Adomini22

So.... I though most answers were good ones..... I dont imagine that God thinks of a nice sports car, snaps his fingers, and Viola!!!!......... thats what I thought when I was 6...

If God has laws, and on some levels he does, then he must abide by them. Otherwise, he would not be God. Because God cannot lie, cheat, decieve, etc. What God says must come to pass...... Good example of mine.... Garden of Eden. God told Adam that in the day he eats the forbidden fruit, he shall surely die. Did he die that same day? No. Did God lie? No. It is written that a day with God is 1000 years. Did Adam die the "day" he ate the fruit? Yes. He did. Adam did not reach 1000 years. He reached like 960 or something....but no mortal can ever reach 1000 years on this earth. The bounds have been set. If someone would be here longer than 1000 years, they would have to be transfigured/translated. No mortal can live 1000 years.......... God also placed Cheribum with a flaming sword to guard the tree of life, because if Adam had partaken of it, Gods plan would come to naught, and his words wouldnt be true, hence, God would not be God..... so means are taken to ensure that his words come to pass.....

Adomini, you said: We enter a contract or covenant with God when we partake of gospel ordinances. A covenant is essentially a contract. Two parties sign or agree to a set of conditions in which both parties agree to do certain things. When we are baptized, we enter into a covenant with God. We agree to forsake sin, love our neighbor and obey God in all things. God agrees to remit our sins if we do so. You said at the end of the above quote that we owe a debt through the transgression in Eden. I don't owe a debt because of Adam's acts. I won't be punished for his transgression, but for my own sins. By sinning, I violate the terms of my covenant or contract with God. You don't view entering covenants as equivalent to entering into a contract with God? Yes. Of course. That wasnt where I was getting at. I was viewing the whole parable thingy as hey, Adam transgressed in the Garden of Eden, all men fell because of that, hence, there is a debt to pay if I want to return to God. I wasnt born into a fallen state because I entered in a covenant with God before I got baptized. I am talking about the parable and the Fall. I know a convenant is a contract, a promise. Dude, how could I not know that? Sorry if my words were mistaken. I know we do ordinances in our life. I was talking about the Fall. I did not eat the fruit...yet, I was born into a fallen world, where I cant save myself from, unless I follow the example of Jesus. To me, that is what the parable is saying, to an extent. ANywayz, we are past the parable part.

I dont know. I know what a Jack mormon is. Its my twin. Yeah, if the dictionary had an entry about Jack Mormons, it would include a picture of my twin.

So what is the difference between a Dry Mormon and a Jack Mormon???? or was this an inside joke that I cant understand.......?

And this conflicts with what, exactly. You have never heard that elements are eternal? Did god create the only being in his image out of nothing? No, he took and made Adam from the Earth. God forms, changes, and makes his best creations out of elements already present. The bible supports this...

here we go again....

But Adam didn't sin against Satan, he sinned against God! Adam incurred a metaphorical debt against God, not Satan. You're ignoring the imagery of the parable. The debtor entered a contract with the Creditor. If the creditor equals Satan, then you are saying that: 1.) Through the Fall, Adam became indebted to Satan. 2.) Adam and all of us enter a contract with Satan. 3.) We owe Satan something. 4.) Jesus paid Satan so Satan would release us. That is utter nonsense bro. C'mon, you have to admit that's rather ludicrous to assert! Being in bondage because of our sins does not mean we sinned against Satan and owe him something! The Creditor is Heavenly Father. That is the parable's message. In the video version of the parable, we see young men tempting the debtor to leave his work and go party with them instead. Satan represents the debtor's friends who convinced him to slack off and go have fun instead of working hard in order to be able to repay the debt. I think this is taken literally by you. I dont see how we enter in a contract with anyone at any time. Through the Fall, Adam came into bondage. the same happens to the creditor and the servant. We never entered any contract.....we fell under his power(the devils). We owe a debt, not through a contract, but thru consequence of an act of transgression in the Garden of Eden. Jesus frees us from this bondage if we repent. There is no other way to be free.... The assumption that we enter a contract is ludicrous. No doubt. Because no one at any time did such a thing, so I dont take that literally at all.

We would not all be perfectly obedient just because we shared the same Parents. Remember that Nephi and Laman/Lemuel had the same parents. Now if God had created "us" at the moment of our spiritual birth, then yeah it would stand to reason that we'd all be the same. But the little "I Am" inside each of us, the consciousness within our spirit and physical bodies that animates them both...that part of us, the "intelligence" as the D&C and Abraham says, was not created or made. So in essence, Heavenly Father got what He got when he clothed our intelligences in spirit bodies. He didn't make us one way or the other. We are who we are, and who we are is imperfect except for Christ. That doesn't explain how he's the only perfect one, but we must understand that he is the only perfect one. Alma 13 discusses these principles well. CK, its been awhile since we have agreed. its nice to go back to the way things were..... I agree.

"So if the creditor represented Satan, you're asserting that: 1.) Mankind entered into some contract or covenant with Satan. 2.) It is because we can't fulfill this contract with Satan (whatever that could possibly be) that we incur a debt to him. 3.) Jesus had to pay Satan some amount of suffering so that Satan wouldn't cast us off from God." i see it differently. Mankind is under bondage because of Satan, because that is the consequence of the Fall of Adam. We cannot redeem ourselves by any means, hence we cannot escape the bondage.... and Jesus had to pay with some amount of suffering to complete the atonement, resurrect everyone (bring everyone back to the presence of God), and have our sins removed if we repent, so we can dwell full time with God.

Tell ya what. When I actually get off work, I will review this with more care. Apparently, I am the only one reading this post so far...so someone might beat me to the punch later tonight if not tomorrow. 2 nephi does appear to say what you say it says (ok, that sounds wierd).... let me take a closer look.

Snows question wasnt answered as of yet..... God is alot more than an organizer in LDS views. Organizing is just one thing he does, since everything is in its rightful time, place, sphere, etc....

Yeah, my twin. (I really do have one..)

It is written (and I am at work right now, so scripture browsing isnt much of an option at the moment), that if it wasnt for the resurrection and/or atonement, we would be enslaved by the power of the devil. We would be in a sort of bondage. So, that relates to an extent....the creditor putting the other in bondage, and the person looking for someone else to pay the debt and set him free. By the fall, the consequence of such would put us in a bondage where we could never free ourselves. Someone has to step in for us. Does that help? I can see the relation....

Actually, if this doesnt sound too bad....I can see that the creditor could be Satan. That actually makes sense.....800pm

CK, relax. Its as if you got your youth back..... I didnt dissect the whole chapter. i pointed out 2 verses, one after the other, saying that mercy 1) satisfies justice or 2) overpowers it. That is an interesting thing that I saw. However, your scriptural basis for your response was good, and I am not even going to dissect all that. And on a side note, I wasnt trying to be direct with that last comment. Notice, I didnt say prophets vs. CrimsonKairos. You believe to be doing what is right, and since your comments/views are not damaging, then I have no problem with it. Something just doesnt fit quite right, and I need more time to look into it. While I have been saying this before, I stumbled on Alma 34, and hence, my post.

I love it how in Alma verse 15 it says mercy overpowers justice, and then in verse 16 it says that mercy satisfies the demands of justice. So lets play with words and say that it is this way or the other.... In this chapter, the Nephite law says that one person cannot sacrifice his blood to atone for the sins of another. But that is not the be all of the characteristic of JUSTICE. That is Nephite law. Lets look at Gods law, shall we? One person did sacrifice to atone for the sins of another, given that the sinner repents. Oh wait, that would be Jesus himself, wouldnt it? Justice , the word and characteristic of Justice, does let that happen. Verse 12 and 12 in Alma 34 says it best, justice requires that we pay the price for sin...."therefore it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice....." and " therefore there can be nothing which is short of an infinite atonement which will suffice for the sins of the world.." on our behalf. "which will suffice for the sins of the world.." Sounds like Justice, doesnt it? Of course, later on it states that mercy overpowers justice ( which by the way, can only be thought possible regarding the sacrifice for sin.... however, it cant be said that mercy overpowers justice regarding the resurrection). And of course the next verse says that mercy can satisfy the demands of justice........... In short..... Authority of President Hinckley through Joseph Smith vs. the authority of anyone on this site NO CONTEST

Never heard of anyone thinking like that either. Gethsemane and Calvary were both needed, together. No one can say otherwise, except for ignorant fools who dont read scriptures.

Who is Steve Salvi? What is his expertise in immigration? What is OJJPAC? What is it's expertise?For every site like the one you linked I can find one opposing it. Everyone has an opinion and loves to put it on the internet. Show me a site designed by people with expertise in immigration issues who have no bias. That I will consider. Elphaba That is kinda funny. Some people who are experts in immigration who have no bias? Well, the names are New Mexico, Arizona, California, Florida, Texas, basically any state that has an ocean nearby......, yeah, the millions of those experts I am sure who lived there years before the populations quadrupled...... they might have an opinion, dont you think?I think they have an opinion and it is worth listening to. They have, after all, experienced the affects of immigration issues. But to accurately represent the situation, you need an expert who can analyze the data but who has no bias. Therefore, no, they're opinion is not relevant when it comes to providing an accurate picture of the situation. What I need is someone who is going to provide a reliable analysis that I can trust will be accurate and without a bias so that I can utilize it to decide who to vote for. I don't want an analysis that tells me what I want to hear. I want one that tells me the truth. Don't you think? Elphaba Actually, I was trying to be a little funny.....guess my humor isnt up to par this afternoon. hard to find the unbiased analysis. I guess people will agree with what they feel is right, rather than what they know to be right....maybe....

Who is Steve Salvi? What is his expertise in immigration? What is OJJPAC? What is it's expertise?For every site like the one you linked I can find one opposing it. Everyone has an opinion and loves to put it on the internet. Show me a site designed by people with expertise in immigration issues who have no bias. That I will consider. Elphaba That is kinda funny. Some people who are experts in immigration who have no bias? Well, the names are New Mexico, Arizona, California, Florida, Texas, basically any state that has an ocean nearby......, yeah, the millions of those experts I am sure who lived there years before the populations quadrupled...... they might have an opinion, dont you think?

A-train....... that is the best post so far. We dont understand EVERYTHING about the Atonement. I know the basics, the "why", and that is enough for me. Thank you for that post.

I am also glad for these discussions. They allow me to think about whats most important in gospel doctrine. Good posts, good posts.....

My first reaction would be Yes, do it. After thinking about it, it might create conflict, and that isnt the purpose of conference, neither the spirit of it......... but I like the idea of it...

As long as there is choice, there is the possibility to choose wrongly. Did Lucifer sin in the preexistence? well, yeah, he did. So free agency still allows the possiblity of sinning... I asked my mission president this question years ago, how was Christ perfect when we were not. He said that maybe it was because Jesus was the only one sinless in that state, hence his perfection before the plan went underway....

That is really interesting. I didnt know about that guy. Nice post.