Gaia

GAIA: Dear Anthony -- Good luck and blessings to you, as you -- like Jacob -- "struggle" with God. May your rewards be as great, as his were. Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi There, Anthony. I guess my response is going to be a little different, but i hope you'll give it no less prayerfull consideration -- Who says that doubt is something that should be avoided? Not God. I see God repeatedly telling people in various ways-- both literal and symbolic --that he WANTS us to "struggle" with Him, and with the "Big Questions" in Life. For example, Consider Jacob, who won a blessing from the Lord precisely because he "wrestled" -- and refused to give in easily or quickly (Genesis 32). The Jews have a somewhat different (and more positive) view of this episode than is often heard in Christian circles; May i encourage you to explore it a bit? -- I think you may find some meaningful ideas --- In fact, i think we CHEAT both God and ourselves, when we try to put down, suppress, ignore or deny our questions and doubts. We're talking about the most important issues and questions in life, right? - The things that in fact, make life worth living. Shouldn't they present us with difficult questions that make us struggle? Shouldn't they be difficult to find? Instead of fearing, avoiding or denying their questions, many people feel that the Questions are often at least as important/ valuable, as the Answers -- If i may quote a line from a movie ("On A Clear Day, You Can See Forever") that raised some of those questions in an interesting way: ".... The answers make us wise, but the questions make us human." Being human connects you with others: If you acknowledge your questions, you begin to be more understanding and compassionate, toward others who have similar questions -- and more understanding if they find answers that differ from yours *smile*. I think the questions themselves are important, and have much to teach us -- and we should avoid rushing to answer them too quickly or easily. Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello There, Ami -- It is probabe that any man who presented himself as the woman's potential suitor, would meet with skepticism by her father -- that's how fathers ARE *smile*. But in your case, at least some of her father's concerns are legitimate. Y'see, The problem is not just that you have a "difficult" past; the problem is that you are asking someone to trust you -- and not just on a superficial or moderate level -- but on the most powerful level of all -- that which concerns the person nearest and dearest to him (his daugher), whom he has all his life worked to protect from any and ALL dangers. At this point, you represent a potential danger. There is pretty much nothing you can say that will change his mind; if anything will, it will be your actions -- your everday behavior, as you prove day in and day out, that you have in fact changed and can be trusted. Have you ever watched "Dr Phil"? He has some very interesting ideas -- One of which is: "The best and most reliable predictor of future behavior, is past behavior." So if your past behavior has been -- well, problematic or mixed --- it is going to take a considerable amount of work to establish a NEW "track record" by which people can judge you. Yes, it can be frustrating and humiliating to feel that someone is constantly watching, waiting for you to "mess up" -- but (try to) look at it as an opportunity to prove your sincerity and determination to really become the (good, honorable) man of integrity, that you can be! Good luck -- ~Gaia

GAIA: May i offer some suggestions? First, i think it's important to understand that attachments to people can be very strong; In fact, they are based on the same thing as addictions to any substance: biochemicals are released in the brain (endorphins) which very much "mimic" the actions & effects of certain drugs -- So your friend can't just "decide" to change his thinking/ feeling about the woman; he (probably) has to actually get over an addiction -- to a person -- and that takes time and work! One of the things you can tell him is that if he cuts it off completely -- no phone calls, text messaging, or contact of any kind, whatsoever-- it will be better and easier in the long run. -- Contact of any kind will just "re-infect" him. Here's a book that might help (there are many similiar to it): http://www.amazon.com/How-Break-Your-Addic...n/dp/0553260057 I think you can do a lot of good by being a support and encouragement to him, and reminding him that he will get over her -- it will just take time and effort. Each day, each week, he WILL feel a difference, until the day will come that he'll find himself realizing he hasn't thought of her at all. for some time! Meanwhile, now is a good time for him to recall the things he enjoys, looks forward to, his gifts or talents or interests that he could now put energy into, that would help occupy his mind/ time now. Keep in mind that depression (and he's likely somewhat depressed) does tend to diminish our ability to get pleasure out of even our favorite things / passtimes, but as he recuperates from his "addiction", he will likely find his interests renewed..... The symptoms of clinical depression are as follows: - Changes in sleeping habits - changes in eating habits - Inability to derive pleasure from even previously enjoyed things, people and activities; - Thoughts of sadness, grief; - Tearfulness; - Inability to concentrate; If he has many of these symptoms for any length of time, it might be well for him to discuss the matter with his doctor. Depression can become a chemical imbalance that can only be solved with appropriate medication. Many people are afraid to take such meds, but it's important to realize that there have been enormous strides in the last couple of years, in understanding and treating depression and stress. Within a matter of 10-14 days, one can feel a huge difference -- as if someone turned on a light in a dark room! I hope that's helpful -- Good luck to you and him! Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi Again, Checkerboy. May i respectfully point you toward a few other posts, for a more "balanced" view -- For example: http://www.ldstalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...10197&st=15 - # 24 http://www.ldstalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...10133&st=15 - #20 http://www.ldstalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...=6026&st=15 - #27 There are several others. If you'd be willing to check them out, i'd be happy to provide the links -- GAIA: On that we agree! *g* Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hello Checkerboy. I think it's interesting, and perhaps a little revealing, that you gave my remarks a "negative" spin. I certainly don't consider "negative" the idea(s) that we should: a) cut mothers some slack and reduce some of our unrealistic expectations of them; B) get "real" about our conflicted feelings about motherhood: the way we alternately ignore, avoid or take for granted our real mothers, and then try to salve our guilt over that, by overly-sentimentalizing motherhood in general. Now, if you had talked about how you personally cherish your mother all year long, and given some real-life examples of that, it might have demonstrated my error; But in fact, your labelling my thoughts "negative" and in effect, trying to silence them, suggests that i may have been more on track than you felt comfortable thinking about. Y'see, Checkerboy, i AM a mother. My children tell me that i was an "incredible" mother. My daughter says the only time she can remember me "loosing it" (ie, my temper) and actually swatting her on the behind, was when at the age of about ten, i heard her take the Lord's name in vain to one of her friends. But i happen to know that -- despite my best of intentions -- i have many weaknesses and made many mistakes as a mother, which grieve and haunt me now. I would hope that my now-grown children would learn how to ACTUALLY value and express their EVERYDAY appreciation and love for the real, live mother they had, and forgive her actual, real-life weaknesses and mistakes; -- rather than harboring a lot of frustrations, disappointments and griefs over her imperfections, and then trying to salve their consciences over that with a yearly orgy of sentimentality that has very little to do with authentic mothers or mothering. If you really want to honor your mother, forget the Mother's Day orgy, and just phone her every week. Visit her every month. Spend some time getting to know who she is as a person -- her likes and dislikes, her dreams and hopes, her thoughts and feelings on things. Offer to fix HER a holiday meal -- or clean up the mess. Take her OUT to dinner during the holidays. Gift her with a hair, clothing and makeup makeover -- and (if you can afford it) a new wardrobe. Tell others (within her hearing) about some real-life happening in which she did something that was courageous, wise, thoughtful, or otherwise wonderful. Send (or TAKE!) her flowers on YOUR birthday. Cut her some slack when she does something that irritates, annoys or embarrasses you. Loving and honoring our mothers is NOT about eulogizing "motherhood"; it's about loving and honoring your real-life, honest-to-gosh Mom, with all her faults and weaknesses. AND that's NOT negative, son -- that's some advice from a real life Mom -- who, i'm sorry to have to remind you -- also deserves just a bit of that "honoring" you were so hot to defend. {gentle smile and wink} ~Mom (and 4x Grand-Mom) Gaia

GAIA: With all due respect to Mothers everywhere - after all, i ARE one *g* -- I think it's very important to note that not everyone has the dream mothers that are sometimes lauded around Mother's day -- in fact, very few have that. The reality is that Motherhood IS extremely difficult, especially because: a) Our culture makes huge demands upon MOthers; B) Iit should be remembered that Mothers are only people, and people tend to have their own problems, weaknesses, flaws, strengths, etc; c) There is not much "preparation" for MOtherhood; As many people have noted, you have to have a license to catch fish or drive a car, but(nearly) any female past puberty can be a mother. If i had followed my mother's "core values", teachings or example, i would have been drinking and having sex by the time i was 18. Instead, i was (on the very night i turned 18) trying to teach HER better values. And i know i am not all that unique in that respect. Neither is my mother entirely to "blame" for her mistakes or problems; each of us does the best they can at the time, with what they have been given. My point here is just to say: 1) I think we should cut mothers some slack -- they are after all, only human. 2) Every year we go through a virtual orgy of sentimentality over motherhood and the rest of the time, many of us ignore or avoid our mothers. I think we need to get real about how we honestly feel about mothers and motherhood -- and recognize that most of us have some very conflicted feelings about them. Blessings -- ~Gaia

God is a loving God, and loves us so much, he wants the best for us, and for us to be the best we can be. This is why he gives us commandments. By following his commandments we become better people. We know we can follow the prophets' advice, because they only state the will of God, though we must pray and ask God ourselves, of course. (D&C 1:38 "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same. ") He is also a just God. In alma 42:13 it says "Now the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God." Laws, if broken, need consequences, or techniquely there is no law, meaning no justice, and hence no God. Since God is a just God, He needs enforce these laws. He will not force us to abide by his commandments, no matter how much he wants us to be with Him. Forcing is Satan's plan. He has granted us the atonement with which we can recieve mercy. Basically, it is up to us if we want to follow God or not, and if we haven't been, it is never too late to repent and begin. On the matter of all the people that have gone before us, Temples will be open 24/7 during the millenium for the salvation of the dead. God knows about those who have not had the chance to visit the temple, and cares about them as much as you or me. During the millenium, everyone who wants their work done will have that opportunity. (That doesn't mean we don't need to do temple work, however. Temple work is a commandment. D&C 127:4 "And again, verily thus saith the Lord: Let the work of my temple, and all the works which I have appointed unto you, be continued on and not cease; and let your diligence, and your perseverance, and patience, and your works be redoubled, and you shall in nowise lose your reward, saith the Lord of Hosts. And if they persecute you, so persecuted they the prophets and righteous men that were before you. For all this there is a reward in heaven." I hope this helps :) GAIA:" Hi There, Maedoc - I've heard that argument too -- in fact, I taught it for years. But i'm just not so sure anymore that it's God's way of viewing things; i think it could well be humans' (mistaken) view. We humans seem to need reassurance that there's somebody maintaining the Rules -- Some great Galactic Traffic Cop -- who won't allow those who have injured us to get away with it. I have begun to wonder whether our need for "justice" hasn't influenced our views of God and eternal Justice, rather than given us a correct understanding of how the Universe actually runs. I really do beleive that this life is about experience, learning, and growth. And as such, i don't necessarily anymore buy the idea that God doles out "punishment" and justice -- Back when i was a student at BYU, we learned a very helpful form of discipline called "Natural Consequences". If you put your hand into a fire, you get burned -- not because someone "punishes" you, but because that's the natural action of fire upon your sensory organs, and in the long run, it teaches you about the dangers of fire. Similarly, i hav begun to view the Universe acting less as a system of "Justice", and more in terms of acting according to "Natural Consequences" -- we experience the natural consequences of all our actions, thoughts, and intentions. If / When we send out positive, (sooner or later) we get back positive, which slowly teaches us that in the long run, being "good", ie kind, compasionate, humble, merciful, wise, etc - is GOOD for us and for others. I don't so much see God as a Traffic Cop anymore, i see God as a loving parent who -- like all loving parents -- stands by with compassion, understanding, mercy and Guidance, when we mess up. But not punishment-- we do that to ourselves. And ultimately, i think we learn that Repentance and Forgiveness, (rather than absolute "Justice") is the way to short-cut (ourselves and others) through the more painful aspects of mortality. Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi There, Prend1 -- I was reminded of several things in reading your post; May i share them with you? First, i'd like to say that i can certainly empathize with what i think must be your sense of confusion, concern, even worry, over your sudden questioning....It is NOT easy, to suddenly find oneself questioning things that one once strongly beleived. Are you familiar with the phrase and idea, "Dark Night of the Soul"? It is a metaphor used to describe a specific phase in a person's spiritual life -- the experience of loneliness, grief, confusion and desolation of a crisis of faith. It is generally accepted to be a universally inherent aspect of spiritual growth -- as you a) survive it and B) work your way through it, it imbues you with spiritual wisdom and maturity. You might find some comfort and guidance in what others have said about it: Try these, to begin: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul www.ccel.org/ccel/john_cross/dark_night.t... www.themystic.org/dark-night/ www.themystic.org/dark-night/ Secondly, i would like to address this idea that "the Lord will not allow the church to be led astray" -- With all due respect, that is NOT quite what was taught in earlier days of the LDS Church. The idea originates from, or was first expressed in, a lecture by Wilford Woodruff -- in relation to the changing policy on polygamy: "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty." (Sixty-first Semiannual General Conference of the Church, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2.) * * * Now, the problem is that this is somewhat contrary to the teachings of Joseph Smith -- the Head of the Dispensation -- as well as Brigham YOung and other LDS apostles and prophets; and it is contrary to (other) scripture. Here are some quotes for your consideration: (IF the post seems too long for you to have to slog through, just note the bolded material in each quote --) 1. Joseph Smith: "President Joseph Smith read the 14th chapter of Ezekiel [see, for example, verses 9-10: 'If the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing ...the punishment of the prophet shall be even as the punishment of him that seeketh unto him.']...said the Lord had declared by the Prophet [Ezekiel], that the people should each one stand for himself, and depend on no man or men in that state of corruption of the Jewish church -- that righteous persons could only deliver their own souls -- applied it to the present state [1842] of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- -- Said if the people departed from the Lord, they must fall -- that they were depending on the Prophet, hence were darkened in their minds, in consequence of neglecting the duties devolving upon themselves..." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith pp. 237-38) NOTE: Obviously, according to Ezekiel 14:9-10, it certainly IS possible for a prophet to "be deceived". 2. President Brigham Young: "What a pity it would be, if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually." (JD 9:150) "How easy it would be for your leaders to lead you to destruction, unless you actually know the mind and will of the spirit yourselves." (JD 4:368) "I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied... Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, 'If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are,'this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord." (JD 3:45) "...Now those men, or those women, who know no more about the power of God, and the influences of the Holy Spirit, than to be led entirely by another person, suspending their own understanding, and pinning their faith upon another's sleeve, will NEVER be capable of entering into the celestial glory, to be crowned as they anticipate; they will never be capable of becoming Gods. They cannot rule themselves, to say nothing of ruling others, but they must be dictated to in every trifle, like a child. They cannot control themselves in the least, but James,Peter, [or Bruce or Gordon] or somebody else must control them. They never can become Gods, nor be crowned as rulers with glory,immortality, and eternal lives; never can hold scepters of glory, majesty, and power in the celestial kingdom. Who will? Those who are valiant and inspired with the true independence of heaven, who will go forth boldly in the service of their God, leaving others to do as they please, determined to do right, though all mankind besides should take the opposite course. Will this apply to any of you? Your own hearts can answer." (JD 1:312) 3. President Joseph F. Smith: "We talk of obedience, but do we require any man or woman to ignorantly obey the counsels that are given? Does the First Presidency require it? No, never." (Journal of Discourses (JD) 16:248) 5. Apostle Charles W. Penrose, who would later serve as counselor to President Smith, declared: "President Wilford Woodruff is a man of wisdom and experience, and we respect him, but we do not believe his personal views or utterances are revelations from God; and when 'Thus saith the Lord', comes from him, the saints investigate it: they do not shut their eyes and take it down like a pill ." (Millennial Star 54:191) 6. "And none are required to tamely and blindly submit to a man because he has a portion of the priesthood. We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark, that they would do anything they were told to do by those who presided over them, if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God... would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without asking any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their minds to do wrong themselves." (Millennial Star, vol.14 #38, pp. 593-95) 7. George Q. Cannon, Counselor to three Church Presidents, expressed it thus: "Do not, brethren, put your trust in man though he be a bishop, an apostle, or a president . If you do, they will fail you at some time or place; they will do wrong or seem to, and your support be gone;" (Millennial Star 53:658-59, quoted in "Gospel Truth", 1:319) * * * These are just a few examples of quotes clearly indicating that each and every person is encouraged to seek the Spirit and know for him or her SELF, what is true, and what is not; and that even the teachings of the Prophets are to be put to this test. Finally, if it were not possible for a Prophet to go or to lead the church "astray" -- WHY would the Lord consider it necessary to include an entire section in the D&C, giving instructions on exactly how to handle the apostasy of a Prophet? And, How would it have been possible for the several General Authorities who HAVE apostatized since the Restoration, to have done so? My point here is to recognize that things are not quite as clear-cut-and-dried as they are often portrayed, by people who are unwilling or unable to accept such contradictions, anomalies, inconsistencies, or paradoxes... In my experience, Life is FULL of Paradox, and the Church doubly so. The Church is not the Gospel, the Church is the (very human) institution that is charged with administering the Gospel. And the (perhaps difficult) truth is that the Church is subject to human flaws and weaknesses, and the fallen conditions in which it must operate (at least for now). Sooner or later, every member must examine (and sort out!) their assumptions and wishes about the Church, from reality, and learn to deal with both, wisely and productively -- with grace, compassion, kindness, faith -- but also discretion, prudence, and (a goodly amount of) wit! -- relative to themselves, other members, and the Church itself. Also, consider this: It can help enormously, to find others of like mind and spirit, who have also endured the "Dark Night" -- who can accompany and support you on your Journey. I hope that is somewhat helpful to you in some way. Good luck and Blessings to you -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Pearl of Great Price, MOses 1:30-35 30 And it came to pass that Moses called upon God, saying: Tell me, I pray thee, why these things are so, and by what thou madest them?31 And behold, the glory of the Lord was upon Moses, so that Moses stood in the presence of God, and talked with him face to face. And the Lord God said unto Moses: For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me.32 And by the word of my power, have I created them, which is mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth.33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.34 And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is many.35 But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them. Blessings -- ~Gaia

What is the Gospel of Jesus Christ based upon? Personal, immediate and Ongoing Revelation through the Holy Spirit.

GAIA: I think it's also relevant to remember that LDS are promised MUCH more scripture and revelations, as time goes on -- both in terms of the "Sealed Portion" of the Book of Mormon, and in terms of ONGOING Revelation: Joel 2:28 28 ¶ And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. I think we should therefore AVOID assuming that just because something is not currently known, it is therefore never to be known or revealed -- Blessings - ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi There, Purple -- It may be important to note that this is not an official doctrine of the LDS Church; It is instead based on: a) implications gathered from various doctrines and scriptures - For example, D&C 132 says that one must receive the "New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage' in order to be exalted; and B) Speculation OR c) Revelation -- from various leaders. The idea that some people have -- that if Jesus was married, it would have been expressly stated in the bible -- is not necessarily valid. Marriage at that era and in that culture was virtually a requirement for a man of his age; even more so for one who was acknowledged as a Rabbi. And it should be noted that even the Sanhedrin - those sticklers for rules and regulations -- did not dispute his being called "Rabbi" on that basis -- So, many feel it's just the opposite: If he had NOT been married, it would have been so unusual and remarkable, that would have been mentioned; but as it was, the idea that he WAS married would have been so "normal" and expected, that there would not have been reason to remark about it. I hope that helps -- Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Joseph was reputed to have said that if necessary, he would go to hell to help redeem Emma.....

GAIA: Hi There, Sheela -- What you're looking for is not in the D&C, it's in the records of what was (during the Nauvoo period) called the "Anointed Quorum" or "Holy Order" -- Joseph and Emma became the first couple to receive the Second Anointing (by which they BOTH made their Calling and Election Sure, and thus received the Second Comforter) or "Fullness of the Priesthood." By this ceremony they were each "anointed & ordained to the highest & holiest order of the priesthood." PLEASE NOTE: "EACH anointed and ordained", NOT just the husband, Joseph. ("Meetings of the Anointed Quorum- Journalizings," 28 Sept 1843; also slightly different entry in Joseph Smith diary, 28 Sept 1843, in Faulring, "An American Prophet's Record" p 412.) I hope that helps -- Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Sorry, not sure i understand what you meant by "wack-o" in either of those two stories/ examples? FYI, There certainly are LDS who do pray for help in dealing with Homosexuality -- see for example: a) www.affirmation.org/ B) Letter from a Mormon Father, re his Gay Son: http://www.affirmation.org/ssu/mormon_father_sends.shtml c) Requiem for a Gay Mormon: www.beliefnet.com/story/14/story_1400_1.html Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Hi Still_Small_Voice -- That's certainly true; However, I was thinking and referring more to women who have been sexually harassed or abused, and therefore develop problems related to intimacy.... The statistics say that one out of every THREE females will sometime in their life, experience some form of sexual harassment or abuse -- THINK about that -- ONE IN THREE! Count six women you know, and TWO of them will likely experience some kind of abuse.... And However inflated that number might be, it is nevertheless an outrageous thing that so many of our girls and women -- our mothers and sisters and daughers -- will have to experience such a violation of what should be such a great joy and blessing -- through NO fault of their own! And of course, one of the unfortunate responses to such violation, is often the tendency to become very confused about sex, and even (compulsively) mis-use it in various ways..... So sad, so sad..... Perhaps we (and our culture!) are ALL in need of healing, eh? .....

GAIA: Hello Deborah and others -- Are you sincerely asking why people begin to question, and why those questions can begin to overwhelm what may have previously been, confidence and assurance??? Because there are reasons *gentle smile*. With all due respect, i guess i have to say that the responses and ideas here, sure seem to be awfully negative, themselves! Isn't it possible for someone to have honest, sincere questions, doubts or concerns, that are not addressed by the admonition to "just have faith" -- In fact, such admonitions can be understood as a way to avoid the difficult questions, and even try to discredit and marginalize those who ask them. Contrary to what many seem to think, it can be incredibly painful, frightening and frustrating to begin having what had previously been firm conviction, suddenly troubled by questions that are just not easily, quickly answered or set aside. It seems that many want to believe that questioning is only the result of a) sinfulness, B) lack of faith; c) superficial, immature or trivial matters. While it may be true that some few people do begin to question the church or Gospel on the basis of such problems, it is also true that many come to have profound spiritual, ethical, moral questions on doctrinal or historical matters, that cannot simply be ignored, suppressed, easily answered or set aside. And i cannot help but wonder whether -- INSTEAD of punishing, labelling them, marginalizing or denigrating them for it - -- If our duty isn't rather, to MINISTER unto them. Sincerely -- ~Gaia

GAIA: I LOVED the whole process -- from falling in love to making a commitment, to becoming (and being) pregnant, to giving birth, to raising children -- Even though my (first) husband was abusive (even while i was pregnant) and left just before i gave birth to our second child -- and I wound up being a single MOther for most of their growing-up years -- the entire experience was (mostly) a joyful one for me. I guess i was lucky in that respect -- I know there are many who (unfortunately and sadly) have had extremely negative experiences that have "soured" them on the process. I pray for their healing --

GAIA: Hi Bunnzy -- Great Question! It is *not* official doctrine, but there are many statements by modern prophets that indicate (they certainly beleived and taught) procreation as the way that God ordained creation to occur. Here are just a few quotes you may want to explore, from the Journal of Discourses -- 1. God is the Father of our spirits and bodies; We are the same species as God; We are His children: President Brigham Young: Thus you may continue and trace the human family back to Adam and Eve, and ask, "are we of the same species with Adam and Eve?" Yes, every person acknowledges this; this comes within the scope of our understanding. But when we arrive at that point, a vail is dropt, and our knowledge is cut off. Were it not so, you could trace back your history to the Father of our spirits in the eternal world. He is a being of the same species as ourselves; He lives as we do, except the difference that we are earthly, and He is heavenly. He has been earthly, and is of precisely the same species of being that we are...." (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot, 1854-1886], 4: 218.) 4:215 2. The Father begat spirits, then created earthly tabernacles: President Brigham Young: Things were first created spiritually; the Father actually begat the spirits, and they were brought forth and lived with Him. ... When the time came that His first-born, the Saviour, should come into the world and take a tabernacle, the Father came Himself and favoured that spirit with a tabernacle instead of letting any other man do it. The Saviour was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits, and that is all the organic difference between Jesus Christ and you and me. And a difference there is between our Father and us consists in that He has gained His exaltation, and has obtained eternal lives. The principle of eternal lives is an eternal existence, eternal duration, eternal exaltation. Endless are His kingdoms, endless His thrones and His dominions, and endless are His posterity; they never will cease to multiply from this time henceforth and forever. (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot, 1854-1886], 4: 218.) 3. We are sons of God through generation same as our children from us: Apostle and 1st Counselor, Heber C Kimball: We are the sons and daughters of God; we have proceeded from him through the laws of generation, the same as my children have proceeded from me. God is the great father of our race, and as a man is not perfect without the woman, neither is the woman without the man in the Lord; they depend upon each other, and are necessary to each other for the propagation of our species. (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot, 1854-1886], 11: 81.) 4. God created man as we created our children: (President Brigham Young): I believe that the declaration made in these two scriptures is literally true. God has made His children like Himself to stand erect, and has endowed them with intelligence and power and dominion over all His works, and given them the same attributes which He himself possesses. He created man, as we create our children; for there is no other process of creation in heaven, on the earth, in the earth, or under the earth, or in all the eternities, that is, that were, or that ever will be. (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot, 1854-1886], 11: 123.) * * * I know (from previous discussions on this topic) that there are some folks who find this idea offensive or troubling, but i can't figure out why -- I think sex is sacred -- not just in theory, but in fact, in PRACTICE -- and certainly no less so when Divine Beings participate in it! Now, a lot of folks seem to try to do all sorts of mental gymnastics to try to avoid the clear implications of Brigham and Heber's words -- suggesting everything from some sort of Celestial version of "in vitro" fertilization, to magic -- But it seems to me pretty simple: When Brigham YOung says, "Man was created precisely as we all are created," "God produced us upon the same principle that we produce our children," or "We are sons of God through generation, the same as our children from us," and "God created man as we created our children," -- We just need to consider -- even / especially in this day of medical miracles -- just how would Brigham and his contemporaries have produced their children? Sex is beautiful, sacred, divine -- in practice, not just in theory; and i look forward to the day when the church proudly (and officially!) affirms that it is the way for all generation to take place -- here and in the Eternities. I think that would put LDS in the (enviable) position of articulating a profoundly beautiful and powerful doctrine worthy of consideration by all people with brains and hearts -- and a healthy appreciation for the sacred, wondrous, delightful and holy blessings that sex and sensuality are / should be. Blessings -- ~Gaia

Hello Everyone -- I think i might have lost my previous effort to post this, so i'll try again -- If it turns out to be a duplicate, please forgive! Here are some great resources on Temple Symbols and Symbolism: a) Allen H. Barber. Celestial Symbols: Symbolism in Doctrine, Religious Traditions and Temple Architecture, Bountiful: Horizon, 1990, ISBN 0-88290-344-6 B) Paul Thomas Smith & Matthew B. Brown. Symbols in Stone: Symbolism on the Early Temples of the Restoration, American Fork: Covenant, 1997, ISBN 1-57734-134-1 Also, see the following great ONLINE RESOURCES: a) www.ldschurchtemples.com/saltlake/ B) Article by Kerry Shirts, on the Pentagram on The Salt Lake Temple: http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/pentagra.htm c) Article by Jeff Lindsay on Masonic Symbols on the Temple: www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_masons.shtml Enjoy! ~Gaia

Does anyone know what happened to the thread on "Magic", please?

GAIA: Hello SaulsSong-- It always bothers me that whenever someone has a crisis of faith, (some folks) seem to need to attach blame -- and invariably, it's put on the person having the crisis, or on Satan. It's entirely possible to just have (quite legitimate!) questions or doubts; Furthermore, i think the Lord much more appreciates someone who actually THINKS about and QUESTIONS things, rather than blindly and automatically accepting everything -- (Revelation 3:15-16.) 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. There are literally dozens of quotes from General Authorities of the Church, encouraging people to THINK ABOUT, SEEK and PRAY for their own testimonies, rather than just accepting everything they're told -- For just a couple of examples, Brigham Young said: "What a pity it would be, if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually." (JD 9:150) "How easy it would be for your leaders to lead you to destruction, unless you actually know the mind and will of the spirit yourselves." (JD 4:368) "I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied... Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, 'If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are,' this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord." (JD 3:45) * * * So i hope that helps you settle the question of whether it's "all right" to have such questions and doubts, and whether there's any "blame" to be (automatically) attached. I don't think anyone but you and the Lord, and possibly your Priesthood authorities -- those with direct and immediate Priesthood stewardship over you -- have the right to question your faithfulness or obedience to the Gospel, so i will leave you to take that up with the Lord and your Bishop/ Stake President. So let's address your questions with (what i feel are) some important principles / information: Are you familiar with the idea of the "Dark Night of the Soul"?? It's a wonderfully descriptive and evocative term, used to describe what many people -- in fact virtually all sincere spiritual seekers -- seem to experience, at some time or another -- a period of spiritual darkness, discouragement, and crisis of faith. Despite these uncomfortable feelings that can often accompany it, a "Dark NIght of the Soul" can (eventually) become a very positive experience in one's spiritual development -- It can be a way for the soul to PUSH the individual toward spiritual enlightenment and answers that really matter, rather than rote, easy, trite bromides. Here's a quote from an article i wrote on "Spiritual Emergence", that may (hopefully) be relevant to your experience: You may be .... experiencing what Transpersonal psychologists call a ”Spiritual Emergency“ or perhaps more positively, ”Spiritual Emergence.“ This psychic and spiritual awakening cracks the comfortable, insulating shell of the ”status quo“ that might have surrounded you. It shakes you awake, boosts...energy, and blasts open the spiritual/ psychic receptors. It is ”a kind of birth pang..... Breakthroughs are often very painful, acute and dramatic. It pushes you through the door of [spiritual] transformation, renewal, growth -- ”ready“ or not! For more on the "Dark Night of the Soul", see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul There are lots of other links to the topic and to references that may be helpful -- if you "Google" it. Also, feel free to email me if you'd like to discuss this further, privately -- Blessings and Good Luck to you, dear Brother -- ~Gaia

GAIA: Here's some more info on this Second Comforter - Making ONe's Calling and Election Sure", for anyone who may be interested: To (briefly!) review: LDS doctrine teaches that one is "saved" by being (re)born of Christ as His son or daughter (see Moses 6:59); however that is a CONDITIONAL state, dependent upon continued obedience to the Gospel, the ordinances, and remaining "faithful to the end". This conditional state is made "certain" by making one's "Calling and Election SURE". One can make their "calling and election" to *anything* "sure" -- we are "called and elected" to salvation, exaltation, etc; that election can be "made sure" by/when the Holy spirit of Promise seals it. Specifically regarding Exaltation: One is "called and elected" to exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom. Joseph Smith said: (From TPJS Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith 295 +) "After having all these qualifications [faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, charity; etc], the Apostle Peter lays this injunction upon the people 'to make your calling and election sure.' He is emphatic upon this subject —- after adding all this virtue, knowledge, etc., "Make your calling and election sure." (Joseph Smith, _Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith_ 305.) "1st key: Knowledge is the power of salvation. 2nd key: Make your calling and election sure. 3rd key: It is one thing to be on the mount and hear the excellent voice, etc., and another to hear the voice declare to you, You have a part and lot in that kingdom. (Joseph Smith, Ibid 306.) "When the Lord has thoroughly proven a person, and learned that person is "determined to serve the Lord at all costs, the Lord will soon say to that person, 'thou shalt be exalted.'" GAIA's COMMENT: In effect, the "day of judgement" is moved up for that person, and when that happens, their calling and election to exaltation is no longer conditional, it becomes SURE, absolute, definite, with a seal put upon it by the Holy Spirit of Promise. This can be done either of three ways: 1. The Holy Spirit of Promise puts the seal on that person. 2. A Priesthood blessing or statement may confirm that the Holy Spirit of Promise either has, or is currently, at that moment, sealing the person up to eternal life. 3. Ultimately, there is a Temple ordinance (called the "Second Anointing" because it is an anointing) associated with this "Second Comforter" ("this Second Comforter is the promise which i give unto you of Eternal Life" -D&C 67:10-14.) In the early days of the church, it was administered to individuals, but as the Fulness of the Priesthood was revealed/ developed, it became an ordinance that is administered to a COUPLE together -- at least part of which occurs within the Holy of Holies. Scripturally, the SEcond Comforter is "the PROMISE which i give unto you of Eternal Life". There are several blessings that can accompany this Second Comforter, specifically: D&C 76: They are they who are the church of the Firstborn [i.e., those who are sanctified and sealed unto eternal life]. They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things— They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory; And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son. Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God— Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ's, and Christ in God's. And they shall overcome all things. Wherefore, let no man glory in man, but rather let him glory in God, who shall subdue all enemies under his feet. These shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever. These are they whom he shall bring with him, when he shall come in the clouds of heaven to reign on the earth over his people. These are they who shall have part in the first resurrection. These are they who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just. These are they who are come [by the powers of the Gospel] unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly place, the holiest of all. These are they who have come [by receiving the Second Comforter] to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and Church of Enoch, and of the Firstborn. (Hyrum L. Andrus, The Glory of God and Man's Relation to Deity [Provo: BYU Extension Publications, 1964], 65.) JOseph Smith explained the meaning of the "MOre Sure Word of Prophecy" spoken of in 2 Peter 1:18-19, thusly: Now, there is some grand secret here, and keys to unlock the subject. Notwithstanding the apostle exhorts them to add to their faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, etc., yet he exhorts them to make their calling and election sure. And though they had heard an audible voice from heaven bearing testimony that Jesus was the Son of God, yet he says we have a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as unto a light shining in a dark place. Now, wherein could they have a more sure word of prophecy than to hear the voice of God saying, This is my beloved Son. Now for the secret and grand key. Though they might hear the voice of God and know that Jesus was the Son of God, this would be no evidence that their election and calling was made sure, that they had part with Christ, and were joint heirs with Him. They then would want that more sure word of prophecy, that they were sealed in the heavens and had the promise of eternal life in the kingdom of God. Then, having this promise sealed unto them, it was an anchor to the soul, sure and steadfast. Though the thunders might roll and lightnings flash, and earthquakes bellow, and war gather thick around, yet this hope and knowledge would support the soul in every hour of trial, trouble and tribulation. Then knowledge through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the grand key that unlocks the glories and mysteries of the kingdom of heaven. (Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected and arranged by Joseph Fielding Smith [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1976], 298.) However, once one has made their Calling and Election SURE, and received this Second Comforter, they are in a much different position relative to sin: Here's some clarification on the conditions governing those who make their Calling and Election Sure - (receive the Second Comforter): (Hyrum Andrus, _Principles of Perfection_ 340) "Joseph Smith held that when a man in mortality makes his calling and election sure to eternal life, he stands in a different relationship with God than he did before he received that guarantee. He has met the fundamental challenge of his mortal probation; he has developed spiritually so that he can return to the presence of God and claim the promises which are ordained for those who make their calling and election sure. Consequently he is under a greater esponsibility to obey the law of God.The promise of eternal life is given initially to man on a contingent basis through the covenant of baptism. But when he makes his calling and election sure to celestial glory, that promise is guaranteed to him——sealed, or made sure——providing he does not sin against the Holy Ghost and thereby become a son of perdition. Except for this possibility, he will receive in the resurrection the promise which was sealed upon him. To an associate who had received this guarantee, the Prophet explained:Your life is hid with Christ in God, and so are many others. Nothing but the unpardonable sin can prevent you from inheriting eternal life for you are sealed up by the power of the Priesthood unto eternal life, having taken the step necessary for that purpose. ... It is not consistent with divine truth and mercy for the atonement of Christ to pay the debt of wilful sin after an individual has been sealed to eternal life. There is such a thing as man placing himself beyond the reach of Christ's mercy and forgiveness. There is a difference between wilful sin and sin committed inadvertently as a result of the weaknesses of the flesh. It is in cases of wilful sin that those who make their calling and election sure are visited with judgments. Having sealed some brethren at Kirtland to eternal life in 1833, Joseph Smith warned that "if any of them should sin wilfully after they were thus cleansed, and sealed up unto eternal life, they should be given over unto the buffetings of Satan until the day of redemption." End. I hope that's helpful -- Blessings -- ~Gaia GAIA: Hi Anabelli -- As for what it means, please see above discussion. One can make their calling and election sure by continued faithfulness -- either in this life, or upon their death. As for who achieves it -- In the early days of the Church, there were many everyday members who did, as individuals -- both male and female. As the Fulness of the Priesthood and temple oridinances were revealed and instituted, however, it became something for a COUPLE to receive together; -- But again, many "everday" members have; it's not something for just the leaders or an elite few; Rather, it's for ANYONE who pays the price of being "determined to serve the Lord at all costs" (see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p 150-151) Blessings -- ~Gaia

GAIA: References, please? With all due respect, LDS apostle John Widtsoe de-bunked the common explanation that polygamy was practiced in order to provide homes to a surplus of women in the church: “Plural marriage has been a subject of wide and frequent comment. Members of the Church unfamiliar with its history, and many nonmembers, have set up fallacious reasons for the origin of this system of marriage among the Latter-day Saints. “The most common of these conjectures is that the Church, through plural marriage sought to provide husbands for its large surplus of female members. The implied assumption in this theory, that there have been more female than male members in the Church, is NOT supported by existing evidence. On the contrary, there seems always to have been MORE MALES than females in the Church... “The United States census records from 1850 to 1940, and all available Church records, uniformly show a preponderance of MALES in Utah, and in the Church. Indeed, the excess in Utah has usually been larger than for the whole United States,...Orson Pratt, writing in 1853 from direct knowledge of Utah conditions, when the excess of females was supposedly the highest, declares against the opinion that females out numbered the males in Utah... “Another conjecture is that the people were few in numbers and that the Church, desiring greater numbers, permitted the practice so that a phenomenal increase in population could be attained. This is not defensible, since there WAS NO SURPLUS OF WOMEN.” (Evidences and Reconciliations, 1960, pages 390-392) From the LDS publication, "Juvenile INstructor": “But then the proportion of the sexes in Utah would not, at present, admit of an extensive practice of plural marriage. When the census was taken five years ago, there were 143,963 souls in Utah Territory, not counting untaxed Indians. In this number there was an excess of 5,055 MALES over females. This does not have the appearance of permitting an extensive practice of plural marriage,...” (Juvenile Instructor, Vol. 20, page 133) Blessings -- ~Gaia