wenglund

Honesty compels me to acknowledge that my thoughts on this subject were substantially prompted and influenced by this fantastic Interpreter Round table podcast: Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Setting aside the debatable quibble about whether gay bowl syndrome is a disease or not, If you look carefully at my OP you will notice that I used the word "relationship" between sin and illness. In subsequent post I used the words, connection, related, cause, link, and contributing factor, most of which allow for multi-directional interpretation, and those that are direction specific (i,e, sin causing or contributing to illness), they are condemnation neutral, and thus best understood as consequences. At no time did I use the word "punishment", because the word never crossed my mind--not that a rational case couldn't be made for the term in certain cases. Also, I wasn't speaking in binary terms, but rather nuanced, which allows for varying degrees of connections and links, etc. from nominal to significant depending upon the case. Furthermore, in my most recent post, I clearly indicated that my mind was far more oriented towards spiritual illnesses than physical. I used the generic term "illness" in the OP to allow discussion of both physical and spiritual illness, and I pointed to the physical illnesses being healed in the New Testament as a means of encouraging discussion that would hopefully lead to enabling me to make the point that I did--i.e. that the physical healings were a "sign" of Jesus' ability to heal spiritually. So, there is no maybe about it. You misunderstood me spectacularly. How is that for comic relief. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

While I have some interest in the possible causal or contributing effects of sin on physical illness, the point you raise in the one I find of greatest importance, particularly to this last weeks Come Follow Me lesson. It is my belief that Christ healed the physically sick for at least two reasons. First, it was prophesied that the Messiah would do so, and Jesus fulfilled those prophesies.. And, second, and far more important in my estimation, it was to provide a physical manifestation of his healing powers so that people would have cause to believe he could also heal them spiritually (making the spiritually blind to see and the deaf to hear) and raise them from spiritual death--something that may not be self-evident to other mortals, at least not immediately. This is, in part, why Jesus made mention of forgiveness of sins in the course of healing the sick. In fact, he suggests as much in response to Jewish leaders challenging him in their hearts while he was healing the man with palsy (paralysis): in Mark 2:10-12 10 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) 11 I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. 12 And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion. In short, Christ's ability to heal spiritually through forgiveness of sickening sin, is demonstrated in the the physical healings. This is significant in that though not all who seek physical healing at the hand of Christ and his priesthood, will receive it during mortality, yet all who seek spiritual healing with real intent and faith in Christ, will receive it. I t is the undeniable and direct relationship between sin and spiritual health that is at the heart of the miracles of hJesus healing people physically. For, all things are spiritual unto God.(D&C 29L34) Thanks, -Wade Englund-,

Sure. According to this article: The Link between Substance Abuse and Mental Illness Substance abuse and mental illness are closely tied together. NAMI reports that 10.2 million people have both a mental illness and a substance use disorder. One may trigger the other; for example, people struggling with bipolar disorder may develop an alcohol use disorder because they try to moderate manic symptoms. However, some substance abuse can trigger mental illness; stimulant abuse, like crystal meth addiction, can trigger a psychotic disorder. About 18 percent of Americans experience mental illness, while 8 percent experience a substance use disorder. Of these, according to SAMHSA, 7.9 million people had both a substance abuse disorder and mental illness in 2014. This condition is calledco-occurring disorders. People between the ages of 26 and 49 were the most affected by co-occurring disorders. In other articles we find that In spite of efforts to downplay and mis-direct the causes and contributing factors, the LGBTQ... communities are at higher risk for mental illness than the general population (see HERE and HERE and HERE)) as well as suicide (see HERE). The PC crowd, though has made a significant effort to place the blame for the higher rates on things like discrimination, bullying, etc. However, the fact that the rates of mental illness and suicides among LGBTQ... have increased at the same time that acceptance of the communitee as increased, logically suggests otherwise. Sadly, and ironically the mis-direction only hurts the LGBTQ... communitee by focusing attention in areas where little or nothing can be done and even less that would be productive, and away from things within the LGBTQ control., Furthermore, there is a growing body of studies linking spirituality positively with mental health (see HERE and HERE) Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It was actually gay-specific (see HERE and also HERE and HERE and HERE), though the PC crowd has since attempted to blur the distinction with other colon/rectal disorders, and render the term outdated. The cause isn't through forcing things out the colon/rectal area in the natural direction, but forcing things in contrary to design, as well as diseases disseminated through the unnatural forcing. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Very briefly, and on the lighter side, I have remained a member because I am peculiar. Certainly, it wasn't because of the green Jello with carrots. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Are you suggesting there is no connection between smoking and lung disease, mouth cancer, etc.? What about alcohol and liver disease? What about gay bowel disease, if not AIDS? I knew of a classmate during my first year of college who was crippled and body twisted from venereal disease. And, this doesn't even touch on possible mental illnesses that may be sin related, if not caused. So, while not all sicknesses may result from sin, can we at least agree that some may? Whatever the case, you point about faith is well taken. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

This last week's Come Follow Me lesson covered several miraculous healings by Christ, a few of which also dealt with the forgiving of sins. My question for this thread is what you may or may not see as the relationship between physical sickness and sin in these New Testament cases or otherwise.? Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I haven't seen anyone on this thread suggest that homosexuality is only about sex. Certainly, I didn't. So, no confusion here. Though, if one examines the comparative data for average numbers of sexual partners, as well as the rate of infidelity, the average duration of relationships, and the number of legalized relationship and divorce, if not also the rate of household with children, and the recent trends associated with each, it wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that physical connections are far more of a dominant, if not sole, attribute of most homosexual relationships than heterosexual relationships. Nevertheless, and simply put, the rightness or wrongness in seeking emotional and physical connections for all of us, regardless of sexual orientation, is dependent upon whether it conforms to the will and design of God. The "pain" for homosexual in not realizing their hope for sodomy and the like isn't any worse than that associated with the far greater number of heterosexuals desiring adultery, if not also the emotional connections related to each. Are these really the kinds of "pain" we are encouraged to bear? Besides, biologically, and in accordance with the design for God's creations, the desire for emotional and physical connections is essentially linked to procreation and continuance of the species. It seems counter-intuitive to bemoan or even share the "pain" of those whose desires run contrary thereto Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I understand and sympathize ith what you are suggesting (speaking as one who is old and hasn't married and has faced the likely prospect of never marrying). However, part of what complicates things unnecessarily is confusing love with the sexual expression thereof. We all have hope of attaining a Christlike love even between members of the same sex, though I don't know how important or right it is to have hope for sodomy. And, it isn't just homosexuals who may feel the "pain" of not being able to express their love in sexual ways contrary to God's will and design for His children. Given the 7th Commandment, I dare say that a significantly greater number of heterosexuals have no rightful hope of sexually expressing their love for someone else's spouse. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Not a problem since his cardinals can only move diagonally on the "tug-of-war" board, whereas the apostles can move in all directions. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Again, I think this is the upside down thinking of the world in at least two respects. First, contrary to what is suggested, it is actually fair to homosexuals in the sense that life is unfair in its own ways for everyone, individually and collectively. The illusion that life is particularly unfair for certain groups is created by the media and identity politics using focused attention on select woes, and this for manipulative purposes. Ironically, what is unfair is the "judges" have rigged the Oppression Olympics to favor useful identities . Second, the thinking is inverted because it prioritizes and promotes the woes over the potential redemption, the weaknesses over the potential strengths, and this on a group rather than on an individual basis. This, too, is by worldly design. It is much easier to subjugate populations by getting them to obsess about their group problems and injustices and inequality, since individuals cant personally solve such things for the groups on their own, thus leaving the false perception that secular governments are the only source of resolution. Not only is misery and the like made dominate, but power is shifted thereby from the individual to the collective--i.e. to the elites who rule the collective. Whereas, the Restored Gospel does the opposite by way of the atoning sacrifice and elevating example of Christ. Salvation and exaltation is made paramount, first on an individual bases, and then on a family basis. Weaknesses are viewed as a means for gaining strength, and unfairness and injustice as a means of building divine character. Challenges, then, become opportunities for progression rather than the cause of damnation and failure. At the very least, the sorrows of the night can be endured and even overcome through faith and hope in the joy that cometh in the morning. In short, beware of the diametrical opposing thinking of the world, and Come Follow Christ.. It can make the difference between real progress or digression, true freedom and enslavement, regardless of race, sex, age, religion, sexual orientation, or otherwise. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yes. Very much so. To get a sense for how bad the harm has been not only to homosexuals but to others in society, see my articles on Spike in Social Ills, Destructive Compassion, Degraded Traditional Marriage, Marriage in Crises, and especially Hurting the Children. Granted, these articles were written in the context of the Same Sex "Marriage" debate, but they also relate to harm stemming from the movement as a whole. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I don't see how this answers my question? Nevertheless, I am not sure you are understanding Mormon correctly. The fact that Mormon leaves the ultimate condemnation (judgement) to God, doesn't take away from the fact that the preceding verses, if not also chapters and books, were filled with his recognition (judgement) that the "fair ones" had "departed from the ways of the Lord." In other words, being able to discern (judge) what constitutes sin or not, and whether people, including ourselves, are sinning, is quite different than condemning (judging) people to hell . The former is requisite to grasping and properly operating within the gospel (how can people have faith unto repentance and be cleansed. justified, and sanctified, if they are unable to say what is sin or no?). Whereas, the later is the domain of the Father through the intercession of the Son. The Savior came into the world not to condemn (judge) but to redeem the world. He wishes all men to become their very best selves, even as he is. But, to redeem the world necessitates recognizing (judging) right from wrong, sin from righteousness, good from evil., etc. One cannot activate the redemptive powers in their lives except they recognize and acknowledge those things from which they need redeeming. Sadly, some of us have foolishly bought into the world's nefarious illusion that not considering certain sins as sins is the merciful and tolerant thing to do. However, this ignores the physical and spiritual consequences of those sins (I mentioned earlier in the thread how disease and mental illness and death have skyrocketed among homosexuals since their movement began. I can provide ample documentation. The same is manifesting itself among transgenders and the like.) Whereas, in truth, it is the gospel that is merciful, not only in helping people to avoid the ravages of sin (after first acknowledging their sins), but also to overcome them. But, we live in an upside-down world. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Interesting and revealing analogy. Does this mean that you view homosexual behavior as conditionally sinful, if at all, rather than intrinsically sinful? If so, then under what conditions do you view it as sinful, and are these condition of man or of God? I am just attempting to determine to what extent your view on this specific matter is worldly based or Christ centered. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Correct. The correlation to Eve , among other things, was that both women were forbidden to touch, causing them to face a difficult situation . And, both women made the choice to touch the forbidden. However, the outcomes are reverse. Smith's article explains further. You are correct. Smith states" Because menstruation was regarded as one of the results of Eve’s sin10 and was linked with sin in general (Lamentations 1:17 and Ezekiel 36:17-18),11 the hemorrhaging woman is associated with Eve. More broadly, the woman’s condition of ceaseless menstrual hemorrhaging is a magnification of the normal female condition. These associations make the hemorrhaging woman the ideal narrative re-creation of Eve in her fallen state." It does indeed. She is not only an example of the cleansing power of Christ, but also metaphorically an example of Christ's power to redeem from the fall. Fantastic stuff! Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Evidently, there is no board rule against you saying things that are demonstrably false. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

While accounting for the numbers of nights may be of interest to some, I am far more curious about how Jonas is a sign of Christ. However, rather than derail this thread, for those interested, I started another thread to explore the topic. It is titled, Redemptive Reading of Mark. The connection between the title of the thread and the subject of Johas as the sing of Christ, will become apparent after reading the article linked therein. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Given that the Study Board has no topic for this weeks (or last weeks) Come Follow Me lesson, I figured it was okay to post it here. IN the course of my research, I came across a fascinating article titled, A Redemptive Reading of Mark 5:25-34, by Julie M. Smith. This article astutely compares and contrasts the story of Eve in Genesis with the story of the woman that hath and issue in Mark, and demonstrates what some have come to call an "inverted motif," though rightly Julie considered it a redemptive reading. By this it is meant that the two stories have similar beginnings (figuratively speaking), they have opposing endings--the first representing descension (the fall), and the second ascension (redemption). The article touches on several other correlations, including the story of Johas in connection with several New Testament events. My intent for this thread is to use this article as a springboard for discussing Jonas as a sign of Christ--a question prompted by another thread., while also considering the scriptural focus of the article more in-depth. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

As expected, the thinking is upside-down on several levels. First, the issue isn't created by the Church, but is manufactured by influential forces in society. The restored gospel has been around since 1830, whereas LGBT et al. sprung up less than 50 years ago. Second, the primary question is morality rather than love and tolerance. Indeed, morality is the reference point by which love and tolerance ought to be assessed.. It isn't loving or tolerant to any party involved to promote immorality. Quite the opposite. And, vice versa. Third, while the forces behind the cultural movement make a pretense of love and tolerance, they could care less about the groups they selectively target, and view them instead as "useful idiots" to manipulate into creating cultural strife, with the end goal of fomenting proliferating government dependency and accruing power to themselves. Whereas the Church cares deeply about the eternal welfare of all individuals and enabling them to become their very best selves. In spite of the pretense of love evoked by the PR sculptured image of happiness within the LGBT... community, disease and mental illness and deaths have skyrocketed since the movement began, not to mention the noticeable degradation of Western civilization. The o-called progressive agenda is anything but... On the other hand, the source for true joy as well as the power to counter destructive influences, is Christ, and this through his Restored Gospel. It is the true and proven plan of progression and salvation. It is the real way of love. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Pride has a way of causing men to do spectacularly irrational and hypocritical things--like when believers in God assume that mere mortals can thwart the will and prophesies of God. What the scribes and other religious leaders counter-intuitively attempted at Christ's birth wasn't all that different from their hypocritical involvement in his death, not excluding placing guards at and sealing the tomb--as if that would make a difference. (.Mt 27:62-66) Thanks, -Wade Englund-

There is also the possibility that some of the collection was a part of oral traditions at the time. What I find interesting is that a number of Old Testament passages refer to the writings of Moses in the singular form "book," whereas at least two authors in the book of Mormon refer to the same writings of Moses in the plural "books." (see HERE) Even more interesting, is that while the translated portion of the Gold Plates contain a number of "books," it is nevertheless referred to in the singular, "Book of Momon." To me, the point being, whether these scriptures are considered and referred to as a single book comprised of a collection of material compiled primarily by one person (i.e. the Book of Moses or the Book of Mormon), or as separate books (the Books of Moses), is of far less importance than the point you made about conceptually understanding that they are compilations of material from different sources. The title is far less significant than correctly grasping the content. After all, regarding the Book of Moses (singular) found in the Pearl of Great Price, Bradshaw and Bowen note: "Hugh Nibley describes Moses 6:51–68101 as an 'excerpt from the Book of Adam.'102 Perhaps it formed part of the 'book of remembrance' mentioned in Moses 6:46. The setting for these verses is a sermon by Enoch." (see HERE) Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It makes sense for your beliefs to follow the evidence. However, choice is still a factor, particularly in relation to the evidence. You choose what will or wont influence your view on the evidence, and in relation thereto: You choose which kind of evidence to which you are or aren't open. You choose how to interpret the evidence You choose how much weight to give this evidence or that And, you choose the extent to which your mind can or can't be changed. Based on these choices, not a few people have moved from atheism to belief, or from belief to atheism, or back and forth in either direction, or sticking permanently with one or the other. In other words, it isn't as though "the evidence" disallows all but one reasonable conclusion, let alone valued conclusion. And, from my perspective, this is by design. God placed us in conditions where there is ample cause for doubt either way, though also the opportunity to come to a more sure knowledge of God's existence than were he always before our eyes. As contradictory as it may seem, people can have reasonable cause to see the light better when placed in the dark. If you are open to it, your disbelief can be changed. You get to choose. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I view the seeming contradiction as a good thing. It suggest the possibility that your friend may be doubting his doubts. [thumbs up] And, while fears about the prospects of the afterlife may be understandable and loom somewhat disquieting, it clearly isn't a motive for current change, and may even distract attention away from people's current spiritual predicament. To me, this is where your friends concerns may best be placed--not that you have much sway or say. It is like were a person to have fallen down a well worrying about whether in the distant future they would be prevented from ever getting out of the hole. Your friend is currently damning himself--i.e. he is now denying himself not only the blessings of heaven , but also the present opportunity to progress towards transcendent character and become like Christ. He is preventing, today, the light from shining into his darkness. He is keeping himself from climbing out of the spiritual hole. In contrast, the messages of the Restored Gospel, as conveyed in this weeks Come Follow Me lesson, is that : "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." (Jn 3:17-18) Condemnation and denial of salvation, then, is essentially of our own making and our own choosing. As @Barrett Maximus wisely counselled, pray for your friend, as we will as well. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The link I provided above supports this notion. Thanks, -Wade Englund-