Traveler

I believe this is both an interesting and important post.  I have a friend that works for the Church in downtown SLC.  Actually, I have more than one but this particular guy works in a department that does research and gathers statistics.    In conversations, he has told me that the Church has done a great deal of research on the family – or as @Rob Osborn has implied – the strong traditional family.   All the research and statistics point to exactly what is implied – the church organizations, wards, branches, stakes, districts and missions cannot remain stable and grow without strong families.
The minimum number of strong families for a ward to remain stable is 5.  I remember asking what was so magical about 5.  He said that was yet to be determined.   But what surprised me the most is what was the necessary demographic or feature that families must have to possess in order to be a “strong family”.  The single most important element for a family to qualify as a strong core family was a strong bond of love.  A family that just flat out enjoys being around each other and doing things together.   This one element is more important than family prayer, family home evening, family scripture study or individual activity (prayer, scripture study or church attendance).  In short – a strong family does not do things because a prophet has commanded them or because they think it will get them into heaven – they do things together because it is fun for them and they enjoy it.
I have discovered – for myself – that if I cannot figure out how to have fun and enjoy something – it does not matter how right or good it is – I will fail at it and quit doing it.  The opposite works with sin for me.  Regardless of how tempting it may be or appear to be exciting – once I am convinced it is not now or will somehow turn out to not be fun – I am done with it – plus I cannot understand why anyone would waste their time with it.
 
The Traveler

Technically, if you take the words and their meanings individually instead of the "phrase" and it's meaning in formal logic terms, "begs" means an earnest request or asking, and so it, literally, would mean "earnestly requests the question" or "asks for the question" -- which is exactly how LP used it.

This whole topic is interesting and all but if a ward is just made up of all these random sinners and misfits it just isnt going to work. I agree we should welcome all but let us not forget the absolute importance of the strength of a ward is, and always will be, in those strong traditional families who hold fast to the iron rod. I have been part of several wards that lack enough strong traditional families and even though we had a mixture of all types those wards were almost always in fail or emergency mode. Getting all to come is great but if change towards principles of the traditional family values do not happen then its only a matter of time until failure happens. Lost in the discussion is how very important more strong traditional families are needed in the church today. We just had a major ward boundary change where we kind of were in emergency mode- failing in almost every facet of operation. We just didnt have enough traditional strong families to glue it all together. Then our ward boundary changed and pretty much overnight our outlook is now the opposite. We are stronger, no longer in emergency mode. Why? Because we gained quite a few strong traditional families. A ward that lacks having enough strong traditional families will fail in todays world. Whereas we do need more sinners in our attendance it means nothing if we are not adding a greater number of strong traditional families in our wards to support and help the lost sheep who need help when they come.

I wanted to follow up on what I consider to be a most important matter.  But I am not sure how I can follow up about a problem without, at least to some degree, being part of the problem.  There is a very discernable difference between right and wrong.  At least we all would like to think there is.  One on the very interesting paradoxes of scripture takes place in the Book of Mormon during the visit of the Messiah to the people of Lehi.  There problem was over what should be the name of the True Church of Christ.  What is interesting is that some arguing what the name should be were right.
However, Jesus was not just addressing those that were wrong when he said there should be no disputations.  He was also addressing those that were right.  I have often pondered this paradox.  How to disagree with someone and tell them they are wrong without creating a disputation and thus being wrong while all along knowing that I am right?
I remember once at church when a good member that themselves served in what some would think is a more responsible calling than mine asked me how I could pretend to be a good member and disciple of Christ and still believe in evolution.  I was being called to repentance for believing in evolution!  What kind of a misguided leader does that?  I would like to tell everyone that I handled this accusation as a true saint ought – but I didn’t.   I am not sure that even having learned my lesson that I could discuss this matter better with anyone that believes that believing in evolution is a sin.
This also reminds me of many years when I was taking drivers education and my instructor was trying to teach us defensive driving – I remembered the term he used was being “dead right” – the operative word being “dead”.  The instructor said that we can do everything “right” when driving and still end up dead.  Likewise, we can be discussing a gospel topic – and be spot on and absolutely correct in our understanding but spiritually assonating ourselves and all around us.  This is sometimes referred to as the letter of the law and not the spirit.
Then there is the problem that without a clean spirit of light and truth in one’s heart any exposer to truth will only make that person more angry.   I once suggested on this forum that if anything being said was making them angry – that they were being tempted by an unclean spirit of anger.  They responded that there is a righteous anger and that G-d himself was the example of righteous anger. 
Often my wife often tells me that – even though I am right about something – I am going about it all wrong! - ????
I have discovered that people do not like being told they are overweight any more than someone else likes to be told that homosexuality is wrong.  I know of someone that will not go to church because they were once told not to drink cola soft drinks.   I do not understand that kind of mentality – if you are going to quit going to church and throw away your salvation – at least pick something exotic, exciting and fun – like adultery?  Why argue over something silly and insignificant like a Coke? – or who should repent and come to church?  Even evolution is not that important.
 
The Traveler

Yes. People have all sorts of private opinion, most of them stupid and practically all of them wrong. That's the common condition of mortality. The problems really begin when people start preaching their beliefs as reasonable, even necessary, interpretations of the gospel.

I think it is a very big mistake to think that the gospel is popular.  It is my understanding that the things of G-d are very unpopular – especially for the natural man.  But the gospel is about those that discard the popular notions and dedicate themselves to the love of G-d and service of their fellow man.
The point of becoming a saint of G-d is not about where someone has been but about the direction (where) they are going.  We should welcome anyone and everyone to the path – and realize it is not about who they were but where the path will take them.
 
The Traveler

I am not saying that I disagree but there are what I could call pitfalls on this path or thought.  What I would ask is how those that are strong proponents of agency or free will reconcile the depth of our choice and our individual investment in being “Saved” in opposition to saved by grace only.   Obviously, there is something brought to the table by those that believe and are saved as opposed to those that are not saved but condemned (Damned).   Scripture tells us that every knee shall bend and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ – but we also know than not every knee that bends and every tongue that confesses that Jesus is the Christ will be saved but that some will weep rather than rejoice.  Something does not quite fit when the glass slipper is being forced on the ugly stepsister.
 
The Traveler

I think it is a very big mistake to think that the gospel is popular.  It is my understanding that the things of G-d are very unpopular – especially for the natural man.  But the gospel is about those that discard the popular notions and dedicate themselves to the love of G-d and service of their fellow man.
The point of becoming a saint of G-d is not about where someone has been but about the direction (where) they are going.  We should welcome anyone and everyone to the path – and realize it is not about who they were but where the path will take them.
 
The Traveler

I am not saying that I disagree but there are what I could call pitfalls on this path or thought.  What I would ask is how those that are strong proponents of agency or free will reconcile the depth of our choice and our individual investment in being “Saved” in opposition to saved by grace only.   Obviously, there is something brought to the table by those that believe and are saved as opposed to those that are not saved but condemned (Damned).   Scripture tells us that every knee shall bend and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ – but we also know than not every knee that bends and every tongue that confesses that Jesus is the Christ will be saved but that some will weep rather than rejoice.  Something does not quite fit when the glass slipper is being forced on the ugly stepsister.
 
The Traveler

I believe there are several problems concerning salvation and exaltation.  Part of the problem is that many do not understand the spiritual nature of things and are stuck on their pre-conceived notion of things.  I will try to put forth my understanding:
First – perfect does not mean to not ever have or be associated with a flaw – In the scriptural sense I believe perfect is more about what a person has or has come into possession of and not about what they do not have.  So, it is not about not having any flaws – it is about being whole, holy, complete or fully engaged or vested.
Second – I believe there are misconceptions concerning about a free spiritual gift from G-d.  Just because something is free does not mean there are no strings attached.  This is so concerning the blessings (even free blessings or gifts) of G-d.  Let me explain my understanding.  Suppose that your father came to you and said, “Son if you will get straight “A’s” for your senior year of high school – I will provide for you a free gift of a brand-new Corvette.  Many in religion do not understand what free means – they interpret free according to what they want to believe so they think that by studying and getting straight “A’s” they earned the Corvette.  They did not earn a single penny of the Corvette.  If they took their report card to any dealership and said, “Where is my free Corvette?”  They would be laughed to scorn and they would go home without even a Corvette tail light – let alone the whole car.  The point is that the Corvette is not nor was it ever free and your getting straight “A’s” did not earn a Corvette.  G-d provided for you something which he pays for under terms he has defined which is only connected to the gift because he owns the Corvette and is willing to give it freely under his terms.
I understand that many want to trifle with G-d with the idea that if there are any strings the gift is not really free.  They demand that their terms apply and so they say free is free.  Fine – then so think and so I believe they are wrong and such logic profits them nothing – so they think they can bargain and demand what they think they have earned – which is nothing and so they are never able to receive the gift based on the principles of the blessing or gift as @laronius pointed out in his post the precedes mine.
 
The Traveler

https://xkcd.com/1901/

This feels right.

In the Book of Mormon Alma organizes the church of God.  After doing so members of the Church begin to sin some grievous sins.  Alma was unsure how the Lord wanted his church to handle such sins so he prayed and asked.  The Lord's answer was quite clear (this is in Mosiah 26)
In verse 29
Therefore I say unto you, Go; and whosoever transgresseth against me, him shall ye judge according to the sins which he has committed; and if he confess his sins before thee and me, and repenteth in the sincerity of his heart, him shall ye forgive, and I will forgive him also.
 
Note how God includes Alma in the Confessional Loop
 
Then in verse 35-36
35 And whosoever repented of their sins and did confess them, them he did number among the people of the church;
36 And those that would not confess their sins and repent of their iniquity, the same were not numbered among the people of the church, and their names were blotted out.
Thus in Alma's day the Lord commanded the sinners of the Church to sit in "Alma's Office."  Alma listened to their confessions (or lack thereof) as the Lord commanded him to and judged them as the Lord commanded him to.  Those that wanted to repent he helped, those that did not he removed from being a part of the church.
The LDS church follows the same pattern today.  The only difference is that we are much larger and President of the Church does not have the time to hear all of us sinners so that responsibly has been given to the Bishop's and Stake President's.
Anyone that teaches otherwise clearly does not understand the scriptures and what they say the Lord has said on such matters.

Gileadi's Isaiah translation is a worthy addition to any LDS library.

I was born of goodly parents – a very respected family of wealth and means (thought as a youth I did not know we were wealthy).   Somethings I have discovered:
    1. Wickedness never was happiness but it was sure fun while it lasted.
     2. Sin would not be so bad if it was not such a hassle to repent (apologize, set aright, change behaviors and explain to G-d why the right thing was not done – so a favor could be asked).
     3. Most sins are relative (many believe sinning is absolute- I was a problem child for my parents who were not shy at all in informing everybody that I was their most difficult child).  In my home, I was wild and out of control – anywhere else in the world I was a model citizen.   For example – three times the FBI came to my home because I had blown something up trying to invent something (the explosion was not on purpose) but when I joined the army and my FBI records reviewed – I was given the opportunity to attend West Point (among other things).
     4. I have also discovered many have very different ideas what is a sin and what is not.
     5. There is no sin where there is no binding law and there is no binding law without a covenant – and without covenant we cannot be exalted.  We will abide that glory (exaltation) according to the law (covenant) to which we abide and are loyal.
     6. Being disciplined is the secret of happiness and the lack of discipline is the scriptural definition of misery.  Never-the-less the natural man feigns discipline and prefers misery and thus is never really happy and always in want or in other words miserable.
     7. We discipline ourselves according to the law to which we love and are willing to abide.
     8. All blessings come from discipline (obedience) according to covenant we are given.  There are no blessings that come from abiding a covenant we do not have.  For example, without a covenant of eternal marriage – it does not matter if we are Celestially disciplined or not – the blessing of a Celestial marriage cannot be given.
      9. Regardless of what others think is a sin and not a sin – if something is good and we turn away from it or do not accept it – it is a sin – the word “something” for sure refers to our personal covenants with G-d.  For example, we cannot keep the Sabbath holy without personal covenants with G-d.  Personal covenants are not defined by our bishop or minister but come only by our personal relationship with G-d.
     10. There are now a lot of items in this list – before I tick someone off for saying more that they do not like – this is the end of my comments.
 
The Traveler

Just a little note - I have no bucket list because I have done and accomplished everything in this life that I desire to do - except endure to the end - which I am sure includes skiing or cycling and reading the scriptures every day except for skiing and cycling on Sunday (unless I can somehow figure out how to get an ox stuck and the only way out is by skiing or cycling.  But then my wife still wants to travel so there are many days I miss skiing or cycling.  Yah, I even done the zip line thing but through a rain forest (jungle) full of monkeys
What I have learned – most things (except skiing, cycling and scripture study) require someone to do it with or there is not much reason to do it.
 
The Traveler

@MrShorty -  @Vort is correct in recognizing ancient text as poetic.  A short explanation of why.  Anciently it was difficult to copy and publish texts so they were written in a poetic style which included vast amounts of symbolism.  The poetic style was utilized so that the text could be memorized as an oral rendition or tradition.  This ancient style was changed by a historian we know as Homer and his creation of the “Iliad” and the “Odyssey”.  All things that precedes Homer are called “Pre-Historic” all records and associated events after Homer are referred to as “Historic” and are divided into fiction and non-fiction. 
The Book of Abraham comes to us from Abraham in ancient Egypt at the same time a very advanced mathematically cult appeared in Egypt.  This mathematical cult believed their mathematical knowledge was divine and therefore sacred and only shared within their religious cult’s priesthood.  We do not know a lot about the cult because of it secret-ness.  But because of their particular mathematics we do know that they believed that the entire universe was “linked” or ordered by ratios.  Using mathematic ratios, they developed the harmonic triad in music and established the ordered ratios of colors.  This cult was very advanced but the point is that their science was based around ratios and the way to describe something and prove it to be real or true was to establish the ratio of it to a known ratio. 
I would add in all the debates I have seen concerning the Book of Abraham – this bit of history is overlooked but for me the fact that this piece of history was missing at the time of Joseph Smith and would not be unlocked until long after the discovery of the Rosetta Stone.  Definitely proving Joseph to be a prophet.
But we do have another document to help us understand the Book of Abraham – in particular, chapter 3 – that is written in the style of modern Newtonian physics in mind.  This is Doctrine and Covenants section 88 which serves as a second witness and a possible means to help unlock divine mysteries.   I would also point out that only by the power of the Holy Ghost and obedience to covenant are the mysteries made manifested.  I have learned by sad experience that trying to explain my understanding of such mysteries will cause unwarranted debate over what scriptures are communicating – obviously, a case of casting pearls before swine.  But hopefully this understanding of the Book of Abraham will assist anyone seeking better understanding.
 
The Traveler

There is a reason it is used in psychological operations on prisoners and considered "music torture". Ugh...

Something interesting in John Gee's statements that stood out to me.


Perhaps this is the key to understanding something like this -- to remember that ancient Old World scripture was written under geocentric cosmologies. Under a geocentric model, where slower moving objects are farther away, it makes some sense that God's place in such a cosmology would be the farthest out, the highest up, the outside most object.
Perhaps an interesting thought that occurred to me -- assuming Ancient, old world scripture is written with a geocentric cosmology in mind, my 21st century "enlightened" cosmology (with billions of "island universes" and vast distances where we are not even confident that we can see the entire universe from the earth and objects orbiting objects which orbit larger objects with no discernible "center" and so on) seems superior (or at least more accurate) than what is presented in scripture. And, yet, I see many in Mormondom and broader Christianity who want to hold the Biblical cosmology as not only superior in a theistic way but more accurate in a scientific way (and SS teachers like one this last Sunday who take backhanded stabs at the Big Bang theory). What I see myself going through here is a bit of a re-evaluation of exactly what scripture is and exactly what it is useful for. It becomes less and less a scientific text (trending towards a strictly spiritual/religious text??)

Tim thought that the humor of the Book of Mormon musical was more mean spirited than funny – I liked his example of good religious humor – when he said that he did not think that Joseph actually gave the golden plates back to G-d – He believes that Joseph forgot where he misplaced them and made up the story of giving them back to G-d so he would not have to explain losing them to his wife.  Not only does Tim’s explanation make sense – it is really funny.
 
The Traveler

I think we may be talking about two different things.  One being the gifts of the spirit which are divine connections that link mankind to divine instruction and guidance through various means and various individuals – a good example of this principle is outlined in Moroni Chapter 10.   -  Stating that the gifts of the spirit are manifested in different ways through different individuals but are for the benefit of all.
The other item is, in essence, organizational positions within the kingdom of G-d or specifically positions in the church – such as Sunday School teacher, organized charity within a congregation (Relief Society – president) or youth leader (minister).  The LDS doctrine and principle is that G-d will reveal to the person with the keys, (keys in respect to the kingdom) who is to be called and at the same time reveal to the individual that they will be called to serve in that capacity.  The example given in scripture (Article of Faith) is when Moses was told to call Aaron into service to help gather Israel and at the same time Aaron was given revelation to go help Moses.   The difference here is that the organization that G-d uses for his work among man is called a Kingdom and is a structured organization with apostles, prophets, teachers and other “officers” that are called to serve within that “Kingdom”.
In our modern society, we do not refer to the kingdom as much as we do “The Church” which brings organization to the official congregation(s) that are organized (ordered) and established by G-d.  I have no problem with men organizing to do good – but I do object when men organize themselves and call it the G-d’s.  Just as there is only one true and living G-d – there is only one true and living Kingdom of G-d or Church.
 
The Traveler

In the quest for truth – I understand that there are divine principles that comprise what we call “The Gospel of Jesus Christ”.  But I have discovered (at least for myself as a scientist and engineer) that there are many basic truths that are mostly pursued by the scientific community (sometimes completely rejected by some in the religious Christian community) yet these truths contribute a great deal to the wellbeing, knowledge and strength of our society and education in general.  I am a little surprised that with your talents you are not that interested in seeking a broader spectrum of truths.
 
The Traveler

Tim thought that the humor of the Book of Mormon musical was more mean spirited than funny – I liked his example of good religious humor – when he said that he did not think that Joseph actually gave the golden plates back to G-d – He believes that Joseph forgot where he misplaced them and made up the story of giving them back to G-d so he would not have to explain losing them to his wife.  Not only does Tim’s explanation make sense – it is really funny.
 
The Traveler

Tim thought that the humor of the Book of Mormon musical was more mean spirited than funny – I liked his example of good religious humor – when he said that he did not think that Joseph actually gave the golden plates back to G-d – He believes that Joseph forgot where he misplaced them and made up the story of giving them back to G-d so he would not have to explain losing them to his wife.  Not only does Tim’s explanation make sense – it is really funny.
 
The Traveler

Thank you @zil that does help in understanding verse 8 better. If I understand Nibley correctly Paul is prophesying of a time when the apostasy would take place and the gifts of prophecy, tongues and spiritual knowledge would be taken away but faith, hope and charity would still be around, which is interesting because in verses 1-2 Paul makes it clear that charity trumps the other gifts. Not that the other gifts are unimportant but that charity gives it all meaning. So do verses 9-12 pertain to Paul's time or the apostasy?