Juliann

What about dead Hindus? Are you referring to the request to not baptise random Holocaust survivors? Church members are not supposed to be doing work for strangers...it is the family line. So if the "dead Jew" is my great grandfather it really isn't your call and I think it might be you giving the offense if you think you can speak for all "dead Jews". Unfortunately, people usually don't discriminate between the public access list and the actual temple list. Anyone can put names on the public list...that does not mean anything has been done. Names like "Bossy Cow" have been shown on the public lists. At any rate, the desire to give salvation to all is hardly new....

Is there anything that involves honoring one's ancestors you do not find "repugnant"? Cultural practices vary. Is it the religious aspect or is a cultural bias?

Have you done work for the dead? There is no one that decides which husband a woman will be sealed to....she is sealed to all of them. I don't know why this is restricted during life when it is done after death, but still...a man can't be sealed to "as many women as he wants". He has to go through the same permission process to marry in the temple a second time as a woman does. I think it is very inappropriate to dismiss one sealing over another...it diminishes all sealings and it is not our call. So despite all of the theorizing and speculating based on 19th century statements that have not been said by our modern prophets...in real life we are left with women sealed to several men and men sealed to several women.

Emma had a very hard life after Joseph's death which "content" does not describe. In some way she had to deny Jospeph and the church in order to survive in Nauvoo after the War of Nauvoo. She had to run a hotel, a daughter ran off with a man from the circus, returning later in life to die...but not to be with Emma. She had to put a son in a mental institution and we all know what those places were like. Her second husband betrayed her and there were continual problems with the church that she established. This is not a life of content. If anyone had a calling and election made sure...it was Emma. I'm not even sure why that would matter, actually. She was sealed to Joseph and she is with Joseph.

This board already has moderators.

All it says is that the KJV has a "wider meaning than is at once apparent from modern usage." I have no idea where you are getting this from...certainly not from the definition of damnation in the Dictionary. It limits its definition to those not receiving the fulness of celestial exaltation being " limited in their progress and privileges." That has always been the standard definition of "damned" in LDS theology since we do not believe in an eternal hell. Outer darkness has nothing to do with damnation, it is a category of its own and is reserved for anyone who knew Jesus was Christ, as in saw him, knew him and was fully aware of who and what he was yet would still be willing to nail him on a cross. Even Judas would not qualify under that definition. Dale, how long has it been since you were LDS?

Every person, men and women, are sealed to all of their spouses when work is done for the dead .....so if that makes a man a polygamist (Polygyngy) it will make the woman a polygamist (polyandry) since women tend to live longer and have more opportunity to accumulate multiple husbands.

Of course there are. What in the world does that have to do with the disrespect of showing someone praying in their garments on a TV show? Please don't derail this into a homosexual debate.

Yes. But the way you have worded this is a taunt and I suspect some of that is filtering through no matter how hard you are trying to do the right thing. I think it would be impossible for it not to show a bit at this early stage. This is not a matter of fairness or "right" at this time. You will have to bear the burden because you are the one stepping outside regardless of who is right or wrong. You have to give them time! And you will have to quash anything that even hints of negativity...or anything that could be perceived as negativity. I think the biggest problem for your family is your desire to remove your name. THat is going to come across as a slap along with the sadness you are creating. It has a hostile feeling to it no matter how justified it may be. THat again is something that you are just going to have to accept. It takes away the initial hope your family has that you might return and that is a vital element for them to be able to grieve and ultimately accept. I think anyone's advice would be to stop attending, put yourself on the noncontact list and give your family a chance to see that you are not changing. If you are going to remove your name I think you just need to give them the time it will take and stop trying to put the burden on them to go at your pace. Be understanding, acknowledge how hurtful this is to them, let them know that you are not going to attempt to influence anyone. Then be sure that you do not ever discuss religion for a very long time...in any form or manner whatsoever. This really isn't about you it is about your family relationships right now. You have found fulfillment and happiness so you need to accommodate those you leave behind. Don't expect anything...just live the Golden Rule and they will eventually get it. Two of my three sisters have their names removed, one by request and one by a bishop who just did it after decades of no contact requests (she was upset about that which surprised me). Our family functions just fine and my sisters were very appreciative of the church's assistance when my parents were ill and in a different state. I am sure this will all correct itself given time but again, it will be your burden to smooth the way for your family no matter how wrong that may feel right now.

Douglas, having been born in the church, these kinds of stories are of great interest to me. We all have to ultimately search for Christ, but it helps to hear of those who come from a different direction. However, don't ever be afraid to say it like it is. If your desires are not fulfilled, I want to hear about that, too.

I don't think it is all that clear when it comes to specifics. I think we can get into plenty of trouble by ourselves. It probably isn't any better idea to assign whatever we consider to be "bad" to Satan than it is to assign everything we think is "good" to the Holy Ghost. We aren't puppets and at some point we have to take responsibility instead of relying on any particular "spirit" as the instigator.

Some people are wise and learned, I thought that was the point of our existence. Drama is good though, I guess.

More important, why isn't what he did for 30 years in the Bible? Don't you think that is kinda weird since he probably wasnt in a coma the whole time? I can think of a whole lot of reasons to hide the identity of Jesus's family but I can't think of a whole lot of reasons to hide things like what happened during the most important time in the history of his life or Christianity, the forty days after the resurrection. The Bible sure leaves out a lot. I wonder why?

That is hardly fact and if you have to go that far back to find anybody saying it then that should be a warning sign. We are supposed to be following living prophets not dead General Authorities. I would be surprised if Jesus wasn't married and Jews were polygamous at the time but it was probably just rich ones. It seems like there has been a lot about Jesus being married lately that isn't from Mormons. I wouldn't rely on any of those Holy Grail books tho, they really take liberties.

/rolleyes.gif