Do you really concur with these statements?

[KristofferUmfrey]

So what?

This stuff gets so old.

Do you really think posting this is going to wake everyone up to the flaws in the Church?

Do you really think it's not something we, including this ex-Mormon, haven't heard over and over?

Do you really think we don't know the "thinking has been done" comment is a weak and shallow "anti" strategy to condemn the Church?

If you want to confront latter-day Saints, there are other and better arguments, though you still will not change anyone's heart.

Give it a rest already.

Elphaba

I just go with the topics as they come up. Ben R.'s "good enough for me." statement about Elder Oaks and white shirts prompted my current wave of conversation. If you don't like it, don't participate.

[SeattleTruthSeeker]

I just go with the topics as they come up. Ben R.'s "good enough for me." statement about Elder Oaks and white shirts prompted my current wave of conversation. If you don't like it, don't participate.

Actually, the request for the validity of your sources is being asked. Why are you having a hard time stating where you received your sources?

Are you honestly afraid that by relinquishing your sources to be verified and checked out you are going to be proven in error of your argument? If this is the case, then actually the one who needs to remove themselves from the conversation is the one who started the conversation to begin with.

You made an accusation and now that the proof of that accusation is being requested, the source where this information is coming from is being requested and not granted shows the lack of honesty and ability to carry out an intellectual conversation to begin with.

[KristofferUmfrey]

Let us try some honesty again. Your avoidance of direct questions leaves me to wonder what you are trying to hide. So I will ask my questions again.

Question 1: How many volumes of the Journal of Discourses have you read (where exactly did you get your quote?) I doubt it was from reading all 26 volumes of Journal of Discourses.

Question 2: Where did you obtain “Ward Teaching” material that is currently out of publication? Again I doubt you got it from any LDS publication, maybe some web site?

Since “Ward Teaching” material is out of publication I would like to know how you checked out the validity of that quote. I would like to check out “your sources” - the real ones.

The Traveler

I wasn't aware you really intended for me to answer your obviously ridiculous questions. Have I read the entire JOD? No

I have them at my disposal to check the context of any given quote.

Do I have access to old "out of publication" Ward teaching materials? No (and I never claimed I did)

Have I read said Ward Teaching materials? No

Where did I find the quote? I remembered it from various things I've read through the years googled it and copied and pasted the first site that quoted it. I have no clue what the site was.

I have nothing to hide.

[KristofferUmfrey]

Actually, the request for the validity of your sources is being asked. Why are you having a hard time stating where you received your sources?

Are you honestly afraid that by relinquishing your sources to be verified and checked out you are going to be proven in error of your argument? If this is the case, then actually the one who needs to remove themselves from the conversation is the one who started the conversation to begin with.

You made an accusation and now that the proof of that accusation is being requested, the source where this information is coming from is being requested and not granted shows the lack of honesty and ability to carry out an intellectual conversation to begin with.

The sources are included with the quotes.

[bmy-]

I just go with the topics as they come up. Ben R.'s "good enough for me." statement about Elder Oaks and white shirts prompted my current wave of conversation. If you don't like it, don't participate.

Or you could realize that it is a shallow argument and you would be better off addressing doctrinal issues if you actually intended to interact and learn from the discussion.. (Apologies if you weren't being snarky. Alot of your posts seem full of frustration.)

To answer your question:

When the prophet speaks I give it serious consideration. I can't imagine very many instances where we [the Prophet and I] would not come to the same conclusions. It's a non-issue. He seems to have a good track record for giving advice.

[KristofferUmfrey]

I admit, I shouldn't have opened this topic. As I stated in my "A Bit Overbearing" topic, I apologize, and will tone it down, and will try to focus on doctrinal disagreements using the Bible and Book of Mormon as my guide.

If Pam wants to shut the topic down, she can have at it.

[Elphaba]

I just go with the topics as they come up. Ben R.'s "good enough for me." statement about Elder Oaks and white shirts prompted my current wave of conversation.

I don't buy it. The way you worded your OP is straight out of "Anti-Mormon 101."

If you don't like it, don't participate.

Obviously the reason I did participate is because I don't like it. We do things like that here.

Elphaba

[MarginOfError]

I just go with the topics as they come up. Ben R.'s "good enough for me." statement about Elder Oaks and white shirts prompted my current wave of conversation. If you don't like it, don't participate.

Once again, reading the reference in question might help you understand something. Elder Oaks quoted Elder Holland in this October's Conference. You can read the entire talk. Ben's comments referred to the explanation for why Priesthood holders wear white shirts to officiate in the Sacrament. This was not done by way of commandment. It was done by was of suggestion, and rationale for the suggestion was given. Again, perhaps you should try reading the source.

Where did I find the quote? I remembered it from various things I've read through the years googled it and copied and pasted the first site that quoted it. I have no clue what the site was.

I have nothing to hide.

So now I'm supposed to trust your incredible memory for all of the context of this quote. For some reason I'm having a hard time conjuring up that level of trust.

[Hemidakota]

Two cities? What's the other one besides Enoch? (which could be a whole other discussion, but I'll defer)

No problem....the other city was called Salem...where the current Jerusalem is located today. These were the same individuals [members of that city] who visited Abraham and was told to save Lot and others from the five cities of the plain.

[KristofferUmfrey]

No problem....the other city was called Salem...where the current Jerusalem is located today. These were the same individuals [members of that city] who visited Abraham and was told to save Lot and others from the five cities of the plain.

Hemi-

Could you please provide the verses that show the city was translated?

Thanks in advance.

[Guest ceeboo]

I don't buy it. The way you worded your OP is straight out of "Anti-Mormon 101."

Elphaba

Hi ya Elphaba,

Is that really a course ?

What degree would that be in ?

How many credits is it worth ?

Thanks for the answers that are coming soon :)

Peace,

Carl

[KristofferUmfrey]

Once again, reading the reference in question might help you understand something. Elder Oaks quoted Elder Holland in this October's Conference. You can read the entire talk. Ben's comments referred to the explanation for why Priesthood holders wear white shirts to officiate in the Sacrament. This was not done by way of commandment. It was done by was of suggestion, and rationale for the suggestion was given. Again, perhaps you should try reading the source.

So now I'm supposed to trust your incredible memory for all of the context of this quote. For some reason I'm having a hard time conjuring up that level of trust.

That's fine, you can believe what you like about me. I know and the Lord knows how much study and prayer I have put into finding truth.

As I stated this topic really wasn't necessary and instead of continuing to insult each other back and forth I have decided to drop it. But by all means if you and Elphaba want to continue, go right ahead.

[applepansy]

"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan--it is God's Plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give directions, it should mark the end of controversy, God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God."

Ward Teachers Message, Deseret News, Church Section p. 5, May 26, 1945

Also included in the Improvement Era, June 1945 (which was the official church magazine before the Ensign)"

"Heber C. Kimball, First Councilor to Brigham Young, exhorted the Mormon people to "... learn to do as you are told, ... if you are told by your leader to do a thing, do it, none of your business whether it is right or wrong" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p.32)."

I have the complete JOD at my disposal so I checked to make sure the Kimball quote is in context.

When it comes to commandments from the God . . .well YES!!!! I know that our prophets are the mouthpiece of God. Its a faith issue.

applepansy

[Hemidakota]

The Book of Genesis 33

Jacob and Esau meet: Jacob goeth to Salem, where he raiseth an altar. 1 And Jacob lifting ..., he called the name of the place Socoth, that is, Tents. 18 And he passed over to Salem, a city of the Sichemites, which is in the land of Chanaan, after that he was come from Mesopotamia and pitched before the cyte 19 and bought a

JST Genesis 14

17 And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine; and... this order; therefore he obtained peace in Salem, and was called the Prince of peace. 34 And..., and obtained heaven, and sought for the city of Enoch which God had before taken

The Book of Judges 1

This city was divided into two; one part was called Jebus, the other Salem...Cinite, the kinsman of Moses, went up from the city of palms, with the children of Juda, into the wilderness...land of Hetthim, and built there a city, and called it Luza: which is so

The Book of Alma 10

Lord. Now this Melchizedek was a king over the land of Salem; and his people had waxed strong... called the Prince of Peace, for he was the king of Salem; and he did reign under ... Amulek were commanded to depart out of that city; and they departed, and came

The Book of Alma 13... of the Lord. 17 Now this Melchizedek was a king over the land of Salem; and his people had waxed strong in ...behold, angels are declaring it unto many at this time in our land; and this is for the purpose of preparing the hearts of the children of men to

[KristofferUmfrey]

When it comes to commandments from the God . . .well YES!!!! I know that our prophets are the mouthpiece of God. Its a faith issue.

applepansy

I am happy you feel that way. Keep being the best Mormon you know how.

[Hemidakota]

Andrew C. Skinner, D. Kelly Ogden, David B. Galbraith, Jerusalem: The Eternal City

From the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) and other historical documents we know only a little about Jerusalem before the fourteenth century before Christ—the approximate time of Israelite penetration into the land. Some scholars claim that the earliest occurrence of a city called Salim may be in commercial documents from Ebla in Syria about 2400 B.C. 1 The name Rushalimum or Urusalimum occurs in Egyptian Execration Texts (incantations against Egypt's enemies) between 1900 and 1800 B.C. 2 Half a millennium later the El Amarna Letters (diplomatic correspondence between local city-states and the ruling power in Egypt at the time, Amenhotep IV or Akhenaton) 3 mention the land of Jerusalem as a non-Israelite entity and, in fact, name the king, Abdi-Heba. Six of the El Amarna Letters were sent by Abdi-Heba from his city called Urusalim.

Another half-millennium later the city is attested in an inscription from Sennacherib as Ursalimmu or Uruslimmu. 4 A Nabataean inscription shows the Aramaic form Ursalem; a Mandaic document preserves the form Urashalem; a Syriac, Urishlem; and an Arabic, Ursalimu. 5 For two thousand years, then, the texts, whether in Egyptian, Akkadian, or West Semitic languages, consistently present Jerusalem under the name meaning "City of Shalem," or "City of Peace or Perfection." 6 The city was known by the various linguistic adaptations of the name Jerusalem long before the Israelite incursion and settlement of the land.

There is an apparent connection between the name-title Shalem and Salem, where Melchizedek, a prince of peace, reigned as king in a city called "Peace." The toponym Salem seems to be a short form of the later Jerusalem. 7 Archaeological evidence from this period, which is usually identified as the Early Bronze Age (third millennium B.C.), consists of pottery, even painted ware, found in the earliest levels of excavation in the southeastern spur of Jerusalem. Remains of the eastern city wall and tower fortification at the city gate, all from the later Middle Bronze Age—the period of the Patriarchs—have also been uncovered in excavations. 8

Besides the meager archaeological remains from these early periods, the Bible provides scant details about persons and events of the time. Following is what we are told about an encounter between Melchizedek and Abraham, for example:

And the king of Sodom went out to meet [Abram] . . . at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale.

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he [Abram] gave him [Melchizedek] tithes of all. (Gen. 14:17-20)

For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness [i.e., the name Melchizedek], and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace. . . .

Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. (Heb. 7:1-4; emphasis added)

Modern revelation gives us essential instruction about the roles of Melchizedek in ancient Salem. Read, in particular, Genesis 14:25-40 in the Joseph Smith Translation; Alma 13:1-19; Doctrine and Covenants 84:6-26; 107:1-4.

Learning about Melchizedek and Abraham from Firsthand Experience

In October 1983 about twenty students with the Brigham Young University Jerusalem Study Abroad program and their instructor began a three-day journey in the footsteps of Abraham and Isaac from Beersheba to Mount Moriah in Jerusalem (see Bible Map 1). That first morning as we rode the bus to Beersheba to begin the fifty-three-mile walk, we asked ourselves, "Why did the Lord send Abraham (who was well over a hundred years old by this time) more than fifty miles away, and uphill? Why not send him to one of the nearby hills in the Negev? What was so special about Mount Moriah to the Lord or to Abraham?"

We thought it seemed likely that Moriah might have already been a significantly sacred spot in the days of Abraham. Maybe Melchizedek had a holy Temple or sanctuary at Salem there before, and perhaps Abraham knew something about the great expiatory drama that would unfold there in the meridian of time. The prophet Jacob in the Book of Mormon taught that Abraham's poignant trial, the offering up of his son Isaac, was a "similitude of God and His Only Begotten Son" (Jacob 4:5; see also Moses 5:7; D&C 138:12-13). Abraham and Isaac not only experienced a similar ordeal, with similar deep and agonizing feelings, but accomplished it at the same place—at Moriah, in Salem/Jerusalem—where the Father would later sacrifice his Beloved Son.

- The first verse of Genesis 22 has God "tempting" Abraham. The Hebrew verb is nissah, which means "to test, try, or prove." What was the test? "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of" (Gen. 22:2). Abraham himself had nearly been sacrificed earlier in his life to the idolatrous gods in his Chaldean homeland. He himself had been laid out on a sacrificial altar, with the cold blade raised to shed his blood, when the angel of the Lord appeared to rescue him (see Abr. 1:7-16). Abraham knew how repulsive human sacrifice was and how foreign such a practice is to the true worship of our Heavenly Father. But Abraham also knew that one of God's expressed purposes for his children during mortality is to "prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them" (Abr. 3:25; emphasis added).

Abraham was called on to sacrifice, to give up, the best he had, just as our Heavenly Father would give the best he had. Genesis 22 does not give many details of time or place; the message is most important. But there is one poignant detail: "thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest." God himself knew the magnitude of the trial. Paul wrote that "by faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son" (Heb. 11:17; emphasis added).

Previous Events in the Land of Moriah

Abraham's instruction to go to the "land of Moriah" for the offering of his son is the first biblical reference to a place called Moriah. Numerous and long-standing Jewish and Christian traditions, as well as the historian Josephus, all support the thesis that Moriah is the same place as Jerusalem's Temple Mount. 9 The biblical record itself indicates that "Solomon began to build the house of the Lord at Jerusalem in mount Moriah, where the Lord appeared unto David" (2 Chron. 3:1).

Partly because of the sanctity of the place, David purchased the rock on Moriah to make an altar to the Lord (see 2 Sam. 24:18-25), and he instructed Solomon to build the holiest edifice in ancient Israel at that spot. But what about Abraham, a millennium earlier? Did he make the long strenuous trek to that same hill to enact one of the most stirring and emotional scenes in all of human history because there was something sacred about that place already?

- We do know that Abraham had met with Melchizedek 10 sometime before "at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale [identified in Bible times and today as the confluence of the Kidron, Tyropoeon, and Hinnom valleys on the southeast of the City of David—i.e., Old Testament Jerusalem]" (Gen. 14:17). 11

We know, too, that Melchizedek ruled over his people at Salem, later called Jerusalem. 12 An ancient Israelite psalmist used the names interchangeably in synonymous parallelism, "In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion" (Ps. 76:2). Melchizedek was a type of the Savior: both are called "King of Righteousness" (the meaning of the name Malki-zedek or Melchizedek), and both are referred to as "Prince of Peace" (JST Gen. 14:; Isa. 9:6). Melchizedek grew up as a prince and then reigned as king in Salem, reigning under or after his father (see Alma 13:18). Jesus too was of royal lineage and if the country had not been under Roman subjugation at the time, Jesus might have been king in Jerusalem; as it was, he was accepted by the righteous as their true King. Melchizedek converted his wicked people to righteousness and established such a great degree of peace and righteousness that they "obtained heaven"; they were translated to join the City of Enoch (JST Gen. 14:34); 13 Jesus provided the way for all humankind to obtain heaven and be exalted. And we suppose, therefore, that Melchizedek and the Savior both accomplished their mortal missions at the same place.

Melchizedek was both king and God's high priest ("Melchizedek was such a great high priest"; D&C 107:2). The holy priesthood of God was thus exercised in Jerusalem a thousand years before David established the priestly orders and Solomon built the Temple. Melchizedek was also keeper of the "storehouse of God" at Salem (JST Gen. 14:37). Abraham paid tithes to that storehouse. (Anciently, Israel's Temple also served as the storehouse and treasury of the kingdom.) How could a great high priest function in his priesthood without a tabernacle or Temple? Or how could a people establish such righteousness as to be transferred from this telestial world without first having the blessings of a Temple, where holy ordinances are performed? 14

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that the main object of gathering the people of God in any age of the world is "to build unto the Lord a house whereby He could reveal unto His people the ordinances of His house and the glories of His kingdom, and teach people the way of salvation; for there are certain ordinances and principles that, when they are taught and practiced, must be done in a place or house built for that purpose." 15

- It is possible that a Temple or sanctuary existed on Moriah during Abraham's early life. Josephus wrote that "[Melchizedek] the Righteous King, for such he really was; on which account he was [there] the first priest of God, and first built a temple, [there,] and called the city Jerusalem, which was formerly called Salem." 16 During the time Melchizedek was the Lord's presiding authority on the earth ("there were many before him, and also there were many afterwards, but none were greater"; Alma 13:19), he and Abraham lived not far from each other in Canaan. Abraham early in his life had wanted to be "a prince of peace" (Abr. 1:2) as was Melchizedek.

Abraham received the priesthood from Melchizedek (see D&C 84:14), though we do not know when or where. 17 Abraham tells us: "I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness [possibly a title, denoting God, and his Son, who is called "Son of Righteousness"; see 2 Ne. 26:9; Ether 9:22; recall that Malki-zedek means "King of Righteousness"], desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers. It was conferred upon me from the fathers" (Abr. 1:2-3), by which we understand (with the help of D&C 84:14) that Melchizedek bestowed on him the priesthood either in the land of the Chaldeans or in the land of Salem. When Abraham "sought for [his] appointment unto the Priesthood" (Abr. 1:4), he either traveled to Canaan or else Melchizedek traveled to Mesopotamia. 18

We may conclude that for Abraham, Moriah was already a place with holy associations when he took Isaac there to be bound and offered up. Past, present, and future continually come together at this sacred space. To be sure, the mount was to be a place of centuries of sacrifices in anticipation of the Great Sacrifice that would be accomplished there in the future.

As with Bethel ("house of God") and Gethsemane ("oil press") and other toponyms that have particular meaning for the historical events that occurred at those places, so the name of Abraham's mount is significant. Moriah is composed of two words: mor, which comes from the verb ra'ah, meaning "to see" (and having also a host of other meanings, including "to provide"), and -iah, or -jah, which is a contraction of the Divine Name YHWH (Jehovah). The name of the place, Moriah, could have something to do with where the Lord himself would be seen or provided.

Abraham and Isaac: Three Days to Moriah

Three days was a lot of time for Abraham to think about what was going to happen. On day two they passed through the area where a future town would be called El Khalil or Hebron, meaning "the friend," referring to Abraham, "the Friend of God" (James 2:23). Then "on the third day" (cf. Luke 24:46) Abraham "lifted up his eyes [as one would do who is walking along], and saw the place afar off" (Gen. 22:4). The area of the Mount of Olives and Mount Moriah can be seen from the south on the Road of the Patriarchs, about ten miles away.

Abraham laid the wood upon Isaac to carry to the place of sacrifice; Jesus also carried the wood, the cross, to the place of his death (cf. John 19:17). Isaac then asked the heartrending question, "My father: . . . Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" (Gen. 22:7). Abraham prophetically responded, "My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering" (v. 8). The Hebrew text is Elohim (God) jir'eh (again the verb ra'ah, "to see or provide"). That is, God the Father will provide a lamb for a burnt offering. "Burnt offering" in the Hebrew is olah (from the verb la'alot, "to go up"); literally, it means "that which goes up to heaven from the altar." The offering had to be a perfect male, or zakhar tammim. A male lamb without blemish was offered by individuals and the nation as a symbol of atonement for sins. According to Leviticus 1:11, when a lamb was slain on the great altar of the Temple, it was slain on the north side of the altar. Golgotha, the place of Jesus' crucifixion, was on the north side of the ridge of Moriah. 19

- When they came to the designated place, Abraham built an altar, laid the wood on it, and bound Isaac; Jesus, too, was bound on wood on his altar of sacrifice. Isaac himself was willing to carry out the sacrifice, as later the Savior was willing to accomplish his Sacrifice. It was probably late in the afternoon when Abraham and Isaac arrived at Moriah and finished constructing their altar; Temple procedure later stipulated that passover lambs be slain later in the afternoon.

When Abraham had passed his test and the angel of the Lord was sent to stop the sacrifice of the son, a ram (not a lamb, as promised in Gen. 22:8) was substituted, and "Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen" (v. 14).

In Genesis 22:8, Elohim (the Father) had promised to provide a lamb for sacrifice; in verse 14 Jehovah (the Son) will appear: Jehovah will be seen or provided. This phrase in Hebrew is b'har YHWH jera'eh, and should read in English: "In the mount [many manuscripts read bahar hazeh, "in this mount," meaning Moriah] the Lord shall be seen, or, the Lord shall be provided." 20

All of this clearly signifies that Abraham knew something of the meaning of his similitude sacrifice. He had uttered prophetically—not unintentionally or accidentally—that our Heavenly Father would provide a lamb as a sacrifice or atonement for sin, and he knew that the Son would be that sacrifice, to be made at that very place. Said Jesus, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad" (John 8:56).

The Significance of Mount Moriah in Salem

It seems the mount of Moriah was already a spiritually important location to Abraham, and the similitude sacrifice he was commanded to make was to be carried out on the very mountain where Jesus would suffer in the meridian of time. Moriah is the mount of sacrifice. There have been altars on it from the days of Melchizedek, Abraham, David, and Jesus. All sacrifices offered from Moriah were supposed to be a type of the Great Sacrifice.

If a Temple and altar and holy place of offering existed on Moriah two thousand years before Christ and during the meridian of time, then what about A.D. 2000—our own day? Knowing how history, prophecy, and divine symbolism always come full circle (God's course is "one eternal round"), we cannot help believing that there will once again be a holy Temple at that place. 21

As the Prophet Joseph Smith taught, the object of gathering in any age is to build a Temple. Where father Abraham unwaveringly offered his beloved son, and where Father in Heaven offered his beloved Son, at that same mountain the Lord will again be seen, when "the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple" (Mal. 3:1).

[KristofferUmfrey]

The Book of Genesis 33

Jacob and Esau meet: Jacob goeth to Salem, where he raiseth an altar. 1 And Jacob lifting ..., he called the name of the place Socoth, that is, Tents. 18 And he passed over to Salem, a city of the Sichemites, which is in the land of Chanaan, after that he was come from Mesopotamia and pitched before the cyte 19 and bought a

JST Genesis 14

17 And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine; and... this order; therefore he obtained peace in Salem, and was called the Prince of peace. 34 And..., and obtained heaven, and sought for the city of Enoch which God had before taken

The Book of Judges 1

This city was divided into two; one part was called Jebus, the other Salem...Cinite, the kinsman of Moses, went up from the city of palms, with the children of Juda, into the wilderness...land of Hetthim, and built there a city, and called it Luza: which is so

The Book of Alma 10

Lord. Now this Melchizedek was a king over the land of Salem; and his people had waxed strong... called the Prince of Peace, for he was the king of Salem; and he did reign under ... Amulek were commanded to depart out of that city; and they departed, and came

The Book of Alma 13... of the Lord. 17 Now this Melchizedek was a king over the land of Salem; and his people had waxed strong in ...behold, angels are declaring it unto many at this time in our land; and this is for the purpose of preparing the hearts of the children of men to

I apologize Hemi, I fail to see where the verses declare that Salem was translated. Perhaps "obtained heaven" or "sought for the city of Enoch", but even those verses are vague enough to cast some doubt onto the theory.

Did Joseph Smith ever declare that Salem was translated?

[KristofferUmfrey]

Andrew C. Skinner, D. Kelly Ogden, David B. Galbraith, Jerusalem: The Eternal City

You posted this while I was writing my response to the other post, give me a chance to read it.

[applepansy]

One more thing, I trust the Prophet. He is the prophet because he wouldn't command anything that is contrary to the will of God.

applepansy

[KristofferUmfrey]

One more thing, I trust the Prophet. He is the prophet because he wouldn't command anything that is contrary to the will of God.

applepansy

And you are within your rights to believe all that.

[KristofferUmfrey]

You posted this while I was writing my response to the other post, give me a chance to read it.

Doesn't really change my view much. Like I said the verses are vague enough, "obtained heaven" could just mean worthy enough for exaltation, but I'm open to the idea.

Kinda off topic... "sought for the city of Enoch"?

Interesting phrase, it like after the were translated, if indeed they were, they began some journey to find Enoch's city, like it's somewhere off in space that it needs to be searched for. Yeah, I pick up on weird things sometimes.

[applepansy]

And you are within your rights to believe all that.

Yes. . . of course Yes. He won't be the prophet long if he starts giving commandments that God doesn't want him to.

You asked if we really believed the statements in your OP . . . that's my answer. BTW as pointed out in previous posts, the JoD is not scripture. While I enjoy reading it. . .I'm on volume 2 in two years. . . . . . my Mom discourage me to read it because it was counsel for that time that didn't become scripture. So Basically, the JoD is history.

applepansy

Edited November 20, 2008 by applepansy
addition

[bytor2112]

Kris.......I notice that you believe the Book of Mormon to be sacred scripture. Do you also believe that Joseph Smith is a Prophet? Did he see Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ as he claimed? Do you believe that the Church of Jesus Christ was restored? If so, what changed? Why did you decide to accept the Book of Mormon as scripture, but reject the church?

Thanks-Bytor

[john doe]

Hi ya Elphaba,

Is that really a course ?

What degree would that be in ?

How many credits is it worth ?

Thanks for the answers that are coming soon :)

Peace,

Carl

It's an online course, and it's worth just as much as any other online degree---- nothing.

[MarginOfError]

It's an online course, and it's worth just as much as any other online degree---- nothing.

Hey, I paid a good $60 for my online degree. I figure that by now, it's appreciated value is about $40. I wouldn't call $40 nothing!