Anddenex

What is wrong with a good beheading @Sunday21 in a story?!
EDIT: The ugly truth of any history where human's forsake truth and love Satan more than God, and among the ugly truth's there are still beauties in this world that are worth praise and adoration. No one wants to relive the awful massacres of Stalin and Hitler (or any other tyrant), and yet during this times those worthy of praise rose to the necessary, yet awful, situation of war.

I am convinced that it is not so much that they cannot find the way of eternal life - just that when they do - they will not want it because it requires virtue.
 
The Traveler

Nowhere in the book of Job does Job curse God.  He laments his birth in chapter 3 (I'd bet a significant percentage of humankind has lamented their birth at one point or another).  In chapter 6 he laments his current condition and prays God will give him relief.  In chapter 10, he again laments.  But throughout, he acknowledges God, and in 13 testifies powerfully "Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him".  In 19 he testifies of our Redeemer (well enough that we made a hymn out of it).  In 23, he expresses confidence that the Lord will deliver him if he endures well.  In 38, God deems Job worthy enough to engage him in conversation.  And in the end, the righteous man has had his eyes opened sufficient that even he finds reason to repent (turn to God) even more than he already had, and is rewarded with great blessings.
The book of Job isn't proof that Satan can overcome man, it is the exact opposite.  It is an example of how to endure well, to overcome laments about how awful our trials are, to overcome the lies of Satan that it would have been better never to have been born, to ignore and refute the false accusations of "friends", to repent of those things we never before knew needed repenting of, and to trust completely in God, though he slay us.  It is proof that we can endure, through the Lord, and will be blessed in the end for our faithfulness.
Job is an excellent example of both reality (we all complain a bit when things get hard) and of humility and triumph over affliction.

I have my own answer to that question, but I think you would benefit from searching it out on your own within the writings of Mormon, though with a less jaundice eye. If you seek for understanding rather than justification for your angst, you will find it. There is something very profound in what Mormon did--particularly given his previous gallant actions, that has beneficial implications for one and all of us struggling with being betrayed and violated, etc., or seeing it happen to others. I will give you a hint, it is something recovering alcoholics are trained to do.
Than ks, -Wade Englund-

I think that revulsion is the intended response to those sections of the BoM. I have long wondered why the war scenes and other gruesome parts are included in any  book of scriptures, let alone "the most correct" book of scripture. The answer that came to me  has two parts: 
First, it is so that we can learn from the mistakes of others (particularly the more serious ones) and not make them ourselves. The BoM and other scriptures provide a way for us to vicarious (kind of like dreaming) sin and vicariously receive the consequence of those sins, so that we learn what happens were we to sin, and are hopefully thus discouraged from committing sin. That is why I will definitely be reading the war and gruesome parts of the BoM and OT, etc., because I want to be so revolted that I won't ever make the same mistakes, myself, that lead to war and gruesome 
Second, it is so that we can learn from correct actions of others. By this I mean that often very bad things happen to good people. War and gruesome events sometimes aren't a product of sin (at least on the part of those initially attacked), and it is good to learn vicariously how to respond when innocent people are wronged, so that we are prepared if or when the same happens to us, or if it doesn't happen to us (except to a much lesser degree), we can yet succor those good people unfortunate enough to be brutally victimized. Again, that is why I will definitely be reading the war and gruesome parts of the scriptures.
But, that may just be me.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The Church's initiative is to bring all members unto Christ, that through Christ we become like the Father and receive all the Father hath. The Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion. Let's make a minor, but important distinction. The Lord has given revelation that a man will draw closer to him by reading the Book of Mormon than any other book of scripture. The Church is the vehicle by which this revelation was/is distributed to all the sons and daughters of God. We also have modern day prophets who have declared that we shouldn't let a day go by without reading from the Book of Mormon.
The question, real question, is then, "Do I exercise sufficient faith in this declaration from the Lord that I will draw closer to him through study of the Book of Mormon? Yes or no. If not, then we should be praying for the same heart and mind.
In saying this, the scriptures tells us that we should live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. For some, their patriarchal blessing may give counsel to read a particular book of scripture often. How this individual decides to honor both counsels is between them and the Lord.
We also accept that the Lord can personally be directing an individually to study other books of scripture more. I remember after reading the Book of Mormon a number of times the spirit impressing upon my mind and heart to read the New Testament. As @Jane_Doe already mentioned, the Church doesn't neglect other scriptures as each scripture is given 1 year of study in the Church, which should be in our personal study. How a person follows the impressions given by the Lord to his heart and mind, is between them and the Lord.
As to this question then, "Or am I taking an old initiative of prioritizing our BOM study too seriously?" That is between you and the Lord.
This however can not be denied. We will draw closer to God by reading the Book of Mormon than any other book of scripture. These are the Lord's words. Do we trust he knows what he is talking about? Or do we think ourselves more wise than his counsel and declaration?
If one thing I know to be true, we cause ourselves more anxiety in the gospel than we should. The gospel is truly simple, but imperfect humans try to complicate simple truths (I include myself in that statement).

Be of good cheer.  Each case of sealing cancelation is considered individually on its own merit.  As to the family of your x – do not concern yourself with what bitterness they may bring to the table – if there be such things will be to their condemnation.  Should they bring forgiveness – that will be for your benefit.  If you are to be condemned it is only because of your refusal to repent and hold bitterness towards others (them) – which from your post would not seem so.
Sometimes in life time is necessary to ensure all things of eternal importance are in order and as they should be.  Rejoice and be glad your bishop intends to make sure all things done and nothing left undone.  If there is something to be done – do it gladly and with love and joy.  Like Joseph in Liberty jail – your hardship is little in comparison to the hardships born by Christ and if you endure this trial well it will be a crown of glory for you in all of eternity.
 
The Traveler

@For eternity. Congratulations! So happy for you! ?
So who will make the decision? The first presidency.
Are these gentlemen divinely inspired? ?
Why not listen to a recent conference talk by your favorite apostle? Are these gentlemen gems? Every last one of them. Not to worry. Your future could not be in safer hands.
 

The Church's initiative is to bring all members unto Christ, that through Christ we become like the Father and receive all the Father hath. The Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion. Let's make a minor, but important distinction. The Lord has given revelation that a man will draw closer to him by reading the Book of Mormon than any other book of scripture. The Church is the vehicle by which this revelation was/is distributed to all the sons and daughters of God. We also have modern day prophets who have declared that we shouldn't let a day go by without reading from the Book of Mormon.
The question, real question, is then, "Do I exercise sufficient faith in this declaration from the Lord that I will draw closer to him through study of the Book of Mormon? Yes or no. If not, then we should be praying for the same heart and mind.
In saying this, the scriptures tells us that we should live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. For some, their patriarchal blessing may give counsel to read a particular book of scripture often. How this individual decides to honor both counsels is between them and the Lord.
We also accept that the Lord can personally be directing an individually to study other books of scripture more. I remember after reading the Book of Mormon a number of times the spirit impressing upon my mind and heart to read the New Testament. As @Jane_Doe already mentioned, the Church doesn't neglect other scriptures as each scripture is given 1 year of study in the Church, which should be in our personal study. How a person follows the impressions given by the Lord to his heart and mind, is between them and the Lord.
As to this question then, "Or am I taking an old initiative of prioritizing our BOM study too seriously?" That is between you and the Lord.
This however can not be denied. We will draw closer to God by reading the Book of Mormon than any other book of scripture. These are the Lord's words. Do we trust he knows what he is talking about? Or do we think ourselves more wise than his counsel and declaration?
If one thing I know to be true, we cause ourselves more anxiety in the gospel than we should. The gospel is truly simple, but imperfect humans try to complicate simple truths (I include myself in that statement).

Thank you. This at least gives food for thought in reference to what I originally understood the portion mentioned being. I have a different thought regarding this statement of "outer darkness" here in relation to those who have NO portion of the Spirit of the Lord, which tells me that it coincides with the following statement, "I would like to speak about God’s realm of light in contrast to the dark realm of Satan. Those who follow Satan will be cast into outer darkness, “where there is weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth.” (D&C 133:73.) How terrible to live in such a place of darkness and cold. It is entirely different from what we usually think of as “burning in hell.” That burning is the lasting regret one feels who has chosen the darkness of Satan in preference to the light of Christ." (Source)
I originally understand this to mean a prophecy of those who will be cast into outer darkness (who are described as "evil", "no portion of the Spirit of the Lord, and who chose evil rather than good), while they are in spirit prison waiting final judgement.
But as stated this gives food for thought.

You don't tell her anything.  She is not in a position to do anything about it, and telling will do nothing but hurt the both of you.  If it makes it easier for you, pretend she turned you down. 
Besides, dating you would be problematic-- even if actually you're willing not have sex until marriage, forfeit coffee/tea/drinks for your life, etc, as an agnostic you cannot accompany her in the temple and support her that way.

She is there to preach the gospel and that is it.  I wouldn't tell her anything at this point.  

Not generally our style.
This is not a justification or excuse for anything.  Acting on one's desires may be fine, or not fine, depending on how those desires relate to the ways of God.
Of course.  That's why Christ came and Atoned for our sins.
You have a weakness,  a natural-man tendency toward some sin.  All of us do.  Some of those tendencies are stronger than others.  Some of those tendencies are harder to overcome than others.  Nonetheless, we all are weak, and all have tendencies we must learn to master.  Don't let Satan convince you that you are unique or alone in this - you aren't.

Its found in scripture.
13 And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of the wicked, yea, who are evil—for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the devil did enter into them, and take possession of their house—and these shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and this because of their own iniquity, being led captive by the will of the devil.
            14 Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this state, as well as the righteous in paradise, until the time of their resurrection. (Alma 40:13-14)
Now, I will agree that generally "outer darkness" is spoken of as the eternal hell after resurrection. The distinction that doesnt change is the "darkness". That applies for both hells.

That was my understanding as well until I just read Alma 40:12-14 where it is clearly implied.
[Edit: It appears that @Rob Osbornbeat me to it, though the implication is made more clear with the addition of verse 12]
'Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Dreams are, by their very nature, highly symbolic. This may create interpretive difficulties and presumption errors for the symbolically challenged.
[Note: I should have read @Anddenex message  before posting my own so as to avoid duplication.]
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Thank you. I also have had dreams, what I find peculiar about dreams is how often God is symbolic within them, and the symbolism is more important than the overt implication.

With very rare exception I have met few that believe that human spirits exist, think that the spirits of the dead leave planet earth – I know of no religion that teaches contrary to this idea.   It may be quite possible to past from mortality to the spirit world and not realize that death has taken place.
We think that there is a gulf that separates the wicked spirits from the righteous – the reality is that there exists a gulf between the righteous and wicked spirits in mortality as well (this symbolism exists even in scripture).  It is not all that rare for me to discuss religious things with people that are so on a tangent and beyond some intellectual gulf – I am convinced that not only are they living on a different planet but a different universe as well.
  
 
The Traveler

The fact of postmortal missionary work demonstrates that the spirits of the just are, or at least can be, in proximity with the spirits of the wicked. The location of spirit paradise might well be different from that of spirit prison only in the sense that Utah is in a different location from the rest of the world.

I think others have highlighted the five main points, the bonus though appears to be false:
I do not believe our doctrine separates the two realms within the spirit world. When we draw the two items (paradise and prison) we often separate them to make a point that there is a distinction between the two; although, I believe the distinction is more the guilt one feels and who is being taught the gospel by the missionaries and who the missionaries are corresponding with (sitting in council).
The notion "we must reside in the spirit world" is only true before the millennium.

I largely echo @zil's viewpoints. I certainly bear the author no ill will, but the article strikes me as pretty fluffy. Specifically, and at the risk of overwhelming pedantry:
"Those in the celestial kingdom will have stewardship over the lesser kingdoms." Sure, whatever that entails. True but not really very useful. It's like saying "We'll all be pretty." "Everyone in the celestial kingdom will have a Urim and Thummin." Yes, but so what? It's kind of like saying, "Everyone who goes to State University receives an Ipad" to someone who has never seen so much as a digital watch. "There is no night in the celestial kingdom." Metaphorically, this is trivially true, perhaps true by definition. In anything beyond a metaphorical sense, this statement presupposes a whole structure in celestial glory that is not well-supported. Do celestial beings live on a planet that orbits a star? Must "night" be defined by darkness? What is the place of sleep among exalted beings, or is that a purely mortal state? You might as well as whether exalted beings perceive the color blue as being red. "There is no temple in the celestial kingdom." I don't know whether to classify this as True, False, or Duh. It's like saying, "There is no oasis in a tropical paradise." Since the very existence of an "oasis" presupposes a barren wasteland, it must technically be a correct statement. But its implicit meaning is opposite the truth of the matter. (To the author's credit, she acknowledges at least part of this in the final paragraph of her writeup on this point.) "The earth will become the celestial kingdom after the Millennium." True. Maybe this has deep meaning for some. For me, the deepest chord it plucks is when thought of in conjunction with the Savior's promise, "The meek shall inherit the earth." Bonuses: Yeah, whatever. No offense intended to the author, but these superhero-ish "enhanced abilities" sound like an anti-Mormon's parody of "Planet Kolob". All true, I'm sure, but outside of a specific and sacred context, not really meaningful beyond a comic-book approach.

IMO, read the referenced scriptures and ponder their meaning for yourself.  Sometimes, in our rush to summarize or "translate into modern English" we make unwarranted assumptions / additions, accidental changes, or ignorant simplifications or complications.  The best thing is to read the source material.
The five items don't seem unreasonable, but I think the summarizing might tend to make us think we know more than we do, or might make one assume understanding where it's absent - for example, we don't know what the "stewardship" described in #1 will be like.  I'm not sure #2 is clearly explained in scripture.  #3 seems like a no-duh (which probably means I'm glossing over something).  #4 is too simplistic a statement (seems thrown in to catch attention rather than explain truth).  #5 may or may not be misleading, depending on how you choose to understand it.
But if nothing else, the article serves as a good listing of scriptures to read on the topic, so study those instead (or in addition).

All of these are directly quoted from the Pearl of Great Price Student Manual.  I would assume that the information in the manual is what the prophets believe and want us to believe.

Before, you wrote:
I believe that Anddenex was just pointing out that Moses was conversing with Jehovah, whom we know to be Jesus Christ. We don't have to merely infer that Moses must have been speaking to Christ because "the Father doesn't speak to man since the fall." Rather, we know Moses was speaking to Christ because he was speaking to Jehovah, who is Christ. We know by direct identity, not by inference.

Anddenex can answer for himself, but to me the connection is obvious. Moses 1:1 specifies: "The words of God, which he spake unto Moses at a time when Moses was caught up into an exceedingly high mountain..." This is a clear reference to Exodus 19:3, which reads: "And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel". The phrase "the LORD" here is יְהֹוָה (Yĕhovah), or Jehovah, as a quick look at Blue Letter Bible demonstrates. And Jehovah is Jesus Christ, QED.