Randy Johnson

Dawn,I know you respect Bradley...heck, I do! But, he is not a lawyer....and he is cherrypicking what it is he wants to actually present in his posts. He is missing the entire point of the book. If you will notice...all of his comments are his opinion on the conclusions drawn by Mr. Reimann. He has been unable to refute any of his conclusions based upon the law. Listen...the book is exhaustive. Bradley just briefly mentioned about JSIII being the "Trustee-in-Trust". This issue is complicated and lengthy and is gone over extensively in the book. He also has not addressed the fact that the LDS church was not a defendant in the case. The RLDS attorneys attempted to make it appear so...but it was not. The tactics used at the time were illegal for the many points that are shown and which Bradley fails to point out. Going back to the issue of the RLDS choosing to use "coined phrases" is because they tried to "piggyback" the issue of succession along with the "ownership of the Temple" case. They had to try to paint the picture that the original church had somehow became "disorganized" and in effect..."ceased to exist". Like I had mentioned, and as Mr. Reimann goes into detail about....if the official name of the Church had been used in the official pleading of the case...the RLDS church's case would have been fatally flawed at the outset. Actually, as Mr. Reimann points out numerous times by numerous ways...the case WAS fatally flawed from the outset. The fact that the original "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" as an institution went west with the official records, history, and acknowledged leadership and assets of the original church....it would have been a no brainer for any judge to be able to rule that said church was neither "disorganized" or that it had "ceased to exist" thereby needing some sort of "reorganization". Bradley mentions that it is obvious that Mr. Reimann didnt like the outcome of the case as it was decided by Judge Sherman. Actually, it could be said that Bradley simply doesnt like the conclusions that an experienced lawyer, whose speciality was in real Estate litigation...and who examined these two cases extensively....was able to show beyond any doubt that the RLDS church LOST both cases and NOT for the reasons that have been traditionally given by the RLDS church. No..Bradley could not give the book anywhere close to an honest review because of the obvious implications. Dawn, is there a way that you can post some emails from me addressing these issues on the Center Place board....or do you feel you cant or should not do it? Let me know...thanks.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :) Dawn, ....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!! Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression. Why? I thought you were being pretty darn civil. Dawn, Me too! I am sure somebody complained. That is so weak. What are they afraid of? Geez!! Oh well....they want to keep the posters within the flock..so to speak. Thats fine with me....I guess. Nuttin I can do about it. Randy, Bradley replied back to you about the Kirtland Temple case over there in case you want to pop in and read it. Dawn, Well, first Bradley is right....he is not a lawyer. His opinions are about as valid in a court of law as mine are. But, notwithstanding that...Bradley "cherry picked" what he wanted to show! He didnt even address the few questions I asked. I REALLY wish I could respond to his post!! I would have ALOT to say! If I post a response here...can you somehow get it posted on Center Place board??? Just a quick example...regarding the LDS church as defendant.....do you know WHY the RLDS "CHOSE" to refer to LDS as "the Church in Utah of which John Taylor is President"??? First, its illegal for a plaintiff to arbitrarily use "abbreviations or coined phrases to address the defendant..when with reasonable effort the correct and legal name can be found and used. The RLDS church KNEW what the official name of the Church was!! They chose not to use it because by the very fact IF they did...it would undermine their case from the very beginning, because it would be clearly shown that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints never ceased to exist....never was "disorganized" etc...as was claimed by the RLDS church. Thats just one example. Anyway....let me know if you can foward some info for me! At a minimum....let the people on the board know that I am not allowed to post..otherwise I would be responding in detail to his post. I just dont want them to think I am running away from Bradley!! Man...I wish I could post ....just ONE MORE TIME!

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :) Dawn, ....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!! Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression. Why? I thought you were being pretty darn civil. Dawn, Me too! I am sure somebody complained. That is so weak. What are they afraid of? Geez!! Oh well....they want to keep the posters within the flock..so to speak. Thats fine with me....I guess. Nuttin I can do about it.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :) Dawn, ....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!! Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression.

Dear Amillia,Then we are finally in agreement!! This is good.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.) NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others. Amillia, Just another common sense thought about "inheritances". It is true...a person can be "written out of the will, or at a minimum..have their inheritance reduced"...but, it is also possible is it not...to have a will "rewritten" ie; re-written through the covenant or contract we make when we are baptized and confirmed...and receive the higher ordinances...we can thus be "restored to our FULL inheritance"!! No where in your references does it infer that an inheritance cannot be restored in its entirety. Actually, just the opposite is true...based upon what I shared with you in my previous post.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.) NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others. Amillia, Since you used the NT commentary...I will make the assumption that I can use another of Elder McConkies's commentary. Speaking on the Atonement of Christ...he says: "Because of the Atonement and by obedience to gospel law men have power to become the son's of God in that they are spiritually begotten of God and adopted as members of his family. They become the sons of God and JOINT-HEIRS (restored inheritance, you cant be an heir without an inheritance!) with Christ of the FULLNESS OF THE FATHER'S KINGDOM...in other words they receive their Exaltation! See D&C 39:1-6; 76:54-60; Rom 8:14-17; Gal. 3:1-7; 1John 3:1-4; Rev. 21:7 By coming unto the Lord through faith, repentance, baptism, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, and receiving all the Temple ordinances....that RESTORES our inheritance!! That is the wonderful love and grace of our Savior in action!

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.) NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others. Amillia, I just read in McConkie's NT commentary of the parable of the Prodigal Son and the additional commentary by JF Smith from "The Way to Perfection". Again, you have misunderstood. First, JF Smith made reference to "riotess living" then coming back into activity into the church. Did the prodigal son end up going to the Temple? Did he end up marrying his sweetheart for time and eternity and be promised the specific blessing found in that order of the PH? We do not know! JF Smith is not saying that a "repentant" new convert who has lived an unrighteous life up until they accept Christ, exercise faith in him and come unto him through all the gospel ordinances will be exempt from obtaining their exaltation if they endure to the end in righteousness. I mean think about for just a second Amillia. Basically, what you are saying is that every adult convert to the church will never obtain Eternal Life..which is Exaltation, because the odds are they have committed these sins which you allude to. I would have to ask you the question then....if what you say is true....why have converts go to the Temple at all and be sealed as families? According to you...it would be a waste of time because they have already squandered away their "inheritance". This notion is completely contrary to the scriptures...the Atonement of Christ, the Temple ordinances...everything that we teach. It really is. Just reread Elder Oaks comments. Ponder them and dont be to proud to acknowledge the fact that you are beyond the "fringes of orthodoxy" with the "Kingdom to Kingdom" progression and "if you have sinned a great sin, that accepting Christ and coming unto him through faith, repentance, baptism, the Gift of the Holy Ghost, receiving ones endowement and entering into an Eternal Marriage and then enduring to the end in righteousness...is not sufficient for one to return back to the presence of the Father and to be a "joint heir with Christ" and to receive "all that the Father hath". IF that is what you are saying.... then you and I are in deep trouble. Because guess what? I hate to be the bearer of bad news...but you have sinned...I have sinned. So..using your logic you and I have both "squandered our inheritance"!! You and I have NO HOPE of Exaltation! I dont believe that for a moment!

I remember that one well. I also remember when the General Young women's president asked all Young Women's presidents to stop teaching it. I heard that analogy just this year in a Gospel Doctrine Class. Amillia, I just came across this address given by Elder Dallin H. Oaks at BYU Devotional in 1992 entitled "Our Strengths can become our Downfall"...the following is an excerpt: A DESIRE TO KNOW ALL "Another strength Satan can exploit is a strong desire to understand everything about every principle of the gospel. How could this be a detriment? Experience teaches that if this desire is not disciplined, it can cause some to pursue their searchings beyond the FRINGES OF ORTHODOXY, seeking answers to OBSCURE MYSTERIES rather than seeking a firmer understanding and a better practice of the basic principles of the gospel. Some seek answers to questions God has not chosen to answer. Other receive answers--or think they receive answers---in ways that are contrary to the order of the Church. For such searchers, Satan stands ready to mislead through sophistry or spurious revelation. Persons who hunger after a full understanding of all things must discipline their questions and their methods, or they can approach apostacy without even knowing it. It may be just as dangerous to exceed orthodoxy as it is to fall short of it. The safety and happiness we are promised lie in keeping the commandments, not in discounting or multiplying them." I think these comments by Elder Oaks speak specifically and directly to what has transpired on this thread. IMO. Amillia....I want to apologize for my getting frustrated and short with you. I am sorry. You are my Sister in the gospel. I am sorry. I will let Elder Oaks comments stand as my last comments on this issue.

I remember that one well. I also remember when the General Young women's president asked all Young Women's presidents to stop teaching it. I heard that analogy just this year in a Gospel Doctrine Class. Amillia, You simply deny the Atonement of Christ. You are putting forth things that are false....thats it in a nutshell. Let's not quibble with words....you just got through saying "this is something they do not like to disclose because of the far reaching issues"....but if we are to believe you...you have sat down in your living room with the Prophets and Apostles and had lengthy discussions about this and other mysteries of the Gospel. I honestly do not believe for a moment that that is the case. Sorry. Nope...when I come across situations like these....I just have to wonder how in the world this happens. But, like I said at the beginning of this thread....you better be careful...because you are walking down a dangerous path. Amillia, I believe in the scriptures. I cannot accept any "doctrine" that is not in harmony with what has been revealed. Yes, I do believe you got it wrong, that you misunderstood what your SP said to you. I got a hint of what you tend to do when you "cut and pasted" Elder Talmages comments to make it appear that he supported this notion of "Kingdom to Kingdom" progression..which he did not. But, you chose to do that in order to give your position some credibility. I am thinking you do that alot. Just be careful.

It will be agreeing with the Lord that will count in the end. 2 Timothy 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto bfables. Dear Amillia, I am about as "orthodox" LDS as they can possibly come. I dont know how old you are, I am 48 yrs old, have served in 3 Bishopric's and everything else on the ward level....have been active...have attended my fair share of Regional meetings with Apostles etc....and I have never, ever in my entire experience in the Church have heard anything remotely resembling what it is you are espousing. The key that this was a false doctrine was when you made the comment that you and your SP agreed that these "doctrines" are not taught openly but secretly or only to those who could "accept and understand" the deeper meaning (I know I paraphrased that badly, I am sorry) There are no secret doctrines within the Church. The Temple ordinances are for all that desire to receive them. Its situations like what you are presenting here that the First Presidency is so adamant about sticking to the basics of the gospel...and not allow ourselves to get caught up into "gospel hobbies" as it were. The doctrine you are putting forth here is false. It does not ring true to my spirit..nor does it agree with scriptures or any teaching or address that I have ever read or heard. I think what we are trying to get you to see is that this is your personal opinion...and thats fine, but do not put it forward as official LDS doctrine because it certainly is not.

I hate to burst your bubble, but I was also a pure and delightful virgin on my wedding night. I never thought that I was more deserving of an eternal reward for that than my non virgin friends. In fact I had a few who I felt were far more "righteous" than I was. They just messed up in different ways than I did, but we were all sinners in one way or another. I just never worried about it. They paid their price with their own remorse. I would never expect a just and loving God to punish them eternally for a moment of bad judgement on this earth. Interestingly enough, most of my posts on this thread state that very thing ~ and the opposing view, coming from a guy on this board who is in leadership, disagrees with ya. Amillia, I am not sure if you are referring to me (if you are, you have my permission to mention me by name)...but I would have to agree with Curvette on this one. The scriptures teach us that if we truly repent, exercise faith in Christ, are baptized....receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost...are sins are forgiven and forgotten. I think I had mentioned before on this board, maybe not...but my wife and I have been together since 5th grade. We went steady in 5th, again in 7th grade...she got pregnant the summer after 9th grade. She was not a member of the church. She studied, took the discussions....and was baptized. She has lived a wonderfully righteous life (IMO) and she has worked hard at home and at church. She has sacrificed tremendously. The Lord has long since forgiven her for that transgression many years ago. It will not be held against her or me. IMO..your SP was coming from left field with his comments. Oh well, it will just give me yet another question to ask my SP. Amillia, please do not misunderstand my position. I believe in the atonement of Christ. I believe in repentance and forgiveness. I also believe in accountability and righteous judgement by our Lord. The church does not believe in a "perpetual second chance" theory. The scriptures are crystal clear on what we need to do, and when we need to do it...and the consequences both good and ill that will come from it.

I loved conference. I wished there were more. Final judgment is a time when everyone will stand before Christ to have their life on this earth reviewed. I'm sure there was one before we came here, reviewing what we had done in the pre-existence. My husband's patriarchial blessings states that he was given a good home and parents who were members of the church, IOW born in the covenant, because of his valiancy in the pre-existence. That meant there was a final judgment before we were given our earthly asignments. There are many endings and new beginnings. There always will be. One eternal round necessitates progression. We can't let end of the world, final judgments and other such phrases' meanings be held back by men's conceptual and limited understandings. We must not lean to our own understandings or we will be as the pharasees who thought Christ was speaking of the actual temple building, rather than His own body when He stated that if they destroyed it, He would build it back up in three days. The Jews didn't recognize Jesus as the Messiah because they were looking for 'literal' worldly leadership. They didn't put the prophecies into their proper perspectives, and were caught up in their own worldly needs. We also need to be careful not to try and limit the work of the Lord in behave of ALL of us, because we are ALL eternally connected. We know it is important to do our geneology and temple work for this reason. Many of the terms used in scripture and doctrine are not so singly dimentional was we think. There is much the people didn't understand in Christ's work and day. There was much the people didn't understand in Joseph Smith's work ~ They search, and they find understandings at one level which seem to be totally contradicted at another. But in truth nothing really is contradictory. Our understanding just lacks the eternal and long term perspective. We are very finite people in a finite world. But God isn't. His work is endless, because He is the beginning and the end, we aren't. Joseph Smith once stated that if he told the saints all that he was given and knew, they would ride him out of town on a rail and label him a heritic. This is true. It is why we are to not share too much of what we have been given spiritually, because it is only given to those who are ready to receive it. Dear Amillia, I want you to know that I have very much enjoyed our discussion on Eternal Progression. I realize we disagree on some points...but I have thoroughly enjoyed it! I have continued to study and ponder over this question of if there is progression from Kingdom to Kingdom. I have reaffirmed several doctrinal truths that I feel have a bearing on this discussion. I will offer my thoughts in a moment. Next week we will be having our Qtrly PH leadership meeting, with a meeting of Stake Presidency,HC and Bishopric's. At the beginning of each meeting there is a short question and answer period. I will be asking this question of the group for their thoughts on the matter. Now my thoughts....you made the comment in your last post that in your view the "Final Judgement" will be a "review" of our life. I would disagree. In Rev. 20:11-15 and 2 Nephi 9:15-16 it states clearly that we will be "judged" not "reviewed" (reviewed to me simply implies, going over our life...with no real accountablity or right and wrong...just a "hey this is what you did"...next)..... But, I submit to you that a "judgement" as referred to in these 2 verses alone (there a many others) imply that there will be a "judge" and a "sentence passed" based upon our degree of faithfulness here in this probation. The above mentioned scriptural references refer to the "Final Judgement" when all mankind will stand before their maker and be judged. After this "Final Judgement" we will thus inherit the Kingdom of Glory that we have prepared for during this life. It is my understanding that "eternal progression" when understood and applied to its fullest extent...can ONLY be enjoyed by those who become Exalted. The scriptures are clear on this point. The people who inherit a Terrestial or Telestial glory will never have the truths and the powers that are possessed by those who become Exalted. The simple fact that we know there are "ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and exceeding, and eternal weight of Glory", and "THEY SO CONTINUE TO ALL ETERNITY, AND FOREVER AND EVER". It is clear that these people will NOT be progressing in the fullest sense as those who are Exalted. See D&C 132:16-17 I have been rereading "ARTICLES of FAITH" and the more I read it..the more distinct impression I receive that Elder Talmage does not believe in progression from Kingdom to Kingdom. On page 372..last half of the last paragraph he simply says "Freedom to worship, or to refuse to worship, is a God-given right, and every soul MUST ABIDE THE RESULT OF HIS CHOICE". So to me what he is telling us, in light of the scriptures and his own feelings of inspiration on the subject...is that TODAY is the day to prepare to meet God, and that we will be judged accordingly...thereafter to be resurrected with the body that we have lived and prepared for here on earth. He gives no hint of a "perpetual second chance" theory...nor do the scriptures, at least the ones I have read. In deed, the notion that eventually we will possess and attain Exaltation eventually...regardless of whether we chose to live a Celestial law here on earth..to me is going against the scriptural injunction that indeed, Mercy cannot rob Justice. The Lords Plan of Salvation provides every individual who has, or will yet ever live on earth, every opportunity to hear and accept the gospel. We cannot be judgemental on what constitutes an "opportunity", thus the plan provides opportunity for all...then the Lord will judge whether they are worthy of Exaltation and the priviledge of "Eternal Progression" in the complete and fullest sense. You mention that perhaps we should be careful of using such "finite" terms such as Final Judgement etc. I submit to you that as Latter Day Saints we have a correct understanding of those terms, because they have been clarified to us through the Lords Prophets and Apostles. We need not be shy or hestitant about using them with perfect confidence. IMO.

Dear Amillia,I hope you enjoyed conference as much as I did! It was wonderful! Good sister, I was just curious....you mentioned in one of your posts that there is no "final" but everything is one eternal round. From your perspective..what is your understanding of what the "Final Judgement" is? What is the purpose of it?

Hmm...so can we also conclude that the first presidency agrees with McConkie's belief that "negros" were fence sitters in the pre existence and that they would never receive the priesthood? I don't recall ANY disagreement with that voiced by the first presidency either. In fact, it's still in the book. Maybe the first presidency should censure the apostles when they teach false doctrine, but they haven't recently. Curvette, You misquote Elder McConkie as well!! Under the topic "Negroes" on pg 527, left hand column toward the bottom..he says...."The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmately to them, although sometimes negroes search out the truth, join the church, and become by righteous living..heirs of the Celestial Kingdom of Heaven. Pres. BY and others have taught that in the future eternity worthy and qualified negroes WILL RECEIVE the PH and EVERY GOSPEL BLESSING available to any man." So your statement in your post is patently incorrect.

Hmm...so can we also conclude that the first presidency agrees with McConkie's belief that "negros" were fence sitters in the pre existence and that they would never receive the priesthood? I don't recall ANY disagreement with that voiced by the first presidency either. In fact, it's still in the book. Maybe the first presidency should censure the apostles when they teach false doctrine, but they haven't recently. Curvette, Elder McConkie has every right, like we all do...to write a book and explain things the way he see's them and to voice his opinion on matters. In the preface Elder McConkie states plainly that the contents of the book are his responsibility and no one elses. Any book written by any member, be they GA or not...should not be held above the scriptures or official proclamations given by the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12. After Pres.Kimball received the Revelation extending the PH to all worthy male members....Elder McConkie in an address commenting on that revelation said in effect..."forget anything and everything I have written or said concerning this, the Lord has spoken and has made his will known through his Prophet". So...Elder McConkie was very aware that his thoughts were not the Lord's thoughts...and he acknowledged that publically. Now when I first saw Amillia's quote from Elder Talmage...my first thought was "ok, now we are getting somewhere". Jesus the Christ and the Articles of Faith are works that Elder Talmage was commissioned by the First Presidency to write, so they hold, IMO...a little more weight. But, the JoD, Mormom Doctrine and other similiar works should be used in the manner I believe they were intended, which was NOT to be taken as "official doctrine of the Church" but rather as study guides. IMO.

Amillia,The entire quote is as follows..."It is reasonable to believe, in the absence of direct revelation by which alone absolute knowledge of the matter could be aquired, that, in accordance with God's plan of eternal progression , advancement within each of the specified kingdom's will be provided for; though as to POSSIBLE progress from one kingdom to another the scriptures make NO positive affirmation". I have said that progression "within" each kingdom is possible. Elder Talmage makes no such statement in support of progression from kingdom to kingdom. So, when I said to be careful, which although I said "you" my intent was for "all of us" to be careful when we talk about doctrines that have not been fully revealed or clarified. With respect to Wilford Woodruffs journal entry...all WW can say is that BY "thought" that perhaps this may be how it may work. There is no statement that he was firm in this conviction or that this is correct doctrine, thus an official belief of the Church. It was his opinion, just as Elder Talmages comments are his opinion. At the very best...I will agree to a tie! LOL! <subject of course to further enlightenment from the Prophets and Apostles>

Why should she be careful? It sounds to me like there is plenty of room on this issue for interpretation. It sounds clear that there have been disagreements on this in the highest echelons of the church. If the guys with the direct pipeline to the divine can't agree than I doubt the Lord would expect perfect agreement from us lowly peons. Curvette, Well, to be honest...I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe there have been any disagreements on it. Our good sister Amillia mentioned Elder McConkies comments on it during a Devotional address at BYU entitled "The Seven Deadly Heresies"....the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 did not voice ANY disagreement with the position he espoused. I believe therein lies our answer with respect to his address. I used the phrase "be careful" because we have a responsibility to ensure that what we talk about doctrinally is correct. Between what the scriptures teach on it...and the fact that Elder McConkie spoke to it specifically and the First Presidency did not censure or in any way make any comment to indicate they disagreed...we can only conclude that they in fact...agreed with his comments. I would still enjoy seeing any statements that speak "clearly" and to the point on this subject. I still have not seen any.

Amillia,All the Temple work will have already been completed before the final Judgement. Those issues will have already been settled. So, at the time of the Resurrection of the Just in the morning of the First Resurrection, that is when those who are destined to inherit a Celestial glory will be resurrected with their Celestial bodies. When it speaks of the Endowment...it is ONLY making reference to entrance into the Celestial Kingdom. At the time of the Final Judgement...when we actually inherit the Celestial Kingdom , it is at the time we actually enter into that Kingdom that we use the pure knowledge given to us in the Temple through our endowment and are able to walk past the Angels who are set as Sentinals there. It is clear in D&C 131...that "in the Celestial Kingdom, there are 3 Heavens or degrees...and in order to obtain the Highest...a man (and woman) must enter into this order of the PH..meaning the New and Everlasting covenant of marriage, and if he does not he CANNOT obtain it. This verse alone teaches us that there are certain prerequisites in "addition" to receiving ones endowment that MUST be had in order to receive Exaltation. It is clear that those who have received their endowment, and who for whatever reason CHOOSE not to enter the New and Everlasting Covenant of marriage, but are otherwise true and faithful to the gospel and their Temple covenants...could expect to inherit at least one of the "two first degrees" of the Celestial Kingdom....but not Exaltation. All Temple ordinances are performed for entrance into that Kingdom and no others. A person does not need temple work performed for them to enter either the Terrestial or Telestial kingdoms.

I will have to do some extensive searching on this one....and I don't have time....but I know it is in one of many books....like JoD...or Joseph Smith's early writings...or journals...or early apostles....writtings....there is just so much I would have to go back through... I did extensive studying about 15 years ago....and came across it... but I can't remember where....I also came across BY teaching that other church had the Aaronic priesthood already.... Good Sister, I read and re-read your quotes. I am sorry...they do not speak of progressing from one Kingdom of glory to the next. A careful study of D&C 76 and 131 teaches this clearly. Again, it has not been revealed if a person can progress "within" a Kingdom of Glory...IMO..we can. But the Scriptures are clear on the fact that there is no progression from Kingdom to Kingdom. I guess there are those who disagree, and we are they. Dear Amillia, Yes, we can agree to disagree. Just be careful. Why dont you forward this question to your Area President for clarification. I would be interested in their response.

I will have to do some extensive searching on this one....and I don't have time....but I know it is in one of many books....like JoD...or Joseph Smith's early writings...or journals...or early apostles....writtings....there is just so much I would have to go back through... I did extensive studying about 15 years ago....and came across it... but I can't remember where....I also came across BY teaching that other church had the Aaronic priesthood already.... Good Sister, I read and re-read your quotes. I am sorry...they do not speak of progressing from one Kingdom of glory to the next. A careful study of D&C 76 and 131 teaches this clearly. Again, it has not been revealed if a person can progress "within" a Kingdom of Glory...IMO..we can. But the Scriptures are clear on the fact that there is no progression from Kingdom to Kingdom.

I've never heard of this, but I'd be interested in seeing some quotes. Do you have any? Amillia, I will have to say that I also strongly disagree with the notion of progressing from "kingdom to kingdom". That is a false doctrine, even if BRM agrees! LOL! In my Gospel Essentials class I was teaching on this very thing last sunday. The manual, and everything I have ever read teaches us that the body we are resurrected with, will determine the glory we shall inherit. We do NOT know however, if there is progression "within" kingdoms of glory, but my understanding has always been that there is NO progression from Kingdom TO kingdom. In the spirit prison we know that the spirits there can "progress". They are in a different situation...they have not yet been resurrected...so there is time there for them to progress to the extent they can. randy Sorry....but JS, BY and JT all taught them very clearly.....and they got it from God himself.... Good Sister, I hear what yer sayin..but, I have NEVER heard such a thing. Let me see your sources so I can educate myself. You mention JT...his GGGGrandson and his wife.... served a mission in Indep.Mo..and were assigned to our ward the entire time they were here. Coincidently, our study guide was from the teachings of John Taylor. We discussed this very doctrine, or should I say alleged doctrine...and as High Priests, all having served in Bishopric's or Stake Presidencies...all agreed that this is a false doctrine. But again...let me see your references. But you know what Amillia, you are still a sharp lady, very articulate and well read! I do enjoy reading your posts!! Yer just a wee bit askew on this one! LOL! randy

I've never heard of this, but I'd be interested in seeing some quotes. Do you have any? Amillia, I will have to say that I also strongly disagree with the notion of progressing from "kingdom to kingdom". That is a false doctrine, even if BRM agrees! LOL! In my Gospel Essentials class I was teaching on this very thing last sunday. The manual, and everything I have ever read teaches us that the body we are resurrected with, will determine the glory we shall inherit. We do NOT know however, if there is progression "within" kingdoms of glory, but my understanding has always been that there is NO progression from Kingdom TO kingdom. In the spirit prison we know that the spirits there can "progress". They are in a different situation...they have not yet been resurrected...so there is time there for them to progress to the extent they can. randy

Hello there!Just an observation..but if thats your list of what you want to get from listening to GC...you obviously have little going on upstairs. Seems to me that you would want to have your faith in Christ strengthened, your desire to serve invigorated....your love for your fellow man increased. You are definately in need of an attitude adjustment to say the least. Lets assume for a quick moment...that I could somewhat agree with your assessment of Elder Faust's talks...(which I do not).....I must ask the question.... SO? Whats your Point? There are many, many other inspiring talks that are given that if you came to the feast prepared to eat...you would most certainly walk away spiritually fed and full! I think you suffer from lack of spiritual preparation! Just my thoughts... ....oh...and a big hearty AMEN to you Amillia! You are right on! randy

Dawn, Please...answer my questions though...ok? randy Dawn, I hope you are not going to let my questions go without an honest attempt at an answer are you?? Looking at the responses from the other board....it would appear that your position is certainly not held up by the others. Bradley was middle of the road with qualifications. Plz...scroll back through my last few posts...and try to answer may questions. randy