laronius

Here are the relevant facts as I see it: 1. God, who is omniscient, loves his children and does those things He knows will best further His work in saving them. The end.

All who are called to the holy apostleship were foreordained in the premortal world to be such. So while there may be many worthy and able that alone doesn't qualify them. We might wonder about why and where those individuals were sent to earth but obviously only God knows that.

I usually do but in this instance I figured plenty of context was given. Clearly I was wrong. 🫡

I agree with this to the extent that the law of consecration is enforce. But it still doesn't explain the disciples' reaction which was my main point. These were men who had in essence already forsaken all worldly pursuits. So it's not a new doctrine. So why so astonished? Their reactionary question of "Who then can be saved?" would seem to imply that what the Savior was teaching applied to everyone, not just those we consider wealthy.

23 ¶ And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! 24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 26 And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? 27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. I feel like I understand what Jesus is saying here. In the JST version it's clear that Jesus is saying we must put our faith in God and not the things of the world. But the reaction of his disciples makes me wonder how much I actually do understand Jesus' words. At first they are astonished and then they are "astonished out of measure" and act as if getting into heaven must be impossible. Even if they had misinterpreted his words to mean that people with wealth must give it away, like he had just invited the young rich ruler, then the path to heaven is clear and yet they act as if it's impossible. They themselves had forsaken the world. Why would this concept seem so impossible? And even if they understood Jesus to simply be saying don't trust in riches, why would that seem so impossible? Difficult? Sure. But not something to be "astonished out of measure" over.

You make a really good point. Far too many, including myself at times, are content to just ignore the evil that surrounds us so long as it doesn't directly impact us "too much." The problem though is that is simply the calm before the storm of persecution.

Okay, I'll bite: An inexperienced 16 year old accidentally drives through a red light and kills someone and gets charged with manslaughter. Though I imagine you probably had purposeful crimes in mind.

I think these words from Paul bring some insight. 1 Cor. 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building. 10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. 14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. I could be wrong but I don't think actually attaching a structure to a foundation was common back then. Rather, a building meant to last was usually constructed of stone, the weight of which would keep it in place assuming the foundation could bear it. So if we are starting with a sure foundation it's the quality of the structure itself that will determine whether it stays put. And because we are talking of spiritual things, it's not so much the building itself that matters but what takes place inside. Temples are built to create holy space and what takes place in that space endures. Likewise, whatever structure we build, it's what happens inside that will endure into the eternities.

I think there is interest among members of our church in seeing how our beliefs are viewed by other Christians. I think we often view ourselves as being misunderstood and if only people could see what we really believe they will think differently about us and see we really are Christian. And when these individuals say complementary things about our church that's just proof that our feelings are justified. And everyone likes to be complimented, right? But as to why it's showing up in your feed is entirely algorithm based. I've watched a few of these types of videos and now they keep showing up.

Mosiah 29:26 Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people. 27 And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land. Do you think this means a simple majority choosing iniquity is the deciding factor for God's judgement to be poured out? And what qualifies as "choosing iniquity"? In the political arena it can be difficult to differentiate between what is evil vs just bad policy. Some of the moral issues I think are more clear but I wouldn't necessarily label someone as evil just on those. Many supporters of these policies are otherwise decent people who do care about others. In the Book of Mormon destruction usually follows internal disruption, often when a threat against personal liberties is carried out. When evil people get power that almost always happens eventually. So maybe that's the tipping point?

I actually agree with your first point. Though I admit that this is mainly because Pres Nelson said the development of these vaccines was an answer to prayer. So yes, vaccines are good. I don't agree with all of your second point. I do agree that we as Americans do have a superiority complex. Some of it I think is actually true because of the origins of our nation but we are definitely in decline. But concerning this specific issue I don't think it's fair to blame conservatives. It was liberal politicians that pushed stricter measures. The general public, both liberal and conservative, were glad to move with life. Otherwise half the population would still be wearing masks. For your third point keeping companies honest is ALWAYS a good thing. We cannot be free if we don't have truth. Many good things, like vaccines, have potential negative side effects. That's just life. But people must be able to make informed decisions. Concerning your fourth point, the LDS Church does not lean left or right, it is politically neutral. But it's very clear that it's values are far closer to conservative principles and values than liberalism. If it's members feel otherwise that's their problem not the Church's.

Joseph Smith: "If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves..." I think the problem started with the Nicene Creed which attempted to make God incomprehensible. It has only gotten worse over time.

I still can't understand how Lucifer and all of his followers thought they actually had a chance at winning the war in heaven. So clearly there are things about the state of our premortal existence we just don't know. But I do think the law of opposition, in order to foster agency, was alive and well over there all throughout our journey from intelligences to spirit beings. So I guess it's possible that there were others who had previously rebelled. But that goes back to my first point. Satan mentor: "Hey Lucifer, if you rebel against God there is great honor within your grasp. I can show you how" Lucifer: "But you failed in your rebellion and so did ever other Satan in eternity." Satan mentor: "Urrr, ummm, nevermind that. I'm sure you'll be different." Lucifer: "Okay, sounds good."

While there is much riding on this mortal existence we did not come into this world with a blank slate. Blank from sin, yes, but not blank in who we are. Who we are has been molded over the course of, perhaps, eons before we came here. Our Heavenly Father, who is omniscient, knows us better than we know ourselves and he already knew, before we were born, what we needed to experience in order to maximize our individual willingness to change and progress. Whether long or short this life is sufficient to bring about the Lord's purposes in our eternal advancement. You keep referring to the principle of fairness and seem to define it as an equal amount of time in mortality. But conditions vary so much on earth in time period, location and family circumstances that I don't know how we could use length of life as a measure of fairness. For example, which is more fair, living to be 15 in an LDS family in modern Utah or to be 100 in ancient Sodom? I have had thoughts that are similar to yours, such as how can the guy I know get killed by an IED in Afghanistan one month after his first child is born? How is it possible that his time on earth was considered sufficient while others live to an old age? Yes, he had accepted the gospel but there is so much to learn still. But at the end of the day God does not fill us in on those details. Rather, he says "I love my children and based on my omniscience and the great mercy made available through the atonement of my Son I will do all within my power to save them to the fullest extent possible" and that's just something we have to exercise our faith in. I think we all will feel that the final outcome for each of us will be far more than fair.

I have thought about this very thing so I offer a couple thoughts I've had. First of all, it may very well be tied to the principle of faith. In the next life that veil we currently have over our eyes is removed and as a result much of the faith we must act under here is removed. I think that may be a factor. But I think a bigger factor simply comes down to the amount of law we want to submit to. It's not just about where we want to end up but also which laws we want to obey. Most everyone would say they'd like to be rich. But how many are actually willing to do what it usually takes to become so? It's the same here. I don't think anyone will be barred from the celestial kingdom that is willing to live a celestial law. And as a rule how a person lives in this life, with whatever amount of truth they possess, will be a pretty good indicator of what people really want. But I also think that there are those who take a little longer to figure things out, like Alma the younger and the Lord makes sure that all such individuals will have that opportunity. God WANTS to save everyone to the fullest extent they are willing to receive and will provide sufficient opportunity to each individual according to His perfect knowledge of us. That is something we can have complete faith in.

2020 was just a crazy year because of COVID. Nothing was normal so it's hard to know what really happened. I think in a normal year Biden would not have been elected. But with people largely stuck in their homes for 6 months leading up to the election and many watching the mainstream media around the clock it's hard to know what exactly people were thinking. On the one hand I would not be surprised if election fraud changed the outcome. But on the other my opinion of the general public is such nowadays that it wouldn't surprise me if anyone got elected in a fair election. Though I will say that while prophecy does not specifically address the presidential election I think it's obvious where things are headed and so I try to not get too aggravated by it all.

I think there are some definite similarities between the Americas as a promised land and the lands of Israel but there are differences too. Namely, the Americas as a land of promise seems to be transferable to whomever the Lord wants where as the lands of Israel have never been given to anyone but them though they may not have always retained possession of it.

I think you make a good point. Apostasy has led the Jews to be stripped of their inheritance on multiple occasions. Abraham 6:6 But I, Abraham, and Lot, my brother’s son, prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord appeared unto me, and said unto me: Arise, and take Lot with thee; for I have purposed to take thee away out of Haran, and to make of thee a minister to bear my name in a strange land which I will give unto thy seed after thee for an everlasting possession, when they hearken to my voice. I think the current conflict is in fact a result of their disobedience long, long ago which allowed other people to take possession of the land. But it is still the land of their inheritance and the place they are prophetically expected to gather to. So we can label that situation however we want to but there are definite promises made to the House of Israel concerning that land that have not been made to other peoples.

I have absolutely no problem with the existence of a species that falls somewhere between man and primate. Considering the differing levels of "intelligence" found all along the spectrum it would even make sense. Though the when and circumstances of their existence is a little more fuzzy. But if they were not sons and daughters of God I'm not sure they could mate with man. That would pose a problem with their premortal identity I would think.

Well the wife of your youth hit the nail on it's head. If I were honest I might feel some unfairness if in her shoes. Like, Really??? I've also been known to use humor to cover up said situations. But this isn't the first time she has expressed an entitlement mentality and a rather high view of herself.

The problem is not the last 5% but the first 1%. The moment you no longer feel you have a choice you are being acted upon. 2 Nephi 2 states that opposition (competing choices) are not only necessary for God's plan but necessary for existence, period. Without choice we are not. I guess you just have to choose between God's wisdom and man's wisdom.

Whenever we speak of scientific facts we are really just speaking about observations that SO FAR appear consistent. This doesn't mean science is just guess work. Scientists probably get a great many things right. If that were not so God would not have told us to gain a knowledge of these things. But what it does mean is that every scientific fact, unless revealed by God, is restricted to man's experience and comprehension. Jesus did not seem to be bound by certain scientific laws during his mortal ministry. So whenever you encounter science that seems convincing, respect the science but leave room for God. Having said that, concerning the argument that is being made concerning determinism, the author points out that our prefrontal cortex is shaped, while we are young, by an environment that we generally don't have much control over and as such our decision making is controlled by factors outside of our own choosing. While it's true that our physical bodies and our upbringing can have great influence upon us, the fact remains that we are surrounded by evidence/people who turn out completely different from what their environment would seem to dictate. People with good backgrounds going bad and vice versa. Siblings growing up in the same environment but turning out totally different from one another. The author's argument, while sounding logical, does not in any way reflect reality. That's why it is so hard to believe because everything in life, whether we can explain it or not, says it simply is not true.

I think the doctrine is pretty clear in this matter: if we are worthy of a blessing and willing to receive it, but for some reason denied it, then we will receive it in the next life. This includes blessings we have lost somewhere along the way but now want to recover. Remain worthy and willing and trust in God's love for you.

If they didn't make a Twilight Zone episode about this they missed a great opportunity.

I don't think he has to be subtle about it. Our doctrine is very clear that those lands were given to Israel by God. It doesn't matter who else may have resided there in the past, that's Israel's land. God says so. Though I guess it might not be taken right if he were to express support for any type of conflict, even if it is justified. But it is interesting to see him focusing on these scriptures. Makes you wonder what his prophetic eye sees in these events as it pertains to the future.