puf_the_majic_dragon

The standard is a pretty simple one - "Be ye therefore perfect". Yeah, it can be pretty intimidating at first. What you have to do is study and learn and work and gain a testimony of the Plan of SALVATION (not the "Plan of damnation"). The Plan of Happiness, not the "Plan of Sorrow". The Lord Jesus Christ is our Savior - you can not be saved unless you're in danger. The Lord Jesus Christ is our Redeemer - you can not be redeemed unless you have fallen. None of us is perfect and none of us will be in this life. But as long as we strive to be as good as we possibly can, as long as we repent and endure to the end, we can be made perfect through the blood of the Lamb. You said you have a "propensity to sin". What I think you need is the repentance process. Read the book "The Miracle of Forgiveness" and learn about how repentance works, and as you repent you'll feel the love of Christ and you'll gain a testimony of forgiveness and how the Plan of Salvation really is a plan for your personal happiness and eternal glory. Isaiah 1 :18 "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool."

Odds Are You're Going to Be Exalted: Evidence That the Plan of Salvation Works

It's also common sense. Salvation is a blessing. Would you offer the blessing of everlasting life to somebody who misused their mortal life? But the Gospel isn't a gospel of fear, it's a gospel of HOPE. Moroni 10 20 Wherefore, there must be faith; and if there must be faith there must also be hope; and if there must be hope there must also be charity. 21 And except ye have charity ye can in nowise be saved in the kingdom of God; neither can ye be saved in the kingdom of God if ye have not faith; neither can ye if ye have no hope. 22 And if ye have no hope ye must needs be in despair; and despair cometh because of iniquity. Jeremiah 15 18 Why is my pain perpetual, and my wound incurable, which refuseth to be healed? wilt thou be altogether unto me as a liar, and as waters that fail? 19 Therefore thus saith the Lord, If thou return, then will I bring thee again, and thou shalt stand before me: and if thou take forth the precious from the vile, thou shalt be as my mouth: let them return unto thee; but return not thou unto them. 20 And I will make thee unto this people a fenced brasen wall: and they shall fight against thee, but they shall not prevail against thee: for I am with thee to save thee and to deliver thee, saith the Lord. 21 And I will deliver thee out of the hand of the wicked, and I will redeem thee out of the hand of the terrible. 1 John 3 1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. 2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. You're focusing on the punishment for failure, not the reward for success. Change your attitude, be positive, and focus on the good :) None of the above and all of the above. You have to live your whole life as best you can (ie progressive), however we can't all live a perfect life, so we have to repent regularly (repetitive). And at the final judgement, after all that we can do - after doing the absolute best we are capable of and repenting of our sins - the atonement comes along and makes up the difference (one time thing). There is no single act you can perform to be classified as "saved" and then do whatever you want. The Lord has said that disobedience can nullify past forgiveness ( Doctrine and Covenants 82 ), therefore we must be constantly vigilant that we do not sin, and when we do sin we must immediately repent. As a convert, you may be thinking of "saved" as a state of being that we achieve here on earth after accepting Christ. This is false doctrine. No one is "saved" in this life. This life is a kind of probation where we demonstrate our willingness to be obedient. If we serve our probation honorably by being faithful, obedient, and repentant, then when Christ judges us, he will Judge us worthy and only then are we "saved".

I believe the verse doesn't just regard salvation, but that it applies to EVERY blessing the Lord would give. Cross-reference Doctrine and Covenants 130 :20-21 "20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— 21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated." Conversely to that, if we disobey the law, we can not receive the blessing which requires obedience to that law. However, "I the Lord am bound when ye do what I say" and one thing the Lord has said is "repent", and the blessing which we receive when we obey the law of repentence is forgiveness. That should be encouraging :) Read 2 Nephi 4 :)

If the cameraman was supposed to be taking a picture of the couple, why are they not in the center of the photo? And digital cameras take at least half a second to refocus, so if that rodent jumped into the shot at the last second, as they imply, he'd be out of focus, yet he's in focus. And if that camera is either on a tripod or in somebody's hand then that a VERY tall squirrel. If the camera is sitting on a rock with a timer, it could be real, but that would be one courageous squirrel. The lighting and shadows on the squirrel, people, and surrounding rocks look accurate. And on a timer, the camera would have time to focus on the squirrel before snapping the picture. It would also explain why the couple is offcenter, since they may not have aimed the camera precisely before sitting down. Finally, those lines on the squirrel are perfect - especially around his whiskers and hairs on his body. We're talking a godly Photoshop job, if it's fake.

I'm not entirely sure I'd call a bunch of 19 year olds the "elite" of God's forces. They're the shock troops, not the calvary.

Actually you can be a convert to Judaism, and once you're converted you're considered a "born" Jew; Judaism recognizes no distinction between a convert and a veteran. But there are a lot of Jews who don't even know about Jewish conversion, so we can't fault your mom for not know it :)

I stand by what I said as truth, and I challenge anyone here to honestly tell me that what I said was patently false. It was not meant to be mean or injurious and it certainly was not meant to "kick her while she was down", but if it was hurtful there is nothing I can do about that; to use an old worn out cliche, sometimes "the truth hurts". However, John 8 "...ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." I definitely did not mean to make her feel inferior, and she already knows she's doing badly, that's why she came here. And ryanh, while you may feel that personal attack about my "porn demons" was warranted, it certainly was not helpful or constructive. Having lost my mother in a car accident when I was 18, and having lived without her for the last 6 and half years, I do choose to take personal offense at sophie's insinuation that she would rather die and leave her children motherless. You may be thankful that I have not expressed myself as regards my feelings in that matter. I have been depressed. All the coddling and tender advice in the world did absolutely nothing for me. A harsh reality check from a friend who loved me enough to be blunt DID help. Sophie came asking for help and advice, I offered mine out of an honest and sincere concern for her (and her childrens') wellbeing. If what I said wasn't what she (or YOU) wanted to hear, too bad. I'm not apologizing for it. I can only apologize for the rough manner in which I presented it. And finally, my advice now is exactly the same as it was in the beginning of this thread, and exactly the same as President Hinckley's, albeit his phrasing may be more eloquent. The gist is - forget yourself and serve others and you will find joy and healing. LDS.org - New Era Article - Words of the Prophet: Forget Yourself and Serve A pertinent excerpt: "By and large, I have come to see that if we complain about life, it is because we are thinking only of ourselves. For many years there was a sign on the wall of a shoe repair shop I patronized. It read, “I complained because I had no shoes until I saw a man who had no feet.” The most effective medicine for the sickness of self-pity is to lose ourselves in the service of others." Now for Sophie's sake, I'll refrain from adding any more to this thread, so as to avoid an argument and the thread being locked. If my advice or yours do nothing, there may yet be somebody out there who can say something to help her.

The 50% of missionaries stat is actually quite encouraging. It tells me A: that at least half of our missionaries have had SOME kind of exposure to reality (vs those that grow up completely sheltered and unaware of anything) and B: that repentance works. Maybe I'm just an optimist.

I was not and am not trying to be mean, just honest and frank. I HAVE suffered through depression and the fact of the matter is you're only depressed because you keep thinking about yourself and how dismal your situation is. How telling is it that you want to die when you have two daughters to worry about? How is your death going to help them? It may ease YOUR suffering but it will definitely make THEIRS worse - as someone who has lost a parent at a young age I KNOW. And yet you're not thinking about them or their pain, only your own. That's the definition of selfishness. I don't care what you've been through, your daughters are more important. "The Son of Man hath descended below them all. Art thou greater than he?" Doctrine and Covenants 122 So I reiterate, you're being selfish and you need to get over yourself and start thinking about the other people in your life. If you want the LDS doctrinal equivalent - lose yourself in service and you'll find the joy of the Lord. Mosiah 2 Doctrine and Covenants 24 Doctrine and Covenants 51 Doctrine and Covenants 136 Job 8 It's not judgemental, it's tough love. :edit: Psalms 30 For his anger kindleth against the wicked; they repent, and in a moment it is turned away, and they are in his favor, and he giveth them life; therefore, weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.

The teachings of the church - when considered together - are harmonious and true. Thinking of single concepts individually can blur that distinction. For example the church's stance on abortion makes complete sense (and is perfectly obeyable) if you also consider (and obey) the church's stance on premarital sex. Another thing to consider: There are laws. For instance, there is a law (or commandment) that you should not engage in sexual activities before marriage. There is also a law or commandment (from modern prophets) against abortion. Breaking the first law does not exempt you from the second. As regarding homosexuality - the sin is not in having lustful thoughts or feelings. The sin occurs when you fail to immediately dismiss those thoughts or feelings. This applies to everyone regardless of who they are or what gender the object of those feelings may be. Scientifically, the causes of homosexuality have not been determined - whether it is environmental or genetic (nature vs nurture). I suspect a combination of both, depending on the individual. In any case, regardless of the origin of homosexuality, it can not be argued that it is natural (since it precludes the possibility of breeding, and therefore defeats the purpose of sexuality). The morality of homosexuality depends on your own perspective on the matter (due to the inherent subjectivity of morality in general). Now it all boils down to 1 thing. Either the church is true or it isn't. If it is true, then it is all true. It's up to you (and your own interaction with the Lord) how you reconcile these issues you have, but if you believe in the scriptures and if you believe in the prophets, then you must act according to that belief. The church is true, what else matters?

THAT has GOT to be a world record run on sentence! I'm impressed! Seriously, buck up. It's not like the rest of us don't have problems. Take a look at war-ravaged Africa. Or Hurricane Katrina victims. Or Chinese earthquake victims. Or that homeless guy you pass on the street as you drive downtown. Get over yourself. You're being selfish, self-absorbed, inconsiderate, and narrow-minded. You can't hear the Spirit when you're only thinking about yourself. John 6 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

I didn't say it was the best recourse. I said it would be my recourse. I'm not talking about doctrine, I'm talking my personal choice. I've already stated my awareness of the consequences for that choice and my willingness to accept them. This was not a topic I wished to debate in open forum, and in retrospect I probably should have kept my opinion to myself. Now if you want to get on a mormon high horse and tell me I'm going to go to hell, go for it. I won't be listening. :edit: In further retrospect, I should probably refrain from engaging in any sort of debate after a long day at a job I hate. I need a cough drop.

First off - I'd like to make it clear that I'm not discussing this as somebody who believes something false and needs to be convinced he's wrong; I'm discussing this as an example analysis in support of an earlier claim that seemingly contradictory scriptures could be reconciled. I believe I've demonstrated that point adequately (that being that seemingly contradictory scriptures may not be contradictory when read from an appropriate frame of reference) and I think the discussion has turned towards whether my example is doctrinal or not, which was never meant to be an issue. Since Truth loves analogies so much - we've taken one of Jesus' parables and started debating whether the Good Samaritan ever actually existed, disregarding the original point of the parable. And now people are joining the thread almost specifically to admonish me for "preaching false doctrine" and I feel like I'm being backed into a corner to defend a castle I never built. That being said, I know the accepted belief regarding the innocence and exaltation of little children. I was raised in the church and raised with that belief and know full well how the accepted belief works. As an exercise, I've looked at that belief in a new and different way in order to demonstrate a point. If we want to discuss the doctrinality of that new and different way of looking at it, I suggest we might move that discussion to the "Gospel Discussion" category, and I'd ask that you please cite valid scriptural and LDS.org references that are specific and definitive. So far all of the references which have been posted refer specifically to a child's exemption from sin and punishment but none of them refer to any exemption from the ordinances of salvation. Where the scriptures or prophets quoted have talked about children being exempt from baptism they have referred only to two specific practices: infant baptism and vicarious baptism for dead children. None have mentioned the need (or lack thereof) for ordinances during the millenium when the children are alive and can receive the ordinances themselves at the appropriate times.

Pam: The article you posted was good and informative, but I don't think it answers this specific question. I'm not debating whether or not children get to go to the celestial kingdom and exaltation. I'm just suggesting there's more to the process than a "free ride" or "golden ticket". We know that no blessing can be granted without obedience to the corresponding law. We know the laws that correspond to exaltation and these laws include specific ordinances including baptism; AND we know these laws have existed since before the foundation of the world. I have yet to see anything that specifically states that there are exceptions to these laws. So there HAS to be some way for children to fulfill those laws if they died before being accountable in this life. Barring some 100% conclusive statement from a GA or scripture, I think this discussion has gone about as far as it can. I'll ask some people at church (Bruce R McConkie's son is a stake president in town not a GA but REALLY knowledgeable) for thoughts on the matter and report back if anybody's interested. Vort: Disobeying God is right if what God asks you to do is wrong. Faith is not blindly obeying every command from God, faith is trusting that God will not command you to do anything except that which is right. If you think a commandment is not right or is unjust, go ahead and question it - ask God. That's what Nephi did. He asked, God answered, and Nephi accepted that answer and obeyed. Truth: I agree that "growing in stature" may not necessarily mean what we now consider to be aging. It hasn't been revealed how that will work and while I could speculate, it'd probably lead to another 20 pages like the last 20 The evidence is before us that God has commanded what we would call genocide. We are left to learn how this commandment is just, merciful, and loving or we can just shrug it off as one of those thing's we'll learn in the resurrection. The ride isn't so much quiet as much as we tend to be wearing headphones listening to something else. :edit: Oh, and I think the overall point has been served - that is to demonstrate how an apparent discrepancy in scripture can make absolute sense without any sort of "spin" or apologetic mumbo-jumbo.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to teach false doctrine, I'm only trying to have an intelligent discussion. I've been asked to reconcile some apparent inconsistencies in scripture and in doing so I am postulating and theorizing. And so far everything I've said - at least as I understand it - is perfectly in line with the doctrines and teachings of the church as you have quoted them above and as I have been taught in church. Whether I've been able to convey it intelligibly or not is another matter. I do realize how easily theorizing and hypothosizing can lead to false doctrine, which is why I continually try to emphasize the theoretical nature of the discussion. But just to be on the safe side - I reiterate that this is all hypothetical and that if anybody reading has a question about the truthfulness of the ideas presented in this discussion that they pray about them as Moroni said and learn by the Holy Ghost whether there is any truth here. I wouldn't consider vicarious work to be a backup plan - I might even call it the primary plan. And if Jesus could nullify the requirement for saving ordinances for anybody, why not do it for everybody? Oh wait - that was Lucifer's plan.... Johnny who dies at 6 turns 8 during the millenium. Doesn't that mean he's reached the age of accountability and therefore is accountable and therefore must be baptised? Or is Johnny 6 for all eternity? Only as long as they are unaccountable. If a child reaches the age of accountability in this life he must be baptised in order to be saved - why would it be any different if he reaches that age in the millenium? Doctrine and Covenants 1312 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; 3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it. That accounts for one temple ordinance that they will have to receive during the millenium :) And since we all know you must be endowed before being sealed, that makes 2 temple ordinances. Just out of curiosity - has anyone ever been endowed without first being baptised by water and by fire as per Christ's own words in John 3? I think the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that somebody can receive exaltation (not just enter the Celestial Kingdom, but enter into the highest glory thereof) without being baptised. No blessing can be bestowed except by obedience to the law upon which that blessing is predicated (Doctrine and Covenants 130 ). The blessing of exaltation is predicated upon the laws of certain ordinances ( Doctrine and Covenants 131 ). Therefore: Regardless of their accountability, little children can not be exalted until they have obeyed those laws and received those ordinances. It stands to reason that they will not be little children anymore at the time they receive those ordinances ( LDS.org - Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith ). So we're supposed to become unaccountable like children? No. We're supposed to become obedient and humble and trusting like children. As far as I know none of Christ's parables involved the "slaughter of innocent babies". I find it just as difficult to imagine a kind and loving god teaching a parable about such slaughter as I do imagining the same kind of god ordering that slaughter. If you want more than surface truths (or more accurately, surface theories) you'll have to do some reading, studying, and praying of your own to get an answer straight from the source whether He commanded these things and why. Oh well. I'd rather go to hell for doing what I know in my heart to be right than go to heaven for doing something I know to be wrong. If things end up that way - I hope you'll come visit me :)

First things first:First Judgement -> First Resurrection -> Millenium -> Second Resurrection -> Final Judgement Basic plan of salvation stuff there. Christ, himself the most perfect being (more perfect than the most innocent child) had to be baptised. Still basic plan of salvation stuff there. Secondly, it is true that children do not need temple ordinances done for them in this life. That's not even an arguable point. So, since Christ was baptised that means that everyone without exception of any kind must be baptised to receive exaltation. So either children who die before the age of accountability are not exalted (they can still go to the Celestial Kingdom, so this is a scriptural possibility) or they have to be baptised at some time. So let me summarize to make it clear what I'm saying: Johnny dies at age 6. Johnny is unaccountable for his sins as we've discussed and therefore goes to spirit paradise and is resurrected at the first resurrection. Johnny comes forth in the first resurrection (before the millenium) at age 6.He's innocent and therefore worthy of the first resurrection. Joseph Smith said children are resurrected as they were laid down (ie the same age). 2 years into the millenium, Johnny reaches the age of accountability and is baptised. Johnny can not be exalted without baptism, therefore when he reaches baptism age, he is baptised just like anybody else. During the millenium he would also receive his endowment at the appropriate age and time and get married. Otherwise - Johnny doesn't get exalted. He can still go to the Celestial Kingdom, just not to the highest glory within that kingdom. Resurrected to the degree consistent withour faithfulness must not apply to everybody - since children aren't judged by their faithfulness What are the spiritual truths taught by false (men's POV or symbolic, still false) stories of a God that commands murder and rape? I think I've already thoroughly discussed the spiritual truths taught by the stories if they are true. I personally like the idea of a God that knows all things that can be. It's more godlike :)

I think God would have found some way of giving us the opposition we need, even if Lucifer had been a good boy in the premortal life.There are some who theorize that Satan is actually playing the part assigned to him by God - ie after God asked for a messiah, he asked for an adversary. *shrug* This goes against accepted belief and, in the end, why Satan is Satan doesn't really matter to our eternal salvation. Adam needed to break the law in order for the plan to move forward - ie mortality, children, the Light of Christ (conscience) etc. Adam can't break a law if there is no law to break - therefore God gave Adam the commandment not to eat the fruit of the tree.Moses 5 " 10 And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God. 11 And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient." I might also say that there are some who consider the Garden of Eden and Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil to be allegorical - ie Adam transgressed not by eating an apple, but by partaking of knowledge that God had forbidden him. In any event, the purpose, meaning, and result of the whole matter is the same. I hope I'm not being too confusing :)

Doctrine and Covenants 132"Abraham was commanded to offer his son Isaac; nevertheless, it was written: Thou shalt not kill. Abraham, however, did not refuse, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness." You can be pretty sure that in these cases such as Abraham, Moses, and Nephi, they were close enough to God to know the difference between the Holy Ghost and Satan's minions. See Moses 1 14 "For behold, I could not look upon God, except his glory should come upon me, and I were transfigured before him. But I can look upon thee in the natural man. Is it not so, surely?" Personally, if God commanded me to kill and sacrifice my son, I'd tell Him where he could shove that commandment. Maybe that makes me unworthy of Celestial glory. Oh well.

Not only does God play dice - the dice are loaded Being the Lord's chosen people gives you an edge when it comes to destruction; ie the Lord has a little more patience with them than he does with other nations. This is evidenced throughout the Old Testament. Mosiah 3 16 And even if it were possible that little children could sin they could not be saved; but I say unto you they are blessed; for behold, as in Adam, or by nature, they fall, even so the blood of Christ atoneth for their sins. This verse almost seems self-contradictory. The interpretation I would render would be "Children can commit wrong acts (sins) however because they are not yet accountable for these acts (because they have not achieved the mental, emotional, or spiritual development to fully understand right and wrong and consequences), the atonement is automatically applied and these sins are forgiven without the need for the repentance process; in effect making them "without sin". It IS doctrine that ALL mankind must be baptised.LDS.org - Topic Definition - Baptism "Baptism by immersion in water by one having authority is the first saving ordinance of the gospel and is necessary for an individual to become a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and to receive eternal salvation. All who seek eternal life must follow the example of the Savior by being baptized and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost." John 3 "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." LDS.org - Topic Definition - Baptisms for the Dead "Jesus Christ taught that baptism is essential to the salvation of all who have lived on earth..." The scriptures and the prophets make it very clear that there is no way that anyone can receive exaltation without first being baptised (and then endowed, and then sealed in marriage). That's as doctrinal as you can get. It makes sense that we don't do vicarious baptisms for children under 8 because they'll still be under 8 when they're resurrected: ergo they would have to be baptised during the millenium. This boils down to one of two possibilities (which echo the entire purpose this thread was intended to serve):1: The scriptures are wrong and God did not order these entire civilizations destroyed; and the same would have to apply to every civilization God has had destroyed in all the world's history including the whole world of Noah's time, the land of Canaan, Babylon after Judah's captivity, the Jeredites, and the Nephites - among many many many others. OR 2: It is Just for this destruction to include the unaccountable children. I've tried (and I think I've done a helluva job!) to reason out how it could be considered Just for God to do such a thing, but in the end it's all theory and rhetoric. The Spirit is required to get any further on this one, I'm afraid. There is a third possibility - that God did order the destruction of these innocent children even though it was not just, making Him unworthy to be God. But I don't think any of us here has the knowledge and understanding to make anything useful out of that discussion.

Probably not but they must have been doing better than Canaan and they had the advantage of being the Lord's chosen people. 1: If children were completely and 100% fully and totally innocent and sinless on their own they would not need the atonement. Since the scriptures you quoted all say that the atonement plays a part in their innocence, I can only conclude that there must be something else going on there behind the scenes. IMO in order for the atonement to have effect, there must be some kind of judgement which determines that the individual in question requires the atonement. The yardstick by which children would be judged in this (purely hypothetical) situation would definitely have to be different from the standards set for the rest of us, but there must still be a standard.2: In order for children to inherit the highest degree in the Celestial Kingdom they have to be A: baptised, B: Endowed, and C: Sealed in marriage. When or if these events occur is anyone's guess. I have not heard of parents in modern times doing vicarious baptisms for children they've lost before turning 8 (but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen), so I would expect that this would be part of the millenial work. I am familiar with all of those scriptures, and yes they did influence my response :) And you're absolutely right, none of this is doctrine. But it sure is a fun discussion! One thing I've always wondered is whether or not God knows what WILL be, or if he knows all things that CAN be - a huge difference. Both can be considered omniscience, however the former pushes the limits of predestination as you say, while the latter is just plain mind-boggling to consider but doesn't affect free will.In any case, as long a the decision to destroy the nation comes after the wickedness - or rather - as long as the decision to kill the baby comes after the baby's birth, it's not predestination. True enough :)

Assumption: Children born to evil parents are perfectly innocent before the age of accountability.This one is scripturally supported, so we can call that one an axiom. Assumption: Children born to evil parents who are allowed to live beyond the age of accountability (ie "adopted" by Israel after their parents were killed) will bring with them none of the evil with which they grew up during those first years. The purpose of destroying the nation was to prevent their wickedness from contaminating Israel. Therefore, anyone left alive must have no way of bringing that contamination with them - otherwise the purpose of the war is made void. Assumption: Children under the age of accountability are exempt from judgement. While the scriptures do testify that young children are made perfect by the atonement, the scriptures do not say that they are exempt from judgement. In fact, since the atonement plays the part in their salvation, and since the purpose of the atonement is to mitigate justice, it's implied that young children ARE judged - albeit possibly by a different standard than those who have reached the age of accountability. I could think of some more angles to go at that from, but I think that's good for now. If A and B then C.A: Children who die before the age of accountability are resurrected to "celestial glory". B: All those who are heirs of the celestial kingdom of God are resurrected in the first resurrection before/at the beginning of the millenium. C: Children who die before the age of accountability are resurrected at the first resurrection. So, if a child is resurrected at the first resurrection and his/her parents are not, what happens to that child? I understand it may be a bit of a leap, however the claim I made before regarding sealing and righteous families is a satisfactory answer. Whether or not it is true, well you'll have to ask God on that one. To be perfectly honest, I made it up on the spot while responding to your earlier post so I haven't prayed about it either :) Note my argument above regarding the role of the atonement in children's salvation.I realize I may be making a few logical leaps here, however you're doing a decent job holding your own in this discussion and I can only do so much research while at work! The judgement isn't made before the man's sins - the judgement is made as a consequence of the man's sins - and sometimes the consequence of that judgement is physical death. It's not predetermination because A: the man's actions were not chosen for him and B: the consequences were not meted out until after he acted. No, God is not above Celestial Law. God is God because he obeys eternal laws.

The difference is who's asking you to do the killing. If God is asking you to bring His judgement upon a wicked nation, that's a far different thing from your grandpa sayin "kill me before the cancer does, you whipper-snapper!". You're trying to compare 3rd grade flag football to the Tet Offensive. Yeah, I admit that was a tiny bit of a stretch to draw that conclusion - hence why I included the caveat "I believe". However, I do believe the scriptures I already quoted fully support my claim, so it's your turn to find a reference :) So what do you think happens to those kids? If they aren't given to another family, who's gonna raise them since their Earthly parents obviously can't? Or are they 2 years old throughout eternity?

The last time I asked for you to reference that assertion: http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/23678-signs-times-list-5.html#post395922 The post in this thread that started this discussion: http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/23678-signs-times-list-2.html#post394357 I just read over the entire thread again and except for my last post, NOBODY has posted any references to support the claim that the witnesses are LDS. Now, I have presented references - including a church authorized First Pesidency approved publication that specifically states that they are JEWISH (the Institute manual). If you want to discuss this topic further, please provide references for your assertions. That means hyperlinks to First Presidency approved articles and resources which directly support your claim.

"To tell the truth I disapprove of suicide more than anything." - Vash the StampedeBut if you're going to kill yourself, at least have the decency to do it yourself. Asking somebody else to do it for you is just pathetic. Besides, suicide is sinful. I can't imagine having somebody else kill you for you is any better. A: Satan will be bound by the righteousness of the people that he will "have no hold upon the hearts" of the people - he won't be tied up and gagged, he'll still be out there tempting - trying his darndest (and failing! w00t). B: Part of the purpose of sealing the whole human race is so those children born to wicked parents will have a family to raise them during that time.