laronius

There may be instances where a heartfelt recital of the Lord's prayer may help us draw closer to God. But in general prayer needs to be far more personal, using our own words, expressing our own thoughts and feelings about the specifics of our lives.

At our stake conference over the weekend the 70 in attendance quoted Pres Nelson, I believe, in making this exact point. The end of a prayer is not a formality to be gotten out of the way.

Sounds like a nice, simplistic children's song, good for primary. But not sacrament meetingesque for my tastes. Maybe it would engage children more in sacrament meeting, which I am all for if that is the intent.

You aren't comparing Mary's account to her grandson's account, you are comparing her grandson's account to her granddaughter's account, both two generations removed. I don't know why Moroni is given preference over Nephi but even the granddaughter seems to assume it was Moroni. It wouldn't surprise me if the angel never actually stated his name but over time in the story telling a name was assigned.

That's a tough one. I have no problem answering questions and talking about the Church but it's difficult to initiate the conversation. For me the easiest thing (though still not always easy) is to make Church references in normal conversation to open the door for them to ask questions. Because religion is one of the topics that we aren't "supposed to" bring up in friendly conversation I think by simply making religious references we show to others that we open to talking about that subject. Social media can also be a lower-stress way of sharing the gospel as well. But we need to remember that it's not our job to convert others. That's the Spirit's job. It's our job to give the Spirit something to bear witness of.

I came across this video that directly addresses my question in the OP. Interesting stuff.

I like these types of things. I was fortunate enough once upon a time to take an adult institute class taught by Bruce Porter. It was fascinating to say the least. I have wondered about 2 hour church. I know it's intended purpose but I think the brethren had to have known that reducing our time spent in church would NOT increase the time that many if not most saints spent studying on their own. My only conclusion was that that they are trying to prepare us for what's coming. Things of the temple are best understood by personal revelation. Bro Porter made the statement that people like Egyptologists can tell us what something says but not necessarily what it means. But while someone who has the gospel like Bro Porter can shed light on it's meaning in light of revealed truths I think there is still much that can only be communicated directly from the Spirit.

Here's what it says in beginning of the Come Follow Me manual: "Use this resource in any way that is helpful to you." To me it is helpful to know what we are studying that week and that is pretty much it. These manuals are written to be used by anyone in the Church, whether it be a 10 year old or a 75 year old lifetime member temple sealer. I used to feel bad that I rarely cracked open the manual when I was Sunday School president. But I knew that having a good scripture study was the main goal, not reading everything in the manual. Having said that, it is good from time to time to reassess our understanding of basic doctrines and how we would respond to basic gospel questions. Small misunderstandings of the plain and simple truths grow larger as we seek deeper truths.

Verse 4 of Section 8 I think also sheds some light: 4 Therefore this is thy gift; apply unto it, and blessed art thou, for it shall deliver you out of the hands of your enemies, when, if it were not so, they would slay you and bring your soul to destruction. If we do what is in our power and trust in the Lord, He will inspire us and open a way for our deliverance. In which case, Moses and the Israelites at the Red Sea are a perfect example.

Elder Cullimore, assistant to the 12, once referenced those verses then said this: "Too often we ask the Lord for the direction of his Spirit before we’ve done all we can. The Lord gave Oliver Cowdery the key here when he attempted to translate and failed. He said: “But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.” D&C 9:8 After we have done all we can, having studied it out and determined how best to solve our problems, then we take our decisions to the Lord; and if they are right, our bosoms will burn within us and we will have spiritual confirmation as to what to do." April 72 GC

There is actually two parts to a sealing. The first part is the actual sealing ordinance. This is the only part we have control of when doing work for the dead. The other part is when this sealing ordinance is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. I don't know if there's a specific term for it but essentially it's when God ratifies the sealing ordinance. This only takes place through faithful adherence of the covenants entered into. So if two people are sealed together, whether living or dead, and one or both do not live up to those covenants or simply no longer wants to be in that sealed relationship then God will not ratify it. Like @zil2 said, all we can do on our end is extend the offer. The rest is between them and God.

I appreciate your remarks. After reviewing those verses my thoughts were sent down a different path. I think when we refer to sealing power we need to connect it with priesthood keys. The sealing power granted to Nephi binds in heaven what is bound on earth but the action being bound or sealed is dependent on the keys given to Nephi. In this instance it's the key of power over the elements to encourage the people to repent. Whereas the sealing power of Elijah is connected to the keys of temple work. It's the same sealing power but different keys.

One thing to remember is that a sealing only works with exalted relationships. If the relationship is not Celestial in nature the ordinance cannot be enforced. So no one has to worry about being "stuck" with someone forever.

If they were not married in life I'm thinking you can't seal them in death without special permission from higher up. But that is just a guess. I remember a story of a pioneer couple who put off getting married because they wanted to be sealed in a temple at the same time. He died on the plains. I believe it was Pres Faust who upon hearing the story had them sealed. I don't know if she had already been sealed to someone else but there are general rules we follow with occasionally exceptions, all while recognizing that everything will be settled in the hear after to everyone's satisfaction. My recommendation is that if you feel moved upon to pursue it then pursue it.

I just Google what I'm looking for and include LDS in the search and it does a decent job. You click on the link and it opens in Gospel Library. The downside is that you can't just hit the back button to go back to the search but it's generally still an open page so maybe an extra click to navigate.

I'm open to an expanded interpretation but part of their problem has always been missing the point of what their own prophets have taught, hence not recognizing the Savior when he was in their midst. I think coming to terms with that will open the way for belief in the teaching of modern prophets.

You mention April 3, 2017. Is that a date of special note?

Those verses in section 98 are really interesting. They seem to expand upon the meaning of turning of hearts. Though I guess the prophets of the Bible are literally ancestors of the Jews.

Okay I think I found a a more specific answer to my question. This comes from the April 2020 GC by Pres Oaks: "The Melchizedek Priesthood keys of the kingdom were conferred by Peter, James, and John, but that did not complete the restoration of priesthood keys. Some keys of the priesthood came later. Following the dedication of the first temple of this dispensation in Kirtland, Ohio, three prophets—Moses, Elias, and Elijah—restored “the keys of this dispensation,” including keys pertaining to the gathering of Israel and the work of the temples of the Lord..." In the quote above by Joseph Smith it says Elijah held all of the keys of the priesthood, it does not specifically say he restored them all.

Here's the context of my question. We generally define the sealing power as binding in heaven what is bound on earth, though there is a specific sealing ordinance performed in the temple. Joseph Smith said this: "Why send Elijah? Because he holds the keys of the authority to administer in all the ordinances of the Priesthood; and [unless] the authority is given, the ordinances could not be administered in righteousness.” This took place in April of 1836. Peter, James, and John restored the Melchizedek priesthood in 1829, about 7 years earlier. So Melchizedek priesthood ordinances, which possess a type of sealing power in and of themselves, were being performed long before Elijah's return. Now, it can be argued that even the Melchizedek priesthood came from Elijah since he was the one who gave it to Peter, James, and John on the Mount of Transfiguration. But that brings me back to my question: What exactly did Elijah restore in the Kirtland temple? Was is just the keys to performing sealing ordinances or maybe even all priesthood ordinances in relation to the dead? Our doctrine seems to teach something more broad than that but I haven't yet been able to define what exactly that is considering the surrounding circumstances.

Jacob 7:26 ...our lives passed away like as it were unto us a dream... We lived before we were born. When we die we in essence wake back up to our previous life. It is a reality we will be far more familiar with than right now. Like waking up from a very real seeming dream.

Moses 7:52 And he sent forth an unalterable decree, that a remnant of his seed should always be found among all nations, while the earth should stand; This is the Lord speaking to Enoch about the flood. If Noah was Enoch's descendent how is it that only a remnant of his seed would be found among all nations? If the flood was universal and only the family of Noah survived should not everyone be the seed of Enoch?

Does it matter? No. Here's what matters: Matt 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. D&C 64:9 Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin. 10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. This may not answer what you asked. But they are far more important than what you asked.

I will add to what @CV75 has said. I know what you are referencing: D&C 29:34 Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created. 35 Behold, I gave unto him that he should be an agent unto himself; and I gave unto him commandment, but no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal, neither carnal nor sensual. But this is not the same use of the word temporal as used elsewhere. Here it is being lumped into the same category as natural (think natural man), carnal, and sensual. Rather all of God's commandments have spiritual ramifications to be sure but the laws themselves pertain to the things of our mortal existence and hence temporary, though with eternal/spiritual significance. For example: Alma 22:31 Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments as to things which were temporal... 2 Nephi 2:5 ...Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever. D&C 89:2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days. Moses 7:42 And Enoch also saw Noah, and his family; that the posterity of all the sons of Noah should be saved with a temporal salvation; In each of these instances God is giving commandments to sustain physical life in order to bring about His eternal purposes. But the commandments themselves were temporal in nature.

In determining what God may or may not have been culpable of or responsible for (I don't want to get hung up on terminology) it might be good to consider what exactly Adam and Eve did in the garden. Alma 22:31 Wherefore, he gave commandments unto men, they having first transgressed the first commandments as to things which were temporal, and becoming as gods, knowing good from evil, placing themselves in a state to act, or being placed in a state to act according to their wills and pleasures, whether to do evil or to do good— 32 Therefore God gave unto them commandments, after having made known unto them the plan of redemption, that they should not do evil, the penalty thereof being a second death, which was an everlasting death as to things pertaining unto righteousness... The initial commandment to not partake of the forbidden fruit was a temporal commandment because breaking it brought about physical death. It was only after they partook that God gave them the spiritual commandment not to do evil which would result in a second death. So while Adam and Eve broke a commandment it wasn't one that necessarily made them unworthy in a sinful way. Having gained knowledge that would soon change, hence the need to be expelled from God's presence, but the breaking of the temporal commandment did not directly cause unworthiness. This allowed them to immediately enter into sacred covenants with God prior to their expulsion. If all of this is correct, then the most that could be argued that God was responsible for was physical death which was remedied unconditionally by the resurrection.