askandanswer

Law existed prior to the existence of our God because God, when He was still a man, became God because he obeyed law.

I also think that the answer becomes clearer when we remember that God was once a man, and as such, lived in a pre-existing law-governed environment, to which he was subject. There also seems to be something odd with the idea of God continuing to engage in eternal progression if that progression is only in relation to, or subject to, laws that He had created.

I think there is no doubt that God is subject to law and whether we call the law to which God is subject the laws of physics or the laws of the universe, or some other name probably doesn't make any difference. I haven't read the article, but I will, but to me, the greatest, and possibly irrefutable evidence that God is subject to eternal is that fact that He allowed, or was required, to subject His beloved Son to the agonies of the atonement. I cannot imagine that any father who loved their child would voluntarily subject them to such a brutal ordeal unless there was an absolutely compelling, unavoidable reason that they do so. I think the requirement for an atonement was something that was imposed on God because of the requirements of eternal law.

Currently there are four credible theories of physics that seek to describe the universe and how it works – gravitation, relativity, quantum physics and string theory. There is disagreement about which one of these provides the best description, or how they could be unified. Would it be reasonable to assume that the best theory, and the one that is most likely to be correct, is the theory which best describes how God does what He does? Some of the things that God can do, which at present do not seem to be well explained by these theories are that He knows all things from the beginning to the end, He lives in a context where time is irrelevant, He can revoke the laws of gravity, eg, Moses and the Red Sea, and He can rearrange atomic or molecular structures with no observable movement of energy, eg, turning water into wine. If it is the case that one of the above theories can explain how these things are done, would that then be a reason to assume that that theory is more likely to be correct than any other theory?

Nice to see you back @Jamie123

It may be that there are different types of knowledge, like there are different types of ore, and we use whatever is the most appropriate tool for whatever kind or knowledge, or ore, we are looking for. If a person wants secular knowledge then perhaps secular tools would be the most appropriate kind, although there would still be a role for spiritual tools in the form of inspiration. If a person wants spiritual knowledge, such as a testimony and a conviction of the truthfulness of the gospel, then I expect that spiritual tools would be the most approriate tools to use, although there would still be a role for secular tools in the form of study.

In my opinion, relying only on reason as the only source of knowledge is a dangerous position to take. (I really feel like saying that its also a very narrow minded view to take, but I don't think I could ever say that about @LDSGator ) I think it is one of Satan's major triumphs to have successfully led people to believe that the only reliable source of knowledge comes from empirical study and the scientific method. I know that there is more than one way of knowing and I think that it is a personal choice as to which way we give preference and priority to.

In a world full of lies and deception, truth is worth repeating, over and over again, at every opportunity.

It sounds like y'all better move to Australia.

21 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have arepented long ago in sackcloth and bashes. Every time I read this verse, I wonder why it is that Jesus chose to do these mighty works in Bethsaida, where they were rejected, instead of arranging for these works to be done in Tyre and Sidon, where they would have been accepted, and resulted in large scale repentance by the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon. I understand that being outside the jurisdictional boundaries that Christ seemed to have been working under, ( See Matthew 15:24) there was a reduced likelihood that Christ Himself would have gone to these two cities, but given that mighty works were performed by previous prophets in other places, its hard for me to understand why His personally appointed apostles were not instructed to go and perform any might works in cities where Christ knew they would have success if those works were performed. Can anyone suggest some good reasons why Christ did works in locations that He probably knew would not bear good fruit, while choosing not to work, and not to arrange for others to do work, in cities that He knew would bear good fruit?

I suspect that there are other ways to show charity and emphaty that still provide your sister in law with love and support without actually putting yourself into an exhaustive and stressful situation. It might be something as simple as sending her a scriptural text message each day, it might be as big as paying for her to undertake some form of counselling or therapy, or it could be a little more indirect by providing support to those who are supporting your sister in law. It could involve undertaking some study and research to better understand your sister in law's condition/behaviour. Increased understanding of something or someone often improves our ability to be charitable and empathic of/about/towards that something or someone.

'These are only my own thoughts on the matter and should not be taken as church doctrine: It seems to me, that another reasonable interpretation of the above scripture is as follows: We are indeed all children of God, and as God's children, then we are His heirs. Those who suffer with him (Christ) in all things are those who will be glorified together and become joint heirs with Christ. Thus, it seems that there are at least two classes of heirs: those who are children of God, who thereby become His heirs, and I think this includes everybody, and those who suffer with Christ, and thereby become His joint heirs. I think this will be a much smaller group of people. This idea is consistent with the idea expressed by Paul in 1 Corinthians, 3:84 8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. Being an heir of God seems to be unconditional. Being a joint heir seems to be conditional. I cannot see anything in Romans 8: 14 - 17 that supports the conclusion that being an heir of God, rather than a joint heir, means that you are no longer a child of God.

We watched a movie together as a family last night, it was the first time since pre-covid days. It was a spider man movie, something about going home or not going home, I can't remember which. My son tells me it was number 7 in the series and included all the previous bad guys and all the previous good guys from the earlier movies. It had a start and a finish, so presumably it had a middle as well. That's about the best summary I can give, which I suppose says something.

I'm writing this as I take a short break from packing and tidying. The best way to reduce clutter is to move house, as I will be doing in the next two days. I've just spent 45 minutes going through some papers that I somehow managed to retain from when I was a stake clerk. In the same pile of papers was an affidavit from another country rom 2006 saying that we were the parents of a child that I'd forgotten about (I don't know the story but I do know the child is now dead. Her biological mother was our niece), about ten copies of my deceased brother's will and tax papers going back to 1993. Some of that stuff will stay (the papers related to the will) the clerical papers will be shredded, some of will be thrown in the trash and some will come with me to our new house. Our kids will end up going through the stuff my wife and I leave behind as they will be staying in this house. My wife and I are being diligent in sorting things out now because we know that our kids will want to do what classylady's kids want to do - just throw the lot without sorting.

@romans8 Merry Christmas also to you and your family. I guess that in your part of the world, its still Christmas day, whereas here, its now Sunday morning. If you have not already done so, as part of your learning process, I strongly encourage you to visit an LDS church service. You can easily find the location of the chapel or congregation closest to you through this link https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/comeuntochrist/belong?lang=eng. There is something to be said for improving our knowledge through study, but there is also much to be said about improving our knowledge through experience. I invite you to have the experience of attending the Sunday services of an LDS congregation. It will only cost you a few hours and those few hours could yield greater learning outcomes, in a shorter time, than what you might gain by lengthy periods of study. Spiritual truths are best learned not from a method that is overly reliant on study, but from learning processes that include a combination of study, faith, prayer, and spiritual experiences. There is no harm in attending an LDS Sunday service and potentially much to be gained. I encourage you to give it a try. I also encourage you to re-read and reflect anew on Romans 8, particularly verses 14, 16, and 24 - 28 and consider how these verses might apply to your own circumstances. Romans 8: 5 - 8 also might be relevant to your current circumstances. To me, it seems that an over reliance on the arm of flesh or relying too much on our own study and intellect for trying to find out the truthfulness of spiritual matters, rather than relying on the guidance of the Spirit might be an example of the kind of carnal practices that Paul condemns in Romans 8: 5 - 8

I think if a child, or anyone else, is asked what they want for Christmas, they should be truthful in their replies, and not calculated. Then it is up to any prospective giver to decide how they will respond to the sincerely expressed, truthful wishes of a hopeful child. And if a potential giver is worried about the cost of giving, perhaps they should heed the counsel of King Benjamin: 24 And again, I say unto the poor, ye who have not and yet have sufficient, that ye remain from day to day; I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I agive not because I bhave not, but if I had I would cgive.

Going through the procedure is a long way from guaranteeing the result. We have someone in our stake who has been through invitro fertilisation three times and each time the results were not live births. First time was triplets, second times was triplets, and third time was twins. A lot of heartache, a lot of expense, and no result.

Lol, that is exactly what happened! When the Stake President didn't respond as desired, this guy took his complaint up with the Area Presidency and then beyond that.

@romans8 the nature of your participation in this forum suggests that you have some familiarity with the scriptures, teaching and practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I’m wondering what it is that is holding you back from building on this knowledge, and acting on it, by exercising faith and prayer to ask God if the things you have learned are true. I believe that you are a man of faith and it seems that you believe in God. I also think you probably believe that we can pray to God and that He will hear and answer the prayers of his humble, faithful, seeking children who genuinely desire for, and intend to follow, whatever answer He gives them. Will you do this about what you are learning about His restored church in the latter-day? Will you, with faith, humility, and a genuine desire to follow whatever answer you receive, ask God if what you are learning about His church is true? If you have already received an answer, or arrived at a conclusion about this question that is from your own study, or from someone or somewhere else other than God, then I state firmly that such an answer is not as good or as reliable as an answer from God. If asking God about these things through prayer is something you have thought about doing, but have not yet made a decision about, I urge you, as strongly as I can, to exercise your faith in God and ask Him, if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is His true church on earth and whether you should unite yourself with it by being baptized. I promise you that if you do ask God about this, and if you do make and keep sacred covenants with God, made with and under the authority of those who hold His priesthood authority, then your ability to understand His gospel, His teachings, His plan of salvation for you and for all of His children, His scriptures, and our ultimate destiny, will be enormously increased, as will your opportunities for happiness and joy in this life and the next. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is true. It is God’s restored church on earth in these latter days. The Book of Mormon is true and is the work and word of God. Joseph Smith was God’s prophet on earth and Russell M Nelson is God’s prophet on the earth today. Of these things I testify in the name of Jesus Christ. I urge you again to fast and pray and exercise faith and humility and ask God yourself if these things are true. If I can assist you with this, I would be happy to do so, and I believe that many others would be as well.

We exist on this earth to learn, grown and (im)prove ourselves by choosing how we will act in relation to God's commandments. That is our specific purpose and the only one that matters. Those who chose to obey those commandments will exist eternally in an ideal situation, and those who choose not to fulfill that purpose will not exist in as ideal a situation. Taking another approach, if there is a scenario where our purpose in God's plan is to assist with the salvation of souls A, B and C, and instead, we held to save souls X, Y, and Z, I don't think that will have any impact on the conditions under which we will exist eternally. There are multitudes of actions that are of equal righteous worth when it comes to shaping the conditions under which we will live eternally, and it seems to me that which group of actions of equal righteous worth we choose to involve ourselves in will do more to shape our post mortal condition than the extent to which any particular set of actions is in line with God's plan and purposes, because all and any of those actions of equal righteous worth will make a contribution to the achievement of God's purposes.

I've seen this exact situation turn into a real stumbling block that contributed to a person falling away from the church. In another ward, some people heard that their Bishop was about to be called as a Counsellor in the new Stake Presidency. One person directly asked the Bishop, after he had accepted the call, but before the call had been made public, if this was true. The Bishop denied it. The following Sunday, he was called as a Counsellor in the new Stake Presidency. This person sustained them but was troubled by the fact that the former Bishop had directly lied to them only a few days before being sustained in the new calling. When this person took their concerns to the Stake President, the Stake President tried to reassure them by saying that he was the one who had asked the former Bishop to deny that he was about to be called as a new Counsellor. In the eyes of the person with the concerns, this did nothing to lessen the responsibility of their former Bishop for lying - it just brought the Stake President under the same shadow. Believing that his former Bishop, with whom he previously had a good relationship, and broken the 8th commandment by lying to him, and that this lying was done under the direction of his Stake President, was enough to plant the seeds of doubt that ultimately led to this person leaving the church. Perhaps a better way would have been for the former Bishop to privately meet with and inform the person that asked, that yes, they were about to be called as a new Counsellor, and then ask that person to not share this information with anyone.

My scripture reading took me to Alma 40 this morning and as I read, the following two questions came to mind: Alma 40:`14 Now this is the state of the asouls of the bwicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, cfearful looking for the fiery dindignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this estate, as well as the righteous in paradise, until the time of their resurrection. This verse comes from what has been described as the most correct book on earth, with no translation issues. Would it be even more correct to say that God will look upon the souls of the wicked with more sadness and sorrow than with fiery indignation? Or can we conclude that Alma was writing according to what truth he knew then, but today we have more truth? Alma 40: 26 How consistent is Alma 40:26 with Doctrine and Covenants 76: 89? 26 But behold, an awful adeath cometh upon the wicked; for they die as to things pertaining to things of righteousness; for they are unclean, and bno unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of God; but they are cast out, and consigned to partake of the fruits of their labors or their works, which have been evil; and they drink the dregs of a bitter ccup. 89 And thus we saw, in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial, which surpasses all understanding; Might this be another example of Alma writing according to what he knew and of we, in the latter-days, now knowing more?

eom.byu.edu

Alma 42: 6, 12 6 But behold, it was appointed unto man to adie—therefore, as they were cut off from the tree of life they should be cut off from the face of the earth—and man became blost forever, yea, they became cfallen man. 12 And now, there was no means to reclaim men from this fallen state, which aman had brought upon himself because of his own bdisobedience; Alma 3:19 19 For the anatural bman is an cenemy to God, and has been from the dfall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he eyields to the enticings of the fHoly Spirit, and gputteth off the hnatural man and becometh a isaint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a jchild, ksubmissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

I think that if you keep asking "why" for long enough, eventually you will get to four basic answers. Things are the way they are either because of 1) God's personal preferences; 2) universal laws to which even God is subject, and which must be obeyed; 3) a combination of God's preferences and universal laws 4) whatever was agreed upon in the council of heaven in the pre-existence. An example of the first: Israel is the chosen land because God likes that part of the world. An example of the second: the requirement for justice. An example of the 3rd: the Atonement. Perhaps there could have been many ways to meet the universal demands/requirements of justice, but the method God seems to have preferred is the atonement. An example of the 4th: The discussion and decision in the council of heaven that Christ be the one to accomplish the atonement.