Doctor Steuss

G-d created all things spiritually before they were created physically (hense two creation accounts in the Bible that differ slightly). So, technically all things have "spirits" -- including the very earth itself. Outside of scripture? IMO, no. In others' opinions, yes. Depends on what your life's experiences are like, and what evidence has been provided to you. Outside of the artist within me that longs for the existence of souls and spirits, I have found nothing outside of the texts of my religion to suggest they exist. However, there are members of my family that have had very strong spiritual experiences that give them excellent reason to believe they “are real things.”

I might need to do a new thread on this (don't want to sully the great Tyler of the SSCE's thread with such nonsense)... I often have trouble squaring the influence of Joseph's worldview upon the BoM with the evidence for a tight translation process. IMO, the evidence for a tight translation outweighs that of a loose, and thus the ability for altering redactions by Joseph seems to be lessened... and least in my mediocre mind. But, conversely, the evidence for Joseph’s influences seems overwhelmingly evident. Any of you peeps find yourself in a similar battle between the translation evidence and Joseph’s worldview within the text?

I keep a copy of the Book of Enoch in my bathroom (I know... crazy bathroom reading material, but I just can't get enough of the darn thing). I hope one day that it is canonized and gains the place in the LDS Church that it once had with Christ and his apostles. Another "discovery" or "evidence" that I really dig can be found in 1 Nephi 16: 34

I know what you mean.

Brilliant! It's like a Marx Brothers scetch.

I think I might throw that in my sig line.

Perhaps. Stepping outside our own belief systems to view those of another is often a difficult task. Maybe we should just go back to singing hymns?

"Serious discussion"? Ah, crap...

Have you had your shots? You can't post here unless you have had your shots.

Modify the quote header? What do you mean? I have seen no such thing happening...

And hopefully they illustrated how sarah_22's question is nonsensical from a non ex nihilo paradigm. Agreed. It's just that for some of us, creation from nothing is illogical.

I’m not against lexicons. I only look at them with caution when it comes to words that have theological significance (especially to “mainstream” Christianity). The authors allow their biases and doctrines that came about in later eras of Christianity to taint the text. As for the reformers. There were some that were “faith alone” (which is interesting because such sentiments are hard to find in the ANF). But for the most part, they rejected the heresy of antinomianism (although there were a few that embraced it in their zeal to downplay works and create lazy-grace [and eventually TULIP]). True “faith” results in obedience. Obedience and “faith” cannot be separated. “Faith alone” when properly understood is to have faith/loyalty/fidelity/trust in the Lord and thusly obey Him. Too often some of us LDS can get caught up in the “works” side of the equation, but at the same time there are many non-LDS that get so caught up in the “faith” side that they become something that the apostles of old wouldn’t even recognize as Nazarenes.

No it isn't. No soup for you.

No showers. We spit on each other. 'Tis the way of the ancients.

There are eternal laws which G-d Himself obeys. It is obedience to these laws that is part of the reason He is G-d. And by obeying those laws, we can become like Him. Possibly He could create from nothing if He wanted to. But it was revealed to the Jews of old, and the Christians continued to believe until the 2nd Century that G-d does not create the pottery He uses to make pots. Thus, such speculation of whether He could if He wanted to is akin to: Can G-d sin... Can G-d create a stone so heavy that He can't lift it... Can G-d stop being G-d if He wants to... Can G-d make a copy of Himself that would be more powerful than He is... Could He? Possibly. But He doesn’t.

Nah, 1/3 is fine. I just think that it isn't necessarily 1/3 as the scriptures always say "third part." There has been some interesting stuff in biblical studies regarding the classifications and what the "first part" and "second part" divisions may have been. But, as far as LDS nomenclature goes, you are probably safe with 1/3. Do you have a particular verse in mind? It’s my understanding that he is addressing the elders of the church and helping to clarify some previous prophecies/revelations regarding spirits.

Now you've got me in a hymn mood: I know that my Redeemer lives; O the sweet joy this sentence gives! He lives, he lives, who once was dead; he lives, my everlasting Head. He lives triumphant from the grave; he lives eternally to save; he lives exalted, throned above; he lives to rule his church in love. He lives to bless me with his love, and still he pleads for me above; he lives, my hungry soul to feed; he lives to help in time of need. He lives, my kind, wise, constant Friend; who still will keep me to the end; he lives, and while he lives I'll sing, Jesus, my Prophet, Priest and King. He lives, all glory to his Name; he lives, my Savior, still the same; what joy the blest assurance gives: I know that my Redeemer lives!

Maybe… maybe not. It might help us to take more responsibility and accountability for the wrong and evil in the world in lieu of using Satan as a scapegoat. But, I see where you're coming from. If Satan is really out there, it seems that he would find it triumphant if we stopped believing in his existence. Then again, would it not better serve his selfish motives to convince us of G-d's non-existence instead of his own? If he's out there, I think it might tick off his ego if we stopped believing he was out there. It's a sticky subject. When I first read Ron's blog on the topic, my immediate reaction was a knee-jerk. Now, I'm just trying to sort through the murky waters to see if there just might be something there. There is no harm in re-evaluating our paradigms from time to time, as long as we don’t lose sight of Christ and G-d. Edited to add: I hope Bro. Baron doesn't mind if I post this, but here is a link to his blog entry that goes into this a bit.

It's a "third part," and not necessarily "one third." But to answer you question, other than their spirit bodies, no they did not. This is why Cain will rule over Satan (as Cain will have a physical as well as spiritual body, and Satan will not).

Fascinating (your love of tacos that is). Actually, I never even thought of the possibility that he was viewed as a "special messenger to afflict mankind." If you look at scripture (even LDS scripture) G-d does seem to use wicked people to inflict punishment/retribution. Why not have an angel who is given government over such a task (much like the designations given to Raphael, et.al. in the Book of Enoch)... Ron, When you say that you don't necessarily feel that there is a Satan, are you saying that you think there might not be an actual individual named "Son of the Morning/Lucifer"? Or do you believe that his role has been confused and conflated into a "Satan"? Thanks, Stu

My thoughts are still in their infancy. Ron and Structurecop could definately give a much more educated answer than I. But, in my speculative opinions: 1) It may be that the actual existence of a Lucifer wasn’t revealed until later. 2) He was a later addition into the text once the doctrine was refined. 3) The “adversary” to the first authors was not a given individual but was instead seen as a general evil (or, IMO “stupidity") that is inherent in all men, and it wasn’t until later that the “adversary” was attributed to a given individual. 4) There was a much more of a general sense of "evil" and "devils" than that which was later espoused. 5) I like tacos. Don't know if I've told you lately... but I love you.

Indeed. Methinks I'm really going to dig this forum. Testimony sharing is pretty much frowned up in the other boards, but to me, it is one thing that keeps me going and keeps me defending. I don't really have one... but I find strength in the knowledge that others do.

I smell burnt toast.

In a nut-shell: Ever since the world began, Woman has tried to rule the man. She created the first offense And she’s been after him ever since G-d created the earth, and He rested then G-d created man, and He rested again. Then G-d created woman for man’s defense And neither G-d, nor man, have rested since. -------------- Seriously though. In regards to death, there are several ways to look at it. I tend to think of death as the seperation of the soul from the body. Do plants and animals have souls? I tend to think they don't (although they do technically have "spirits"). So, plants and animals could "die" but there could have been an absense of "death." Also, keep in mind that there is more than one kind of "death." Physical death wasn't the only kind of death that entered the world with the Fall of Adam and Eve. PS. Often my views don't line up with official LDS thought/belief/doctrine. So, take what I say with a grain of salt.