Anddenex

Members
  • Posts

    6111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by Anddenex

  1. In some ways, I wish this were as easy as Spencer W. Kimball's quote, "Do it." We are informed in scripture to take the "yoke" of Christ upon us. We have wonderful poems, analogies, that say when you see only one set of footsteps it is because the Lord was carrying you at that time. We come up with other analogies to comfort, or try to comfort, our hurting souls. In practice for us to fully practice this we must be "fair dinkum" -- fully committed. This correlates with with what Omni said, "offer your whole souls as an offering unto him." This is why it is also hard, because the majority of us, in practice, do not fully commit and give our whole selves unto the Lord. We seek to maintain - self. To cast fully our burden on him, means we lose "self." When we look over scripture we can see highlights of how this looks in practice (even in not in perfection): 2 Nephi 4 Alma the Younger who remembered the words of his father about a Savior Stephen upon being stoned who saw the heaven's open Nephi upon being tied by his brothers allowed his suffering to be caught up in Christ Alma and the Nephites when seized upon by the Lamanites And many others I'm writing this, full well, knowing I'm not yet 'fair dinkum' -- at one point I felt like I was fully committed -- until I had some experiences in life that shifted many thoughts of mine. The shift is all do to the word "self". If we take Lehi's counsel, invitation, to Laman and Lemuel to be righteous like unto the river they past flowing continually into the sea of righteousness. As we look further into the analogy, when the river flows into the sea are we able to tell the difference between the water in the sea and the water coming from the river? No. But if we seek to maintain "self" then we ultimately seek to maintain our ways, our truth, and our life.
  2. Yep, a specific site that wants members to "think" are just this type of individuals. At least the ones who are in charge of the site. They are a prime example of this meme.
  3. Same. It makes absolutely no sense to restrict where a person can work if they come into the US. This is a subtle attack against religion -- to be frank by the great and abominable church.
  4. @scottyg - Here is another example of the attack against religion that is happening. My daughter works at the MTC. She has befriended a wonderful Korean girl who is from Korea. She can no longer work at the MTC because of a new rule that has been implemented this fall semester. If you are on a Visa they prohibit you from working for a religious organization. There is no logical or good reason for this restriction. If a person comes to America on a Visa they should be able to work anywhere that offers a job. The devil works by small and simple means. We will see how this unfolds also.
  5. Yep, and something I never saw (at least from this brother) has already removed me from his life. He initiated the setting on Facebook where I can't see him anymore nor any post even if we post on the same message. He even told our mother that it was either him or me, and he now has blacklisted her because she chooses both (the shame of her to love both sons). It's sad (oh well, his choice) but this is exactly what we have been warned about. The devil will rage in the hearts of men in the last days, and he will pit them against their brother/sister. This is because I don't adhere to the ideologies of mammon with regards to the LGBTQ.
  6. Yep, this is a perfect example, and yes, if we look at the Bible and the Book of Mormon we know before Christ came the first time those that believed were targeted by those that did not. What will be even more concerning is the members of the Church who are in support and do support such actions. We will see this also, and already are seeing this to a point.
  7. This is one thing I have concerns about. We are already seeing this form of intimidation in many avenues.
  8. Indeed the Father and Son rule, and they also minister. For we know our Savior "ministered" to the people in the Spirit World. In the context I was providing, minister is an appropriate word here.
  9. Yep, agreed...thus I'm interested to see if a similar thing will happen in the US, and how quickly it will go to the supreme courts. It should never be even a charge in the first place, but we will see.
  10. I'm unsure how this will play out in the US, but with more Socialists and Leftist ideologies and philosophies I wouldn't be surprised that we will start seeing this soon in the US either.
  11. In light of the breakdown between kingdoms which may have some truth; unless of course, my understanding of what I have been taught and understood is wrong. Celestial - ministered unto my the Father and Son (Jesus Christ) Terrestrial - ministered unto by the Son (Jesus Christ) Telestial - ministered unto by the angels (Father and Son are removed) O.D. - No glory So to a degree, the division could easily be what you have suggested. I'm also reminded of the individual in the NT who was giving blessings (if I'm remembering correctly) and the apostles wanted to stop him, but the Lord stopped the apostles with some counsel about the individual doing "good."
  12. I wasn't worried, nor did it enter into my heart. I thought the question, overall, was a good question. Mercy is one character trait we all could better understand and apply.
  13. In order for something to be merciful, it must reflect accurate what mercy is. As was already brought up, we can ask a similar question with regards to love in relation to the potential kingdoms. Which do you think is the most loving arrangement? A) All are saved because God's love is complete and unconditional -- only Celestial B) All are saved who choose to be saved - Celestial and hell C) All are saved, except sons of perdition -- Celestial, Terrerstrial, Telestial, and Hell From the provided list, I would choose B because it reflects more what mercy actually is. This is why I also appreciate the scripture lesson regarding "spheres of truth." Mercy is within a sphere of truth, and as long as it remains within it's sphere it is merciful. The moment it extends outside of it, it will either rob justice or no longer be merciful. This is where we see people who are "enablers" which extends beyond the bounds of mercy and begins to rob justice.
  14. I agree. We shouldn't develop "illusions" of what we think the outcome may or may not look like. We already know the Great and Abominable Church will fight against Zion, even through legal suits, or what would look like a "legal" suit. Let's be frank, I think we already have people trying to sue the Church for tithing they paid who are no longer members? No matter how ridiculous that sounds, it doesn't change what the natural man is capable of. I agree percentage wise. The percentage of active members I think will remain constant sadly. I am more inclined to believe though the growth will more come outside of the US rather than within. We are already entering into a realm where calling repentance to known sin is bigotry -- for example. I'm also looking to prophecies before Christ comes about the nature of Zion. It will be enough people to thwart an army, but does that mean it's a lot of people or simply the faith of Elisha (they really should have had really different names -- always have to look them up ) who could call on the angels, or Moses who could command elements. Much like the prophets in Jerusalem. This is true.
  15. This will be one of the reasons why the Church will grow. In an unstable world with consistently shifting Telestial values, it will be one place where the core values will remain constant and will not change. Yes, I'm hoping to see that grow also. And that is one of my concerns and has been for a while now. What you describe in my mind is part of the great and abominable church and the whore of all the earth. The idea you are presenting with banks is no different than Facebook, what was once Twitter, and Google (YouTube). It covers the same type of moral relativism. If you can't bank there how do you then create a business? The adversary works in small and simple ways.
  16. Thank you. It definitely should be pointed out, but then again I'm not surprised especially with regards to how the riots were treated also.
  17. Anyone protestor/insurrectionist shot?
  18. In my studies, both teachings are correct. At least for me, I separate the conditions of the world from the righteousness of the Saints. The conditions of the world do not need to meet any standard for the Lord to come the second time. God's kingdom/Church, on the other hand, will need to have a people ready to receive him. Yes. Not everyone in the Millennium will be members of God's kingdom/Church. I believe there will be Atheists who may not believe in God, but recognized the safety that will be among the Saints before Christ comes. They will honor the laws/rules of this body of people. There will be good Christians, Muslims, Hindu's, and many other people who live "good enough" lives to be spared. As God doesn't force anyone to accept or believe his strait and narrow path, this means they will die according to their beliefs but will have lived a Terrestrial law, thus receiving a terrestrial body/glory. I think this is the type of question that creates a conundrum of sorts. Sorta like when growing up my Christian friend would ask me, "If God is all powerful could he make a rock that he can't destroy"? Does "evil" stop existing because God is perfect? Yes and no, I suppose. If God always chooses "good" and never would choose evil, then ultimately "evil" doesn't exist -- and yet evil does exist -- it is simply no longer present. In the Millennium, I am thinking there is to some degree "the natural man" because not everyone will "choose" the strait and narrow path. If the Millennium were the "Celestial" law and kingdom, then the natural man would not exist (paragraph above). Yes, as to same sex attraction -- in time. The mortal body will be perfect, thus any deviation from that (any ideology of the world) will be resolved. At the same time, it may not be because same sex attraction is a choice (I understand the world doesn't like this thought -- it tells them to behave and control their thoughts), and any choice could remain. The difference in this place no one will be raising a "rainbow" flag -- a telestial ideology.
  19. This sums it up nicely. We can see this concept with the popular "ideologies" of our day.
  20. I'm unfamiliar with this teaching, and I find it very interesting. I'm in agreement though with @Just_A_Guy in that a translated being isn't going to die. John the Beloved is to have been plunged into boiling oil and no harm came to him. If no harm came to a translated being from boiling oil I have a hard time believing then any human could destroy their translated flesh -- fulfilling the prophecy that these two died and then were resurrected. We learn from the Book of Mormon that a translated being will feel no pain and will not die (as to our temporal death experience). In order for this to be true concerning Moses and Elijah or Enoch and Elijah, then the promised blessing of becoming a translated being would have to be removed. I mean, it could be possible that -- voluntarily -- either of these individuals would give up such immortality to fulfill another purpose, but I would highly doubt it.
  21. @clbent04 I'm late to the answers, but here are my thoughts. Why did the universe demand Jesus Christ have to sacrifice and die on our behalf to save us from sin? Do you suppose it’s a universal law that we as imperfect beings can never have eternal life without a Savior interceding on our behalf? Yes, this is a higher law -- according to the Father's knowledge -- that allows our Father in heaven to remain perfectly just and merciful. Yes, if we choose to sin, a way must be prepared. We learn that clearly in our temple ceremonies, and the Book of Mormon highlights this pretty well. The relation between our agency and our Savior. Did a law in the universe crack when Adam and Eve committed the first sin where all hope was lost without a Savior? I’m trying to conceptualize why the universe demands sacrifice for us to reach certain levels of progression and if it's necessary for our existence. Have you had the chance to read or listen to Boyd K. Packer's analogy/parable "The Mediator"? If not, I would recommend listening to it, as it breaks down a more complex doctrine into smaller bits that are more easily understood. If not, this link -- The Mediator -- will take you to it. In relation to that, this is a great seminary video (very 80's) that helps break down agency. How we explain a concept is important. Nothing "cracked". If someone breaks a law, even a simple law, the law acts upon that individual. When Adam and Eve committed "sin" the law now "acts" -- not cracks -- upon them. Sacrifice is required because we are unable to recompense the law on our own. If I steal I can return what I stole. If I break a neighbors window I can repair that window. If I "sin" how would I recompense and make myself clean? How do you make something unclean, clean? Thus, reiterating why Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. He is the only way to the Father. If we are eternal and have always existed and always will exist, and if the atonement never happened, how do you suppose we would exist after this life? This question is already answered in scripture. We would be like the devil and his angels who rebelled against God. Does God’s plan work without sacrifice? An interesting question. The Lord was perfect, he chose to be perfect. Was there any sacrifice for him? Sacrifice is part of God's plan, because we choose to sin. If we loved God like our Savior loved God no sacrifice would have been required. In that light, our Savior is the center of the gospel. Because we do not love God (look at today how many sons and daughters of God know more than God and his servants the prophets) like our Savior does, and we choose to sin, thus a sacrifice was necessary. The easiest modern day "love of the world" rather than "love of God" is how clear God has said he made "male" and "female." Yet, despite the plainness even the "elect" fight to say otherwise. If sacrifice and suffering are meant to continue in the next life? We hardly grow in this life without suffering, so why would that formula change in the next life? If we are considering "sacrifice" like our Savior, no, at least for us. Suffering, what do you mean by suffering? We have perfected bodies, so there is no suffering with mortal ailments. We are immortal. Animals are immortal. Once immortal (spirit and body joined) there is no more death. So the suffering of death is no more, swallowed up in Christ. If we are exalted, this highlights a different perspective in life. If we are not "exalted" then we know to some degree their is a form of suffering -- a type of hell. In scripture we are told that even our Savior learned obedience via the things he suffered. What is possible for us to suffer in the next life though? Is God the Father suffering? He sorrows for the sins and decisions of his offspring, his heirs. He even cries due to their decisions that he knows do not bring eternal and mortal happiness/joy. And along those lines, why does human life need to be sustained by less intelligent animals such as chickens, cows, and pigs...? Eternal concept here to our eternal existence needing to be sustained at the expense of less intelligent life forms having to die for us? It doesn't. The word "immortality" -- no death -- should be sufficient to answer the next question.