omegaseamaster75

aka church sponsored fight club

I said your desire to always have the last word is intolerable, I don't know you so how could I have any sort of opinion about you? As far as I know you are a member in good standing, and from everything I can tell articulate and intelligent. We differ on points of doctrine and history.

Good job providing context to everything that I have posted or said in the past....nice one

I fundamentally agree that the more you have in common with your spouse the easier navigating the waters of marriage will be. I mentioned this quote because I live in a part of the country where it would be extreme difficult to find a wife who was not of mixed race, the same religious background is paramount to me....There is always the exception, I hear them creeping our of the woodwork now..... It just struck me that if I was giving the lesson I might skip that quote.......

A mission as a priesthood duty is not doctrinal. Did you know Joseph Smith personally? or Brigham Young? we are all entitled to our opinions about the people that they were. I have never said that Joseph was not a prophet of God and I have never said that Brigham was not a prophet of God. I am entitled to my opinions about the counseling role that Bishops should play in the lives of the membership. Bishops over step....it's my opinion. The church does not provide adequate training to our leadership, from bishops on up. again my opinion and in no way contrary to any teaching of the church . The membership in general is not informed about the history of the church. We are born and raised in a culture where we do not question and just accept. Why the big uproar about the recently released essays? everyone already knew about that stuff anyways right? You are right about one thing though not all women are catty......I apologize

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I bet Jesus had to deal with homosexuality during his time on the earth. The roman society was ripe with it. I think that you can see evidence of it in the new testament Romans 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. Or Corinthians 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. Or in Timothy 9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Never said that. Show me where I did..... I in fact specifically said that he cannot save the unrepentant sinner. Still waiting for you to prove that I am against the teaching of the church also.....

Be careful when you make accusations. I disagree with YOU on points of policy, doctrine and history....not the church....... I am a member in good standing. Have a temple recommend and a calling....you'd be shocked if you knew what calling. I await your apology

Repentance was available, and I am sure many people repented of their sins and were welcomed back into the fold, however those are not the stories that we are told in the old testament in general... No an unrepentant sinner is an unrepentant sinner. How the sinner is treat is what changed I am not sure I understand, a gay person who chooses to remain single and does not act on his homosexual tendencies has not sinned. Who knows I wasn't there....maybe he did.... maybe he didn't.

We view it differently, I want to build a bridge so that when they are ready for repentance they have an outlet. I do'n't want to create a further divide. We are reading things into each others posts that we may or may not mean...I read them into yours and you read them into mine...such are the limitations of the interweb

Here is my point and you can agree or disagree as you like, without a lot of detail. In the old testament the Law was the law of Moses the Jews could make no distinction between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law, to them they were one in the same. The Iseralites were constantly messing up and as such we read about the judgement and chastisement that God administered to them. Now was the God of the old testament kind and forgiving sure he was. However In the new testament we see the SAME Jesus, but the rhetoric has changed some what. The Law of Moses was the lesser law, under Christ the law was expanded, an inclusive law for Jew and Gentile. Through the atonement of Christ we can all be forgiven. He said "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." "When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief." Who did Christ administer to? who is the gospel for? We do not need to accept the sin, but Christ would look towards forgiveness first that they may be participants in his atoning sacrifice. If you want to drive a wedge between you and someone who may one day hopefully see the error of their ways then cold hard old testament justice is what you want. In the end the unrepentant sinner will have to answer for his sins. However why should we go out of our way to harden their hearts, why would we not be Christlike and show love and compassion? My overriding point with the 2 Jesus statement was that the Law has changed/been expanded on. We have an obligation to help the sinner overcome their sins.

Please quote where I said God would forgive unrepentant sinners? I never said that and while I appreciate your ability to google your scriptural references they are not necessary because you are reading to much into what I have posted....

I never said that it did

You don't know that or are you the arbitrator of doctrine for the church?

Let me be clear there is one Jesus only, my response about there being 2 was in reply to the TFP and his thought of fire and brimstone and Gods righteous judgement being brought upon the marrying couple. In my mind I was joking about the 2 Jesus thing...there is one. I think that New Testament teachings do not point to the Old Testament way of dealing with sin.

https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/enrichment-section-a-who-is-the-god-of-the-old-testament?lang=eng

It's this a serious question?

See and we wonder why people think we r not Christian.....

It's the same man, but one of them destroyed the whole of the earth genesis chp 7-8 and the other said forgive 70 times 7.. Matthew 18:22 Or we can go with Matthew 5:44 love your enemies

Old Testament Jesus would bring down fire and brimstone and burn them all. New Testament Jesus would love and forgive.

Sure Old Testament Jesus or New Testament Jesus

If I am would it make my saying that women are catty acceptable......because a man can't state the obvious

Depends on which Jesus your talking about.......

Stop, please don't put words in my mouth. you referenced an illegal act and tried to compare it to a legal act. If in said state teenage marriage is illegal I will not attend because its AGAINST THE LAW If in the same state gay marriage is legal I will attend So now are both legal? Let's just pretend that they are and assuming both future spouses are participating of their own free will I go to both.

We must be crossing lines, I said most passive brags are done subconsciously. Hence the need to be more self aware which most people are not. I am sure that the passive brag in question was not meant as such. However when she was "called out" on it by a snide remark from another person the automatic assumption is that they are attacking her personal problem? Sorry it's a big world and someone can't pick on you about something they know nothing about. Intentional or not the forum in which said passive brag took place was not the correct forum to ask for help aka prayers it was a forum to express thankfulness. If the shoe fits.... Tell me I'm wrong.....women aren't catty?