Amillia

Sorry, what do you mean that I am "not in any strength of my own"? I don't understand what that means, and I am not sure if I should be offended You shouldn't be offended by anything I say. I see you as a nice guy, but not a strong one in any direction. I love you to pieces and enjoy your posts, and learn from them, but you aren't leadership material, in my estimation, and I believe we can't say others are not doing a darn good job, if we can't do better ourselves. That's all I was saying.

This is so true! and well said!

LOL ~I heard that the American/USA church is very unhappy with who they chose.

Who are you addressing?

Just what is it you think my understanding of the BoM is? I don't recall ever saying. That Brigham Young didn't leave the BofM in the dust as you suggested. He taught many of it's precepts and more. He was a teacher of the higher laws which were found in both the temple and the BofM. Not to mention he sent missionaries all over the world with the BofM. What exactly should he have done differently? You do remember that most of his presidency was plagued with the work of starting a new community in the desert, with the opposition of the American Government constantly dogging his every effort....

Sorry.

Well milk before the meat was good enough for Christ and Paul and all the great men of the church ~ that's good enough for me. Line upon line, precept upon precept.It always amazes me how people who really aren't in any strength of their own, seem to want to tell the church leaders and God how they should be doing their job.

I don't think we have an over population problem, as much as we have a waste problem. We don't use our resources correctly and we have over consumers ~pigs ~ who think the supply is endless. I blame government and big businesses for our problems, not big families.

I believe he gave up all religious belief; he fell prey to the "try to prove it" syndrome I mentioned earlier. After just having slogged through Whyprophets reams of dreck (you so thoughtfully posted, A) the thought of him leaving THE CHURCH after he tried to "prove it" made me laugh and laugh and laugh! thanks! It made my day, somehow. :) Maybe you shouldn't have 'slopped' through it. It always seems the way though , doesn't it? Those that slop through things expect to have the same insight as those who search ponder and pray....

That might have been true before the Nauvoo era, but once the beliefs of the early church started changing to include things like temple ordinances, etc., the BoM had been left far behind. And from that time on, the BoM is a footnote in LDS theology. It is used as a conversion tool and then quickly discarded, because there is nothing in post-Kirtland LDSism that in any way resembles BoM theology. Are you nuts? The BofM was central to everything taught or done, not discounting continuing revelation. It was taught that the BofM contained events that would correlate with happenings in the latter days and most everything done in early history of the church was founded upon the teachings of the BofM. It is the truest book, not the most complete. Remember it is an abridgment made with a very specific purpose in mind. I don't think you understand what I am saying. I agree with you, in theory, about the BoM, but you need to look at things historically. After BY came into the church and started becoming prominent, the BoM fell out of favor. Nobody preached it, not even Joseph Smith, and other things became the focus. The theology of the BoM, which is very Biblical in nature was left behind and "self" became the focus. What can I do to further myself? to progress as high as I can? That is the whole purpose of the temple ordinances. Actually not. The whole purpose of the temple was to turn the hearts of the father to the sons, and the sons to the fathers. ~ Not to mention the irreplaceable knowledge of how to pray and receive visitation, and power from on high ~ that can not be found anywhere else. The temple work was so far reaching beyond anything anyone has even comprehended since Christ, Himself was on the earth, unless they have searched it out and experienced the highest gifts given, that not even a lot of the LDS know what it can give. BNut they have to seach, ponder and pray...most don't. It is the farthest thing from focussing on selfish there is. The work done is done for others, loved ones, strangers, lost and saved alike. So, I totally disagree with your understanding of both the BofM and the Temple....in the historical and modern experiences.

The one thing I know is that those who can read the stuff and come out stronger are the ones who will endure to the end. The more shallow testimonies and minds, will suck up the anti-stuff without any deep searching and end up a groupie with the anti's. There will truly be only a remnant left after this battle for right..... we are in armagedon.

Are you saying: the one expression is ultimately exclusive? Truly the soft brother?

One thing is for sure, "this is eternal life, that ye may know God...."So we best get to KNOW HIM!

You are wiser than most! Cudos! :)

That might have been true before the Nauvoo era, but once the beliefs of the early church started changing to include things like temple ordinances, etc., the BoM had been left far behind. And from that time on, the BoM is a footnote in LDS theology. It is used as a conversion tool and then quickly discarded, because there is nothing in post-Kirtland LDSism that in any way resembles BoM theology. Are you nuts? The BofM was central to everything taught or done, not discounting continuing revelation. It was taught that the BofM contained events that would correlate with happenings in the latter days and most everything done in early history of the church was founded upon the teachings of the BofM. It is the truest book, not the most complete. Remember it is an abridgment made with a very specific purpose in mind.

Hey, we were just funnon!

The funny thing is, there is a group of 'christian preachers' who have converted up in the colony states and they are trying to figure out how to convert their congregations.It could be the breaking news in about a year ~ whole congregations converting to the LDS church!

It depends on the girl.

Sorry, they're a gorgeous green!! M. We are talking inner brown appearance ~ not the outer appearance which is often deceitful. :) We? I'm not; I'm talking about the actual colour of my eyes - not just green but gorgeous green. M. You're not just a little bit prejudice, but way beyond. I am beginning to think you have a delusion of grandure. LOL Bug eyed?

Sorry, they're a gorgeous green!! M. We are talking inner brown appearance ~ not the outer appearance which is often deceitful. :)

Amillia - Why do you feel you need to believe in Joseph Smith? M. I don't feel the need. (Just for the record ~ I know/KNOW JS was a prophet, no believing need about it! just fact) Why do you feel the need to make up stuff? What am I making up? It was just a simple question. Feeling a little onary? (Just a joke for those Utahn's. I'm not saying that you're a Utahn Amillia, since I don't know where you live - but I'm getting the impression you are not at your happiest.) M. You are so full of it! LOL Your eyes must be brown!

Semantics seem to be the big un-resolvable issue.

Amillia - Why do you feel you need to believe in Joseph Smith? M. I don't feel the need. (Just for the record ~ I know/KNOW JS was a prophet, no believing need about it! just fact) Why do you feel the need to make up stuff?

God is plural. It is only our limited language which makes this a confusing issue.

It's not slamming your church Amillia. It's my opinion on how I view the story of JS. I don't buy the glorified way the LDS church tells the story. People are not two dimentional characters where everything is either black or white. I think JS's story is more complex and more interesting than how the LDS church tells it. You sure have a problem with other posters sharing their opinions, don't you Amillia? Maybe you should take a good look at who is acting bitter. M. You could turn it on me, but it is interesting that you seem to have a fixation on us believing in JS.