LeSellers

That's potentially offensive, and at the very least, disrespectful. You've used it at least twice, and it is unhelpful. Lehi

Are things good because god did them? Or does god only do good things? The first is true, the second is not. People are perfectly capable of doing good things. Sometimes on purpose, sometimes by accident. However, no one knows what "good" is without a touchstone. Atheists who claim they can be moral without God have to ignore the fact that mankind is inherently self-serving, and that being good is not normal. So, to arrive at the conclusion that one can be moral without God, he must assert that people can determine what "good" (or "moral") is. That is not likely. What happens in reality is that these godless moralists use religion (all of which came, originally, from God via Adam and Eve and, later, Noah and Shem) to define goodness and morality. Even the "don't hurt others and don't take their stuff" morality of the libertarians comes from God: "Do unto others as ye would have others do unto you." You may have heard that somewhere. No, one cannot be good, cannot be moral without God. Lehi

And it's not a position we Saints take, so I have no reason at all to defend it. This goes back to your original query: can you be good without God? The answer is no because you do not know what "good" is without God. Even with God, we have the comparative. He cannot do two contradictory things, i.e., save the women and children, and give the evil full rein to exercise their wickedness. Would you let one of your children get sick if it meant you could develop an antigen so the others would avoid the illness altogether? That's rough;y the same question. Lehi

What "seems to be" isn't always what we may imagine. In that specific case, maybe so. But we have Abraham's experience with Lot and Soddam. god would have spared the cities for ten righteous men's sake. And there is the eternal perspective that here'n'nowers, like most atheists, ignore. It isn't always bad to die when one is in a repentant state. It isn't even always bad to die unrepentant — thank a soldier willing to die on account of you. Lehi

Yes, but "technology" has finally caught up with his needs Unfortunately, sperm whales live only about 70 years. Moby, sad to say, has died. Lehi

I've reported a few of mine, but I have not checked back to see it anything happened. Lehi

Take them out of the government-run, tax-funded welfare schools entirely. Just another reason. GRTF-Welfare schools were designed to weaken families and undermine Christianity. Doing a great job, ain't they? Lehi

On this subject, would it be appropriate to "Report post" for these matters? The mods may or may not see every post. Lehi

In defense of the white whale, he didn't have access to a pen or waterproof paper. Lehi

It might be more accurate to say that He (Christ) inherited His power over death by virtue of the Father's DNA. There may be others out there who believe this, but as far as I have been able to tell, we're the only Christians who really believe that Jesus is the actual Son of the Father. (We do not know, in spite of a lot of speculation on the subject, exactly how that happened, but Mary's DNA gifted Him mortality, and Father's immortality, both traits essential to the sacrifice that makes the Atonement possible.) Lehi

No, just their sprinklers. Lehi

Any of which would, by revelation, make Him something less than God. Lehi

It is not, however, a requirement for God, that He redeem us. He could have left us in our sins. We don't merit it. We don't earn it. It is solely a gift, from God, freely given out of love, for our benefit. And this is one significant place where Catholic (and most of Protestant) dogma is simply wrong. God did not create us out of whim or caprice. We are His children. He does not need to redeem us, any more than we must breathe. But it is in our nature to breathe, and it is in His nature to redeem His creations, and, especially, His children (us). To be true to Himself, He must redeem us. That (among a few important "other things") is what makes Him God. Lehi Lehi

Not so sure about that, at least not in that Father derives nothing from our redemption. We Saints have a scripture where we learn that it is the work and glory of god to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Moreover, as His sons and daughters, it is only common sense that He wants us back in His home. So, like any father, when we do what is best for us, He takes joy in it. Lehi

Your Olympic analogy is flawed: This isn't a competition. Father wants us all to come home, and there is plenty of room. Justice is an eternal law. Justice cannot be cheated. Every sin must have a price paid. And none of us is capable of paying that price; Christ alone had the capacity to do it for us because He is the unblemished Lamb, unspotted from the world. "Atonement" means "putting at one", that is, making the penitent the same as He is: clean in every whit. And only His blood can do it. You are right, of course, that we must become Celestial beings. We do that by obeying the Commandments of God, but mere obedience is not enough. We must be "converted", i.e., changed from what we are (sinners and rebels) to "Celestials", conforming in every way to the laws of "Celestiousity". The Atonement is the only way that can happen. All the obedience in the world will not be sufficient for that. It doesn't even make it easier for the Atonement to work on us. That process requires infinite washing: the least sin is wholly polluting. You cannot pop a bubble just a little bit. But we can advance our intelligence (light and truth) by study and by faith, and by obedience (as well as one is able). I cannot recall exactly where I read this more than a half century ago, but the Spirit World is a classroom: we go from one study to another. We will have classes on Faith, on repentance, on the Atonement, on revelation, on every aspect of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and we will learn to be Celestial beings (if we have already done the minimal work here, as far as we knew it). Some of us will already have mastered he rudiments of Faith, some more advanced concepts in that same subject. The latter will be better for their greater knowledge and practice, but they will still have infinitely more to learn. The same is true of all the other pieces of the puzzle: more to learn than any of us has every imagined, and much more than any of us has mastered. So, we need a Sacrificed Mediator because nothing we can do is sufficient to wash away our own sins, and because we have, through sin, "divorced" ourselves from the family of God, we need an advocate (a better title, I think, than "Mediator") to plead with the Father to let us back into His household. I see Jesus with His arm around my shoulder, we both standing before the Throne of God, saying, "Father, this is my son, Lehi. I have done what Thou hast asked of him. He is clean by my sacrifice. Wilt Thou let him in?" And, because of that Sacrifice, Father will say, "Yea, My Son. For Thy sake, I will let him in." And to me, "Lehi, enter into the rest of thy Lord." Assuming, of course, that I have asked for, and received through repentance, the cleansing blood of the Lamb. Lehi

Now, if only she'd hold herself to that (or any) standard. For most politicians, and especially progressive politicians, the only standard they adhere to is the double standard. Lehi

You asked a similar question earlier, and the answer is the same: Government doesn't want us to have any gods before it. Hilary is the quintessential power-hungry beast who wants all the power, and all the glory for herself. One wonders how anyone could mistake her for a Christian, liberal or otherwise. Lehi

The best sarcasm is that which is very nearly undetected. Lehi

This is, indeed, a legitimate perspective. In fact, it is, outside the morality itself, the best perspective. Whether it would work out as you propose is open to debate. Much of the evidence supports your comment. Lehi

Yes, he has the right. Otherwise, those buttheads, etc., would have the right to service, kindness, etc. One cannot give something to someone if that person has the right to it. Lehi

From another topic: This is one reason it's so easy to attack Joseph Smith: from essentially the beginning of the Restoration, people recorded much or most of what he said, at least in public. Lehi

Lehi

Again we return to Blake: A truth that's told with bad intent Beats all the lies you can invent. Lehi

No. death, as you define it, cannot occur. There was no beginning to our existences, and there will be no end. If the options A, B, and C are before you, you can legitimately choose among them. But if "C" is only imaginary, is it reasonable to claim that your options are limited? Makes no sense to me. The premise is faulty. What on earth (or what in infinity) could lead anyone to imagine that anything in immortality, to which he had been assigned based on its being what would make him happiest, would be undesirable? Lehi

That's partly true, partly because "most" isn't "all". Her approach, the mind-reading and projection, was also a major issue. Yes, this last one if from a generally favorable review, but even people who want to believe the worst of Jefferson (or of Joseph) can recognize that she is not a good biographer. Lehi