Sealings?

[Amillia]

Curvette,

I appreciate your concern about what I believe, but I have sat with high people in high places and discussed these doctrines, not to mention reading books like the NT commentary which quoted prophets.

I really don't think I have it wrong, Unless, the apostles and prophets have no knowledge or firm grasp of the doctrines they have put forth.

I do remember that President Kimball disagreed with President Smith on this issue, but not by much. Like I said before ~ it isn't something they like to disclose because of it's far reaching issues.

I just wonder why my trying to convince Randy of the proposition that all will return to the Father eventually, (which he claimed they wouldn't) turned into this discussion, which actually agrees in end results with Randy's ideas he was defending.

I believe we will all reach the Celestial glory eventually. Randy doesn't. He believes that once we have been judge and received whatever glory, that that is the end of it, unless we are already in the Celestial glory.

In my beginning posts, I was showing how really we all had a better chance than what was being put out. Now that I have disclosed what my leaders have told me over the years, I have been hammered.

If one read all of the posts from beginning to end on this thread, (thoroughly) they would see just how rediculous this has gotten.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Apr 7 2005, 01:11 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Apr 7 2005, 01:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Amillia@Apr 7 2005, 11:42 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--pushka@Apr 7 2005, 09:25 AM

Just read a little of the last few posts regarding the atonement, and the beliefs of Amillia...

Curvy, Cal and Shanstress 70 I agree with you entirely.

It will be agreeing with the Lord that will count in the end.

2 Timothy

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto bfables.

Dear Amillia,

I am about as "orthodox" LDS as they can possibly come. I dont know how old you are, I am 48 yrs old, have served in 3 Bishopric's and everything else on the ward level....have been active...have attended my fair share of Regional meetings with Apostles etc....and I have never, ever in my entire experience in the Church have heard anything remotely resembling what it is you are espousing.

The key that this was a false doctrine was when you made the comment that you and your SP agreed that these "doctrines" are not taught openly but secretly or only to those who could "accept and understand" the deeper meaning (I know I paraphrased that badly, I am sorry)

There are no secret doctrines within the Church. The Temple ordinances are for all that desire to receive them. Its situations like what you are presenting here that the First Presidency is so adamant about sticking to the basics of the gospel...and not allow ourselves to get caught up into "gospel hobbies" as it were.

The doctrine you are putting forth here is false. It does not ring true to my spirit..nor does it agree with scriptures or any teaching or address that I have ever read or heard.

I think what we are trying to get you to see is that this is your personal opinion...and thats fine, but do not put it forward as official LDS doctrine because it certainly is not.

I never said 'secret', as I never said 'second chance' and I really don't find it possible to even discuss things with you when you constantly put words and ideas into my mouth I have never uttered or espoused. NO matter how many times I have tried to get you to understand this, you continue on.

I wonder how your people you have lead, have dealt with this bad habit ofyours.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by curvette+Apr 7 2005, 03:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Apr 7 2005, 03:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Apr 7 2005, 08:18 AM

The other one I heard is the "nail" analogy--you can remove the nail, but he hole remains--this is supposed to represent repentence.

I remember that one well. I also remember when the General Young women's president asked all Young Women's presidents to stop teaching it.

I heard that analogy just this year in a Gospel Doctrine Class.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Amillia+Apr 8 2005, 12:13 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Apr 8 2005, 12:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 7 2005, 03:36 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Apr 7 2005, 08:18 AM

The other one I heard is the "nail" analogy--you can remove the nail, but he hole remains--this is supposed to represent repentence.

I remember that one well. I also remember when the General Young women's president asked all Young Women's presidents to stop teaching it.

I heard that analogy just this year in a Gospel Doctrine Class.

Amillia,

You simply deny the Atonement of Christ. You are putting forth things that are false....thats it in a nutshell.

Let's not quibble with words....you just got through saying "this is something they do not like to disclose because of the far reaching issues"....but if we are to believe you...you have sat down in your living room with the Prophets and Apostles and had lengthy discussions about this and other mysteries of the Gospel.

I honestly do not believe for a moment that that is the case. Sorry.

Nope...when I come across situations like these....I just have to wonder how in the world this happens.

But, like I said at the beginning of this thread....you better be careful...because you are walking down a dangerous path.

Amillia, I believe in the scriptures. I cannot accept any "doctrine" that is not in harmony with what has been revealed. Yes, I do believe you got it wrong, that you misunderstood what your SP said to you. I got a hint of what you tend to do when you "cut and pasted" Elder Talmages comments to make it appear that he supported this notion of "Kingdom to Kingdom" progression..which he did not. But, you chose to do that in order to give your position some credibility. I am thinking you do that alot.

Just be careful.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Amillia+Apr 8 2005, 12:13 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Apr 8 2005, 12:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 7 2005, 03:36 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Apr 7 2005, 08:18 AM

The other one I heard is the "nail" analogy--you can remove the nail, but he hole remains--this is supposed to represent repentence.

I remember that one well. I also remember when the General Young women's president asked all Young Women's presidents to stop teaching it.

I heard that analogy just this year in a Gospel Doctrine Class.

Amillia,

I just came across this address given by Elder Dallin H. Oaks at BYU Devotional in 1992 entitled "Our Strengths can become our Downfall"...the following is an excerpt:

A DESIRE TO KNOW ALL

"Another strength Satan can exploit is a strong desire to understand everything about every principle of the gospel. How could this be a detriment? Experience teaches that if this desire is not disciplined, it can cause some to pursue their searchings beyond the FRINGES OF ORTHODOXY, seeking answers to OBSCURE MYSTERIES rather than seeking a firmer understanding and a better practice of the basic principles of the gospel.

Some seek answers to questions God has not chosen to answer. Other receive answers--or think they receive answers---in ways that are contrary to the order of the Church. For such searchers, Satan stands ready to mislead through sophistry or spurious revelation. Persons who hunger after a full understanding of all things must discipline their questions and their methods, or they can approach apostacy without even knowing it. It may be just as dangerous to exceed orthodoxy as it is to fall short of it. The safety and happiness we are promised lie in keeping the commandments, not in discounting or multiplying them."

I think these comments by Elder Oaks speak specifically and directly to what has transpired on this thread. IMO.

Amillia....I want to apologize for my getting frustrated and short with you. I am sorry. You are my Sister in the gospel. I am sorry. I will let Elder Oaks comments stand as my last comments on this issue.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 7 2005, 10:53 PM

I just wonder why my trying to convince Randy of the proposition that all will return to the Father eventually, (which he claimed they wouldn't) turned into this discussion, which actually agrees in end results with Randy's ideas he was defending.

Yes, this thread has definitely taken some unexpected turns. I do believe that you have some good points about the doctrine of eternal progression. It's statements like these though that seem heretical to me:

<<Do you understand the inheritence and how it can't be given again when it is spent? According to JFSmith, and other prophets.....your wife and yourself will not receive Godhood, but will only be servants in that kingdom.

It isn't a matter of repenting and being atoned for.....it is a matter of the used up inheritence.....think of King David who lost his throne....yet he repented all of his life....>>

You are saying that people who engage in premarital intercourse (in spite of full repentence and the atonement) lose their shot at exhaltation. That's absurd and completely unscriptural. According to the Old Testament, if a man sleeps with a virgin, he is only obligated to marry her. Adultery was a far more serious crime. Also, King David didn't lose his crown because of his adultery, but because of his murder of Bathsheba's husband Uriah. So murder is deemed even more serious (as it should be.) Fornication is not an unforgivable sin.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Apr 8 2005, 06:40 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Apr 8 2005, 06:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 7 2005, 03:36 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Apr 7 2005, 08:18 AM

The other one I heard is the "nail" analogy--you can remove the nail, but he hole remains--this is supposed to represent repentence.

I remember that one well. I also remember when the General Young women's president asked all Young Women's presidents to stop teaching it.

I heard that analogy just this year in a Gospel Doctrine Class.

Amillia,

You simply deny the Atonement of Christ. You are putting forth things that are false....thats it in a nutshell.

Let's not quibble with words....you just got through saying "this is something they do not like to disclose because of the far reaching issues"....but if we are to believe you...you have sat down in your living room with the Prophets and Apostles and had lengthy discussions about this and other mysteries of the Gospel.

I honestly do not believe for a moment that that is the case. Sorry.

Nope...when I come across situations like these....I just have to wonder how in the world this happens.

But, like I said at the beginning of this thread....you better be careful...because you are walking down a dangerous path.

Amillia, I believe in the scriptures. I cannot accept any "doctrine" that is not in harmony with what has been revealed. Yes, I do believe you got it wrong, that you misunderstood what your SP said to you. I got a hint of what you tend to do when you "cut and pasted" Elder Talmages comments to make it appear that he supported this notion of "Kingdom to Kingdom" progression..which he did not. But, you chose to do that in order to give your position some credibility. I am thinking you do that alot.

Just be careful.

Again ~ where have I denied the atonement? ~ I want references!!!

I have said what the scriptures say. The atonement takes away sins. Show me a scripture where it states Christ gives back all you have taken from yourself in sin.

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again. Show me where the prodical son was given another inheritence. show me anything of authority ~ as I have documented everything I have stated, you have documented nothing.

GIVE ME REFERENCES OR SHUT UP!

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

[Amillia]

Originally posted by curvette+Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 01:13 PM

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Please show the quote from the parable of the prodigal son that shows virginity at marriage is a requirement for exhaltation.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Amillia+Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Amillia,

I just read in McConkie's NT commentary of the parable of the Prodigal Son and the additional commentary by JF Smith from "The Way to Perfection".

Again, you have misunderstood. First, JF Smith made reference to "riotess living" then coming back into activity into the church. Did the prodigal son end up going to the Temple? Did he end up marrying his sweetheart for time and eternity and be promised the specific blessing found in that order of the PH? We do not know!

JF Smith is not saying that a "repentant" new convert who has lived an unrighteous life up until they accept Christ, exercise faith in him and come unto him through all the gospel ordinances will be exempt from obtaining their exaltation if they endure to the end in righteousness.

I mean think about for just a second Amillia. Basically, what you are saying is that every adult convert to the church will never obtain Eternal Life..which is Exaltation, because the odds are they have committed these sins which you allude to.

I would have to ask you the question then....if what you say is true....why have converts go to the Temple at all and be sealed as families? According to you...it would be a waste of time because they have already squandered away their "inheritance". This notion is completely contrary to the scriptures...the Atonement of Christ, the Temple ordinances...everything that we teach. It really is.

Just reread Elder Oaks comments. Ponder them and dont be to proud to acknowledge the fact that you are beyond the "fringes of orthodoxy" with the "Kingdom to Kingdom" progression and "if you have sinned a great sin, that accepting Christ and coming unto him through faith, repentance, baptism, the Gift of the Holy Ghost, receiving ones endowement and entering into an Eternal Marriage and then enduring to the end in righteousness...is not sufficient for one to return back to the presence of the Father and to be a "joint heir with Christ" and to receive "all that the Father hath". IF that is what you are saying.... then you and I are in deep trouble.

Because guess what? I hate to be the bearer of bad news...but you have sinned...I have sinned. So..using your logic you and I have both "squandered our inheritance"!! You and I have NO HOPE of Exaltation!

I dont believe that for a moment!

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Amillia+Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Amillia,

Since you used the NT commentary...I will make the assumption that I can use another of Elder McConkies's commentary. Speaking on the Atonement of Christ...he says:

"Because of the Atonement and by obedience to gospel law men have power to become the son's of God in that they are spiritually begotten of God and adopted as members of his family. They become the sons of God and JOINT-HEIRS (restored inheritance, you cant be an heir without an inheritance!) with Christ of the FULLNESS OF THE FATHER'S KINGDOM...in other words they receive their Exaltation!

See D&C 39:1-6; 76:54-60; Rom 8:14-17; Gal. 3:1-7; 1John 3:1-4; Rev. 21:7

By coming unto the Lord through faith, repentance, baptism, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, and receiving all the Temple ordinances....that RESTORES our inheritance!! That is the wonderful love and grace of our Savior in action!

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Amillia+Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Amillia,

Just another common sense thought about "inheritances". It is true...a person can be "written out of the will, or at a minimum..have their inheritance reduced"...but, it is also possible is it not...to have a will "rewritten" ie; re-written through the covenant or contract we make when we are baptized and confirmed...and receive the higher ordinances...we can thus be "restored to our FULL inheritance"!!

No where in your references does it infer that an inheritance cannot be restored in its entirety. Actually, just the opposite is true...based upon what I shared with you in my previous post.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by curvette+Apr 8 2005, 03:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (curvette @ Apr 8 2005, 03:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 01:13 PM

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Please show the quote from the parable of the prodigal son that shows virginity at marriage is a requirement for exhaltation.

Why would you ask for something you know isn't there. Doctrinally, show me where it states that one has their virginity returned to them. It isn't. I grew up with GAs teaching that once virginity was lost, once chastity was lost ~ it wasn't ever going to be brought back, though the sin be taken away ~ your virginity wouldn't be brought back.

One GA actually stated that for women, the hymen would never be put back in place and that the Lord created our bodies with this specific thing in mind. It was a sign to the man that he was getting a virtuous woman.

Why else would there even be a hymen? I'm not talking about today's society and what it accepts etc. ~ I am talking about how God created women and why.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Apr 8 2005, 03:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Apr 8 2005, 03:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Amillia,

I just read in McConkie's NT commentary of the parable of the Prodigal Son and the additional commentary by JF Smith from "The Way to Perfection".

Again, you have misunderstood. First, JF Smith made reference to "riotess living" then coming back into activity into the church. Did the prodigal son end up going to the Temple? Did he end up marrying his sweetheart for time and eternity and be promised the specific blessing found in that order of the PH? We do not know!

JF Smith is not saying that a "repentant" new convert who has lived an unrighteous life up until they accept Christ, exercise faith in him and come unto him through all the gospel ordinances will be exempt from obtaining their exaltation if they endure to the end in righteousness.

I mean think about for just a second Amillia. Basically, what you are saying is that every adult convert to the church will never obtain Eternal Life..which is Exaltation, because the odds are they have committed these sins which you allude to.

I would have to ask you the question then....if what you say is true....why have converts go to the Temple at all and be sealed as families? According to you...it would be a waste of time because they have already squandered away their "inheritance". This notion is completely contrary to the scriptures...the Atonement of Christ, the Temple ordinances...everything that we teach. It really is.

Just reread Elder Oaks comments. Ponder them and dont be to proud to acknowledge the fact that you are beyond the "fringes of orthodoxy" with the "Kingdom to Kingdom" progression and "if you have sinned a great sin, that accepting Christ and coming unto him through faith, repentance, baptism, the Gift of the Holy Ghost, receiving ones endowement and entering into an Eternal Marriage and then enduring to the end in righteousness...is not sufficient for one to return back to the presence of the Father and to be a "joint heir with Christ" and to receive "all that the Father hath". IF that is what you are saying.... then you and I are in deep trouble.

Because guess what? I hate to be the bearer of bad news...but you have sinned...I have sinned. So..using your logic you and I have both "squandered our inheritance"!! You and I have NO HOPE of Exaltation!

I dont believe that for a moment!

In order to sin, you must have knowledge. Those who were not in the church or raised righteously, have an excuse and a chance to have what you had before you chose to sin.

I know you are taking this personally, and I don't want any pain caused by this, but I stand by what I have stated. Sin is sin. It does matter which kinds of sins we choose to commit. We must expect some long term consequences for those sins, if they were mentioned as more grievious than others.

I don't think anything is permenant. I do believe the closer to the top one reaches through righteousness and repentence, the easier it will be to finally be with the Lord and our families.

If you are anxcious about not becoming a God, then maybe you might think about this ~ would you want to think of your God as one who was sexually impure at one time? Even if I think about it real hard, I can't think about my God ever having done that, repentant or not....

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Apr 8 2005, 03:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Apr 8 2005, 03:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by -curvette@Apr 8 2005, 01:32 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 8 2005, 10:00 AM

Show me where it says a fornicator will be a virgin again.

Show us where it says that a repentant teenager who fornicated loses the opportunity for eventual exhaltation (please.)

NT commentary ~ parable of the prodical son ~ comments made by JFSmith and others.

Amillia,

Since you used the NT commentary...I will make the assumption that I can use another of Elder McConkies's commentary. Speaking on the Atonement of Christ...he says:

"Because of the Atonement and by obedience to gospel law men have power to become the son's of God in that they are spiritually begotten of God and adopted as members of his family. They become the sons of God and JOINT-HEIRS (restored inheritance, you cant be an heir without an inheritance!) with Christ of the FULLNESS OF THE FATHER'S KINGDOM...in other words they receive their Exaltation!

See D&C 39:1-6; 76:54-60; Rom 8:14-17; Gal. 3:1-7; 1John 3:1-4; Rev. 21:7

By coming unto the Lord through faith, repentance, baptism, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, and receiving all the Temple ordinances....that RESTORES our inheritance!! That is the wonderful love and grace of our Savior in action!

It is the inheritence of the Celestial kingdom then, not exaltation or Godhood. I am joint heirs with my brother's and sisters from our parents estate, but we didn't all get the same inheritence.

We were all in the will and joint heirs though. I think you assume too much. To be equal with Christ is not possible. Joint doesn't mean equal.

[Amillia]

I have been reading in Alma 40-42 and the phrase I think struck me most in context was this:

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

As I read this, I felt that even virtue or sexual purity would be restored again. In this light, I agree, that all those who repent completely and live righteously the rest of their lives, will be given all that the Father hast...

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 11:28 AM

Why would you ask for something you know isn't there. Doctrinally, show me where it states that one has their virginity returned to them. It isn't. I grew up with GAs teaching that once virginity was lost, once chastity was lost ~ it wasn't ever going to be brought back, though the sin be taken away ~ your virginity wouldn't be brought back.

Obviously, virginity can't be brought back once it's lost. (thank goodness.) That means absolutely nothing. Virginity is not a requirement for exaltation. I don't understand how things can get so twisted. (sigh) Virginity and virtue are two different things. Virtue is important. Virginity is not. Good riddance to the hymen--I'm glad mine is gone! :)

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 01:26 PM

I have been reading in Alma 40-42 and the phrase I think struck me most in context was this:

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

As I read this, I felt that even virtue or sexual purity would be restored again. In this light, I agree, that all those who repent completely and live righteously the rest of their lives, will be given all that the Father hast...

Dear Amillia,

Then we are finally in agreement!! This is good.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 12:26 PM

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :)

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Apr 10 2005, 08:06 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Apr 10 2005, 08:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 12:26 PM

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :)

Dawn,

....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!!

Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Apr 11 2005, 05:14 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Apr 11 2005, 05:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Jenda@Apr 10 2005, 08:06 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 12:26 PM

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :)

Dawn,

....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!!

Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression.

Why? I thought you were being pretty darn civil.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Apr 11 2005, 06:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Apr 11 2005, 06:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Apr 11 2005, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Apr 10 2005, 08:06 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 12:26 PM

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :)

Dawn,

....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!!

Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression.

Why? I thought you were being pretty darn civil.

Dawn,

Me too!

I am sure somebody complained. That is so weak. What are they afraid of? Geez!! Oh well....they want to keep the posters within the flock..so to speak. Thats fine with me....I guess. Nuttin I can do about it.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Apr 11 2005, 01:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Apr 11 2005, 01:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Jenda@Apr 11 2005, 06:43 AM

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Apr 11 2005, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Apr 10 2005, 08:06 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 12:26 PM

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :)

Dawn,

....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!!

Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression.

Why? I thought you were being pretty darn civil.

Dawn,

Me too!

I am sure somebody complained. That is so weak. What are they afraid of? Geez!! Oh well....they want to keep the posters within the flock..so to speak. Thats fine with me....I guess. Nuttin I can do about it.

Randy, Bradley replied back to you about the Kirtland Temple case over there in case you want to pop in and read it.

[Randy Johnson]

Originally posted by Jenda+Apr 11 2005, 07:34 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Apr 11 2005, 07:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Apr 11 2005, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Apr 11 2005, 06:43 AM

Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Apr 11 2005, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Apr 10 2005, 08:06 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 9 2005, 12:26 PM

Alma 40: 23

23 The soul shall be restored to the cbody, and the body to the soul; yea, and every limb and joint shall be restored to its body; yea, even a hair of the head shall not be lost; but all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame.

Randy should be really happy about this. B) :)

Dawn,

....and a real big hardee har har har to you too!!

Oh, I just got an email from Mike Palmer....he deleted my account on the Center Place discussion board. So much for freedom of expression.

Why? I thought you were being pretty darn civil.

Dawn,

Me too!

I am sure somebody complained. That is so weak. What are they afraid of? Geez!! Oh well....they want to keep the posters within the flock..so to speak. Thats fine with me....I guess. Nuttin I can do about it.

Randy, Bradley replied back to you about the Kirtland Temple case over there in case you want to pop in and read it.

Dawn,

Well, first Bradley is right....he is not a lawyer. His opinions are about as valid in a court of law as mine are.

But, notwithstanding that...Bradley "cherry picked" what he wanted to show! He didnt even address the few questions I asked.

I REALLY wish I could respond to his post!! I would have ALOT to say! If I post a response here...can you somehow get it posted on Center Place board???

Just a quick example...regarding the LDS church as defendant.....do you know WHY the RLDS "CHOSE" to refer to LDS as "the Church in Utah of which John Taylor is President"??? First, its illegal for a plaintiff to arbitrarily use "abbreviations or coined phrases to address the defendant..when with reasonable effort the correct and legal name can be found and used.

The RLDS church KNEW what the official name of the Church was!! They chose not to use it because by the very fact IF they did...it would undermine their case from the very beginning, because it would be clearly shown that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints never ceased to exist....never was "disorganized" etc...as was claimed by the RLDS church.

Thats just one example.

Anyway....let me know if you can foward some info for me!

At a minimum....let the people on the board know that I am not allowed to post..otherwise I would be responding in detail to his post. I just dont want them to think I am running away from Bradley!! Man...I wish I could post ....just ONE MORE TIME!