Anddenex

Greater responsibility. Let me see if I can put it this way: A deacon has specific responsibilities. When a deacon becomes a teacher, the duty of home teaching is now a part of their responsibilities. Thus, a teacher has more responsibilities than a deacon, and as such has a greater responsibility of righteousness. An Elder isn't able to participate in every ordinance a High Priest is able to do so. Thus a High Priest, has a greater responsibility of righteousness, due to the fact that they have more responsibilities. I couldn't agree more, we should all be aspiring to be as righteous as the Savior, regardless of the office. I never said otherwise. As pertaining to the office of an Apostle and this being the highest office, let me share this verse to clarify my statement as to why the high priest is the highest office. D&C 107: 22, "Of the Melchizedek Priesthood, three "Presiding High Priests" and the Apostles are under the authority, or presiding authority, of three High Priests. Also read D&C 107: 64-66, "Or, in other words, the Presiding High Priest over the High Priesthood of the Church." I note, that the doctrine does not specify the Presiding Elder, but the Presiding High Priest. My authority and responsibilities as an Elder, are not the same as an Apostle whose title is Elder. Which title emphasizes full time missionary. Note, I no longer go by Elder Exon, as I did on my mission. I am simply Brother Exon. "As for Elder's looking to HP's as examples, I can only assume you mean because of the typical younger age of the EQ." No, not in the least, whether younger or older, an Elder should be able to look up to a High Priest for a better example of living the Priesthood. Just as any deacon should be able to look up to any teacher, despite their age, as an example of righteousness in their office.

Thank you for the question, and comment explaining your question. I will clarify my statement, because after writing this one I realized others may not completely understand what I said. However, if you read the last part of my statement about following doctrine and the calling of an High Priest, then I believe, it would have been more clear. Agreed, same Priesthood covenant with the same requirements for Exaltation. The EQP remember is the President of the quorum who holds keys. The President of the high priest quorum is the Stake President, who holds keys. As Vort explained in a latter comment, and which was explained well. As pertaining to a greater responsibility of righteousness here are some verses of scripture that may clarify my statement. Alma 13: 3 "on account of their exceeding faith and good works" Alma 13: 5, "in the first place they were on the same standing with their brethren...for such as would not harden their hearts." In connection read all of verse 10. I would also lead you to Abraham 1: 2, "Having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge...I became a rightful heir, a High Priest..." The scripture we are all familiar with, "many are called, but few are chosen." I believe, you might be reading my statement as saying a high priest is more righteous, automatically because they are a high priest. This is not so. They hold a "greater responsibility" of righteousness, not that they are more righteous. To be really lame, I am going to quote Spiderman, "with great power there must also come great responsibility." (ha, ya, I know I just quoted Spiderman---the Star Wars quotes have been used to much :) ) As such with the call of a high priest, there comes a greater responsibility, with that responsibility a desire should follow to be more righteous. It is the highest office in the Melchizedek Priesthood, and one that should not be taken lightly. An Elder, should be able to look up to every High Priest as an example, unfortunately as with other time periods, this has and is not the case. I hope that clarifies my statement.

Well, yes it is true, and it is apparent you read a little to deep into my statement. Also, an Elder, who does not hold the office of an High Priest, is not able to officiate or perform the sealing ordinance. Thus, the following statement, "an elder...may participate in [ANY] ordinance, would not be correct. Unless you can provide doctrinal or specific evidence an Elder, who has not been ordained to the office of a High Priest, has performed and does now perform sealing ordinances? Really...no kidding, you mean you need to be an Elder before you become a High Priest? If you would actually read my comment you would recognize I never said otherwise, and you would not need to sarcastically "venture to say" anything. Hmm...yes it is so, and I never said the office of a high priest "confers" any authority. The authority was already conferred upon the individual, a high priest, who received the sealing authority to perform the sealing. If an individual, and Elder, wants to be one who performs sealings, then he must first be ordained to the office of an high priest, after he is ordained to the office of an high priest, then the sealing power is conferred or given to the individual. Please read my statement slower. I never said anything about conferring anything. I clearly stated an Elder is unable to officiate or perform a sealing. Whereas a high priest is able to do so. I assumed it was common knowledge that the sealing power or authority needed to be conferred. However, I guess not. Again, I never said it wasn't distinct. I said it is within the office of an high priest, not that it is a high priest. Or let me be more clear, how many Patriarchs do you know that only hold the office of an Elder? Any, I will venture to say this time, you know of none. I will also venture to say, how many seventies, apostles, and prophets, do you know who only hold the office of an Elder? Either way Vort...please ask questions of clarification next time, instead of assuming I said something, or wrote something, I did not. Best.

This is a really easy question if you think about it. An Elder is an office in the Melchizedek priesthood as is the High Priest. Within the Aaronic Priesthood, we have (as you know), deacon, teacher, and priest. As the priest office is higher than a deacon and teacher, so is the office of a High Priest higher than the office of an Elder. Each office holds responsibilities and duties. The higher up the office the greater the responsibility of righteousness and what one may participate in. The office of an Elder is not sufficient to perform sealings within the Temple, but the office of a high priest may officiate in sealings. The priest may now perform the ordinance of baptism, while the deacon and teacher are unable to do so, because they hold an office, which is unable to participate or perform this responsibility. A Patriarch is within the office of a High Priest, thus signifying again that the office of an High Priest is higher than the office of an Elder. This does not induce that the High Priest is more important than the Elder. As the Priesthoods form a body. Each body part is important to the function of the whole body, yet in function, certain parts of the body require more attention, or else the whole body will shut down. Loose a limb, the body keeps moving, yet the body misses that part. Take out the brain or heart, and the body ceases its function and life. If we are following doctrine the calling of a High Priest should follow: 1. Righteousness and Worthiness (Abraham 1:2, Elder Bednar's talk this past G.C., many called but few are chosen) 2. Revelation (Think of Aaron being called the first High Priest in the law of Moses) 3. Willingness (Some are worthy, but not willing)

I think, feel, I have always had a testimony regarding Jesus Christ and our Heavenly Father. That always made sense to me. I wasn't sure though if Joseph Smith was a prophet though until I was 17. I went to a Private Christian school in the 7th and 8th grade, and earned some friendships, which friendships lead me to other friends who would condemn me to hell because I was a Mormon. I thought hard and pondered a lot. I remember, when I was walking 17 years old, as I was walking through the halls the spirit witnessed to my heart, "Andrew, why are you not praying like your mom taught you to pray." I, to this day, am shocked how easily I listened and begin praying every night before I went to bed. This action obviously helped me to have the Spirit with me, but yet I still lacked a testimony of Joseph Smith. I was given a Home Teaching companion who was a convert. He noticed one day while we were out that I was pondering something deeply. He then asked me, "Would you like to share with me your thoughts?" I then shared with him my dilemma about Joseph Smith, and I thought he would respond like everybody else, telling me to believe and that he knew. But he didn't. He didn't even address the question, he simply asked, 'And what have you come to realize?" I thought for a moment and then answered, "I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet." He then bore testimony and said, "I feel the same way." However, the solidity of my testimony blossomed on my mission in a strange way, at least strange to me. In the MTC I read D&C 8:9. My world, my testimony, was almost broken when I read the words for the first time (or I should say when I understood these words for the first time) that I had never experienced a "burning in your bosom." I realized, then and there, I had never felt a burning in the bosom, and to hear one of the members of the Branch Presidency speak about his burning in the bosom verified my thoughts, my fear, that I did not really have a testimony, I only felt I had a testimony. I begin fasting and praying once every week, and on fast Sunday I would have fasted 2 times that week. So within 2 months on my mission, I had fasted 10 times in hopes the Lord would reveal the truth to me by the burning in the bosom. I had prayed every night, with no success, and was really thinking about returning home because I did not have a "proper" testimony, or at least I thought I did not. One Wednesday night after fasting, which was probably the last night, before I would have decided to return home while kneeling, I didn't receive a burning in the bosom, but the Lord spoke to me by His still small voice saying these words, "Andrew, stop asking me something you already know. Live what you know and build upon it." Since then, that is what I have been doing. The gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored, what a glorious day and age we live in.

I am with John Doe. We just had a Stake Primary training where they provided us with the password, and told us to take advantage of the Churches programs available on the internet. However, at our ward we have an old building and the internet isn't very good in the building, and in some rooms you can't even receive a signal, which really stinks. I have been downloading videos to my iPad, however this takes up a lot of space on my iPad. The Stake Center internet access was blazing fast compared to our wards (ok, blazing maybe an exaggeration). I would be less concerned with people using the internet unless they are using it inappropriately.

No, however should a member come out in open rebellion and try to force the hand of the Prophets, as some have, then yes, the member is subject to their covenant. If they have broken their covenant, then they are subject to the consequences of their decisions. I am not sure why people complain about being subject to their covenant, both the blessings and the consequences when disobeyed. People even now believe missionary work is forcing people to believe your belief system. Some people suggest, that if you even try to talk to someone about your belief, that wasn't elicited, then you are forcing them to believe your way. The right course is to stand our ground in truth, not a societal plea, that has and will continue to have the Lord's disapproval on our nation. You need not fear loosing your recommend if you are grounded in truth, and if you are keeping your temple covenants. If you are not grounded in truth, and you are not keeping your temple covenants, it shouldn't surprise anyone if a temple recommended is returned, however with technology today, they don't need to take your recommend away, they only need to send an alert on your record attached to the bar-code on your recommend, and it is flagged.

The idea of accepting this doctrine, if true, would not turn your eye from the true vine and the source of our salvation and exaltation. A parents righteousness is only possible through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. There is no Salvation without Christ, as such, "Parental Salvation" is an incorrect place of words. Some, have incorrectly, interpreted these passages, focusing on the parents. The focus is not the parents, but the focus is the "sealing" and the sealing performed by the "priesthood" which is only granted through Christ. Without the "sealing", without the "priesthood", a parent's righteousness is futile. This is no different than the covenant God made with Abraham. Through the righteousness of Abraham, all of his children receive specific blessings. Or, one can say, through the righteousness of a parent, the children have been blessed. This doesn't turn a eye, from the true giver of the gift, but it does provide me as one of the children, great-great-great grandchildren of Abraham, to be thankful to a parent who lived such a life, that I would receive a blessing from. In your case, should your parents continue to live a righteous life, sufficient for redemption and exaltation, you will receive a blessing from your parents as we receive blessings from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. Yet, as with these men, we all know these promised blessings, due to the righteousness of these men, is not possible without turning our eye to Christ, as they did, and as they still do. I agree with a previous post, there is a difference between "Salvation" and "Exaltation", and Joseph Fielding Smith explained in the Doctrines of Salvation, that due to a parent righteousness, children who are sealed, by the priesthood will have the opportunity, after they have suffered for their sins, to be allowed entrance into the Celestial kingdom. I would agree with this interpretation. The children still receive their consequence, yet the family is not separated.

Tipman, If you are loosing your testimony here is some counsel: 1st - Check under your bed. It is amazing what we find under our beds. 2nd - Check between the sofa cushions. Just make sure you wash your hands afterwards. 3rd - If not there, pray, it is amazing how often we find things after a sincere prayer? My question to you Tipman, would be, "Have you received a witness from the Spirit?" If so, then trust in that witness. There are many things in the Old Testament that appear to be very disturbing. The first and foremost, people are not perfect. We do not know the history or the actual reason why certain things were established. We don't know why, it was ok for Sarai to beat Hagar, or deal with her severely and when Hagar fled, was commanded by the Lord to go back and submit herself to Sarai. Yet, despite our lack of knowledge, God remains as God. The witness, remains as a witness. The test, for us to submit to our father's will, to see if we will do all that he commands, still remains. The consequence of retreating from Godly commandments, still remains. When ever I am in a position of such confusion, I remember my roots, my faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. I am not going to Church because of a Book, although very important. I am not believing in God because I have good priesthood leaders. I remember, my love for Christ and what he did and what he accomplished for all God's children. Remember, opposition, is an opportunity for us, in many instances, to be proven, that we will remain faithful, and do all that God has commanded. Peace to you Tipman.

Wonderful Hala! I remember when I finally came to that understanding, and it was a change in my life and the way I viewed life and the commandments.

I say go with an Android or iPad touch pad. Yes, it is so much better, because the church has an app that can be downloaded for free. I use the apps for videos for my primary class, and it is awesome. I have all the Ensign talks, since 1976, the Standard Works, Teaching of the Prophets, all the Church manuals they make available. Could you imagine trying to bring all these books if they weren't electronic. I love it. If you can afford a Kindle Fire, then see if you can bump yourself up to the iPad or Samsung Galaxy. These devices have a Kindle, app, which I love also, that I use to download books. Just my opinion.

Traveler: I would be curious to hear more of why you say "Agency" is the right to act for God. I understand the gift part and would agree. Agency, or our moral agency, is definitely a gift from God which allows us the opportunity, through knowledge, to distinguish between good and evil. Since we have a moral agency, we now have the ability to choose. Without agency, we definitely would not have the ability to choose for ourself, whether we want to become like God or not. I think "free will" and "agency" can be interchanged, however free will and "moral agency" I think are not interchangeable. Agency is simply the ability to choose: good or evil. Free will, is also the ability to choose: good or evil. Moral agency is the right, or gift, to use our agency toward that which is good, and maybe that is why you say "agency" is right to act for someone else. If we should choose to act against good, then we have a "moral" obligation, as intelligent beings, to repent, and thus line our actions with our moral agency, or line our actions that represent we are coming unto God.

I have always loved Elder Richard G. Scott's words regarding the spirit of the law when he came and visited my mission, "Living the spirit of the law is living the letter of the law in the right spirit." At BYU, we are under contract to have no one of the opposite sex in the appartment after midnight (ha, or was it 11pm), been to long. This was a rule to help prevent young couples in making a mistake. So, couples would leave the house and continue to be by themselves either outside, in car (if it was cold), etc... In this example, the letter of the law was no one of the opposite sex in the apartment. Thus, these couples were living the letter, however by living the spirit of the law, we would recognize the purpose of the law and recognize that being out of the apartment alone, can also lead to trouble. I would agree with Vort, that if your son is having to justify breaking a law, he is probably in the wrong. I would also agree with MarginofError, in the sense that on my mission we weren't supposed to teach single women, and were supposed to allow the sister missionaries know and hand them over, so to speak. It really depended on my area. If sister missionaries were close, then I would easily hand the investigator over to the sister missionaries without teaching them. If the sister missionaries needed to travel, and make separate plans, just to visit a potential investigator discovered through tracting, then I would accept the invitiation to come in, teach the first discussion in less than 10 minutes, try to discern their interest, and if interested my companion and I would hand them over to the sisters. I had one companion who hated this and gave me a real hard time. I didn't care, it was his opinion on the matter. I justified the action, thinking, it would be a horrible waste of the sister missionaries time to say go visit this single lady, who is out of your way, and may not even be there when you get there. In all this, I still felt I was following the counsel provided by Richard G. Scott --- to live the letter of the law in the right spirit. The spirit of the law, however is never an excuse to break the letter of the law. The Spirit of the law, I believe, is a higher obedience. Best.

Yes, in order to reach the conclusion I shared, I have to assume, which was stated in my post. Not sure the debate there, seeing I publicly stated "I assume". It is safe to assume because of the language within the scripture already shared. Mosiah 11: 4, "And all this did he take to support himself...and also his priests, and their wives and their concubines..." If we knew, then there would be no reason to assume anything. The idea that we don't know is where people, like both of us, draw conclusions, or assumptions according to the information shared. It is safe to assume due to the language of the verse. The language doesn't specify "some" of the priests, it mentions their wives, their concubines. Yes, it definitely is easy to generalize as it is definitely easy to accept human nature and the natural men and the desire of the natural men when money, power, women, and politics (the King and his priests) are involved. As pertaining to the idea that I would have to know that "all priests" had wives and concubines, is not the case, I only need to accept that a majority of the priests had wives and concubines. If more than not had wives and concubines, then is it more likely than not that Alma also had the same. I do not need to know that all had wives to draw a conclusion from the provided language within scripture.

No, we don't know if all of them had many wives and concubines, which is why I said it is safe to assume he did as we read the words of the Book of Mormon. Mosiah 11: 4, "And all this did he take to support himself...and also his priests, and their wives and their concubines..." From this verse alone, I would take the stance, myself, the default position is that Alma had many wives and concubines, since he was one of Noah's priests. I would also take the nature, carnal nature of men, who are wicked and idolatrous. In this situation, it is more likely that Alma had many wives and concubines, then he having only one wife or none. I would also specify it is more a "default position" seeing that not only did they have many wives and concubines, but that these wives and concubines were being supported by other people. The carnal nature of men, tells me, if a wicked man could have more than one wife, and many concubines, and that he would not have to support them himself, but that they would be supported by other people. Yes, the carnal men would easily say, "I'm in." Especially, if it also included a position of power. Just look at our American politicians as an example ;D I realize, this is my thoughts, and you disagree. No problem. I appreciate your thoughts. Best Volgadon!

Hello Casey, I am not going to pretend to understand your situation, and the depth of love you have for this beautiful young lady, Melissa. This is definitely a difficult decision you are now faced with, and one that has eternal consequences. One of the most important gospel truths we face in life is defined in the Book of Mormon, "Opposition." Without opposition righteousness could not be brought to pass (2 Nephi 2: 11). My first thoughts, I would assume the gospel was not forced on you, and neither can the gospel be forced on Melissa. I would counsel, if you have come to the point in believing in prayer and fasting, then fast and pray that her heart will be softned, that she would be willing to read the Book of Mormon herself. I would agree with Tyler, let her know how you feel about her, how you feel about the gospel, and one of the greatest principles within the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, is eternal marriage. With such great love, as you have expressed, I would assume this thought would be pleasing to you. Only you would be able to answer, if it would be pleasing to her ears also. On my mission, a gentlemen was converted to the gospel because of this principle. He couldn't see his life without his current wife who was a member. My second thought, the first and great commandment is to Love our God with all our heart, might, and strength. I assume you have received witnessed, which is why you are desiring to be baptized. I assume, this has brought upon you possibly one of the greatest potential hardships of your life. In scripture, we are taught about a young lady, Esther, who married someone not of her faith, a King. As a result of her fasting, and prayer, she was able to spare the lives of many of her people. In scripture we are taught about 4 men, who would not bow to idols, and as a result faced the consequence of death, but the Lord spared them because of their faith. Yet, in scripture, we have examples of equally righteous individuals, but were not spared death. The point, that, no matter our consequence, we need to put God first. Not an easy aspect in the lives we live. My final thought, is remember that with God all things are possible. Love God first, kneel and plead with our God, let him know your hearts desire. Then do your part in expressing to Melissa, your love, your desires, and your hopes. And then remember with God all things are possible. Put God first, believe He knows your heart, and then make the right choices. I wish you the best! I hope that you will choose to follow your witness and be baptized. I pray that Melissa's heart will be softened, and that in the end you two will be married in one of the glorious temples of our God. Best! Andrew

When I first tried this, I was told I didn't have permission. Now it is letting me.

Well spoken uniderth. People need to make sure they are 100% sure before calling a statement blatantly false. I have understood it the same way. Alma was one of the false priests, and we know in record the false priests had many wives and concubines. Alma being one of them, it is safe to assume, he had many wives. And there is no record that he had to divorce them or get rid of them. There is so much history within the Book of Mormon, we know so little about. It would have been nice to have everything, however could you imagine carrying the whole record while on a mission ;D

These are topics which I write in my journal: 1. Spiritual Experiences. It has been said that we would have more miracles written about if the pioneers had written in their journals as counseled. 2. Personal Failures. Spencer W. Kimbal said that we should write about our failures and how we dealt with them. 3. Personal Success. What you have accomplished and how you accomplished it. How you felt about the accomplishment. 4. Baby Blessings. I have been intrigued by the baby blessings I have given, and how each were unique. 5. Service. Have I done any good in the world today? Especially with your own family. 6. Personal Revelation. As Elder Scott mentioned, when we right down what the Lord taught it, it is saying to the Lord that what He taught us was very important. We then are more likely to receive more revelation. On my mission, and since I have been home, one of my favorite experiences is when I receive knew knowledge of a particular topic while I was writing in my journal. A blessing of journal writing. 7. Posterity. Although I do enjoy going back once or twice a year and rereading my journal entrees (My Patriarchal Blessing tells me to look back and to feel good about what I did), however that is not the main reason we write in our journal. Our journals are for our posterity. Remember the words of Jacob 4: 2-5 - That we write in hopes that our children will receive them with thankful hearts. That our children, above else, will know that we had faith and hope in the Lord, Jesus Christ.

I stumbled upon this site through a particular question a friend asked me. Glad I found it.