Jump to content

JulieM

Members
  • Content Count

    2,863
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,706 Excellent

About JulieM

  • Rank
    Brings Forth Plants

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

1,659 profile views
  1. That was actually in reference to her being Christ’s wife (evidence). Others believe she possibly could have been an apostle. I’m open to that as well and actually love the thought of either.
  2. Yup. Thus my usage of the word “or” and not “and”. But to be more clear, should have used “either”!
  3. I think there’s writings that most definitely support it. Or possibly Mary was his wife. I’m open to both. Why did he appear to her first when he returned? Who would you come to see first?
  4. According to who? (Man’s interpretations or writings?) I actually believe Christ did have at least one woman as an apostle. Why not? Anything wrong with that?
  5. If you read the article in the DN (I think Calm posted it), Pres. Nelson said it was a revelation or revealed to him by God who was supposed to travel to Rome. So, if no women were included (leaders), then maybe It was God who wasn’t concerned about whether they were there or not?
  6. Oh I know the current teachings of our leaders (and policies). I’m referring to being a follower of Christ and having a place in His gospel. As far as I believe, those can sometimes be two different things. I believe the policy and current views of our leaders are from man, not from God or Christ.
  7. Ugh. Really? You think a person who is gay and in a SS relationship or marriage can’t be a follower of Christ? That they don’t “fit well” with the gospel of Jesus Christ? I think you are terribly wrong here and that would be an awful idea. I’ve know a few gay people and they were some of the kindest and most Christlike people I’ve known. For sure they follow Christ’s teachings.
  8. But both of those have changed over the years (mainly because of polygamy). I think that should be considered as a part of this discussion.
  9. Why? I learned new information from reading it. I’ve worked through it after a family member shared it with me, but many are reading it. It has definitely had an impact. Plagerized or not, it’s causing many members to leave after they read it. What do you disagree with that’s it’s in (other than Jeremy’s conclusions)? Many have asked you this, but I’d like to hear you answer (specific quotes).
  10. Probably because that is the topic of this thread.
  11. Thanks for your posts and additional information! All very interesting to read.
  12. Scott needs to withdraw both of his accusations (against you and Alarson) since your posts just honestly reflected your opinions and feelings. But if he attempts to support them, this could he interesting to watch. Duplicity: deceitfulness, deceit, deception, deviousness, two-facedness, double-dealing, underhandedness, dishonesty, falseness, falsity, fraud, fraudulence, sharp practice, swindling, cheating, chicanery, trickery, craft, guile, artifice, subterfuge, skulduggery, treachery, unfairness, unjustness, perfidy, improbity.
  13. So what is the law of chastity if it’s not the wording of this law or the rules (or qualifications) given by our leaders which need to be lived in order to be living this law? Those have changed (wording and rules). But you believe the actual law hasn’t changed? Can you post exactly what you specifically believe the law is then? I’m just trying to understand you here!
  14. Some here are saying that the law has never changed, only the wording. So, what is The Law?
×
×
  • Create New...