The Folk Prophet

The Gospel in Our Lives

Put Off the Natural Man, and Come Off Conqueror

Repent of [Our] Selfishness

I would suppose that the attending of ministering angels and the "when" of that is the purview of the angels as directed by the Lord, and not our place to "call them forth", particularly not for selfish reasons. Our place is to obey -- or, rather, to do the will of God in all things, not to improve our lives and situations by trying to wield sacred things as if they are magic.

...can't now...because we wouldn't know who to seal to whom. But these sealings will have to be done by proxy by someone at some point. Ordinances must be done in mortality.

We are....unless Christ lives, God reigns, and we're actually right. But until that is proven, yeah...we will be viewed that way.

My first example concerns Satan’s efforts to corrupt a person who has an unusual commitment to one particular doctrine or commandment of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This could be an unusual talent for family history work, an extraordinary commitment to constitutional government, a special talent in the acquisition of knowledge, or any other special talent or commitment. - DALLIN H. OAKS Edit: This was in response to this: Edit more: Actually the whole talk is fantastic. Here.

Oh my goodness gracious me. I believe the world has ended.

Uh....circumstantial evidence is still evidence.

Protein shake.

+1. While I know there are things like this that do happen (I've been mistreated myself by ward leadership, and I'm not a female or a feminist) I find that when there is a consistent pattern of supposed problems like this (assuming it isn't all fabricated to get a rise out of everyone) then there's something amiss with the offended more than the accused offenders. For example, we have a family in our ward that has gone inactive because of "abuse". I have been personally involved in much of the effort around them and there has been nothing but love, invitation, kindness, help, service, etc., etc. shown towards them. But according to them they are constantly abused, belittled, judged, mistreated, berated, hated, and marginalized. It's easy to throw one-sided accusations at church leadership. I wonder what the local leaders would say were they willing to accuse back. I wonder what would really come out in an honest, fair, both sides, legitimate assessment. These are easy, safe attacks on the church. The best the church can do to defend themselves is with content like in this letter, because the bishops and stake president don't publish the issues, tell their side of the story, etc., because it would break confidences and offend even worse. The church is, and has been, working to solve legitimate issues. The letter makes that clear for anyone who didn't already believe it (not that those who didn't believe it before will believe the letter). Frankly, the church is, and has been, working to solve non-legitimate, irrational issues too. It will never be enough. The efforts of Satan to tear down the church can never be satiated. No matter how many policy changes, doctrinal alterations, and management re-orgs occurred (even up to and including replacing the entire leadership of the church with women) it will NEVER be good enough for those unwilling to humble themselves and look past human imperfection to God's will, ways and means. We live a spoiled-brat existence in these latter-days. The current cultural climate breeds entitlement. Entitlement is not God's way.

In the age of Google and Wikipedia there is no longer any excuse for making such mistakes. But, to be fair, I make them myself from time to time. It's a good lesson. Google first. Comment Second.

Just for the record here, I'm pretty solidly in agreement with mdfxdb here. In case anyone was wondering. :)

I suppose it depends on your age and the "older woman's" age. If you're 30 and she's 40 then there might be problem. If your 65 and she's 70 there might be a problem. If you're 30 and she's 70 there's probably no problem. Transgressing?! Haha. Impropriety? Maybe. Transgressing? Show me that commandment anywhere. "Thou shalt not drive another woman to church if you are married under any circumstances."

Whereas anatess is right that we do not have specific revelation as to what happens, it is clear that the ordinance of celestial marriage must be performed in the temple by living persons. I expect those who die single will have it set right sometime in the millennium and will have that work done for them just as any work must be done for any who have died without the opportunity for ordinance work in this life.

For digestion by those interested: M. Russell Ballard "I testify to you that this is true and that the Father and the Son appeared in wondrous vision to young Joseph as a step in the restoring of the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the earth." "Through subsequent, equally miraculous experiences, Joseph Smith was God’s instrument in...establishing the restored church of Jesus Christ in these latter days with the fulness of the gospel as taught in the meridian of time by the Savior and His Apostles," "The Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus Christ or it is not. Either the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ was restored to earth through God’s chosen latter-day prophet or it was not." James E. Faust "This prophecy has been fulfilled. Because we believe the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored in our time by the Prophet Joseph Smith, we wish to give all people an opportunity to know and accept this message." "I am grateful that the Restoration of the fulness of the gospel has taken place in our time." Joseph B. Wirthlin "Today more than 44,000 missionaries are working to fulfill the divine mandate to preach the gospel. They bless the people they teach by acquainting them with the fulness of the restored gospel." Richard G. Scott "[Missionaries] will skillfully unfold the subsequent events that restored the fulness of the gospel, with the authority to act in the name of God, on earth again." Russell M Nelson "This unique mortal mission of the Lord—the gospel as He defined it—we know as the Atonement. The fulness of the gospel, therefore, connotes a fuller comprehension of the Atonement. This we do not obtain from the Bible alone. The word atonement, in any of its forms, is mentioned only once in the King James Version of the New Testament. In the Book of Mormon, it appears 39 times! 24 The Book of Mormon also contains more references to the Resurrection than does the Bible." Harold B Lee "On the day the Church was organized, and shortly thereafter, the word of the Lord came to the prophet-leader of this dispensation. After the announcement of the establishment of the church of Christ in these latter days, the Lord gave to the President of the Church commandments and “gave him power from on high,” first, to bring forth “a record of a fallen people, and the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ” (D&C 20:8–9); then, to be a light to the world and a standard for Church members and for those who are not members to seek for it (D&C 45:9); third, to prepare a people ready to receive the coming of the Lord; and finally, to teach the fullness of the gospel with power unto all nations (see Documentary History of the Church, vol. 4, p. 537)." Boyd K Packer "We, as members of the Church, have the fullness of the gospel." "How disappointing when the fullness of the gospel, the whole keyboard, is here upon the earth, that many churches tap on a single key. The note they stress may be essential to a complete harmony of religious experience, but it is, nonetheless, not all there is. It isn’t the fullness." "Now we do not say they are wrong so much as we say they are incomplete. The fullness of the gospel has been restored. The power and the authority to act for Him is present with us. The power and the authority of the priesthood rests upon this church." "It is not unusual to find people who take an interest in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but give only casual attention to the ideal that the fullness of the gospel is here."

Heheh. Whoops. Yeah. I meant everything but the endowment and celestial marriage.

I've been doing some study into this topic and I'm still a bit confused. The fulness of the gospel is fairly clearly defined in a variety of places as the new and everlasting covenant that includes, baptism, gift of the holy ghost, the Sacrament, priesthood ordinance, the endowment, and eternal marriage. All of these are in the Book of Mormon except eternal marriage. Yes, as mentioned, marriage itself is mentioned. But not eternal marriage. Hmm.

skalenfehl, How do you reconcile what you're saying with D&C 20:9 and D&C 42:12. How can we have the fulness of the gospel in the scriptures but not have the fulness of the gospel? Here's L. Tom Perry: "Our message is unique. We declare to the world that the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored to the earth. We declare with boldness that the keys of the priesthood have been restored to man, with the power to seal on earth and in the heavens. The saving ordinances pronounced by the Lord as requirements for entering into eternal life with Him can now be performed with binding authority by those who worthily exercise the power of His holy priesthood. We declare to the world that this is the day referred to by biblical prophets as the latter days. It is the final time, before the coming of Jesus Christ to rule and reign over the earth." More insight I've gleaned in my studying: The fulness of the gospel is the new and everlasting covenant. (D&C 66:2) When was this taken away? Which covenant are we missing that are required for salvation?

According to Dr. Paolo Mantegazza (1859), cocaine is a remedy for "a furred tongue in the morning, flatulence, and whitening of the teeth." So at one time, Coke was good for that too... ...uh....

No, I understood...I think. Sorry if my response sounded like I was just debating. I was debating...but not super seriously...mostly meaning to continue with the light humor by pointing out what shall now and henceforth forever be referred to as Lucas' folly *. *Edit: In the spirit of debate, and to show I'm an equal opportunity offender, I contend that I am wrong. Lucas' folly is clearly The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Not entirely accurate. If I 'simply believe' that blacks are inferior then I am a bigot -- no getting around it.

That is misreading my response. I am not saying there is no other behavior but right or wrong. I'm saying that incorrect behavior and wrong behavior amount to the same thing. I'm saying that incorrect = wrong. It has nothing to do with whether there are shades of gray or not. Regardless, mdfxdb clarified and I accepted his clarification as valid. Speaking of "Sith" and the conversation surrounding "absolutes" -- and as a prime example of another way Star War went from being awesome to lame: Anakin Skywalker: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy.Obi-Wan Kenobi: Only a Sith deals in absolutes. compare to: Jesus Christ: He that is not with me is against me. So....by George Lucas logic, Jesus was a Sith.

Ran across this quote and though it was applicable. Interesting food for thought, I think: “Nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God” (Jospeh Smith - History of the Church, 4:573)

Thanks. Very helpful. Here is an article on Sins and Mistakes by Dallin H. Oaks. It details out, fairly well, I think, what makes the difference between error (foolishness) and sin (wrong action when you know better). Clearly getting a tattoo/piercings could easily fall, for some, into the foolishness category, and very clearly into the sin category for others.