mnn727

I can't believe no one has suggested the Work and the Glory series yet. Historical fiction, but a very good series of books IMHO. It gives a very good history of the Church from the First Vision through the trek west to the SL valley (from an LDS perspective). My only complaint is that the author, Gerald Lund, tried to wrap everything up in the last book and did it too quickly - 3 books worth of material in 1 book (he was called to be a GA and had to finish it before he was sustained). It follows the story of multiple generations of a fictional family set in Church historical times.

Only those of African descent. There were many dark skinned Pacific islanders ordained to the Priesthood. Australian aboriginee's would have been able to be ordained, but I personally have never heard of one converting -- there may be some, I'm just not aware of it.

I teach from the JS manual, as I said and as you agreed, nowhere does anyone say He was a sinful man like us. Christ was a man, but not sinful, perhaps God was the same. As Pres Hinckley said and I posted, "We just don't know that much about it".

I don;t elieve JS does contradict this, I am assuming you are talking about the King Follet discourse. I see no contradiction at all. I see people reading into it things that are just not there. TO assume that God the Father was a sinful man somewhere just like we currently are, is to ignore the fact that Jesus was an exalted man without being sinful like us. No where does JS say the God was a sinful man like us. Perhaps he was, but thats not doctrinal and we know nothing about it, just like President Hinckley said.

Like I said about 15 pages back, its all semantics.Is the Father God? Is Jesus God? Is the Holy Ghost God? Is that 3 Gods or 1 God? Its all semantics and makes no difference at all to anyones salvation.

Really, I noticed that the first time, I even had money in my pocket ready for it, (I figured a few bucks for the time the missionaries had spent with me was ok) It just floored me.When I went to my wifes (who was my girlfriend at that time) RCC church the first time, they had baskets on a stick, the elders(or whomever it was?) reached them into the pews and stopped in front of each person, they even shook them a few times if you were not quick about it-- I know from future visits and my RCC friends this was not normal -- the guy doing that day was just rude. But boy did it leave a bad impression on me.

While many LDS believe that He was once a man like us, its non-doctrinal. That He is a man yes, but like us? Jesus was a man also, was He like us? I don't think anyone would make that claim.Can you find quotes from people saying that? yes, very easily. I can think of 3 or 4 quotes right off the top of my head Can you find doctrine declaring that he was a man like us? No President Hinckley rightly said, we don't know much about that and we don't teach that.

I would not call them counselors, but yes, God the Father is the Highest and Jesus and the Holy Ghost, while equal in all aspects are subordinant . -- tough concept to explain. These verses may help: John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just because I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which hath sent me. John 14: 26 But the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. So if the Father is sending them, they must do what the Father asks them to do and are thus subordinant to Him. Speaking of Jesus: Luke 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: There are about 20 other Biblical references to God the Father as the Highest Yes and no Yes In the fact that He was first, yes. In power and authority, no. They are united in :will, desire, power, authority, grace, etc. nevertheless the Father is the Highest or in LDS terms "the Father presides". Not sure theres an RCC equivilent but let me try (and perhaps fail miserably). If the ArchBishop, the Bishop and the Parish Priest all show up at the Same Church for Mass, who would be presiding (or in charge?) IF the answer is the ArchBishop, does that take anything away from the Bishop and the Parish Priest? is their authority any less because he is there? Jesus IS the Son of God, that's not a saying, he is a son just like I am my fathers son.

1.) How do I relate to an 'office'? You respect the office and relate to the members of the office - in this case the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 2.) Personal relationship -- that really depends on how you define a personal relationship. I define it as looking to Christ as my example of how to try to live my life and trying to become like Him (more Christ-like),being grateful for His atoning sacrifice on my (our) behalf, on trying to follow His teachings and commands, I also define it as worshipping God the Father and living my life to be worthy of the guiding influence of the Holy Ghost, so my answer would be yes. 3.) Do I believe that God (talking about the office or the Godhead) has always been made up of the same 3 people? Yes

I doubt you'll find anything official, but I invite all LDS here to comment whether its a valid comparison.

We LDS believe 'God' is an 'office' or 'Title' similar to our 'First Presidency' 3 people make up that First Presidency (the Prophet and his 2 Counselors) Each are called President so their are 3 Presidents, yet they are united in purpose and unanimous in decision making up 1 First Presidency and are the highest ruling body of the Church. We see the Godhead as being similiar.

Someone on another message board posted it about 4 years ago. Thats all I know about it, it seemed very profound so I copied and kept it.

While this is not official, this sounds right to me. Blacks and the priesthood The Priesthood has never been held in bondage. Aaron and his sons weren't allowed to exercise the priesthood until after the children of Israel were free from Egypt and out in the desert for a while. When the nation of Israel was carried away into captivity in Babylon, same thing. This said, certain groups in modern society have been held in slavery as well. It's not the fault of persons held in slavery, but just the same, the Priesthood cannot be commanded. And, even though the Civil War and related events technically ended slavery in this country, many things didn't change culturally until efforts of the Civil Rights movements in the sixties and seventies. And until all people could regard themselves as free from bondage, they couldn't hold the Priesthood. And now, while efforts continue to advance the rights of all races, we have the responsibility of adhering to the Gospel and using the Priesthood to officiate in the ordinances of that Gospel.

I find it funny (strange) that many Churches are coming to an understanding of the Gospel. Its undeniable that in the past, the RCC taught that unbaptised children that died went to either Limbo or Hell, as did most Protestant Churches, but I know of no Church today that still teaches this. The same goes for people who, through no fault of their own never hear of Jesus Christ, in the past Churches doomed them to Hell, today most Churches say they leave it in the hands of God (where it should have always been IMHO) The last 50 years or so there has been a great shift in religious beliefs and teachings about not only this, but many other things also. I wonder if the reason is that the members understanding at some basic level that God is not a cruel, uncaring God? Or if Churches that preach nothing but hellfire and damnation have lost many of their members as the older generation dies off.

Many others shared the same belief, Here are some old quotes from the "Early Church Faters" followed by some quotes from some prominant modern Protestant Ministers.

Since you have expessed interest in the Jouranal of Discourses (JoD) I thought it would be good to post what the JoD is and what it isn't, Highlighting is mine. Keep in mind the JoD is not considered a source of doctrine by anyone in the LDS Church. It is of interesting historical value, but thats about it. The JoD is copyrighted and published by B.H.S. Publishing, NOT the LDS Church. For those who seem to be unaware of what the JoD actually is... here is an informative definition. Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol.2, JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES The Journal of Discourses was a sixteen-page semimonthly subscription publication privately printed in Liverpool, England, in 1854-1886. It served as the printed word of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, particularly for members who had no access to the Salt Lake City Deseret News. While the Journal most often published sermons of Church leaders, these speeches were not always considered to be official statements of doctrine. Many different kinds of speeches were printed, including the prayer given at the laying of a cornerstone of the Salt Lake Temple, a report of a high council court decision, a funeral sermon, and a plea for the defendant and the charge to the jury in a murder trial. In all, the collected Journal of Discourses contains 1,438 speeches given by fifty-five people, including Presidents of the Church, members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, members of the seventy, and sixteen other speakers. Brigham Young gave 390; John Taylor, 162; Orson Pratt, 127; Heber C. Kimball, 113; and George Q. Cannon, 111. Twenty-one people gave a single speech, and the rest gave from 2 to 66 speeches. The semimonthly issues have been bound into twenty-six annual volumes and are currently available in a lithograph reprinting "of the original edition." The origin of the Journal of Discourses is tied to George D. Watt, an English convert baptized in 1837 by Heber C. Kimball. Before immigrating to the United States in 1842, Watt learned Pitman shorthand. He used this new skill in his adopted land to record the proceedings of conferences of the Church. He also recorded the trial of the accused murderers of the Prophet Joseph Smith. After 1852 Watt transcribed Church conference addresses for the Deseret News. But because the News was not generally available outside central Utah and because Watt received little pay for his work, he proposed to publish privately and sell sixteen-page semiweekly issues of the Journal of Discourses containing selected sermons of the General Authorities. The sale of these to the Saints at large would enable Watt to earn a living with his shorthand skill. He was supported in this proposal by Brigham Young, who authorized him to print his sermons. [ note...he did not CORRECT them... he just authorized Watt to print what had already been transcribed] David W. Evans, also an English convert, an associate editor of the Deseret News, and the first violinist in the Salt Lake Theatre Orchestra, succeeded Watt as the main reporter to the Journal from 1867 to 1876. Another major reporter was George F. Gibbs, who was born in Wales and was the secretary to the First Presidency of the Church for fifty-six years. In all, twelve people reported sermons for the Journal of Discourses, including one of Brigham Young's daughters, "Miss Julia Young," who reported one of his speeches. While Mr Watt used shorthand it is know that some of the scribes used longhand which means that all they could do is take notes and try to reconstruct the sermon afterwards. Some of the printed sermons were a result of 2 or more people trying to reconstruct the sermons from notes taken during the sermons, remember this was all done in an era before recording devices.

You can always find something wrong with any Church that includes Humans in it. You can always take something small and blow it up into something large You can always find things to take exception with. In refuting: I almost never wear a white shirt and no ones ever said anything to me. I would say at least 1/4 of the men in my ward don't wear white shirts, I know of no one who has said anything to any of them, if they did, it must not have worked. The Church tells you what to think and what to believe -- about what? its teachings about Jesus Christ, yeah I suppose you could say that, about being a good example, serving others, being kind and generous, ok. About decisions in your outside life -- gee I must have missed that. Feeling guilty about turning down callings? Both my wife and I have turned down callings and no one has ever made us feel guilty, we've also been blessed when we took callings we were not too sure about. I was called to teach a class to men in a Federal Prison located within the ward boundries. I was scared of that one at first, I told the Bishop I would let him know in a week and I prayed about it all week long, I accepted it because I believed the call was from God and it was the greatest calling I ever had. I really learned a lot and its still the most spiritual meetings I have ever been a part of and I grew in my own spiritually, the men there taught me a lot. Sadley after 2 years we moved out of the area. Feeling guilty about not tithing? No one ever says anything to you, we don't pass a collection plate, so no one could possibly know if you do or do not. As a former ward clerk, who entered the tithing into the computer (record keeping for peoples taxes and for financial accountability) I can tell you the names and numbers went in my eyes and out my fingers and that was it. I couldn't tll you anything about it later that same day. If this person felt guilty it was their conscious talking to them. Fast and testimony meeting "I know this Church is True" used to be a pet peeve of mine also, people fall into patterns and its easy to say. Ask someone what they mean when they say it before you condemn it. I'll let someone else go into it more. Indoctrinating Youth; All Churches and schools do this, Parents teach their children what to believe, so do school teachers. Of course they are taught the tenets of our faith, so did the Protestant Church I grew up in, so did the Catholic Church my wife grew up in. SO does the school system, they teach you what they want you to know too. This is the lamest thing the person said. Bytor has explained the BY quote so I won't even go into that, just to let you know, most people against the Church will take something out of context, ignoring whatever does not support their point of view. You'll run into that a lot, my recommendation is that you find the exact quote and then read the entire sermon it was from. Anti's also liberally use ellipses ................ to denote missing words, one quote I read from the JoD that the Tanners 'quoted' used 1 set of ellipses to connect 2 things 7 pages apart to make it appear it was 1 sentance saying something the sermon never meant -- changed the intent of the sermon totally.

The Protestant Church I grew up in changed Pastors when I was a teen. The Church Elders (different than our Elders) interviewed a number of candidates and chose 4 applicants and invited them to speak 1 Sunday each. After that each adult member got a ballot and voted for who they wanted as the new Pastor.

You're right we LDS do, however someone asking if we say the 'Hail Mary' must be RCC and they don't call it 'the Sacrament' so I was answering in a way she would know what I was talking about.Baptism and Temple content are not prayers.

It might be different in Australia due to the time difference.

No we do not say fixed prayers with 1 exception and that is the prayers said when blessing the Sacrament of Communion.

TrueGrits is right, it is General Conference this weekend. Broadcasts at (in the Central Time zone) 11 AM and 3PM Sat and Sun. No regular meetings. If your local building has a Satellite dish, it'll be playing there. Also shown on BYU-TV for Dish Network and DirectTV and some cable systems

No problem, going back. You'll be welcomed with open arms. No need to contact anyone, you can just show up, but it might be helpful at some point to contact the missionaries to be re-taught the basics, they'll also be happy to meet you at Church and guide you and your children to classes.

Just read your conversations. While no one is trying to push you too fast, don't let acne and clothes be the only thing keeping you away. I had terrible acne when I was a teen and it never did get treated - finally went away in my 20's, I have scars today from it. As far as clothes most younger guys and many older guys wear slacks (either dress pants or something like Dockers), also a nice shirt and tie, if you have that, you'll blend in just fine. We do have people that come in jeans, but I'll admit its rare. "Sunday best" just means the best of what you have, and we wear that out of respect to God, not for the approval of others. Its usually the older guys like me that wear a suit (I'm 52). Missionaries do too but for them its the dress code. I'm not trying to push, but just wanted to let you know that those 2 things should not be the only thing stopping you.

You can leave anytime you want, we don't lock the doors, people come and go even during classes sometimes.No, Sunday School (2nd hour, Gospel Principles) is not males only. That would be 3rd hour when the men go to Priesthood and women to Relief Soceity.