Ruben

God created Adam and Eve, they had sons and daughters who had relationships with each other. We must interpret that humanity is the result of incestuous relationships?

Is it difficult to think that the Jesus of the New Testament who did not condemn adulterous women was the same one who in the Old Testament had them stoned? John 8:7 ...He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. Leviticus 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. How do you explain this to me without beating around the bush?

Should the book of Job be considered a true event or is it simply a fictional story for educational purposes to teach us the principle of patience?

I would be curious to know how the Nephite and Lamanite armies moved during their battles and pursuits. If it is true that horses were introduced to America by Europeans. Did the armies travel on foot or did they have other means of transportation? The Book of Mormon does not explicitly mention this.

Numbers 31:17 17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. Joshua 7:24-25 24 And Joshua, and all Israel with him, took Achan the son of Zerah, and the silver, and the garment, and the wedge of gold, and his sons, and his daughters, and his oxen, and his asses, and his sheep, and his tent, and all that he had: and they brought them unto the valley of Achor. 25 And Joshua said, Why hast thou troubled us? the Lord shall trouble thee this day. And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones.

Thank you LDSGator. I can easily accept that Jehovah is terrible to his enemies as well as merciful to those who love him (even though this is a very human characteristic), what I find difficult to understand is the fact that He punishes children with the same cruelty with which He treats adults while Jesus said: "let the children come to me..." Doesn't that seem like a contradiction to you?

What meaning should we give to the tower of Babel? Has God truly confused the language of men for fear that they would build a tower to reach heaven?

...I like to think that God is our heavenly father who loves us and wants to forgive us for our mistakes, as I do with my children. Don't make me live in fear of being punished by a terrible and vengeful God.🤔

Do you really think that we, today, are better than ancient peoples? I have some doubts. Did ancient peoples really have tougher necks than ours?

1. This is a possibility, but in this case we are describing an unyielding God the Father versus a merciful Jesus. Like the good cop and the bad cop. 2. We want to compare a Jesus who verbally rages against the Pharisees or a Jesus who expels merchants from the temple with a Jehovah who carries out a "genocide" with a flood.

Do you need references? There are too many. In my original question there is a reference to Numbers 31, which you apparently missed. However the OT is full of stories of wars, the Lord commands the children of Israel to make war on the peoples who inhabited the promised land, he sends to kill without mercy, men, women and children. He calls himself Lord of Hosts. He defines himself as jealous, vindictive and furious with his enemies. The universal flood where all humanity (except 8 people) was exterminated, men, women, children, animals. The law of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth as opposed to the commandment to love your enemies. Nahum 1:2 God is jealous, and the Lord revengeth; the Lord revengeth, and is furious; the Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserves wrath for his enemies. And only a few examples... Exodus, 32:27 Leviticus, 26:27-29 Numbers, 25:9 Numbers, 31:17-18 Numbers, 31:31-40 Deuteronomy, 2:33-34 Deuteronomy, 3:6 Deuteronomy, 20:16 Deuteronomy, 28:53 Joshua, 6:21-27 Joshua, 7:19-26 Joshua, 10:32-33 Joshua, 11:20 1 Samuel, 15:7-8 2 Samuel, 24:15

Curiosity : In the Italian version it was translated with the word "donna" which currently means woman but in the past its meaning was different. The Italian "donna" derives from the Latin "domina", (lady, married woman, mistress of the house). In fact, Italians call the mother of Jesus, "Madonna" (lat. mea domina) which means "my lady". "Mona" also has the same root. The famous painting by Leonardo Da Vinci representing Lisa Gherardini, i.e. "Mona" Lisa, wife of Francesco del Giocondo (therefore the "Gioconda"). So when Jesus called his mother or other women "donna" it was the same as calling her "lady." In fact, calling one's mother "signora" (lady) was in use in Italy until not so long ago.

When Jesus addressed his mother he called her "woman" instead of mother. Nowadays this name for a mother seems a little rude. How was it seen in Jesus' time?

Seems the author was not the brother of Jared... ... The one who wrote this story was Ether, and he was a descendant of Coriantor. (Ether 1:6)

My favorite character in scripture is Jared's brother. He had so much faith that he saw the finger of the Lord before he was born on earth and because of his faith the Lord could not hide from him. Curiously, his name does not appear in the Book of Mormon. In your opinion, why such anonymity? Has there ever been such a case in the scriptures?

Members generally avoid asking certain questions in church for fear of being misinterpreted and labeled as protesters, so many doctrines are taboo, they are not talked about for fear of offending someone and they remain unresolved, sometimes causing more damage in silence than what they would have done by discussing it.

The scriptures say that God does not change, He does not repent, He is the same yesterday, today and forever. We know that Jehovah, the implacable God of the Old Testament (see Numbers 31), is the same Jesus Christ who lived in the flesh and was full of mercy and love towards humanity. How can we reconcile Jehovah's great cruelty with Jesus' great love? What kind of God should we expect after this life, the loving character of Jesus or the terrible character of Jehovah?

This introduces another principle, namely: "Are prophets infallible?" Perhaps we can believe that Brigham Young was a prophet and yet still accept that he made a mistake. Prophets are not infallible, after all they are human and as the ancients said "errare humanum est".

I recently read the chapter where Talmage talks about this topic but it did not satisfy my curiosity. He covers the topic but not in as much depth as I would like.

Do you mean that President Spencer W. Kimball, prophet of the Lord, really believed that it was a divine doctrine?

Your explanation actually makes sense however this situation is a little different than the situation you describe. In our case the initiative did not come from the Lord but from the leaders of the Church. President Spencer W. Kimball found it necessary to ask the Lord to eliminate the practice. If it was a human error and not a divine one that had continued for 126 years, it would not have been sufficient to admit the human error, apologize and abandon the practice without inconveniencing the Lord. Why did leaders believe a revelation from God was necessary to abolish a wrong practice? Here is an excerpt from the official statement 2: "... Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to change this practice and sought guidance in prayer. The revelation came to Church President Spencer W. Kimball and was disseminated to other leaders in the Salt Lake Temple on June 1, 1978. This revelation removed any racial restrictions that once applied to the priesthood. "

In autumn 1975 I experienced a mystical crisis and started looking for God. Until then I considered myself an atheist, although I was taught the Catholic faith. A friend of mine lent me a book of Mormon that he had received from the missionaries who had visited his home. Reading the book of Mormon was the key to my conversion. I couldn't resist its spiritual power. Finally my friend and I accepted the invitation to join the church through baptism.

I know this is a sensitive topic and I don't want to be rude or offensive to anyone, my question is simple to understand. Since the time of Brigham Young, several theories have emerged to exclude blacks from exercising the priesthood, with the explanation that they were not very courageous in their pre-existence or were descendants of Cain or even descendants of Canan, son of Noah. Since none of these theories or explanations are today accepted as official Church doctrine, but merely human theories, why was it necessary for divine revelation to put an end to this practice?

If we take into consideration what Iaronius said about the possible lack of physical attraction between Adam and Eve when they were in the immortal state we can reasonably believe that the same characteristics will be present after the resurrection. After all, why would an immortal being need to reproduce himself?

I met the church in 1975 in the same year as the country opened to the preaching of the gospel after the 1974 revolution. In the summer of 1976 I was baptized at the age of 20 and was one of the first converts in Portugal, the following year I left for the Spain-Barcelona mission. At the end of my mission I moved to Italy where I got married and started a family. I have four children and five grandchildren. I have served in various positions in the church in both Portugal and Italy. I am currently retired and now live between Portugal and Italy.