Jump to content

RevTestament

Contributor
  • Content Count

    4,380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,900 Excellent

About RevTestament

  • Rank
    Brings Forth Plants

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,943 profile views
  1. I think he would respond that there is objective proof or evidence. We see societies which follow common codes of decency advancing with those who comprise it being in relative happiness, while those who don't follow any common codes of learned conduct fall into states of anarchy and war. He would claim some part of us sees the sensibleness of following a path leading to the common good - I'm pretty sure that is what he'd say. I guess you can claim that is a kind of secular religion, but there need be no God in it. It is man learning to advance by forwarding to common good. Indeed, I would say that Buddhism teaches something like this, although it could be argued that Buddha has attained a state of semi-godhood within that ideology, and some forms do recognize these spirit beings in another realm.
  2. Well my friend, you are picking on him now that he is dead. I'm sure he would respond in his disturbingly painful, and quaintly British way by saying that having a soul is not necessarily religious, and that man has learned a common code of decency in order for us all to advance together. In other words he would claim that it is in our own best interests to adhere to a common code of decency, because that way we all contribute to society, and all benefit as society advances in a peaceful pursuit of knowledge.... but he would say it in his painfully stuttering, blathering way.
  3. Well, this is none of my business Ken, but are you interested in a particular area of law? Do you aim towards serving a certain segment such as disability rights? If so, you could volunteer in that area, and show some rehabilitation that way. I wonder if you have tried being admitted into a bar in another state? Perhaps Nevada is not so picky. Once admitted, that may as a practical matter throw a little weight behind an application in UT for instance. The last option is to apply for admittance into the Federal courts - thus bypassing the state bar. If you are interested in civil rights this might prove a better course anyway. You seem to like writing. Perhaps there is room as an appellate lawyer in the Federal courts.... Lots of room for different talents and interests in the legal system... you certainly seem to have the drive for it.
  4. Yeah, there are a number of em. Actually, D&C calls Adam our Father. I believe he is Elohim with the Father. Not much of a problem with me. How it gets interpreted seems to be the bigger problem. I see the key of Adam representing something man has not really comprehended. In fact the whole OT tells a story of God, and Adam represents the first. You don't have to believe that, but that's me. The blacks in the priesthood thing I do chalk up to tradition. Traditionally, blacks were slaves, and as Church membership grew, not all Church members could countenance their having equal standing - it was a traditional prejudice thing imho. So because the Church just wasn't ready to get over that, it became a tradition or policy. I have never really accepted it as a revelation, and I don't believe it was the case under Joseph Smith. It is the fault of early Church members for painting it that way imho. While Joseph Smith was alive there were several black priesthood holders. But what happened is that after Joseph Smith died, BY moved the Church out West, and news got back to him of a black elder marrying several white sisters. This type of thing got lampooned in the press back East, and I think this was the catalyst for the ban. BY was right though that Blacks would be able to hold the priesthood after everyone else was given the opportunity - for awhile the Church leaders seem to have forgotten that part. There are others. I see no need to go through them all. People on the board know that I do not believe Eden was in the Americas.... Really, none of these things have to do with the truths of the gospel. What needs correcting will get corrected.
  5. I concern myself with the tenets of the restored gospel, and not so much the other stuff.. There are traditions in the Church which have changed, and others that will. They are thought of as truth, because they have been bantered about, but really are just traditions imho, and will go into the dust heap like other traditions have. Coincidentally, the Jews had their traditions too... someone came along and upset their apple cart.... Not sure why God does things this way. It seems to be a repetitive process here on earth.
  6. Yes. I believe Yeshua was crucified on Thurs. Thus, He was in the tomb that night, Fri night, and Sat night, arising on Sunday. In the year 30 AD, the sabbath of the Passover began on Fri.
  7. We had hail... at least it wasn't the size of a talent!! My tulips didn't enjoy it though. You'll have to share that recipe for friend chicken.... Is it something like fried chicken with extra love?... LOL Well, at least you have us... all our kids are away right now, so I fixed my wife eggs, grits and bacon in bed, but I didn't make her eggs green or anything special....
  8. I believe it was on this day 1989 years ago that Yeshua raised up from the grave - Passover started on Friday this year....
  9. I just want to wish everyone a blessed Passover Sunday. i will use it to remember what our Savior did for us as the Passover lamb whose blood was spread on the door lentel marking the door/entrance into the house of God.
  10. How about anyone? I do and certainly will kneel before Yeshua and the Father.
  11. Thought I might add a little something to this discussion. This seal says "Belongs to Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, King of Judea." Note the Egyptian symbol of life on the right. Those archaeologists who still say there was no Davidic kingdom, are running up against new finds like this, which pinpoint the probable palace of David, and support the historical narrative of the Bible. Anyway the tet or cross symbol was the Egyptian sign of life or essentially their resurrection symbol. One could certainly call it a pagan symbol, but it was adopted in eastern Christianity as well. The point is that its a very ancient symbol predating the advent of Yeshua, and was used by certain elements of Judean society as well. To extend what Teddyaware said, the symbol brings to mind the brazen serpent episode of Moses, and the evil and torture Yeshua was made to endure. Shall we look upon it? The Israelites had to to be saved from the fiery serpents. There is nothing inherently evil in a symbol, but I will not kneel before it or pray before it, which is why I think they do not appear in our ward buildings.
  12. I by no means hold myself up as a centrist saint in my views, but I believe that salvation is a present tense concept. If I kneel to pray and ask for forgiveness, and seek to right my wrongs, I believe I "am saved." If I were to die right then, I would bypass Hell, and go to await resurrection in paradise. I believe that is a much different process than exaltation. Angels can die saved, but not reach exaltation. So, I don't consider it the same "process" at all. Maybe it is on a continuum, along the same path, but the two are quite distinguishable. We are rewarded based on our degree of exaltation. To receive all the Father hath is the goal - not everyone receives that promise, and Yeshua never said anything like that. That is where I think modern Christianity has lost lots of truth. They view heaven as one big room all saved people go to, when Yeshua said the Father's house has many rooms. Everyone in those rooms is saved from Hell, but have not received the same degrees of glory - because His house(of Elohim) is a house of many rooms. I agree. What Paul calls sanctification, I call exaltation. I don't see a difference. I think the difference you perceive is due to the doctrines of trinitinarianism. Yeshua prayed that we may be one with He and the Father even as He was one. The Roman catechism preserves the early patristic concept of theosis that was obviously in early Christianity, and I believe got replaced later with doctrines of the trinity. I believe we can be every much as one with the Father as Yeshua is - and even as He prayed for it. And actually, I believe this is the teaching and hope of the atonement - God looks for a godly seed. I agree. LDS definitely believe we can fall. Now Yeshua said none can wrest away those given to Him by the Father, but we certainly can choose not to follow. We can wrest ourselves away. However, I believe Christ will do everything He can to soften our hearts and win us back. I am LDS and that is my thinking. I believe we need to repent to be prepared for baptism. I am sure that is in LDS doctrine somewhere. The bishop conducts worthiness interviews beforehand as well. I admire you as someone willing to leap that bridge of trust, and willing to be hurt in the process. i do agree that the verbiage is used differently among Saints and Evangelicals, but I think the same is true of Catholics and Evangelicals. I think the conversation you seek to have is worthwhile. I just want you to know that I consider you to be one of the rare internet friends I have met online. I believe you to be straightforward, and that you do not have an axe to grind. I know you are not always trusted, but I can only speak for myself in saying that I trust you, and enjoy our conversations. It brings to mind another internet friend I met from Sweden. He took a test to see which denomination he might align best with - one was LDS. He said even higher was Mennonite! I think he tried the Mennonites for awhile, but I think he has dropped that. Anyway in light of the bond I think we made, I find our present conversation intriguing. I wonder what it is about the Mennonite sect and the LDS sect which seems to find common ground?
  13. Well, there simply are essentials. To be saved, one must repent, and accept Yeshua. There are differences in opinion about this. I've had one on this board try to tell me that Christ will save simply through His grace. I disagree. In the end everyone who is saved will repent as a condition of their salvation. Yeshua Himself said the road which leads to life is narrow, and few there be who find it. That sounds like they must meet certain conditions to me. It does not sound like everyone finds it. Are covenants you speak of are not all that involved. One must not commit common sexual sins. Do you remember the couple in the early church who represented they had given all they had, but had held back? That skirts another covenant. Nothing the early Christian wouldn't be asked or expected to follow. If they were expected to follow them, that should be good enough for the modern Saint. I understand painting us outside the standard modern evangelical view, but we don't really do anything that unusual - unless you think the early Christian Church was doing something wrong.... perhaps you disagree with them as well....?
  14. Um... they don't call themselves Mormons.
×
×
  • Create New...