iamlds
-
Posts
31 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by iamlds
-
Interesting, laud and clear ,thanks for that
-
Interesting, laud and clear ,thanks for that
-
Interesting, laud and clear ,thanks for that
-
Interesting, laud and clear ,thanks for that
-
Interesting, laud and clear ,thanks for that
-
I will tell you a story, this story is one of the reason I asked this questions: It all starts at the Sunday school where we discussing on the part and reading on Acts. then we came through this. Acts 15:20 New Testament But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Acts 15:29 New Testament That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. (some says its for gentiles only ) My question is : This was approximately 45 AD after Christ thought people that the mosaic law was fulfilled and should be done away. 45 years after the death of Jesus then here comes Paul teaching these doctrine? Then after several years till know It just dis-appear just like that? (but if its just for gentiles its none of our business) Then the class has its divided opinions, some says yes we should not eat blood then the other says its ok to eat blood. And there is no explanation on the teachers and student manual Question: There's a doctrine that disappear like a bubble through time the we are here waiting for an official doctrine? But the other doctrine on the Bible we still believe without waiting an official doctrine to be released? Still this is a Question, not a thing that I insist.
-
we can drain blood better than days, if we will drain them for days it will be rotten Once we punch whole on their neck the blood will come out rushing like water faucet, of-course it will not totally drain but not "filled" either. I'm just thinking of what you said is filled with blood compared to a meat with blood drained and washed But you are correct there still a blood on it.
-
I can read this post different from your other posts More kinder and more clearer Yes I said I understand and I Believe, and it doesn't mean that my understanding is correct that's why I'm asking questions. And if you wonder why I keep on asking? coz I need answers to keep coming I don't need insulting or miss interpreted comment, but this comment of yours is much better than the others
-
Oh yes, Thanks for that advice, my mistake
-
Yes of-course the Lord will give different revelation specially on personal revelation, for example what will you do in a particular situation, or where will you go to school? or whom will you marry, or what will you say, but we are talking about blood. There is difference between them. I'm not actually mentioning covenant, I'm just quote whats on the article. and I'm pretty sure that the Prophet knows more than we know about that 1 nephi 17:2. and the question is whey then he still said it in the article? If its alive maybe yes . We have a lot of slaughter house here and I know its only a matter of minutes to drain blood on a animal after you slice it and remove the parts that are not edible Yes that is right but my question here is that Is Deseretbook publish false doctrine? The answer is No, I'm not asking if its official i'm just asking if its false or true? or non doctrine? If you say yes its none doctrine then nevermind that, if no its not true then its false, And if Yes its true doctrine but not official then I still believe it. Thank you for your comments
-
So you insist that saying addicted is speaking evil your definition of addiction is correct but its not the only meaning. Anyway yes I already got the answer and definitely its not from you. All I hear from you is Bias judgmental comment, insisting your understanding about the situation. Just like this comment. Answering your accusations: yes they are priesthood leaders (me too), No! I do not disregard their the fact that God called them (us), No, I'm not ignoring simple truths of the Gospel. What an accusation this is! I already got the answer(I already said it) I just answering your false accusation. Anyway its just your opinion, Thanks it will not be "official" just keep it to yourself, I can find answers through other users anyway
-
Ah yes, someone told me that already that he is not yet prophet that time, and maybe the question now would be, was the answer true or false? Fact or Myth? Our reactions to it depend on how we answer it Thanks Iggy, I know this will always be kicked around around Answered and asked many times and been discussed by other people also. I still stand for what I know is true, since there is no doctrine about it(as they say), saying to eat blood or not to eat is non of our business as far as I understand it(base on THEIR comments ) So if we want to eat or not its up to us.
-
What is wrong of saying "ADDICTED" to someone who is addicted? What is that calling evil good and good evil? I hope you understand what I mean. So I can't understand the real situation and you know? Do you know us? I will say this again to you I WILL MAKE THIS BIGGER FONT SO YOU CAN SEE. I AND MY LOCAL LEADERS ARE FRIENDS. i ALREADY TOLD YOU. AND WE ALSO TROWING JOKES WITH THIS ISSUE. AND WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT, WHEN THEY SAY I SHOULD NOT TELL OR PREACH THIS, THEN I DIDN'T. WHEN WE EAT TOGETHER, THEY EAT BLOOD WHILE I'M NOT, BUT WE DON'T FIGHT ABOUT IT. THEY SHOW ME HOW ADDICTED THEY ARE AND I'M NOT CONDEMNING THEM! I WILL TELL YOU AGAIN AND AGAIN. I AND MY LOCAL LEADERS ARE FRIENDS. WHY ARE YOU JUDGING ME OF LIKE I'M SPEAKING EVIL TO THEM, I JUST SAY THEY'RE ADDICTED. THEY KNOW IT, AND FOR THE SAKE OF THIS FORUM TO UNDERSTAND I ALSO TELL IT. SO HOW IN THE WORLD YOU COME UP WITH THIS THAT MADE YOU SAY THAT I KNOW ENOUGH TO JUDGE THEM LIKE I WOULD FIGHT TO IT TO DEATH. YOU ARE A SENIOR MODERATOR AND YOU ACT LIKE THAT WHICH MAKES ME THINK HOW YOU MODERATE ON SOME POST. AGAIN I WILL TELL YOU THIS, I AND THE LOCAL LEADERS (WHICH IS I'M ONE OF THEM) ARE GOOD FRIENDS. WE JUST WANT TO CLEAR THIS THINGS UP. THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING A QUESTION.
-
Calling an addicted person addict is judgmental? So what then will I tell you guys? that some local leaders here are NOT ADDICTED even though they really are? How can we understand the real situation? So you think they are not really addicted? Maybe you can eat blood and they said its very delicious and so addicting. Then Just by saying they are addicted I am now judging them? This is so funny I am also called by God and by prophecy and by the laying on of Hands was called to serve in the church then I am a Lord's anointed? You call me judgmental so what will you call yourself then? if that's the case? They even said that if the blood is really prohibited in our church they will leave the church or go inactive? So what do you want to here about them? they are not addicted? So I see you don't believe in the bible, do you think all the important commandments are in the Doctrine and Covenants? So why do we have four standard books? and a continuous revelation? Just like what I've said Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith authored a book called ANSWERS TO GOSPEL QUESTIONS, to answer these questions but then again will be questioned over and over again Or maybe you change the Title of that book to QUESTIONS TO GOSPEL ANSWERS.
-
Yes that is right, some are consuming cola drinks and energy drinks while others not. There are articles about this but same case, its not official
-
Correction, not all leaders are united to this, just like what i've said some of my leaders says its prohibited and some says it's not. How can you say that most of the leaders are united with this? How do you know at the first place? And what made you say that I'm judging my local leaders? So who are the Lord's anointed? Are the local leaders are Lord's anointed? I believe its the prophets who are the Lord's anointed. Where in the world you get that? I'm also a leader in our place, So am I a Lord's anointed you call judgmental? So you also judge the Lord's anointed? Are you rendering unrighteous judgment so as well? You know estradling75, no need for an official doctrine to this, The Lord forbade eating blood on old testament, he forbade it in new testament and he gave personal revelation to Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith. or it is you that judge the Lord's anointed for his revelation? If you don't like the revelation of Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith then go back to New testament. Acts 15:20 New Testament But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Acts 15:29 New Testament That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. Don’t tell me this was done away by the fulfillment of the mosaic law, Take note this was approximately 45 AD after Christ thought people that the mosaic law was fulfilled and should be done away. 45 years after the death of Jesus then here comes Paul teaching these doctrine? So is Paul’s teaching is unofficial again? Or what will you say then?
-
None of the above Im just wondering why we don't have unity of beliefs regarding this
-
Correction, I'm not judging my local leaders. I will tell you some of the scenario here. I was taught by my previous leaders about this, my mission president also taught us not to eat blood, then now my local leaders will tell me that this is a false doctrine, So what do you want me to do, just leave the things I once knew and eat blood with them? I'm seeking for answers where I think I cannot get from this forum for almost of the answers here are only personal opinion and no legit source just like your comment What made you think that I want to put myself in the position of judging over them? Can I also ask that to you? You really want to put yourself in the position of passing judgment over me? And maybe I should add category to post more convincing comment, not only the once who are not addicted to eating of blood but also with a scripture reference or atleast a personal revelation from a prophet. Please read again this is a personal revelation(most of them say) received by Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith Question: "Is the eating of blood and food therefrom, such as blood sausage and blood pudding, forbidden by the law of the Lord today? In "Gen. 9:4Genesis 9:4, and from Paul's enjoinder against partaking of blood I deduce that this teaching is part of the everlasting covenant, and not a principle that passed with the fulfilment of the Mosaic law. Is this conclusion correct?" Answer: Definitely your conclusion is correct. The blood plays a far more important part in this mortal world, whether it is the blood of human beings or the blood of other creatures, than is generally understood. It is the life-giving fluid of the mortal body; but it has in it the seeds of death as well as the sustaining power of mortal life. Its duties are many and varied, but it is not the purpose here to recount them. Notwithstanding its great importance to the physical body, it is, above all else, a mortal element. Its not the dire moral problem, its only a PART OF THE EVERLASTING COVENANT (this is base on the article) If Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith received personal revelation about abstinence of blood(just like what other says coz its not official) what would the Lord will tell the rest then? Eat blood coz its only for Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith? Would the Lord say, "Vort and the rest of the Saints, you can eat blood because the prohibition of eating blood is for Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith only"? Or will the Lord would say the same personal revelation that the Prophet received?
-
Okay if that is really the case then Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith received personal revelation about abstinence of blood(just like what other says coz its not official) what would the Lord will tell the rest then? Eat blood coz its only for Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith? Would the Lord say, "NeedleinA and the rest of the Saints, you can eat blood because the prohibition of eating blood is for Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith only"? Or will the Lord would say the same personal revelation that the Prophet received? Again please be patient with my English. but I guess its still understandable
-
I like This Post Hello Iggy, I've been an active member for almost 28 years now, I'm from Philippines. Eating of blood is somehow a part of Philippine culture, and you can see blood food almost . everywhere, on the street and on famous restaurants. And the saints here have different beliefs regarding this eating of blood. I personally believe that blood should not be eaten, this is base to what I knew. If Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith received personal revelation about abstinence of blood(just like what other says coz its not official, what would the Lord will tell the rest then? Eat blood coz its only for Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith? I like your post.
-
Thanks for not trying to insult me, I'm not easily offended anyway Actually it should be 4 different sentences just be patent with my english, I speak another language, english is not my native language. Just try your best answering my post and if there will be at anytime some opportunity to converse using my native language, I too will not insult you
-
So what can you say about Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith's article? It's like going out to the crowd and not inhaling smoke from cigars you can walk along but don't smoke:) Its recorded in D&C Eat but a VERY LITTLE meat and its clear. The problem is our local leaders are trying their best not to understand this doctrine because they were addicted to it. And did even said that "I will leave the church or go inactive if eating blood is prohibited" Eating blood is more important to them than their covenant with the Lord. Funny. So all their answers are motivated by their addiction. I will be more convinced if someone who is not addicted of eating blood says something about this principle
-
Ah ok it was distributed by deseretbook. Doesn't make any sense, Deserethbook is publishing false doctrine, even-though its not official, deseretbook will not publish false doctrine either? Do you know a book published by deseretbook that contains false doctrine? If no, will you think again if this doctrine is true or false?
-
So to make the story short, the Book entitled ANSWERS TO GOSPEL QUESTIONS is a false Doctrine and not to be shared to others because its a personal revelation of the Prophet I believe that Prophets are foreordained. And even their early days on this earth, their example and lifestyles are in-harmony with the gospel, that is why you can read books, "FROM THE LIFE OF PROPHET............"
-
So what can you say about Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith's article?
