askandanswer

Well of course! :)

Thank you TFP

I note you I note you've omitted German from the list. I recall several posts from several months ago in which you expressed your enjoyment in learning German.

This forum seemed to be attracting a steady stream of new members during June and July but I notice that the last new member came on board in late July and there has been no one since then. Does anyone have any ideas why this might be?

aAe you referring to the Lamanites of ancient times, or the modern day Lamanites?If you are interested in the modern day Lamanites, I've always found the Church Almanac to be a good but very brief source of information about the history of the church in every country where the church is recognised, including countries populated predominantly by descendants of the Lamanites.

Thank you Becca, this is helpful.

Certainly it is the case that those who did not have the opportunity to hear the gospel in this life will have the opportunity to hear and accept it in the next life. But I'm having a bit of trouble remembering those scriptures which support the idea that those who accepted the gospel in this life can still repent of their sins in the next life.

I won't be watching the Conference broadcasts until next Sunday, but the descriptions of President Monson that I've read here remind me of what Joseph Smith said about Sydney Rigdon when they were receiving what is now section 76 of the Doctrine and Covenants. “Joseph sat firmly and calmly all the time in the midst of a magnificent glory, but Sidney sat limp and pale, apparently as limber as a rag, observing which, Joseph remarked, smilingly, ‘Sidney is not used to it as I am.’” (Juvenile Instructor, May 1892, pp. 303–4.) https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-69-80/section-76-the-vision-of-the-degrees-of-glory?lang=eng

Thank you for sharing this cdowis, I enjoyed reading it and found it to be uplifting.

I'm sorry Parakeet, I didn't mean to be bothersome. What I think rarely matters because what I think often changes and my viewpoint is just one amongst millions. If I'm trying to argue in favour of a particular view then I will often give an indication of what I think. If I'm seeking additional understanding, I'm more likely to ask questions rather than state positions. I also like Becca's response but I was also initially concerned about Alma 34: 31 - 33. 31 Yea, I would that ye would come forth and harden not your hearts any longer; for behold, now is the time and the day of your salvation; and therefore, if ye will repent and harden not your hearts, immediately shall the great plan of redemption be brought about unto you. 32 For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors. 33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed. This seems to suggest that there might be some difficulties with the idea of post-life repentance as Becca suggested, and that here and now seem to be the time when repentance needs to be done. However, I read a little further and found verse 34: 34 Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world. This verse seems to suggest that it is the spirit which possesses our bodies at the time of death which will make the difference in the next life, rather than individual acts which may or may not be sinful, depending on the context. The man in my scenario seems to have been possessed of a goodly spirit throughout his life, and that is the spirit that, according to Alma, will make the difference in the next life. So now I have an understanding that I think I can at least partially rely on in answer to the question of what will happen to the man in the scenario. However, I'm still sort of stuck on the question of how we should understand the various scriptures that I have referred to. For example, it seems plain that in this case, the anger and violence shown by this man after the car accident are indeed contrary to Christ's teachings, but he still gets to heaven because of the goodly nature of the spirit that possessed his body at the time of his death, and his chances of exhaltation are not ruled out because of a few small unrepented acts. So in what circumstances do these various teachings apply, and what are the exceptions? And how do we know, when reading the scriptures on a particular teaching, when that teaching will apply, and when it will not?

ummm, where else do you keep your tongue? :)

Well I'd certainly pay a lot more attention to their answers than I do to some of the answers I see here.

You really need to meet more martians. if you were a Catholic, I'm sure you would have met quite a few marians.

Lol, no need to be sad Eowyn, this is not what I think. I often word my posts in such a way as to avoid stating what I think because I don't want my opinion to restrict or overly influence the course of a discussion. I'm not trying to persuade anyone of a particular viewpoint here, I'm simply looking around for further light and knowledge. Additionally, there are many things about which I do not have a firm opinion and having too firm a view on some matters can sometimes inhibit further learning or get in the way of what could be a fruitful discussion. Many things discussed in this forum come down to an answer that is either more likely or less likely, rather than any definite conclusion. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I am asking questions, not stating positions. If I get some well thought out responses, with good structure and lots of support, then I will have a better idea of what to think. The evidence that might perhaps lead one to think that God operates in the manner I have suggested is the scriptures I have referred to, although I realise that there are other scriptures that could be used quite effectively to support a counter-argument. So it gets back to a question of scriptural interpretation.

It comes down to a question of scriptural interpretation. The scriptures teach that sin makes us unclean and no unclean can dwell in the kingdom of God. They teach that lieing, in the first scenario, or violence and anger, in the second scenario, are types of sin, although perhaps in the first scenario, no lie was told. They teach that we need to repent of our sins in this life and that unrepented sin can keep us from returning to live in the presence of God. So I'm wondering, what happens when a person who has been good all of their life does something we would normally think of as bad, and then dies without repenting of it. Some scriptures seem to suggest that this person, because of his unrepented sin, would not be able to return to God's presence. This sounds somewhat unfair, and inconsistent with our natural sense of justice, but it seems to be what the scriptures are saying. So how do we interpret those scriptures that support the idea violence is sin, sin that is not repented of makes us unclean, and no unclean thing can dwell in the presence of God?.

See below

Elder Holland and Elder Cook were companions on their mission in London. Try https://www.lds.org/prophets-and-apostles/meet-todays-prophets-and-apostles?lang=eng for background information about current apostles.

It seems like quite a few responses are centred on the question of whether or not the what the man said constitutes a lie. This is not the point I had been hoping the discussion would focus on so perhaps it might be better to change the ending of the scenario. Consider this: On the way to the mission reunion, the man's car is hit by another car travelling at high speed through a stop sign. The wife is trapped in the car and injured, the husband less so. He struggles out of the car and the other driver approaches. In his grief and anger and his frustration at being unable to get his wife out, he swears and curses at the driver and insults him and when the other driver makes a rude reply, he punches him on the nose, breaking it. The stress of the event triggers an asthma attack and he dies at the scene, gasping for breath, still angry at the other driver and unrepentant for breaking his nose. And some of the relevant scriptures: Luke 3:14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages. John 13:3434 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another 3 Nephi 12: 22 But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of his judgment. And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. So, the same question: What will be the fate of this good and righteous man who in one brief moment near the end of his life acted in a manner contrary to Christ's teachings, as recorded in the above scriptures?

"Perpetuating"? I thought you were Santa perpetuating being a Folk Prophet.

I guess this statement must have been made by, or cleared by, the First Presidency, because I can't imagine anybody else making a judgement as to whether or not the First Presidency are up to date with their work!

A very good question. And if we conclude that his lieing to the SS was ok, then immediately we are faced with the questions of how are we to interpret and understand the scriptures, and many others like them, that I referred to?

My question is not so much about what actions the man in the scenario might need to do to be saved, or whether or not his actions, or our actions will have any impact at all on our prospects for salvation. It is more a question of whether or not certain actions might be sufficient to prevent a person from being saved. You mention in your post that "If we exercise faith and repentance, Christ is merciful and saves us despite our errors and mistakes." I agree. My question is about whether a man who has exercised faith but has not repented of what might be a small sin at the end of his life, will still be saved, and if he can, what are we to make of those scriptures that teach about God not looking up sin with the least degree of allowance?

I disagree that this scenario does not reflect reality. As I suggested above, I believe that there may be many people who have lived good lives and then towards the end of their lives, whether that be at a young or old age, do something that is inconsistent with the overall pattern of their lives, and then are taken away before they have a chance to repent. The scriptures I have quoted seem to suggest that unrepented sin might out-weight the cumulative effects of a life of righteousness as sin brings uncleaness and no unclean thing can dwell with God. I also disagree that it is a waste of time to engage in thought and discussion about the kinds of actions, or inactions, that might or might not, have an impact on our eternal salvation. Hopefully we all often engage in such contemplation. In fact, giving consideration to this question might well fall under heading of the pursuit of saving knowledge you have referred to.

I have not defined it as a sin. To quote from my post: Was it a sin Did he lie? by repeating an action that may be sinful I have asked questions, not made statements.

This is not a wildly hypothetical thread. It posits a situation of person who has lived a very good life but almost at the end, engages in a form of behaviour - stating a mistruth - that in some circumstances, (note the "some") might be worthy of condemnation, and then moves on into the next life before having time to repent, if indeed, there is a need to repent. I think there might be many who find themselves to be in a comparable situation. A reason to speculate on this situation is that coming up with a plausible response could provide greater insights into how the scriptures I referred to could be interpreted and understood. If we want to have a well developed understanding of what the scriptures mean, then it may be helpful to have an understanding of what they mean in all circumstances and the extent, and limitations, of that meaning.