askandanswer

I've sometimes thought that the exercise of extracting a coin from the mouth of a fish has some similarities to priestcraft - the use of divine Priesthood power for personal gain. Perhaps it could be argued that Jesus did not personally gain anything himself from this process as He gave the coin to the tax collector, to which I would reply that meeting a financial and legal obligation to which one is subject in this context is pretty much the same thing as personal gain. Or looked at in another way, it might appear that Christ used His Priesthood power to provide financial support to a dictatorial, murderous, corrupt, merciless, cruel government. This would be a rather unusual way of characterising this particular event but its an interpretation that seems to fit the basic facts of the matter. If this is indeed what Christ did, it must have been the right thing to do otherwise He would not have done it.

To me, the use of the word “we” suggests that Paul was talking to, and about, in the first instance, the congregation in front of him at the time. The use of the word “all” suggests to me that he is talking about everybody and not just those who are around during the millennium. And I understood the use of the term “twinkling of an eye” to refer to a time frame, ie, that the resurrection will happen very quickly, even in the twinkling of an eye.

New Testament | 1 Corinthians 15:51 - 53) 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 88:94 - 99) And another angel shall sound his trump, saying: That great church, the mother of abominations, that made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, that persecuteth the saints of God, that shed their blood—she who sitteth upon many waters, and upon the islands of the sea—behold, she is the tares of the earth; she is bound in bundles; her bands are made strong, no man can loose them; therefore, she is ready to be burned. And he shall sound his trump both long and loud, and all nations shall hear it. 95 And there shall be silence in heaven for the space of half an hour; and immediately after shall the curtain of heaven be unfolded, as a scroll is unfolded after it is rolled up, and the face of the Lord shall be unveiled; 96 And the saints that are upon the earth, who are alive, shall be quickened and be caught up to meet him. 97 And they who have slept in their graves shall come forth, for their graves shall be opened; and they also shall be caught up to meet him in the midst of the pillar of heaven— 98 They are Christ's, the first fruits, they who shall descend with him first, and they who are on the earth and in their graves, who are first caught up to meet him; and all this by the voice of the sounding of the trump of the angel of God. 99 And after this another angel shall sound, which is the second trump; and then cometh the redemption of those who are Christ's at his coming; who have received their part in that prison which is prepared for them, that they might receive the gospel, and be judged according to men in the flesh. Paul seems to be saying two things here. One, that we shall all be resurrected at the same time, and two, that the resurrection will occur at the sounding of the last trump. Section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants seems to be saying that the resurrection will be a staged process occurring in several stages, and that it is only after the third trump that the resurrection will be completed – “And again, another trump shall sound, which is the third trump; and then come the spirits of men who are to be judged, and are found under condemnation. (Doctrine and Covenants “| Section 88:100) Furthermore, this third trump is definitely not the last trump as verses 102 – 110 state that there will be at least another 11 trumps after this third trump. What do you think is the best way to reconcile these apparent differences between 1 Corinthians and Section 88 on the nature and order of the resurrection?

I've never felt the need or interest to look at other LDS related forums. lds.net easily meets all my needs and interests.

Maybe God IS smiting with you this election

And this is exactly what King Mosiah reminded of us of in Mosiah 4:16-18 16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish. 17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just— 18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.

Here are some possible reasons why people may have asked if she smoked: 1. They are curious 2. They are conducting their own informal research or trying to increase their own understanding about connections between lung cancer and smoking 3. They're really bad at small talk and don't know what else to say 4. They are gathering anecdotes to use in their next arguement with a loved one who refuses to accept any link between smoking and cancer 5. Maybe, just maybe, they are trying to work out how much sympathy the dying smoker deservies. To assume the fifth answer, ahead of the equally plausible other four answers, sounds exactly the kind of judgement that this person is railing against.

Many years ago, in another stake and state, I am aware of an ex-communicated bishop who, about 30 years later, was called to be assistant high priest group leader. I believe that in between when he was excommunicated and when he became Assistant HPGL he also served as a home teacher and had various assignments over several years in the family history centre. I think he may have had more than this but I don't know for sure.

35 And the multitude of the earth was gathered together; and I beheld that they were in a large and spacious building, like unto the building which my father saw. And the angel of the Lord spake unto me again, saying: Behold the world and the wisdom thereof; yea, behold the house of Israel hath gathered together to fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb. What percentage of the population of the great and spacious building do you think the House of Israel make up? The way this verse is worded makes it hard for me to work out whether few, many or all of the inhabitants of that building are of the House of Israel. Like many of you here, I’ve read this verse many times, but this is the first time I’ve realised that it was the House of Israel who were fighting against God’s apostles. Normally, the House guys are the good guys.

Thanks Mirkwood

From the introduction to Sectio n138 In his opening address at the eighty-ninth Semiannual General Conference of the Church, on October 4, 1918, President Smith declared that he had received several divine communications during the previous months. One of these, concerning the Savior's visit to the spirits of the dead while his body was in the tomb, he had received the previous day. Does the church have a record of, or has it been made known, what the other visions are that President Smith received in the months preceding the October 1918 General Conference? I note that in the October 1918 General Conference, President Smith stated: I will not, I dare not, attempt to enter upon many things that are resting upon my mind this morning, and I shall postpone until some future time, the Lord being willing, my attempt to tell you some of the things that are in my mind, and that dwell in my heart. I have not lived alone these five months. I have dwelt in the spirit of prayer, of supplication, of faith and of determination; and I have had my communication with the Spirit of the Lord continuously; So it seems that he did not want to say at that time what was resting on his mind, but that he had an intention to do so some time in the future. However, given that he died shortly after the conference, I'm not sure if he ever did tell anyone, or keep a record, of what those visions were.

My brother is reading the book Visions of Glory by John Pontias, and is interested in hearing people's thoughts and opinions about the book and the ideas it puts forward. If you're familiar with the book, I'd love to hear what you thought of it and how much truth you think it contains.

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 130:9 - 10) This earth, in its sanctified and immortal state, will be made like unto crystal and will be a Urim and Thummim to the inhabitants who dwell thereon, whereby all things pertaining to an inferior kingdom, or all kingdoms of a lower order, will be manifest to those who dwell on it; and this earth will be Christ's. 10 Then the white stone mentioned in Revelation 2:17, will become a Urim and Thummim to each individual who receives one, whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms will be made known; (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 130:11) 11 And a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon is a new name written, which no man knoweth save he that receiveth it. The new name is the key word. It may be reasonable to suppose that the white stone referred to in verse 11 is the same type of white stone referred to in verse 10. Verse ten indicates that one of the properties of the white stone is that it is able to make known things of a higher order of kingdoms. If a white stone is given to those entering the celestial kingdom, as verse 11 indicates, I wonder what order of kingdoms it will make things known about to those celestial beings who receive white stone. I understand that there are degrees of glory within the celestial kingdom, but they would all seem to be degrees within the same kingdom, whereas vs 10, with its reference to kingdoms, plural, seems to be referring to something other than higher degrees within a particular kingdom. Does this verse give reason to consider the possibility that there is something higher than the celestial kingdom?

If I was in your situation I would start looking at the various LDS dating sites, but there are many others in this forum who are far more familiar than I am with such sites, so I will leave it for them to comment on how good or useful those sites are. But that is where I would first start looking.

He never said that sinning had to be a part of the learning process, but He set up a situation where nothing could happen until sin had been committed. From one perspective, it was a no-win situation. On the one hand, Adam and Eve could either commit a sin of omission by ignoring the commandment to go forth and multiply, and keep the commandment not to eat the fruit, or they could commit sin of commission by eating the fruit and thereby be enabled to keep the commandment to go forth and multiply. The commencement, although not the continuation, of the plan, depended entirely on some sort of sin. I suspect that God was just waiting for the fruit to be eaten before He came back with His additional instructions. it's also unstated how many times previously God had returned and given other instructions prior to Him giving the instructions that we are told of in another place. There were two special trees in the garden. If I had been Adam, I would have made fruit salad, rather than just sampling one type of fruit at a time. I wonder what outcomes that would have produced?

This is a bit of a side track, but I thought that under the rules of the game, the spiritual and physical predicament that we are currently in are necessary and unavoidable parts of the whole plan of salvation. Adam and Eve certainly committed the acts that led to our current situation, but according to the rules under which they were operating there was no way that they could have avoided doing so without jeopardising the broader plan. Adam and Eve, by their actions created the situation but He, not they, created the rules that led to the situation.

In the course that my God and I are following, one of the many determinants of our current relative positions is starting time. God started this course before me so He has therefore progressed further than me but we are on the same road. I believe that in pursuit of the course that He and I are now on, there is nothing that He has done that many living now will also do t some point in the far distant future (where time might not have a meaning). Although there are major differences between my God and myself, I believe that with time, faith, and works on my part, and grace on God's part, the number and significance of these differences will change, although some differences will certainly remain. As to whether or not we worship the same or different Gods, I believe that there are a lot of strong and overlapping similarities in our concept of God as many other posts have pointed out. However, I worship a being of tangible flesh and bone whereas I believe that many protestants worship some kind of immaterial amorphous being. It seems to me that the difference between an immaterial amorphous being without body, parts of passion, and a loving, physical being with flesh and bone casts some doubt on whether we worship the same God. The concepts are very similar but the physical reality is totally different. There were also a great many similarities in the concepts of Baal and Jehovah, but Baal quite often dwelt in the work of man’s hand and had a very physical reality from Jehovah. Worship of one certainly did not count as worship of the other.

And any thoughts on the second part of the OP - the idea that the physical act of the atonement occurred on this world because this was the only world faithful and righteous and worthy enough to have Christ here, and the only world wicked and sinful enough to kill Him?

Does the bolded bit limit the infinite nature of the atonement to only mankind, which as far as I know, is a term limited to those who occupy this planet?

Could someone please tell me the origins, bases of support, and current status of the ideas/claims/teachings that: Christ’s infinite atonement covers all of God’s creations, both on this world and others; The physical act of the atonement occurred on this world because this was the only world faithful and righteous and worthy enough to have Christ here, and the only world wicked and sinful enough to kill Him. I believe Elder McConkie spoke about this, but I was never sure of where he got these ideas from, or whether they were officially accepted by the church as doctrine. Thanks

So what happens when the best possible candidate is also the lesser of the two evils? Do we vote for them and be judged for it, knowing that the Lord will still bless our country?

Also when (at what point) does indulging in sugar become excessive and habitual? The Traveler I'm trying hard, through personal experimentation, and self sacrifice in the cause of health and science, to find the answer to this question. I'll let you know when I find out. Sugar is not worth dying in pain, not worth missing my granddaughters' weddings, not worth spending months or years attached to a room full of machines, taking pain killers, and not worth spending my money on doctors and nursing homes. Lehi Lehi, I think you grossly underestimate the delights and importance of sugar.

I can't help thinking of the situation described in 3rd Nephi 19: 1 - 3. (Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 19:1 - 3) 1 AND now it came to pass that when Jesus had ascended into heaven, the multitude did disperse, and every man did take his wife and his children and did return to his own home. 2 And it was noised abroad among the people immediately, before it was yet dark, that the multitude had seen Jesus, and that he had ministered unto them, and that he would also show himself on the morrow unto the multitude. 3 Yea, and even all the night it was noised abroad concerning Jesus; and insomuch did they send forth unto the people that there were many, yea, an exceedingly great number, did labor exceedingly all that night, that they might be on the morrow in the place where Jesus should show himself unto the multitude. Would it have been better for them to exceed the speed limit in their desperate hurry to be on time to sit at the feet of the Saviour and hear His teachings, or would it be better for them to obey the speed limit and possibly miss out on that precious moment? Should they have discarded man made law in order to listen to the source of divine law, or would it have been better to obey the man made law because that is what the source of divine law teaches us to do? What would Jesus do? Possibly He could have stayed a little longer than He actually did and/or maybe given a repeat version of the same teachings the next day so that those who were late because they kept the speed limit didn't actually miss anything. But maybe I'm wrong in suggesting this because that is not what Jesus did even though it sounds like quite a logical and reasonable thing to do. And that highlights again the difficulties of trying to imagine what Jesus might do.

I completely agree. I'm sure that church's genealogical and record keeping practices are entirely consistent with the Lord's will. I just don't understand how the practice reconciles with the direction contained in these verses. I can speculate on a range of possibilities, but some of those would just open up more questions. For example, perhaps God just changed His mind at some point, and gave a new direction in revelation not contained within the Doctrine and Covenants.

My question was intended to be a question, not a condemnation.