a-train

Yediyd Ya did? Are you re-posting the OG questions? This is an old thread. Are you wanting new posts for those questions? -a-train

To those that said the earth is the spirit world: I am so glad to hear that. So many around me aren't sure about that. I think many of us still see things as do many of the sectarians. We think that when a man dies he goes to some distant heaven or some remote hell. The truth is, when a man dies, he is still the same man here on the earth with the same mind, but without his physical tabernacle. He will have a great awareness of being dead and he will have a good sense of his guilt. This is the misery of hell. But the torture or pain of hell is worse than guilt. Spirit Prison is so designated because it is simply ignorance. It has been said that ignorance is bliss, but tell that to a man dying of a disease with no known cure. The spirits in prison have no surety of a good day of judgement and may have little or no knowledge of how to secure one, this can be very painful. I think we often imagine that on the day of our death, everything will be answered and we will know all we ever needed to know. That is just not true. We know that a great work of deception is commenced all around us in this world, that same power and engagement is just as in force in the realm of the disembodied. Satan and crew are there working to bring men into their power. But even as Satan is there, so is the LORD and a fantastic host of ministering spirits engaged in delivering the knowledge of salvation which is the Gospel of Jesus Christ to them that don't have it. Notice that Alma said the spirits are received into a 'state' of happiness or a 'state' of misery, not a 'place' of happiness or a 'place' of misery. (Alma 40:11-15) -a-train

Most def Sixpack. Word. -a-train

Haha, I already had the Revelation to John in my back pocket for discussion in this thread. Fantastic! Who is the bride? He says the bride was 'arrayed in fine linen, clean and white', and what did he say that fine linen is? He said it 'is the righteousness of the saints'. Paul definitely taught us to wear righteousness: 'Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness' (Eph. 6:14) Perhaps the wife who hath made herself ready, is the woman clothed with the sun in Revelation 12. Joseph Smith clearly said she is the Church of the Firstborn with the twelve apostles at her head, clothed in celestial glory, standing above the terestrial and telestial. The notion presented in Isaiah 62:5 is wonderful when considering the sealing work that goes on within the LORD's house. -a-train

I'll go ahead and offer another idea about the 'who' the groom is marrying. This is highly speculative, but I enjoy exploring these things. In Jewish poetry and literature, the Sabbath is known as a 'bride'. An expression is even made: 'Come see the bride', which is a calling to keep the Sabbath holy. The engagements of the Jewish people on the last day of the week were considered a holiday celebration to a certain extent, not a boring day of nothingness as so many seem to suppose. Could the bride within this parable be the Sabbath of the Millennial Reign of Christ? Could our involvement in the celebration of that union be in similitude of bridesmaids? Are we more associated with the Sabbath than the LORD? 'The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.' (Mark 2:27-28) It's something to think about. Still, there is no question that Paul, independent of the Parable of the Ten Virgins used the symbolism of marriage to describe the union of Christ, to the saints: 'For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.' (2 Cor 11:12) -a-train

I think one of the most ingenious and powerful points about the Saviour's use of a wedding to symbolize the Second Coming is that His Coming is not just 'the end of the world' as we often imagine. It is also the beginning of a wonderful eternal union between God and man and there shall be a great celebration of that at his coming. Dr. T: So you consider the virgins to have been bridesmaids and NOT brides. OK. That's really all I am asking here. This interpretation, though not directly in the scripture, has been accepted by many Christians and I can understand their difficulty and apprehension in considering the virgins to all be marrying the groom because of their utter distaste for polygamy and ardent belief in monogamy. The designation of the virgins as bridesmaids gives a new question: Who was the groom to marry and in what way can we function as 'bridesmaids' at the Second Coming of our LORD? -a-train

Yes, I understand what a parable is. The women, the groom, none of this was real. It was a symbolic story. I have understood that since my youth. I understand that the parable is about the return of the Saviour. Has anything I have said even slightly intimated that it is NOT about the return of the Saviour? That is NOT what I am asking. Is this really that hard to understand? Let me try to break this down as plainly as possible. Jesus made up a story to represent his coming. The story is only symbolic. Some of the key symbols follow and some of their interpretations follow: Foolish Virgins = Unbelieving/Unrighteous people who are not prepared for Jesus return. Wise Virgins = Believing/Righteous people who are prepared for Jesus return. Lamps = The souls of the respective people Light from lamps = Enlightenment/Spiritual purity Oil from Lamps = Spirit of God/Knowledge of God Groom = Christ Wait during the night = Our wait for the LORD to return/Darkness of the world in His absence Arrival of Groom = The LORD's second coming The Wedding = The union of the wise saints with Christ at his Coming/The rejoicing celebration of his return. My question: Why did the LORD use a polygamous marriage to symbolize the union and celebration of the saints with the LORD at his coming? Is there some specific meaning to that? If polygamy is wickedness, is there some meaning there? Or, was polygamy not considered wickedness by the LORD at the time he gave that parable? Do you see the question? -a-train

Nobody is saying that the parable supports polygamy. I am NOT asserting: 'Jesus talked about polygamy so it's OK, go and have many wives.' I only brought it up because we are here to discuss any New Testament references to plural marriage. This is one. I am really making little or no assertion at all. On the contrary, I am asking a question: 'Would the Saviour's use of polygamous marriage, and the preparations on the part of the virgins desirous to be included therein, to symbolize the union of Christians with the Saviour at His second coming and their preparations therefore, at least demonstrate that the practice of polygamy is not to be considered utterly foul and wicked, just as the preparedness of the saints to be united with the Saviour are not to be considered foul and wicked? If polygamy is and always has been deplored and an abomination before God, what are we to understand by this use in the parable? Is there a negative or evil aspect to the union between the LORD and the saved at His coming? What is the LORD teaching us here? -a-train

I don't think so, sir. Because of that, it appears that a better reading and understanding of that passage/parable would be that it had nothing to do with the wedding of these woman to one man and specifically dealt with Jesus' return. OK, What are you asserting? Are you saying that the parable doesn't contain a reference to polygamy at all, as in the five virgins are not marrying the groom? You said: 'I don't think so'. What don't you think so? I don't understand. -a-train

Have at look at these links: www.christianpolygamy.info I am not really certain there are specific sects of Christian polygamists operating under a single or multiple appellations, but I wouldn't doubt the possibility. Perhaps the greatest reason is because of the legal and social intolerance of the practice as I am sure you can imagine. Many polygamists live in the united states that have little or nothing to do with the LDS Church, but the general public has heard the practice so repeatedly associated with 'Mormonism' that they imagine every American polygamist to have at least some belief in the revelations of Joseph Smith or some involvement with the LDS Church. As mentioned already above, there were Christian polygamists within traditional sects of the Faith long before the birth of Joseph Smith. The truth is, that the legal ramifications of polygamy in the U.S. have gone vastly uninforced throughout the history of the prohibition of plural marriage. LDS have and do consider the law and it's strict enforcement against the LDS people to have been nothing more than a politically and socially acceptable means to impede the progress of the LDS involvement in government. Simply put, our national government feared the implications of Mormon governers, senators, congressmen, and so forth and sought a means to prevent Utah from obtaining statehood without positioning non-Mormon officials. Polygamy and rebellion were the charges brought by US officials to persuade public opinon thereto. Graphic images of LDS leaders seducing young girls and enjoying the sexual gratification of orgy-like harems were printed in the news and circulated among the people in a time of great sensationalism in American journalism. Utah was depicted as the wildest and wickedest portion of the already 'wild-west'. All of which seemed to express the notion and solidify it in the minds of the public that the seemingly depraved, immoral, and lawless people of Utah were not worthy to have elected officials among members of the U.S. governing bodies. A non-LDS governor was sent with military inforcement to take power over Utah. The Utah war would eventually be called within the media 'Buchanan's Blunder' for the Presidents mistreatment of the issue. The embarrasing situation for Buchanan resulted his sending of peace commisioners who issued a 'global pardon' to the LDS. While the people felt it was full of lies and incorrect assertions, Brigham Young accepted the pardon in order to prevent further military action against the LDS. The end wasn't yet. The attacks against the LDS Church on grounds of polygamy would continue until the 1890s when the Supreme Court upheld that Congress had power to dissolve the LDS Church and seize all of it's real properties including Temples. It was in this context that the LDS Church leadership asked the LORD for His counsel regarding the future of the practice of polygamy. They were facing the loss of all temples and Church property in general and the dissolution of the Church's incorporation itself. Concerning his reflection, supplication to the LORD, and revelation on the subject at that time, Wilford Woodruff (President of the Church at that time) said: 'I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . . .' And what did he write concerning the prohibition of polygamy? 'I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.' Now we could ask: Why was he not like Daniel who went into the Lion's den when the commandments of men outlawed adherence to the LORD's commandments? If you listened, Wilford Woodruff already answered: 'the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do'. As you can see today, to the disappointment of government officials who sought so diligently to prevent LDS members from rising to various positions within the government, members have been able to rise to such positions and continue to do so. As the years pass, the public opinon seems to continually move away from the previous fears that were so instilled by the sensationalism, slander, and libel of the anti-mormons. For the most part, as long as our governement has had no other problem with any polygamists, they have turned a blind eye. I wouldn't doubt that polygamy probably exists in every state in the union. Only when child-abuse or other stituations arise do polygamy laws ever get enforced. It is the sad truth that while this country has touted justice and equality throughout it's history, it has often been discriminatory in the application thereof. -a-train

The Parable of the Ten Virgins was given in the Saviour's teachings to the Apostles prompted by their question: 'Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?' (Matt 24:3) The 'things' they were asking about in addition to the LORD's coming and the 'end of the world' were the destructive events which were to come upon Jerusalem and the Holy Temple as Jesus preceding the question said: 'There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.' (Matt. 24:2) The Saviour's reply mentioned that false teachers would attempt to deceive the saints and would suceed among 'many'. He fortold wars and pestilences. Matthew 24:9 is where the Saviour outright tells the Disciples that the wicked shall 'deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.' We can here witness an incredible faith and determination to do the will of God in Matthew, as he wrote this knowing wherein his calling on this earth would end. After their death, deception and falsehood were to continue worsening until 'iniquity shall abound' Without going into to much further detail I'll suffice to say that the LORD told more specifics of the age of His coming and gives council that those alive at that time must endure the tribulations and trials therein and be ever ready to receive Him at His coming for the 'day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.' (Matt 24:36) The Parable of the Ten Virgins is then given in further instruction in preparation for the LORD's coming. Many through the ages have attributed a strong symbolism in the marriage of the virgins to the Groom, the impression upon the mind therein is one of union, love, and faithfulness to Christ as He is faithful also to us. As Paul further expressed: 'For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.' (Eph 5:23) Indeed, even as marriage is a covenant between a man and his wife, the relationship between the saved and the Saviour is one of a covenant. This interpretation is NOT LDS spin. The interpretation has been handed down through the Christian tradition from the earliest age. LDS simply agree that it is correct. Perhaps what is even harder for the antis to believe and accept is the fact that the vast majority of LDS doctrine is or has been believed by at least one or more traditional Christian sects. Now the question still remains: Why would the LORD use a fordibben and illegitimate form of marriage to symbolize the faithful and pure union between Himself and the saved he so gracefully suffered the Atonement for? Could it be that this union was NOT therefore considered by Him to be so filthy and carnal as so many would suggest? -a-train

Through Adam's transgression, death came upon all mankind. What is worse? No priesthood or death? Is anything we take in this life a punishment? Who did sin in the man born blind from his birth, the man or his parents? Remember Jesus' answer to that question? Even if there is a 'priesthood ban', should we infer that it is a punishment? Are we to assume that the crack baby is being punished? Were those children born to Jews in Germany during the holocaust being punished? NOTHING in this life is a punishment. We live in a probationary state here, a time for us to prepare to meet God, a time wherein we are tested to see if we will do all things whatsoever the LORD our God commands us. How many people died before the Restoration? Was that a punishment? Are the Chinese under the rule of communism who have still not been able to receive the Gospel and the priesthood being punished? We are NOT being punished, we are being tested. -a-train

LDS did NOT use the New Testament to bring about or vindicate any notion and/or practice of polygamy. However, there have been groups of Christians that have and do. Two of the New Testament scriptures used by non-LDS groups are the two I brought up: the Parable of the Ten Virgins and 1 Corinthians 7. So, do I understand this right? Is everyone here but CK of the opinion that the five virgins were NOT polygamously marrying the groom in the parable? Now, understand, I am making no ascertion here that to admit that the LORD's parable contained polygamy would in any way mean that polygamy is to be practiced by us today. This thread is somewhat dedicated to New Testament references to polygamy and that is why I am asking about what people think of these two references, because they have been viewed by non-LDS Christians to be making mention of polygamy. But here is another question: 'If polygamy was indeed allowed under the Mosaic Law, then what indication do we have in the New Testament that it was to be discontinued altogether with the new covenant?' -a-train

Wow, Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my post. Of course the parable is about being prepared for the LORD's return. That is exactly why the question exists. Why is the Church/Kingdom of God on Earth uniting with the LORD at His coming symbolized by a polygamous union? Is the question unclear? Do you not understand what the question is? How can I be more clear in this question? -a-train

Perhaps this has also been asked, but why was the 'kingdom of heaven' likened to ten virgins who all waited on a single bridegroom in Matthew 25? The five who maintained enough oil for their lamps are considered 'wise' and go into the marriage. Why do we have the LORD portraying the kingdom of heaven as the polygamous marriage of five women to one man? And why would He give us an example of polygamous women as role models? If they are only bridesmaids, why were they waiting on the groom and not the bride? Indeed I can see a necessity to present the union of the numerous host of the Church to the LORD with a plural company marrying the single Groom in 'the hour wherein the Son of man cometh', but it would seem that most of modern Christianity (and many LDS for that matter) would be highly uncomfortable with the LORD's inclusion of polygamous marriage in such a holy and beautiful parable. In fact, there are many who will outright deny the bridegroom was polygamous in this parable for that very reason. Imagine if the LORD were to have put it forth as ten men waiting on the Groom? While this could have some validity in the symbolic union of all men to Christ, it would be shocking nonetheless to our modern society of Christians if not also the Jews to which the Master gave the parable. It would of course sit easier with us however, for we could interpret them to be mere groomsmen in support of a bridegroom to whom some unknown virgin was being wed. However, the parable would lose it's conveyance of the symbolic matrimonial hold of Christ to the Church as was also presented by Paul in his Epistles. DISCLAIMER: For anyone wondering if New Testament references to polygamy such as this are where the LDS obtained the notion and vindication of polygamy, the answer is emphatically NO. -a-train

OK, Since this thread is on the subject. I'll ask this question: Does Paul outright condone polygamy in 1 Corinthians 7? 'And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.' (1 Cor. 7:10-11) If the LORD here commands a man NOT to put away his wife and further disallows the wife to marry another, what does this mean? Does this mean the man whose wife has left will re-marry without a divorce? If the estranged wife returns and is so reconciled does the man then have two wives? What about verses 27-28? 'Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned.' Is he saying that a man, whether bound to a wife or not can marry and 'hast not sinned'? Why is there any question whether a virgin would sin by getting married? Are we talking about a virgin who is marrying a married man? These are questions. I don't intend to put forth the answers. GOD BLESS -a-train

It is interesting to think that there are languages that do not contain 'curse words'. While much of what our moms are steaming over today is in the KJV of the Bible and can be used both there and in cursing contexts, the king of all that is profane is perversion of language in its usage itself and it seems to bear little capability to convey much meaning without complete reliance on context. Perhaps the use of a single word for virtually any meaning is profane in and of itself without benefit of any implication through the etymology of the term in the first place. Consider how those that use the ol' F-Bomb do so as a verb, adjective, noun, or as anything else they want to emphasize within their speech. It is interesting to consider words such as 'dude' that exhibit similar capability in usage. The term can be an exclamation, an expression of sorrow, a cry of frustration, a title, and much more. In many cases, it bares no similarity whatsoever to its true definition. It is a wild-card in the game of expression, but is only a bug joker compared to the fully wild duece (the 'F' word). The truth is, the rappers and poets of our modern era are in many ways more advanced and as capable as the greats who are cherished by our professors within the universities of the world. The great frustration is the fact that they are as a pearl of great price on the floor of an ocean of impostors. It is easy to see in a bout of spontaneous poetic expression set to a beat and a rhyme scheme that a total wildcard could become a crutch for those less capable. Add to that the fact that it is met with resistance and received with shock and you have the go-to term in the rap game. Modern urban vernacular seems to be in a bona fide war against orthodox diction itself. We continually and habitually modify and ruin our language in our efforts to appear as the real poets who stand at the helm of language and easily grab specific notions from the sea of terms at their fingertips. Let us not assume that the use of these wild-cards are any indication of malice or intended malfeasance. Further, let us remember that the most hurtful and damaging statements that could be made against could be so spoken without benefit of any of the earmarked terms our moms are so unhappy with. We alone choose whether or not to be offended. We in our agency can solely choose to seek understanding rather than judgement. Do NOT get me wrong, I intend to follow the admonitions of my mother, but I intend also to prevent the walls of judgement and pride from rising between me and my fellow man over their use of nothing more than a four letter word. -a-train

OUTSHINED Most of my family is military. My Dad, my sister and her husband, and my wife's father and brother were/are all Navy. My grandfather went to enlist for WWII, but somehow (I don't know the full story) he ended up going to some company to build planes for the war. His brother, was a pilot who bombed the Japanese and was shot down on some tiny island over there. He escaped and is still alive (but very old) today. I would love to be involved with the military, but I have a very different calling at this time in my life. I fully honor and respect your efforts. I applaud you and I am compelled to say THANK YOU to both you and your family for both your offer and your courageous service and determination to promote democracy and peace throughout the world. I have no doubt, that in a situation such as that of traveling through modern Iraq with a dozen or less men in U.S. military fatigues, a man must possess a clearity and awareness of the highest rank of capability and astuteness. May God be with you over there and let your labors be blessings to both the people of Iraq and your family. -a-train

For handheld scriptures, 1st try: LDS.org I had to use: www.skimware.com If you can't get any of that to work, get googling. Let me know how it turns out. GOD BLESS -a-train

Doesn't this illustrate the enormous need for modern revelation with great and vivid poignance? Vast multitudes have through the aeons of history debated the authority, meaning, implication, and implementation of virtually every jot and tittle of holy writ. God grant us the willing heart, the faith, the courage, the stability of mind, and the wisdom to receive His truth and know His will in spite of the whirlwind of opinion. -a-train

There are certain things you keep put away for certain reasons, guns, money, underwear, tooth-brushes, and chapstick are among those things. This is also a reminder that you always tip anyone who is alone with your car, luggage/personals, or food. -a-train

Perhaps the missionaries were getting snappy with the scriptures. OK, That was bad. I know. Still, there is a twinge of a smile on my face, I don't know why. My main scripture set is one of those little quads with a snap. I wonder if in thirty years or so I'll be able to read the small print. I am a little past halfway through making this set into a full colored-letter edition. I hope to be able to finish that and keep it for the rest of my life for reference. I think the snap helps preserve the set. I still have a set my dad bought in the 1970's that has zippers. They are in extremely good condition. I would go for zippers if they had that these days. At the end of the 1980's I once said: 'I wonder if one day books won't even be books anymore, what if our scriptures were more like a game boy?' I now have all the standard works in my phone, I can flip it out and peep verses right there. If in the next few decades a new edition is released with a whole new lay-out we will all be thumbing through it forever trying to find anything as did my Dad's generation when the current edition dropped. However, I seem to use digital scriptures so often now that I am less and less reliant on the lay-out. I remember when they quit making the snap, I can't remember why. Ebay or Obi Wan is your only hope. -a-train

Each of us have at our fingertips the scriptures, the teachings of the latter-day prophets, huge mountains of historical data, and much more provided by the unprecedented vast information base of the internet. We stand in an age that all our progenitors may have been unable to even fathom. Still, it is a matter of our own agency what we will search for amongst all this. Will we seek to understand? Will we 'search knowledge'? (2 Nephi 2:37) Will we love darkness more than light? (John 3:19) Who can doubt that every man is able to formulate his own understanding through the efforts of his own study and supplication to God? It is with this in mind that we can safely have faith in the LORD that He will edify, instruct, and enable each man as fast as he can endure truth. Therefore, isn't it good wisdom that if we intend to do the will of God and bless our fellow man that we will seek not to argue and contend with them? Let us not assume that anything but kindness and love will lay contention to annihilation. And understand that when we undertake to convince another man through the mechanisms of logic and semantics of what has been shown to us by revelation, we therein manifest our lack of faith that the LORD will do for them just as he has done for us in revealing the truth. Let us all be uplifting and in the spirit of brotherhood and faith bear our own testimony and offer what we have been given of God in the reciprocal spirit of humility. And let us be sufficed with what answers our fellow men are able or obliged to give and let both they and us get the rest from God. -a-train

I remember a High Priest in a southern North Carolinian ward I served in as a missionary. He told us of how he became aware of the Church through friends in the military many years before the priesthood was extended to him. He had served our military in several wars and was then retired (in 1996). He had an asian wife that he met on deployment. They were a great old couple. He told me and my companion one night of his experience joining the Church. This was during some of the most bitter moments of the civil rights movement. He said he actually had black friends and family scorn him for having anything to do with a 'white' Church. He had attended many Churches until he had come to the LDS Church. He explained that the LDS Church was the only one not segregated. He had tears in his eyes as he told us that on one Sunday a white sister in the ward hugged him in the foyer. He must of noticed that my companion and I didn't seem struck by that. Growing up in such an integrated America perhaps kept us from seeing exactly what he was describing. After a pause, he said: 'You have to understand, I coulda got killed for something like that back then.' He laughed and went on to say that he remembered hearing that the time had arrived that had been so long awaited that the priesthood could be extended to all men regardless of lineage. He mentioned how it seems that those same naysayers who attended the segregated Churches and scorned his assimilation with a 'white' Church now make accusations regarding priesthood bestowal. Regardless, he had a testimony that the Restoration was true and passed no judgement against those who had been so good to him for many years before civil rights were extended. We went out on many splits with him. He was great. Most of those who I baptized on my mission were black Americans. -a-train

Go buy some Notorious B.I.G. and blast it 24-7, that will get you desensitized... ...wait... ...maybe not. I work at a skateboard shop. Parents come in trying to look cool and cuss a lot. The best is when they lean over the counter and say stuff real low so their kids don't hear them. It is as if they are saying: 'Hey, my kids don't know it, but I am actually sooooo coool.' I could choose to be offended. But what is the right thing to do here? The reality is, we live in a society where the vast majority of people constantly use the language mommy told us not too. I live in Kansas City. I hear harsh language all day every day. I am sufficiently desensitized I guess. I think the best we can do is speak as well as possible and others will follow our lead. When one raises the vocabulary stakes in a game of conversation the others tend to make efforts to see that bet and the more observant and wealthy in jargon will attempt to raise. -a-train