wenglund

Maybe I am dense, but I just now recognized an important distinction made by Elder Oaks between: 1) the status of being legally married in the eyes of the state, and 2) the immoral conduct between homosexual couples married or otherwise. It is the first, and not the second, that saw a change in policy from "apostasy" to "serious transgression" (rather than sin). This makes sense since homosexual couples being granted a marriage license from the state isn't, in itself, immoral (certainly not sexually), and though it is a pretense or a shame in the eyes of the Church, it doesn't drop to the level of sin. What is, and always has been at issue, is the homosexual conduct, which the church views as immoral regardless of state marriage licenses. I don't know what difference in results there may be with the change in policy expect the unlikely or very rare instances of same-sex marriages without homosexual conduct. In such rare cases, will the "serious transgression" result in disciplinary action? We'll see. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You mean were they to identify as being sealed? I suppose it might be analogous in mortality to not sealing a wood deck and living and acting as if the deck is sealed. Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

It has been my experience that some children whine and carry on when they have to go to bed, and then they whine and carry on when they have to get out of bed. Perhaps this tendency carries over into adulthood in other matters, like Church policies. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

There was an even quicker turn around. A Canaanite/Greek (Gentile) women pleaded with Jesus to cast the devil out of her daughter. Jesus replied, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Yet several verses later, after an exchange about dogs and crumbs, Jesus said, "O woman, great is they faith.: be it unto thee as thou wilt." (Mt 15:21-28 There were other exception to Jesus' revealed policy (the Samaritan woman at the well, and the Roman Centurion), which should give some pause when considering policies too rigidly. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The issue of revealed change in policy within 3 years brought to mind some things I have been contemplating in relation to the Come Follow Me lessons. Early into Christ's 3-year mission, he ordained the twelve and commissioned them to not go unto the Gentiles, but only go to the house of Israel (Mt. 10:5-6). About 3 years later, Peter had the vision that opened the door to the Gospel being preached to the Gentiles. (Acts 10) Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

This is my sense as well. The policy change wont effect outcomes so much as it calls the agitators bluffs. The more I think and pray about it, the more joyful I am. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The Church doesn't recognize as married the homosexual relationships. The world can label things as they may, but the Church must view things as God wishes. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I am trying to understand your struggle. Why is reveled changes in policy after only 3 years problematic for you? Are you supposing that conditions can't change enough in three years to warrant a change? Are you supposing that the divine reasoning behind the first revelation isn't different than the second? Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wise advice from an intelligent source. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Sealing is necessary for making the temporary permanent (the temporal eternal( and binding the earthly with the heavenly. Metaphorically, it is like a sealant that protects against corroding forces, and an adhesive that holds things together. Thanks, -Wade Englund- ,

Perhaps. But, I don't see much difference between vinegar and sour wine in terms of quenching thirst, even with, or especially given the alleged bitter drug to dull pain. Besides, James Talmage was of the belief that the cry for thirst came after Jesus knew all things had been accomplished. Talmage describes the situation thus: Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I am deeply moved when Jesus moaned, "I thirst." There are many layers of meaning in that simple statement, perhaps even as many as in the briefest passage of scripture, "Jesus wept." During the final hours of Jesus' mortal life, so much instructional and symbolic irony was conveyed when the source of living spiritual water declaring a need for physical water, and the world give him vinegar instead. It amazes me how so little a statement could say so much. I am surprised it was deleted from your shortened list. Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

I understood the quotes from the Church in the article to mean that we are to respect other people of different faiths. To me, this differs somewhat from the title of the thread and even more so the title of the article. because it puts the emphasis on people rather than on diversity, itself, or other faiths. This may seem like a trite distinction, but I think it important in a world confusedly abd distructively obsessed with the notion of diversity and group identity. Other than that, the article has an uplifting message. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Exactly! Beautifully said. When the scriptures speak of God resting on the 7th day of creation (Gen 2:2-3), it wasn't as though He took a heavenly nap the entire time. Rather, His rest consisted of working to assist His spirit children in their journey into and through mortality and beyond. So, when we enter the rest of God, it means we continue His work. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I just came across a video that describes the transforming power of agency in a young man's life.: Very profound and inspiring. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2bFzK2EdIo Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wonderful. I love the complimentary analogy of the butterfly effect. It provides a helpful image of the divergent impacts of things. By way of exploring the metaphors even deeper, do you have any thoughts on the causal or catalytic or contributing elements behind the leavening/butterfly effects, particularly as they relate to differentiating those things associated with the disciples of Christ as contrasted with those things associated with the Pharisees et. al.? Of related interest is the difference in development and growth since the time Christ of the Jewish religion as opposed to Christianity, especially the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS. Thanks, -Wade Englund

What do you make of the the leaven metaphor? Christ warned against the leavening of the Pharisees, but he also likened his disciples to leaven. So, leavening may not, in itself, be a bad thing, just the type or way in which the leavening occurs. Right? What then is the leavening of the Disciples as contrasted with the leavening of the Pharisees? What part do each play in relation to the "bread"? Is "leavening" a metaphor for missionary work, or doctrine development, or the 4-fold mission of the Church, etc/? Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

Did I forget to mention it is "gluten free"? Thanks, -Wade Englund-

From the time the Book of Mormon was publish until now, there have been a number of detractors claiming the Book of Mormon is of modern provenance and was likely plagiarized from other books and slightly altered using KJV language. To make their respective cases, they tend to cherry pick words and phrases scattered throughout the Book of Mormon, or they have performed dubious wordprint (word pattern) studies. Scholars in defense of the Church have discredited the alleged "science" and "reasoning" of the most prominent challenges to the Church claims about the origins of Book of Mormon, The good folks at FARMS and FAIR and Book of Mormon Central are an excellent resource for the discrediting and well as supporting evidence. (regarding wordprint studies see in particular HERE and HERE) Thanks, -Wade Englund-

In this and past weeks Come Follow Me lessons, there are multiple references to "bread" in different places and circumstances. I am curious to learn if or what connections you draw between them. Here is a list: Jesus is tempted to turn stones into bread. (Mt 4) The Lords prayer makes the request: "Give us this day our daily bread..." (Mt 6)) In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus commands his disciples to seek and knock, for "what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will give him a stone?" (Mt 7) Jesus likened the kingdom of heaven unto leaven (Mt.;13:33), In a desert place he feed bread (five barley loaves) to the five thousand followers, and he had 12 baskets left over, (Jn 6) the scribes and Pharisees criticize the disciples for not washing their hands before eating bread (Mt 15), and Jesus distinguished between that which goes out of the mouth from that which goes in. He compared a gentile woman to taking bread from the table of children, and she speaks of eating crumbs that have fallen to the floor. (ibid) On the coast of Galilee he feeds seven loaves of bread to four thousand people, (ibid) People from Tiberius went looking for Jesus and found him in Capernaum,. Jesus remarked that they sought him not because of the miracles, but because they were feed the loaves and were filled. (Jn 6) There, Jesus compares and contrasts the manna from heaven in Moses' day to his salvific mission (he and his gospel are the living bread from heaven), (ibid) He also draws an inference to the bread of the sacrament (see Jn 6), to be introduced in the future (Lk 24) He warned the disciples against the leavening of the Pharisees, Sadducee, and Herod (Mt 16 and Ml 8) and they mistakenly assumed he was chiding them for not bringing bread. What do you think? [Note: biblical scholars have speculated that the feeding of the five thousand were Jews and the four thousand were Gentiles.] It would also be interesting to later link together the references to water in the Gospels. However, this is enough for now. Thanks,m -Wade Englund-

I agree that parasite is too strong. To me, a better term is "fowls of the air" that "lodge under the shadow" of the gospel tree, as analogized in the Parable of the Mustard Seed--a point that a family member brought to my attention during yesterday's Come Follow Me home study.. I prefer the more charitable term because there are under-developed aspects of my soul that fit the description (I am far from perfect), and I have beloved family and friends who may currently be more wholly inclined that way than I. The value I see in viewing it more charitably is the hope that when I stand before the perfect Savior with all my imperfections a-glare, he might view me as a "fowl of the air" rather than a parasite, Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The answer to your question is in Alma 32:28-34, which provides a simple process for growing in faith and getting closer to God as well as a way to test whether the "feeling" is a self-generated emotion or the touch or whispering of the Holy Spirit. It enables growth as fast as you are able. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Not that I disagree with much of what you said, however, If I understand correctly, Jonah was sailing in the Mediterranean sea (he left from Joppa and sailed for Tarshish, both of which are coastal cities on the Mediterranean sea). Whereas, the Tigris empties into the Persian Gulf. If what you theorize is correct, the shortest route (assuming that a semblance of the Suez canal existed in Jonah's day), would still amount to between 6000 and 7000 nautical miles--nearly a 1000 of which would be upstream on the Tigris. Assuming an average speed of 13 knot (which is the top speed for a humpback whale), it would take 19 days and 10 hours, rather than 3 days and nights. If there wasn't any semblance of the Suez canal at that time, it would have taken more than 34 days at top speed (13 knots) to travel around the Cape of Good Hope. Whereas, if the giant fish swallowed Jonah no further away from Joppa than Siracusa, Itally,, it would take less than 3 days and nights. Whatever the case, we know from Jonah 3:4 that Jonah traveled at least one day under his own power. I wonder if you might be blurring the distinction between fore ordination and predestination, particularly in Jonah's case? You do realize that if agency is binary, then progress in agency is not possible? In other words, our power to act as pre-mortal spirits or mortals is no different than what our Heavenly Father has had all along. For that matter, the power of an infant would be no different than a grown adult. Does that seem right to you? Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Well said. However, it could also consist of the removal of personal choice, or a combination of the two. Either way, the results would be the same: complete and utter failure. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

If agency is defined as the power to act, and if actions can be limited to varying degrees, doesn't this mean that the power to act may be limited to varying degrees, and thus by definition agency may be limited to varying degrees? While it may appear on the surface to have been a binary choice as presented in the pre-existence, the nuanced reality of mortal existence suggests otherwise. Your own example of Jonah is a case in point. If agency was a binary choice, and we all, including Jonah, chose agency, then according to your understanding, all actions in life would be by the power of agency. Right? This would mean that Jonah had to have been transported by his own power. Otherwise, his power to act in that situation didn't exist, which would mean that agency didn't exist in that situation. And, if the choice was binary, then if agency doesn't exist in certain situations, then it doesn't exist at all. Whereas, if agency exists in certain situations, and not in others, this would mean that there are varying degrees of agency (based on the situations we face). If I understand my geography correctly, Nineveh is more than a hundred miles inland. So, unless the large fish is able to travel by sea and land... We understand from the scriptures that the large fish vomited Jonah onto dry ground, and that "Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh." (Jonah 3:3) So, the large fish only took Jonah part way (i.e. by the power of God). Jonah traveled the remaining couple of hundred miles on his own power. That admixture of divine power ("force") and personal power (agency) would not be logically possible were agency a binary condition of mortality. Right? I submit that when we chose agency in the pre-existence, we understood that to mean varied degrees of agency, that is until we become as God, entirely empowered to act for ourselves and not be acted upon. In other words, we chose the path towards absolute agency--or as absolute as agency can exist. Thanks, -Wade Englund-