off a career) rather than sacrifice (kept career) and did not experience the same financial stability. So, I have a hard time reading a comment that talks about letting God prevail when their choices clearly showed they did not let God prevail, they merely kept doing what they wanted to do. I can think of many homes right now who did obey, who did sacrifice, and how I have watched them struggle financially. Now, it seems like their struggles were vain. They should have sacrificed, rather than obeyed (and at least obeyed in all other aspects) so they could enjoy more financial freedom. This is the type of post that causes any person who has been obeying rather than sacrificing to feel/think, "Have I had everything wrong?" Why keep the commandment if the commandment is subjective? If I can merely converse with God to do what I want, why have the commandment/counsel in the first place? I remember reading articles talking about the seductiveness of two incomes, and how two incomes will only make it harder for a woman to stay at home without entering the workforce if her husband doesn't have a high paying job. This sister increased that likelyhood. Making it harder for others to follow the counsel, and now she is in a leading position counseling mothers to be mothers, while she put a career ahead of being a mother. These are tough situations. These are times where the scriptures specifying "Do not judge" come into play also. It seems as though the idea from President Nelson regarding having the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost is more real than ever.

If you haven't seen Cabrini, I recommend going to see it! It is a great movie! https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14351082/ My wife and I loved it. If there is anything praiseworthy, lovely, or of good report we seek after these things. This movie is definitely praiseworthy and of good report.

I really like the scripture that specifies, "All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence." The "gap", so to speak, is the mind and heart. The reward, the significance is the glory added upon. In that sense, yes, the gap is very significant. An individual needs to be quickened by the Spirit in order to see God. Does a person need to be "quickened" to see an angel (where glory has not yet been received)? My personal opinion, the gap between Terrestrial and Celestial isn't that wide, but the gap between Terrestrial and Telestial or Celestial and Telestial is much wider. They rejected both the Son and the Father, and thus live without the Son and the Father.

I'm would think it is the same process that Abraham followed on an individual level, except with the city it was a collective decision accomplished by individual choices by each member of the society (Abraham 1:2). I also think it helps to have a leader to who lived as long as Enoch. If we were to take the 10 commandments, and every one in a society/village decided to follow those ten commandments (with full purpose of heart and with real intent) imagine in three generations how strong that society would be/become. There would be no: Adultery Fornication (including rape) Stealing Lying Dishonoring parents (one of the great doorways of our society toward evil) Perversions of Sex/Gender Murder War Welfare Occupation This is a society that can only be accomplished through a belief in Jesus Christ, and we would start seeing: Stronger families Honesty in all dealings Service Industry Forgiveness Repentance

I really like this thought, and I'm reminded of mine own experience with this type of change myself. My parents taught me who I was as a son of God, and made it very clear I was a child (son) of God. Despite the very clear teaching it wasn't until my mission when I received personal witness/revelation that I was a "son of God." It to this day, is the most important revelation I have received outside of receiving witness of who Christ is and what he accomplished. Enos's father was a prophet. He didn't neglect teaching his children about who Christ was, the law of Moses, and many other things, and despite all these teachings Enos still required his own personal revelation/witness. This also reminds me of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Abraham received covenant, taught his son, and Isaac sought after the same blessing to receive it for himself. Jacob did also, they both didn't rely on the witness from their father, but they let the teachings of their father to have full sway in their hearts to seek after the blessing themselves.

Yep, this is a pretty significant purchase by the Church.

When I think of this scripture a few things come to my mind. The first is when Christ said to Peter, paraphrased, "Before the cock crows thrice you will deny me thrice." The hour or time for this to come wasn't known but it did come quickly. In the moment, Peter could have easily seen what was happening, but it wasn't until the third crow that the prophesy did prick him. This highlights that members of the Church who are not read (prepared for) the signs of Christ coming will come as a thief in the night. Also, Peter did not believe this would be the case, so when the cock was crowing his mental state dismissed the first and the second. For some, they will dismiss the signs because they do not believe these are the signs. The second is that we are aware of a general assembly that will happen. We understand Adam will preside (if I'm remembering correctly) and Christ will come to his people at this assembly. These people will not be surprised as to the day and hour the Lord will come again. This brings back to my remembrance the words of Nephi when they were in a time of need and the Lord said, "Tomorrow I come into the world." (paraphrased) If we believe in the signs, if we have studied the signs, we will be watching and we will be prepared. The Spirit, like with Nephi, will bare witness of the Lord's return to those who are listening. To those who are not, it will be similar to the Nephites at Christ's first coming to them. The Spirit spoke (or the Father here) and they comprehended it not. Or like Amulek, who said something to this nature the Lord did call but I did not listen.

This is the type of question, at least to me, that doesn't change the fact that God said no, and then said yes ( @laronius beat me to it). This happened also in the Old Testament when the children of Israel asked for a King. The prophet and God said no, but after time God finally said give them what they want with further light and knowledge as to what would happen, and it happened. The original version still answers the questions just fine.

The glory of God is "Light and Truth". I take this verse to be both figurative and literal. Our bodies are wrapped in glory (light), even such that it has the ability to kill a mortal body unless that body is quickened -- light increased.

I think this is a great question. I think these type of questions allow us to ponder truth a little more as we seek further light and knowledge. I would take a different approach and simply say focus on these aspects within their sphere of truth. I really like this teaching in the Doctrine and Covenants where it teaches us the following, "All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence." (emphasis mine) Let's review this independent truth, "the only true Church." This is a very important truth that shouldn't be replaced by the "most correct," which is pointing toward the Book of Mormon in reference to other scripture (Holy Bible). Within its independent sphere of truth it should never be compromised to "most correct." There is no other way back to the Father, except through Christ and his Church. If we were to solely focus on "most correct", then it could lead some to remove themselves from the Church because it may be the most correct but there are still other paths that are correct. This would result with some members making a choice to follow a forbidden path, letting go of the iron rod. As truth is a sphere, independent, spheres of truth are also interwoven with each other. Remember, we believe the "restored" Church of Jesus Christ, and as President Nelson has made clear that restoration is still very much occurring. This is also taught in our Article of Faith #9. We believe that God will continue to reveal truth to his Church. This revelation may result from another church's teachings. This is why I find Mason theory from anti-Church individuals to be humorous. If the Lord preserved a "truth" for his restoration through another faith or culture, then the Lord has every right to bring that truth back into his Church -- without question. All truth is Christ's -- for he is the way, the truth, and the light. As we properly focus on each of these two truths, "most correct," and the "only true Church" we will profitably grow quicker. If we focus on one more than the other we will lose that independent truth and eventually look beyond the mark. It needs to be announced unapologetically and unequivocally that this is the only true Church. This is the straight and narrow path. There is no other way to the Father, and this is why we have work for the dead (as you know). We also need to keep aware that the Book of Mormon is the "most correct," because this allows the right and privilege of the apostles and prophets to make updates, corrections, or clarifications to scripture.