Jump to content

stemelbow

Limited
  • Content Count

    10,094
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,144 Excellent

2 Followers

About stemelbow

  • Rank
    Creates Man & Woman

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,768 profile views
  1. If God is the author then where does that leave Nephi, Mormon and Moroni? If God or one of his minions is translator then where does that leave Joseph? Either way this seems to suggest either Joseph didn't know what was going on, or God has a weird concept of relatable English. It also brings in the question of historicity. If it's not an ancient, as in 400CE and before author, then we have little reason to treat it as telling us a story from those people.
  2. Well in time I wonder what the effect will be. The prophet came and told them paying tithing will end poverty. If they remain in poverty after having making sacrifices we don't really imagine in order to pay tithing, if they will stick with the Church. Or if as the membership swells in Africa if they too will find themselves overblown with tons of members but few who actually participate, or consider themselves Mormon, kind of like what's happened in various parts of central and South America. As it is there'll remain some how will find their way out of poverty, perhaps with the help of the Church while others will look on feeling less than and foolish because while they paid tithing they must have lacked somehow else as they remain in poverty, watching on the sidelines as the very few stand up and testify that the prophet was right for them, even if not for most others. Ah well...I hope was seen as a mistake and won't be carried to all other areas of the world.
  3. counsel? I thought it was supposed to be prophecy. I wonder how many tithe-paying Kenyans have gotten rich since his prophecy was pronounced.
  4. I am sorry to hear it. But, as life goes, there are better days ahead. There's no need, at all, to treat a bad day as a sign that your life started the wrong course 23 years earlier. I get down like you describe above too, and honestly for me, it feels good to put myself in such a place from time to time, because well....there are so many with the toughest roads to venture down. I'm feeling confident you are a delightful person to be around. I"m sure I'd be blessed to know you, beyond this world of frank religious talk.
  5. I know I"m rather cynical when it comes to Church these days, but I will note, I hope this is not another "if you want to get out of poverty, then pay your tithing" tour.
  6. that would be interesting. A ton of non-members surviving spiritually yet unprepared members getting destroyed spiritually because they fail to have the constant enough companionship of the HG. It's not so difficult if these warnings all mean we should just stay members. Maybe nelson's been deceived himself. That'd be an interesting twist, at least.
  7. I think he's essentially saying "if you're daughters, sisters, cousins etc that are women break the law it's part on you." He goes on: If he's truly prophetic and knows what's coming and knows the failures of the whole world, then I suppose it'll all prove interesting. What lay ahead, he suggests, will spiritually destroy everyone and their families except those who hold the priesthood, exercise it, thrusting in their sickles with all of their might, mind and strength.
  8. no it's not. He's being a bit too misogynistic for my tastes. If a woman who I know breaks the law of chastity that is not necessarily on the men in her life, perhaps except for the man (or woman) with whom she breaks the law with. It is on her. To the OP: No. I don't think so. Mostly I think he's thinking of younger folks who are dating. If they break it together the fault is more on the man than the woman--because the man has the priesthood and it is on him to make sure the woman remains chaste. To me it's simply an old-style misogynistic perspective which has been repeated in the Church many times.
  9. I"m still back, then, wondering what the warning of needing the constant companionship means. One must have it to survive spiritually, apparently. Will non-members survive spiritually I wonder? if so, then what's the point of the ordinance? That means anyone can enjoy the constant companionship and the ordinance must mean nothing to very little.
  10. Whose he? I'm sorry i'm not sure whot he OP is quoting per se. I can go with warning over threat on this. I'll explain my thoughts more below. Everyone has the intuition and guidance you speak of. This is not a religion thing. So I'm not sure what the phrase may mean to have the constant companionship. Would you say, with this notion that we are all in different places on this, that the prophet has the companionship of the Holy Ghost more than everyone else? Is there some achievable level that puts religious Mormons at a higher level than others? And how would anyone know? We'd have to actually be able to see into another, it seems to me. So, if what you describe is all that is meant by constant companionship, then it hardly feels like a warning, since it is common to all, or nearly all. The gift of the HG, as some official ordinance that makes it happen seems empty since all can enjoy the very same.
  11. I don't know if one could be more unfaithful to a spouse then to go behind the spouse's back and try and illegally marry another. As I said, no I dont' think the Church is trying to take a step back into that direction. I do think we will see the Church moving closer to the view of acceptance and tolerance when it comes to LGBTQ. It'll be forced to, more and more. I think the Church was forced to drop their policy, essentially. They simply could not keep it.
  12. I disagree. I don't think the Church sustains the notion that husbands should go behind their wife's back in a marriage and commit adultery and fornications by illegally marrying other women and young girls. I think the Church today is very much against that.
  13. Great. And I guess in answer to Wade's question, I'm just saying essentially, the leaders would have to see reason to go back to the laws of the early Church, but again that seems to have nothing to do with dropping the ill-conceived and hostile policy that was put in place a couple of years ago. Agreed
  14. Depends on if they go back to what Joseph used to practice with his polygamy. For some reason I see non-legalized polygamy, particularly if hidden from spouses and all of that, as adultery and fornication. I, in fact, can't understand that anyone would conclude otherwise. It seems to me you are only asking if the Church will return to it's former self and seem to want to tie in the dropping of the poorly constructed and ill-considered policy change from 3 years ago. No. I think the dropping of the poorly constructed and ill-conceived policy change from 3 years ago as a necessity for the church. They wouldn't have done it otherwise. finally the leaders realized the foolishness of it and dropped it. I don't know that dropping it resolved anything for those who were negatively effected, but it's a good thing the Church can learn from it's mistakes to some extent. And no I don't think it necessarily stepped the Church back to the adultery and fornication that the Church used to practice. More the opposite of that.
  15. I'm curious, how is what is quoted in the OP counsel? It sounds more like threat or something. Added to the quoted line in the OP I think it obvious there is a certain vagueness to saying we can't survive without the "constant companionship". Some, I see, feel comfortable that they have the constant companionship so they feel they will be safe, while many others seem to lack it or question it. The weirdest part, of course, is the leaders are said to be fallible. They are said to be guided by the spirit. And they are said to be mistaken at various times. HOw are they as error prone as any of us if they enjoy the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost? if say they make a mistake and make pronouncements or implement policies and practices that are mistaken, then surely they did so while not prompted by the Holy Ghost to do so. But, as it were, they suggest they were so prompted. So it appears, they can't ever be sure if it is the Holy Ghost that is there constant companion or not either. I admit, I'm quite fascinated to hear that some say they have the constant companionship.
×
×
  • Create New...