laronius

I figured I'd add my two cents though it might not be worth half that so I'll give it for free. First of all, as one who has served with what you could call a very unconventional bishop, I would caution us all to not judge too hastily when things are done not exactly as we think they ought to. He holds the keys and has been called under inspiration to serve and we never know everything he does that may prompt him to direct the ward as he does. Secondly, being more productive does not necessarily mean busier. Productivity is outcome based not busyness based. Likewise, in the gospel, I'm pretty sure the Lord does not define the "abundant" in living an abundant life in terms of how much we can cram in a day. I actually think that lesson on being productive and setting goals is exactly what you need. You are obviously hard working and driven. But if what you are doing isn't making you happy then I would say you are not being completely productive, assuming happiness is your goal, and a reprioritizing of your pursuits to obtain that happiness needs to take place. I remember once struggling to make an important decision but when I finally made a decision I could not find peace. It only took two weeks (I was being stubborn) before it dawned on me that just maybe I had made the wrong decision. When I told the Lord I was instead choosing the other alternative peace immediately came. I learned that when the Lord wants us to make changes do not expect him to sustain us in pursuing the wrong course.

In my opinion no. I can appreciate the sentiment of the person writing the article but nothing else equates with having and raising children. Obviously, if a couple try to obey this commandment but are not able to for whatever reason the Lord will honor their desire to obey and reward them accordingly. But we should never try to substitute this commandment with anything else. What is interesting is that the commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is really just one part in a string of commandments the Lord gave Adam and Eve in relation to their purpose on earth. But if you read it all as one long commandment then I guess you could say tending the garden is complying with the commandment in part but obeying one part does not excuse you from obeying the rest when it is within your power to do so.

None that I'm aware of. If the goal is exaltation and exaltation is defined, at least in part, in terms of the ability to continue having offspring then the presence of additional wives has no bearing on that covenant relationship.

You misinterpreted what I meant. I was not saying Sherem was a son of perdition anymore than I was saying much of modern Christianity are sons of perdition. When I said he denied the Holy Ghost I simply meant we did not believe there was such a thing or if there was that it didn't impart revelation as we know it does. It almost sounds like he may have had that witness at one point but lost it through transgression.

The wives aren't married to each other. The marriage covenant is made between the man and each wife individually.

I think anyone who professes a belief in the Bible, even in Christ himself and yet distorts the true meaning of what Christ taught and accomplished through the atonement falls, to one degree or another, in this category. With Christ now being a historical figure Satan's tactic has shifted from denying his existence to corrupting what he taught and did. But Sherem not only denied the Christ but he also denied the Holy Ghost. This to me is a very direct connection to much of modern Christianity and the cause of so much of the confusion that exists today.

That had crossed my mind though I don't recall ever hearing of it referred to as the first covenant. Any thoughts on what the second covenant is?

Perhaps someone can shed some light on the covenant mentioned here: Mormon 7:10 And ye will also know that ye are a remnant of the seed of Jacob; therefore ye are numbered among the people of the first covenant... Any insight on which particular covenant this is and what might be the second covenant?

?

To me it sounds like you are speaking of the dual but interwoven processes of becoming one with Christ and being born again wherein our identity is lost in Christ (perhaps some divine camouflage from the demands of justice) and then being reborn in a newness of life, free from the debts of our old selves.

I agree with you that the purpose of this life is NOT to return to the Garden of Eden. To most in the Christian world Adam and Eve were already at their pinnacle and they blew it. And the current desire of many of these same Christians is to return to a paradisiacal state. So I guess if they end up in the Terrestrial Kingdom they will have achieved their desire. But the restored gospel teaches us that that level of accomplishment is as the moon to the sun in our potential. I also agree with you that obedience is the process of becoming sanctified. Consider what Pres Woodruff taught: Whatever law anyone keeps he is preserved by that law, and he receives whatever reward that law guarantees unto him. It is the will of God that all His children should obey the highest law, that they may receive the highest glory that is ordained for all immortal beings. But God has given all His children an agency, to choose what law they will keep. I would equate the word "preserved" as he uses it with sanctify. We will be preserved, sanctified, saved, to the extent that we obey His laws and will then inherit a kingdom of glory in accordance to the law we obey. The glory of God, and I think it's safe to say the glory of each kingdom, is intelligence or in other words, light and truth. D&C 88: 13 tells us that "the light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things... is the law by which all things are governed..." So in other words we will inherit the kingdom of glory or light that we allow ourselves to be governed by.

What you ask about is definitely not the milk of the gospel and perhaps not even the meat. You just might be gnawing on some bone here. And while there is still much about the life to come we do not yet understand I will try to respond on the same level as your questions. Here is an excerpt from Joseph Smith's King Follett Discourse. (I am using the Newly Amalgamated Text as it seems to have more details of what he actually said.) I want you to know the first principles of consolation. How consoling to the mourners when they are called to part with a husband, father, wife, mother, child, dear relative, or friend, to know though they lay down this body and all earthly tabernacles shall be dissolved, that their very being shall rise in immortal glory to dwell in everlasting burnings and to sorrow, die, and suffer no more and not only that but to contemplate the saying that they will be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? To inherit and enjoy the same glory, powers, and exaltation until you ascend a throne of eternal power and arrive at the station of a God, the same as those who have gone before. What did Jesus Christ do? "Why I do the same things that I saw my Father do when worlds came rolling into existence." Saw the Father do what? "I saw the Father work out His kingdom with fear and trembling and I am doing the same, too. When I get my kingdom, I will give it to the Father and it will add to and exalt His glory. He will take a higher exaltation and I will take His place and I am also exalted, so that He obtains kingdom rolling upon kingdom." So that Jesus treads in his tracks as he had gone before and then inherits what God did before. God is glorified in the salvation and exaltation of his creatures. So it appears that these eternal families or kingdoms are really families within families or kingdoms within kingdoms. Kind of like an earthly kingdom where the king never dies but gives each of his own children part of his kingdom to rule over, who then give their own children the same and so on. Of course we are talking about the universe so there are no limitations, geographically speaking, to how many times these kingdoms can multiply. Each kingdom is a kingdom in it's own right but it is also part of perhaps an infinite number of greater kingdoms. Likewise each family is an eternal family in it's own right but also part of many, many eternal family units. I would correct one thing you said when you mentioned "each God and his wife." While we see very little reference to our Heavenly Mother, you cannot really speak of God without referring to them both.

When it comes to the doctrines of justification and sanctification the scriptures seem to present an interesting relationship between them and the law. In 2 Nephi 2:5 it plainly states that "by the law no flesh is justified; or, by the law men are cut off." We also read in D&C 88:38-39 "And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions. All beings who abide not these conditions are not justified." To me this makes perfect sense because our inability to perfectly keep the law condemns us making us unjustified. It is only through the grace and mercy of God that we are forgiven of breaking his laws and thus become justified. Meanwhile, the doctrine of sanctification appears to actually depend on the law. D&C 88:21 "And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit another kingdom..." and then in verse 34 "that which is governed by law is also preserved by law and perfected and sanctified by the same." The way I interpret the two different relationships with the law is that while we are currently unable to keep the law perfectly, perfectly keeping the law is ultimately what is required of us. So the Lord extends his mercy to us when we mess up (justification) while seeking to strengthen us and increase our desire and ability to more fully keep the law (sanctification). Is that how everyone else interprets these verses and these doctrines in general or is it something different/more?

This thought has also crossed my mind. Perhaps equivalent obedience but in the face of greater evil equals greater faithfulness. With the changes going on in the world it's probably not fair to assume a true comparison of one generation with another in determining preparedness.

I have wondered about this too, not about you @Traveler but about me. 😃 I would like to think that I was among the five wise virgins and yet I see a pretty good gap between myself and what I view as a Zion like individual.

I think that is a pretty good self evaluation test indeed. Zion lives the law of the Celestial Kingdom, specifically the law of consecration, which goes far beyond contributing all of ones wealth to the Church and Kingdom. It's the contributing of one's self, both what we are and also what we may become.

I have thought of this as well and we know that it's going to happen to one degree or another. Among the Nephites this is exactly what took place. Great destruction of the wicked followed by a year of assumed preparation before Christ appeared to them though it doesn't really say much of what happened in that year. I wish we had a more detailed account of it.

I came across this quote from George Q Cannon in an article and it got me thinking: "As a people we are expecting the day to come when Jesus will descend in the clouds of Heaven; but before this day comes we must be prepared to receive him. The organization of society that exists in the heavens must exist on the earth; the same condition of society, so far as it is applicable to mortal beings, must exist here." 1. To what extent is this true? Is this the purpose of the New Jerusalem, a sufficiently righteous society, or is it required of the Church membership in general, or something in between? 2. How much progress are we making towards that goal? Is each succeeding generation more righteous than the one before? I don't have a firm opinion on the first question. I'd like to think that the Church in general was ready to meet him but that sure seems to be a LOOONNGG way off, longer than it seems like it should, at least at the rate we are going, which opinion reveals my attitude about the second question. We often hear of people saying how much better the then upcoming generation is but I don't know if I see it. That's not to criticize the upcoming generation, rather I'm pointing out the faithfulness of previous generations. So I guess my current opinion is that something's got to give. The hastening of the work needs to translate into a hastening of individual righteousness. But is that happening?

I don't know how sexual attraction could have existed prior to receiving a physical body and therefore a condition of mortality only and imperfect bodies and not our spirit but putting that aside, the only way for your interpretation to be possible would be to limit the reach of the atonement of Jesus Christ. I really doubt God would make exaltation, which is by definition the perpetuation of lives, impossible for a certain segment of his children.

No blessing will be denied to the faithful. It might take until the next life but once free of their fallen bodies they will have the opportunity for this and all blessings. There might be similarities to the extent that both groups were denied something they couldn't have but one was founded in doctrine and the other the simply the will of God at that time with no doctrinal explanation.

Children paying for the iniquities of their parents even unto the third and fourth generation is actually a common consequence of evil in the scriptures. We find it in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants. Though the D&C reference immediately points out that if the children repent then they will be forgiven. I think there is the underlying premise in all of these kind of scripture verses that children more often then not grow up to be like their parents and the evil that afflicts one generation will often continue to the next. In these situations death, as used by God, can actually be an act of mercy rather than punishment.

He hasn't accepted the fact that marriage and a family, within the gospel, is likely not going to happen in this life. That's a tough pill to swallow but it's one that not just people with same sex attraction have had to accept. I know some women who for various health reasons are likely to not find a spouse willing to deal with the challenges they face. As a result they are pursuing other rewarding paths in life. Is it still tough? YES. But they don't feel without hope and that seems exactly like where he is at this point, without hope. We must have faith to not just accept THE plan but also His specific plan for us whatever that may be. I feel for the guy but it sure sounds like he is not looking for help to endure but reasons to give in. I don't know what anyone, especially strangers, can say to help in this situation. We generally only see what we are looking for.

That my friend is what you'd call a self fulfilling prophecy. Though apparently the powers that be have different plans so I guess that makes you a false self fulfilling prophet. 😄

I'm not a physics expert by any means but if science is the study of how things really are then yes, whichever theory can account for everything, including "miracles" and other acts of God, would be more correct than the others.

As I listened to that hymn it made me think about how the purpose of life could be described in the context of our ability to see. First with an eye of faith and then literally as we seek to part that veil. It makes me wonder that if all things are before God, past, present and future, and hopefully for us too some day, how necessary is it to be able to "remember" when we can simply view the past as if it were all one eternal now?