Questioning the prophet

[Guest ceeboo]

Misshalfway,

Your Christ light is indeed shinning bright today my dear friend :):)

MISSHALF FOR PRESIDENT !!!!!

Peace,

Ceeboo

[Guest ceeboo]

OHHHH , I so appreciated your last few posts and you delete one of them :lol:

You are indeed one of my favorites here Misshalfway :)

[pam]

Yes I liked your post as well Miss 1/2.

[Misshalfway]

OHHHH , I so appreciated your last few posts and you delete one of them :lol:

You are indeed one of my favorites here Misshalfway :)

I am so sorry. I was trying to write and then realized that I was late to pick up my daughter from preschool and so in my haste I failed to really think thru my post and felt the last one was redundant and I didn't want to look like a dingle.

Oh well. I have succeeded in looking like a dingle anyway. LOL

Glad it was of some value, only I can't really remember what I said. Silly me.

XXOO

[Hemidakota]

For me, you are not a DINGLE but a brilliant woman.

[Guest ceeboo]

I am so sorry. I was trying to write and then realized that I was late to pick up my daughter from preschool and so in my haste I failed to really think thru my post and felt the last one was redundant and I didn't want to look like a dingle.

Oh well. I have succeeded in looking like a dingle anyway. LOL

Glad it was of some value, only I can't really remember what I said. Silly me.

XXOO

I can't remember word for word but I can tell you the jist of it ( In case you want to re post it :))

You were saying something about how much you admire and appreciate Catholics and feel that Catholics have so much good to spread around the world. Or something like that.

:lol::lol:

[Hemidakota]

“I do not pretend to say that the items of doctrine, and ideas I shall advance are necessary for the people to know, or that they should give themselves trouble about them whatever.” Teachings of President Brigham Young, 344-45.

[Guest ceeboo]

Oh well. I have succeeded in looking like a dingle anyway. LOL

XXOO

HMMMMMM, dingle :confused: dingle ? :confused:

Does anyone know where Elphaba is ???

[Moksha]

Or it could have led to the destruction of the church if the nation would have turned on them as one for it.

I doubt we will ever know the Lord's purposes fully until we are with him. I choose to accept on faith that he knows what he is doing, whether or not I understand it at this point. That goes for a few doctrines within the church.

Destruction of the Church would have been unlikely. We would have earned the instant praise of the religiously disenfranchised, for our seeing the light, and in a delayed gratification sort of way, the rest of the nation would see how wise the Mormons had been on this point.

I too trust the Lord in His beneficence, that is why I firmly believe the doctrine did not emanate from His lack of love.

[MormonMama]

Destruction of the Church would have been unlikely. We would have earned the instant praise of the religiously disenfranchised, for our seeing the light, and in a delayed gratification sort of way, the rest of the nation would see how wise the Mormons had been on this point.

My point was a hypothetical one, as is yours. No one knows why the Lord instigated or allowed such a doctrine, and we likely won't know until after this life.

[annewandering]

i found this which was interesting on lds.org.

Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom

[bert10]

"Were these men not valiant in the preexistance"?

Not all things that are given to us is from the pre-existence. Some of the weaknesses are given to us...because of errors and others are given to us for the glory of GOD.

In any case...the suffering that we go through is for learning obedience to the law we have offended or for the glory of GOD.

As for children who are mentally challenged. The law in heaven is ..where much is given much is required. Since they cannot appreciate the law...they cannot be condemned by it. It is a fast track into heaven. So to me it does not make sense that it is because they were less valiant in heaven....Unless that this Weakness is their last weaknesss which they have to bear in this world.

Peace be unto you

bert10

i am going to follow the statement by pres. harold b. lee with a few observations.

five general authorities just off the top of my head were handicapped at one point. boyd. k packer, pres. hunter, and pres. kimball. not to meantion david o.mackay and pres. benson.

Elder Packer was stricken with polio, Pres. Hunter was in a wheelchair for much of his presidency, Pres. Kimball has his larynx removed and Pres. Benson was completely incapacited for around 6 years of his time as prophet.

Were these men not valiant in the preexistance?

In the last general conference one of the general autjhorities, and i don'tremember which at the moment, gave a very spiritually uplifting talk and included some comments on his mentally challenged daughter. would you say that this lovely child was not valiant? i did not have the impression her dad did.

what i am inclined to think is that harold b. lee was giving his opinion. was he even prophet then?

in fact he may well have had a good point in that perhaps some of the less valiant spirits were born into situations less pleasant for this life time. that does not mean all or even most people who have disabilites of one sort or other are less valiant. one does not lead to the other.

a thing i would be more concerned about is that we have been told that we will never be given more than we can handle. i would be wondering if those born into the gospel, given everything to them on a silver platter, as it were, might be more likely to be the less valiant spirits in heaven. after all God wouldnt give them anything that they couldnt deal with, would he?

lets look to our own hearts and spirituality before condemning those, that love their handicapped family members, to being apostates to the gospel because they can not believe that these loved ones are less valiant.

[aliasgeorge]

This is a spin off from the thread about mentally handicap people. The question was asked why they are that way and a quote , given at general conference by Prophet Harold B Lee was given explaining that they were less valiant in the pre existence and many people have come to the conclusion that he is wrong. Many explained about how their brother,sister,uncle aunt kid etc had this issue and they new it couldn't be right. How is this any different then someone with a gay relative saying that President Monson is wrong about homosexuality?

I'm just trying to understand how a member can disregard the words from a Prophet of God on one subject (especially something as unknown as pre existence) while taking everything else at general conference as doctrine?

Where do we draw the line?

Did a later Prophet tell us that Harold B Lee was wrong or is it our own human bias (having a dog in the fight so to speak) causing us to second guess what he said?

And if we can do it on one issue. What will keep us from doing it on another?

I'm sorry to phrase this question so long after the original question, but what is the original quote by Harold B. Lee? It would seem that as this discussion was sparked by the supposed comment, it should be provided. Does anyone have the reference and full quote? Thanks.

[hordak]

I'm sorry to phrase this question so long after the original question, but what is the original quote by Harold B. Lee? It would seem that as this discussion was sparked by the supposed comment, it should be provided. Does anyone have the reference and full quote? Thanks.

"This privilege of obtaining a mortal body on this earth is seemingly so priceless that those in the spirit world, even though unfaithful or not valient, were undoubtedly permitted to take mortal bodies although under penalty of racial or physical or nationalistic limitations...." (Decisions for Successful Living pp 164-65) TLDP:497

Hemidakata had a longer version.

[BenRaines]

Sounds like a personal opinion to me. Not that it matters but was that before or during the time he was leader of the church? President Lee had one of the shorter terms as leader of the LDS church

Ben Raines

[Elgama]

"This privilege of obtaining a mortal body on this earth is seemingly so priceless that those in the spirit world, even though unfaithful or not valient, were undoubtedly permitted to take mortal bodies although under penalty of racial or physical or nationalistic limitations...." (Decisions for Successful Living pp 164-65) TLDP:497

Hemidakata had a longer version.

That does not say to me that everyone with a mental illness, certain nationality, or physical limitation, was not valiant just that some were.

-Charley

[john doe]

Oh come on, you're not going to put words in the prophet's mouth? But it's so fun!

[Hemidakota]

Sounds like a personal opinion to me. Not that it matters but was that before or during the time he was leader of the church? President Lee had one of the shorter terms as leader of the LDS church

Ben Raines

1972–1973

Joined by Howard W. Hunter [1994 - 1995] and Joseph F. Smith [1970-1972].