Anddenex

I would agree, and felt this is what you were meaning, but didn't want to assume. I agree we definitely are better off by following good counsel, be that from God, or His servants.

If I understood you correctly happy boy, you feel that if you feel a loss in the spirit then there is a commandment by which you might be breaking, or are breaking, and thus make a change in your course, or actions. If you don't feel a loss in the spirit, then it is probably counsel, although good counsel, not necessarily salvation threatening. This reminds me of the need for us to not become "past feeling", or we may not recognize that loss in the spirit. Thanks.

Living by every word which proceedeth from the mouth of God, whether by His voice (personal revelation), or by the mouth of His servants, it is the same. I would definitely see truth in your reasoning via by-passing servants, and it would definitely be costly and dangerous, if one is following their own will. My father shared with me a story in Germany about an individual, a member, who had the spirit of prophecy, and prophesied many things which came to pass in their area. One day this individual received a revelation to begin a new church. Unfortunately, the hubris gained through correct prophecies allowed a costly and dangerous error, and unfortunately some members decided to follow. I am not sure if this fits your thoughts, but I believe I have an idea of what you were meaning. Thanks.

Although I agree with the initial premise, I am not following the play on semantics.

I am reminded with your thoughts regarding the Lord's words to Adam and Eve regarding partaking of the fruit, by which he commanded them not to partake, and then providing the words, "nevertheless thou mayest choose for thyself." Without moral agency we would not be able to grow, and no righteousness could be brought to pass. Thanks.

I once read from President Hinckley that any time he received counsel from the Lord he took the counsel as a commandment from the Lord. I have read others say that a commandment is only a commandment if it is in scripture, or if it is officially added as a declaration within our cannon. I have read from others, family home evening is a commandment, R-rated movies is a commandment yet these have not been mentioned within scripture, nor have they been added as a official declaration, yet we can read from President Benson, spoken as a prophet, not to watch R-rated movies. I have three questions: 1. What is a commandment? 2. Is there a point when a counsel no longer is counsel, and becomes a commandment? 3. Does our definition of a commandment define our love for God (as with President Hinckley, a counsel from the Lord is seen as a commandment)? Thank you in advance. Please flame responsibly.

5 stars for this decision.

I am inline with Dravin, I remember, when single, kneeling and asking the Lord concerning marriage and this is the answer I received, "In my due time it will come, in the meantime, be watchful, be prayerful, and be happy." I realize my situation was different. I am sorry to read about your first wife, this is an experience that could throw the strongest of men for a loop. I am reminded of Elder Packer's words when he decided he was going to be a seminary teacher and the income he would be receiving. He then realized, that he needed to search for a companion who would be willing to live on the measly income he would receive, and the income he received then, is not even similar to the income seminary teachers receive today. Are there women who will accept a farm boy/men, or an author. Sure there are, however, this is easily said.

Whenever this type of discussion emerges between friends, or forums, I am always reminded of this statement, "Thoughts proceed actions." Any form of media, discussion, conversation, article, teaching, etc. which is able to influence thought, has also the tendency to influence action, however the action of course is solely influenced by the person controlling or freely entertaining the thought. In the Book of Mormon we know that Nephi did not teach his children and the people of the ways of the Jews, 2 Nephi 25: 2, because their works were darkness. Why would Nephi not teach after the manner of the Jews, including their wicked deeds, if they would have had no influence upon the thoughts and actions of their children and family? I remember when I was young, and unfortunately I fell under the scripture, 2 Nephi 9: 28 - 29, I went away, being more wise than God, assuming these movies had no influence on who I was and the actions I would make. However, on my mission, I learned how easily these movies had persuaded my thoughts, and ultimately (as with anyone else), if uncontrolled can lead people to forbidden paths. I remember Elder Eyring (this was before he was President Erying) giving a talk, or it is in his book "To Draw Closer to God" , speaking about how he was with a business friend. The friend was driving, and asked if they could make a quick stop by which Henry Erying agreed to the detour. When they reached their destination, the friend invited Eyring to come in with him, and he agreed to. Eyring didn't realize what type of store it was until he noticed all the nude pictures of women on the wall. Erying turned to his friend and said, "if you don't mind I will wait in the car". I remember Elder Eryings words mentioning how for two weeks he was unable to remove and get rid of the images from his mind, no matter how hard he tried. I remember his words in lesson by the spirit being something to the nature of, "Now you know what it is like to not have the spirit with you always." After this revelation the images never entered into his mind again. Anything that is able to persuade thought, ultimately has the ability to persuade actions, unless controlled, or bridled. For me personally, I highly doubt the Lord through his servants would have provided a commandment not to watch any R-rated movies, unless they had an ability to persuade or desensitize people to important aspects of life. Example, anybody who has ever lifted their hand to murder another human being has been, by what means I have no clue, desensitized to murder or the killing of innocent blood. If you feel they are not fair in their views, then create your own by which you will and will not watch. Ultimately, with any movie I watch, I am not going to be able to stand before my Lord, and my Father in Heaven and say, "But, they said it was PG-13???" I will be held accountable for my own thoughts, words, and deeds --- and dang it, telling the Lord, "Satan made me do it" is out also. :)

Oh on the contrary mnm727, then the light saber handle would be used as a blunt force object, similar to a police baton... Dr. Who, then would have to have some serious ninja skills to avoid his attacker.

ElZorillo: I have access to scholarly journals and I could not find any support for your statement. I did find that THC is only found in the cannabis sativa family, this includes Hemp and marijuana. It is noted in other forms, that the non-psychoactive cannabis, not marijuana, also produces THC. Cannabis Sativa has been used for producing milk (like soy milk), for cereal, for clothes, and other industrial purposes. So, these findings would set your premise false also. Apparently, the family associated with the marijuana plant has other uses, which would provide another variable and confirm you have provided a false dichotomy. I also, found writings from pharmaceutical students specifying that the body when it initially absorbs marijuana, the psychoactive form, the body's brain first induces that this is a foreign substance (not a natural substance), and it is not until the user has consumed a sufficient amount of marijuana that the body begins to produce and react to a "foreign" substance. As a result of the new adaption of the brain, the person then receives the high that so many people use marijuana for. I also found this, Title: Within this article it mentions that scientist have found, discovered, that our body's naturally produce a chemical which also interacts with the CB receptors. Thus providing evidence to contradict marijuana and THC are solely responsible for CB1 and CB2 receptors. Note: I did not find this evidence on Google, except for the information pertaining to Hemp.

Depends on your definition of "visions." Lehi said I have dreamed a dream, or in other words he had seen a vision. I know this to be true. I am currently married to my wife because of a dream I had on my mission. Three people I spoke with on my mission were converted because of a dream, or a vision they had. Now here is the most interesting thing to me regarding these dreams: One dream was regarding eternal families. The other dream was regarding the one and only true church. The third person's testified of the importance of reading the book of mormon. In one of my areas we worked with a man who also was converted by a dream, or a vision, regarding Joseph Smith. Very interesting dreams these four had. I would love to go into detail, however in a live forum it isn't my place to share these people's dreams, nor my own. They are written in my journal and my posterity will read about them when I am worm food.

No wood doors? Sonic screw driver you fail me! My post would have been more clever if I had actually read the title "In a fight..." of the thread verses only the post "light saber vs. sonic screw driver." Now I will answer the real question of the thread, the light saber will win, it has a longer reach, unless the sonci screw driver can omit a deathly sonic sound that affects any opponent but the user, if so, sonic screw driver for the win. The only thing Anddenex showed, is that he can't read! My brain, you fail me...rrrrr. Now I must hold up this sign " new brain wanted."

My wife, is definitely a "winner" and is of such caliber as pertaining to imperfect souls, that women of her character, honesty, love for life, love for children, love for people, hard work and dilligence (despite how she may feel) would have qualified for the Savior's companion. However, she was born in my time, she condescended herself in saying "Yes" to me. I guess, I only have to look at my relationship of a near perfect woman, married to an imperfect man to recognize that it is plausible that a pefect man could easily marry an imperfect woman. I am just playing the devil's advocate pertaining to "she's got to be a winner." Most of the women upon this earth are "winners."

I would definitely agree with this statement, as my previous post made mention, that the pharisees and saducees were the elite of their time in scripture study, yet they are the ones which crucified their God. This is why I would agree that scriptures are not sufficient, however I wouldn't agree that the scriptures are not necessary. We wouldn't have the 10 commandments if they weren't written within scripture. The first 4 principles of the gospel, we would not have if they weren't written down and specifically pointed out as cannon. I would definitely agree with the statement that Noah didn't come by the flood because it was in scripture, it was delivered by personal revelation, which in my minds eye, specifies scriptures are not sufficient but important. Scriptures, as you are familiar with, are the written words of prophetic teachings, or valuable and important teachings. Noah, wouldn't have known about God without the teachings of Adam, and others. The only difference then and now, is that scripture wasn't written, it was orally passed down from one generation to another. Having written scripture maintains, if the passed down by honest people, the accuracy verses dealing only with oral scripture. We know men, is more likely to add, or forget experiences and spoken words, which are not written down. Scriptures would not be accurately preserved, yet at the same time, if changed, it can create confusion and contention. I would appreciate your answer to this question, do you think you would have come to the knowledge you have now without scripture, a cannon scripture? I personally do not think I would, however, if I rely solely on scripture and scripture alone, then I will loose out on personal revelation, which draws a person closer to God. Without personal revelation even the scriptures are just words in a book. I personall feel, without scripture, men are more likely to fall under the message taught in scripture, to be ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth. Scripture cannon, provides a solid foundation by which humankind can build and grow their testimony and knowledge in correct truths. Otherwise, people may continue to preach the "Adam-God Theory" as preached by Brigham Young, or other teachings professed by previous apostles and prophets which were not doctrine as well. Would you agree that scrptures divide doctrine from personal opinion?

Ok, this is where Anddenex, gets to share with this thread how smart he is The sonic screw driver is able to open doors, any door. The light saber can completely demolish or destroy any door, or at least make a new hole for a new door knob. Win for sonic screw driver. A person can sneak out of any door without being detected. The saber alerts any enemy within the house, or complex. Win for the sonic screw driver. In time of war, the light saber is more masculine. The light saber will strike fear into the heart of the enemy to see an onslaught of rainbow colored death swords, richotteing all their bullets, and disembowing soldiers. A double bladed light saber (Darth Maul) strikes even more fear in the enemies hearts and mind, because it can put a hole through the stomach of one opponent while disembowing another all in one strike. The sonic scew driver is more feminine. The sonic screw driver will cause a decrease in the defensieve line, as the enemy is keeled over from laughter, as an onslaught of wavey haired freaks come running waving a glow stick. Win for the light saber. The sonic screw driver is able to mess with the synapses of enemies and change their brain frequency to fight for the opposite team. The light saber removes the brain, or any other body part. Light Saber = Sonic Screw Driver. Tie, depending on the need at the time. If you don't need an extra body to feed, light saber. If you don't mind feeding another stomach, sonic screw driver. The light saber can be used by anyone, dumb, smart, intelligent, or brainless. Win for the Light Saber. Even the dumbest person can disembow their opponent, if their opponent is dumber than them (however this negates the dumbest person). However, without the force, it is just a flashy, high tech, colorful sword. The sonic screw driver must be used by someone of high intelligence. When it is not used by someone with high intelligence, i.e. anybody on LDS.NET ( ), then it becomes a neat flash light with an eerie sound. This is great for entertaining people in the dark. The sonic screw driver, put underneath the chin, in the dark, highlights the face with an eerie sound coming from the screw driver, this totally enhances this experience as the user vocally mimics an eerie, diabolical laugh. Whereas, if a light saber is used in the dark, and put close to chin, too close, the person is left without a chin. Win for the sonic screw driver. The light saber and sonic screw driver is able to come in an array of different colors. Fuscia is available to the more feminine men. Win for both. The sonic screw driver, comes with a telephone box, that is actually a time machine, and is much bigger inside than outside. Just becareful not to change any even regarding your own time-line. Win for the sonic screw driver. The light saber comes with the force, the ability to move mountains, planets, jump high, choke someone by bringing the thumb and index finger close together but not touching. Win for the light saber. In comparison, the sonic screw driver is for intelligent, neat, and careful people who want to play with time. The light saber is for anyone who want to disembow, demolish, or move mountains. It is almost a toss up, but I am going with the sonic screw driver. :)

If Dr. Who is bad for Mormons, then I am in deep doodoo (sorry for the language) Some of my fond memories is sitting down and watching this show with my father when I was younger. Some of these shows, scared the bajeebees (I think it funny how we like to make up words) out of me when I was a child. I have seen most of the older series, and have watched all the new ones. I must say, one series really made me scared of mummy's, especially when I went to any place that had a mummy being shown. However, for those who are Dr. Who fans, have you seen or read about the TV remote screw driver. A company has a built and I think is about to market, or already has marketed, a sonic screw driver which controls your TV and Blue Ray. Yes, I have never been tempted to purchase a $100 remote until now. :)

I could be wrong with beefche's intent and question, however if I understood her correctly, you have already answered your own question, and it may no longer appear as weird. Correct me if I am wrong pertaining to your intent beefche, but I think the question results, that in the end, are we all not perfect, and would no longer be seen as an imperfect but exhalted being? Thus, if Christ did marry, in the end his partner would be equal, because of her exhaltation, who would no longer be a lesser being or mortal. If I understood your question right beefche, it was a question that already provided an answer.

Me too, I was trying to make that point clear, but I may not have, yet I feel it is perfectly plausible that he did also. I just realized in my last post, I transitioned from one thought to another without even recognizing it. Ignore the virgin birth part, that is a different transition of thought from what I was originally writing about. RRRR...hate when that happens.

It is definitely weird, and the first time I had heard this was on my mission. However, it is not weird to have a perfect being to become involved with an imperfect being. I personally feel, it puts God in a box. If God can kill all of Egypt's firstborn sons, and the children of Israel of Israel's firstborn sons, who did not follow the specific guidelines provided. I am reminded of the Lord's words in Isaiah, "My ways are higher than your ways, my thoughts higher than your thoughts...." Remember, Moroni 10: 32 - 33, which states that in Christ we all become perfect and without spot. So, this idea of perfection becoming involved with imperfection wouldn't be true, because Mary, a virgin and fair, surely was "perfect" in Christ, thus perfection would have been involved with perfection. However, I personally don't believe it either, not because of perfection, but because I believe it denies the virgin birth. Yet, when I stand before God, if he were to tell me that this is how it happened, well then, that is how it happened. I am sure, you would probably feel the same way, if God said, this is how it happened. It kinda ends all argument.

Excellent, never read an actual statement before regarding this, it is nice to know that this isn't a three nephite story.

I worked with a woman whose husband joined the church because she said she would not marry outside of the Temple. After a year, he no longer decided to pretend anymore. As a result she divorced him. She was hurt that he would deceitfully join the church, and then stop living it, despite his promises. You know your wife, if you are concerned this decision of coming out will completely destroy or hurt her, then you must accept the potential consequences of your decision. If she is the "Molly Mormon" you profess her to be, then you will shatter one of the most important gospel doctrines the LDS faith teaches, eternal families. Spiritually you are divorcing her. However, are you giving your wife enough credit? Does she love the Lord, while loving you? Your marriage is not like my co-workers, in that she was an active Mormon before they dated. Your relationsip began very differently, and she seems to have loved you before you joined the Church. Do you think, yourself, her love will wax cold if you are honest with her? Did you listen to, or have read, Elder Bednars talk about being a good little boy? His father wasn't a member of the Church until he was older. He would not join the church for anybody else. If I understood your words correctly you mentioned you joined the church for her, pretending you had a testimony and actively served. I think it would be very hard for anybody to convince someone, or provide a witness to, if they are pretending. You say you sought, but in the same sentence you also say you pretended to believe, and are tired of pretending. Pretending and sincerely seeking a witness, as you already know, are not the same. My suggestion would be to stop pretending you have a testimony, and actually sincerely seek an answer yourself? A question that enters into my mind is, Does your wife already know you are pretending? In some relationships, a person will compensate for the decision of their companion. Her "Molly Mormon" decisions could be a direct result of your pretending, and she is hoping through her increased activity that this will help her companion? I am not saying this is it, but providing different thoughts.

I think you might find this link in connection with fair to be insightful. I did. Jesus Christ/Was Jesus married - FAIRMormon Here is an actual quote from the site: "Dale Bills, a spokesman for the Church, said in a statement released Tuesday, 16 May 2006: The belief that Christ was married has never been official church doctrine. It is neither sanctioned nor taught by the church. While it is true that a few church leaders in the mid-1800s expressed their opinions on the matter, it was not then, and is not now, church doctrine.[3]"

I have been thinking, actually quite a bit (no, it doesn't hurt when I think), regarding this thread and some of your answers in other threads. You mention you believe the scriptures to be neither necessary nor sufficient. I would agree with the sufficient, but not necessarily the "necessary." Adam lived before there were any scriptures. Seth and Cain, at least according to what we have written in the Bible, didn't live by a book either. However, they did live by the words of their father, and the words which proceed from the mouth of the Lord, personal revelation. Abraham remembered what was taught, not necessarily what was written. We don't have any record specifying Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob read any scriptures. When Joseph was in Egypt, what scriptures did he base his knowledge from? I would think as a slave, he didn't have any scriptures, but remembered the words of his father, and I would venture to say, personal revelation. It wasn't scriptures which interpreted Pharoah's dream, but the spirit of the Lord which was within Joseph. Thus, I would agree with the words, that the scriptures are not sufficient. A person can easily look beyond the mark if they wholy focus only on scriptures, as did the pharisees. The pharisees, saducees and scribes were the scripture authorities within their day. Yet, when the God of Israel stood before them, despite their studies they could not recognize their God, their deliverer. However, I would disagree in the statement that the scriptures are not necessary. Here are my evidences: 1. When Lehi left Jerusalem he was commanded to return and get the scriptures, the works and words of our God. The scriptures clearly state that if they had not obtained the plates, then they would have dwindled in unbelief. In saying this, my personal thoughts, is that Nephi and Lehi would have been ok without scriptures. However, not all are of the character of: Joseph, Nephi, Lehi, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Thus the scriptures provide weak souls, like myself, a rod to hold onto, untill we reach the more sure word of prophecy, and then the scriptures become a standard, but living by personal revelation becomes a way of life. 2. As already shared, the iron rod is the word of God. Those who let go of the iron rod, or did not hold fast unto it, either went their way feeling toward the great and spacious building, others were drowned. In light of Elder Bednars words, I would say, the scriptures are very necessary to help weak souls like myself, to reach new heights until we obtain ourselves a more sure word of prophecy; we live by every word of God, especially personal revelation. In light of these two options, I would say the scriptures are not sufficient, but are definitely necessary for the salvation of anyone who is like me. It keeps me grounded, and one day hopefully I will obtain the sure word of prophecy, and thus become one with God. When a person becomes one with God, this may be the only time the scriptures are no longer necessary, but doubtful, at least in my minds eye.

I think you two are arguing over semantics verses actually listening to each other; I am not perfect at this and get ahead of myself also. If exhaltation is obtained only by entering into the Celestial Kingdom, then the answers you have provided are correct. However, I could be wrong, what Bytor is expressing is that exhaltation is not in obtaining the Celestial Kingdom, exhaltation is when we become more like God, and receive all the Father hath. In this instance, then Bytor is correct, and exhaltation is only obtained through marriage, and by obtaining the highest degree within the Celestial kingdom. I am more inclined to believe, from my understanding of exhaltation, is that exhaltation is only obtained if a person obtains the highest degree within the Celestial kingdom. If they obtained the Celestial kingdom, then they have received eternal life, but are not exhalted. Bruce R. McConkie could be wrong. I remember, while attending BYU, a professor who wrote a book and wanted a seal of approval by the Church head, so that it could be published as church approved. They had put a quote from Bruce R. McConkie in it from Mormon Doctrine. They were asked to remove the quote from the book. Thus when quoting Mormon Doctrine we need to make sure it stands the doctrinal test via cannon.