Jump to content

Messenger

Members
  • Posts

    1,076
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Messenger

  1. That is where I was at as a convert as well. I'd already been studying and felt I had not found the answers. People who invite the missionaries in already know something is missing.

    I would add that 90% of the time that main part that's missing is Holy Ghost as a constant companion, and the Priesthood, which is what makes it all true.

  2. I just said goodbye last night after you pontificated on the failings and non-down-to-earthedness of this board which you could not tolerate. Quit playing games with my heart.

    Nehor, I don't respond well to threats. If you don't like your own games, stop playing them. If I get another threat from you, you know what will happen. If you want to go to jail, threaten me again and I have no problem taking legal action. Your private message is a threat. And I expect a public apology.

    I've asked the mods for their legal council information so that I can get the process started. Its up to you. I was going to leave, but I wont be threatened.

  3. Is it normal for members of this forum to threaten another on a Private Message? Just curious to see how the forum attorney is going to respond to mine.

    A while back I had a death threat by someone over the phone. He's in jail now for 90 days. Gosh, I hope this doesn't turn out the same way for Nehor.

  4. I suppose the pre-existence is similar to spirit paradise in terms of how people communicate with each other and how you recognize them. Although, they may be a bit busier! I'm sure there are some people on this forum that might know something about that.

  5. Level of hatred and/or animosity. ;)

    A lot of people use 'hatred and/or animosity', that are in the church even to their fellow priesthood holders. I would say that those that truly understand love and forgiveness, instead of accusations and shadows, have a pretty keen understanding of Jesus Christ. What better exemplifies Christ, than the book of Mormon? Those that follow it, and understand it, can even accept Samuel the Laminate - Christ did.

  6. I think the reluctance to discuss your situations is that they are so personalized they pretty much require revelation to answer. Since God rarely gives revelation regarding hypotheticals it was pointless to discuss the questions in your last thread. They also seemed calculated to pit the gospel against itself which is probably why it was locked.

    Reluctance to discuss improbable scenarios is not fear of applying the gospel. It's fear of being puppets in your little fantasy game.

    Sorry you misread that. I guess people can come up with anything they want. Definitely out of here! Nehor, I still love you man ... Come on give me a big kiss like I know you want to! haha! It was fun, but I need something thats a little more honest and down to earth. Later guys!

  7. Should we openly discuss how to apply "the gospel" to life, bearing in mind that "the gospel" isn't composed of policy-based minutiae contained in handbooks? Sure. But the gospel is timeless. Policy, by contrast, may change from time to time as necessary to meet the changing needs of members and increased understanding and capacity of leaders.

    Should [x] stay on a mission, in light of some occurrence? Did [y] handle a particular baptism appropriately by doing certain things, and/or in light of certain circumstances? Should [z] stay in a marriage, in light of certain circumstances? While all of these policy questions may implicate certain gospel principles (God calls missionaries to certain places at certain times to suit His purposes; repentance should be manifest prior to a baptism; how should a spouse consider the question of whether to seek a divorce in light of Gospel principles involving charity and being longsuffering?) that does not mean that the questions themselves are "gospel" questions. And the gospel principle of revelation may dictate that the answers to these questions change on a case-by-case basis.

    Openly discussing "policy" is one thing. Openly discussing "the gospel" is another. I tend to shy away from discussions of the former because in "nonhypothetical hypothetical" situations, real, live, flesh-and-blood with real, live feelings are involved (even if nobody in the discussion but the person who posed the "nonhypothetical hypotheticals" knows who they are). Have I ever made any mistakes in cases in which Church policy is implicated? Yep. Would I want those mistakes dissected and discussed in forums such as this one when it's very likely that none of the discussants know all of the details, and even if nobody knows who I am? I think the most charitable thing to do would be to leave the resolution of those issues to the person who has stewardship over the people and issues involved. If the people with that stewardship make mistakes in handling those situations, they can join the world: who hasn't made such mistakes?

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints isn't God's Church because nobody who runs it on this earth makes any mistakes. It's God's Church because, while He gives us just enough power to run His Church, He, and He alone, retains final power and authority over how ultimately to resolve issues which inevitably crop up when His children deal imperfectly with each other.

    Im not talking about consequences at all, just how to apply the principles in situations. I think you read too much into my post that his thread is referring to. But, perhaps its time for a more free thinking forum that actually applies the gospel to life, instead of a purified theory that has nothing to do with life. Shying away is no problem, but why not have it an option to talk about for those that do. Who knows??? I think its funny!

  8. When the gospel is applied to life we learn how to apply it. The scriptures are full of life's examples of love and forgiveness. Yet, I have learned that some people love to talk about doctrine, the commandments and its points, but their opinion is that we apparently shouldn't apply them in the forum (sorry I misspelled that) form of life examples.

    What do you think, yes or no?

  9. The real point of this exercise with these scenarios is to learn how people in today's L.D.S. church master dealing with other people that practice the very common "unrighteous dominion" that conflict with another person's choices. This is something that I think about quite often because I deal with a lot of people that tell me about some of their experiences. All of the scenarios above are all based on actual true events. I'm sure we have all gone through similar things that meet the pattern of the OP.

    Knowing how to resolve conflict in the church social structure is something that we all need to practice. Saying it doesn't exist is probably a pipe dream. I often find the same type of resistance when it comes to Emergency Preparedness. Lots of people want to store some food, and a first aid kit, but when it comes to being in a building during an earthquake, and going over scenarios on how and what to do, most cringe. Yet, if we are prepared, we wont fear.

  10. I would simply respond that an abuser would not be celestial material anyway, and as there is no sealing outside of the Celestial Kingdom, no woman would have to worry about being sealed to such a man. Theoretically, if she is righteous, a suitable mate will be provided for her with whom she can share all the happiness of celestial glory.

    Again, this isn't about the woman "worrying" about being married to such a man (although that may be worth looking at in some other thread). The pattern of this thread is simple and I've given three examples or scenarios to help MD readers the point of the thread. Perhaps there are those that just don't want to conceive of the pattern ever materializing. But I would say, after doing many High Priest visits with inactive people, that these are indeed patterns that people deal with, some successfully, and some unsuccessfully. I welcome you to participate in the spirit of the discussion, within the bounds of the OP.

  11. I only wish you would stop using the phrase free agency, since that is a doctrinal misnomer, even though it has only been in that last 20 years that it has been generally recongized as such.

    It's hard for me to take your hypotheticals seriously, because they are just make-believe anyway, and you can contrive them any way you want to suit your argument.

    Scott,

    Stay on topic please.

  12. The OP is not a debate is not how to define agency as either moral or free. That's a very old argument and its not the purpose of this thread. So, for the purposes of this thread, agency is the ability and privilege God gives us to choose and to act for ourselves. Agency is essential in the plan of salvation. Without it, we would not be able to learn or progress or follow the Savior. With it, we are “free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil” (2 Nephi 2:27).

    Of course in our minds we have choices based on the knowledge we possess. If it is true that a man, can not receive revelation for another man, then is it Christlike to limit another mans choice through an act of coercion?

    Hypothetical Scenario #3

    An LDS woman is married and sealed to an LDS man. After 8 years, the Woman is unhappy. The woman feels that the marriage is dead. There is no more passion and the man is gone for weeks at a time. The Woman has tried to bring the man to a Councillor, but the man tells her there is nothing wrong, and he seems to be happy regardless of her feelings. Further, he starts to lose his temper every time she mentions needing outside help. He stops giving her money, and instead has the finances of the house done through his friend an accountant. In fact, we she complains, he strikes her across her face and tell her to stop. This has gone on for 4 years. The woman prays about it, and get her answer to file for divorce. She goes to her bishop and her bishop tells her she must stay married. She then realizes that if she gets a divorce, she will have lost the support from the Bishop and the ward, and if she stays married she will be losing support of Heavenly Father.

    What should she do?

    Does being married in the temple mean that she is forever sealed to unhappiness and abuse?

  13. OP: What exactly do you mean by "free agency?" Because what I would mean by that phrase does not appear to be what you would mean.

    Log,

    Thats why I gave a link to the talk on Free Agency from the church. I suppose there could be other meanings. But, we could go all the way back to the pre-existance where we had free agency to choose between two plans. One, would disolve our agency to fail and make incorrect desicions because those decisions would be Lucifers, thus we would all be saved (Lucifer) and we would give glory to him, the other would allow us to fail, which would mean we would need a savior, but we still might not live with God again because we may choose against repentance.

    I would use that model against hypothetical senarios, even of your choice if you wish. Later tonight I might post more senarios.

  14. Mission decisions can be difficult. Because we don't know if Heavenly Father wants us there to bring the gospel to a specific family or person. But, I think we have to be careful with this, how do we know that the missionary wasn't to meet someone while visiting his dad in the Hospital? Its been said that personal revelation trumps all. Does it trump other's free agency? In other words, if the missionary received personal revelation that it was ok to leave, wouldn't that be violating the people he could have meant to bring the gospel to in Russia, knowing that the church would not spend the money to send him back?

    And if we do receive revelation to violate another person's Free Agency, (Nephi killing Laban), what if the act of killing Laban gave free agency of the greater mass of people who were repressed by Laban? Would that be congruent with the Law of Free Agency?

    Also, if we receive revelation to do something that is against the law, and we choose to do it, it is fair that there would be consequences such as arrest? Would violating another person's free agency be considered against spiritual law?

  15. In another thread there has been discussions about a person acting on personal revelation. I don't think anybody would disagree that we can and should act on personal revelation. As one person mentioned, personal revelation trumps all. But, does it cross the line when a person acts on what they know to be true (real or not) to take away the free agency of another?

    Here are some examples of what I am bringing up for discussion.

    Hypothetical Situation 1

    A person has been introduced to the gospel through friends and has gone through the entire process of taking the discussions with a set of missionaries. Then, after the last discussion and interviews, the current missionaries are re-assigned and a new set of missionaries have come to perform the baptism. The missionaries perform the baptism, but one of the missionaries doesn't feel the new convert is worthy. And does not turn in the paperwork to the church. There are plenty of witnesses, and photographs of the baptism, and the convert, after several months, convinces another bishop that it indeed has taken place and the records are created. Is it right for a single missionary to thwart or covertly disrupt the members records from being created?

    Hypothetical Situation 2

    A missionary is overseas and is serving in Russia. The missionary receives a letter from his mother that his father has had an accident and will not survive the next week. The father is drifting in and out of consciousness and is asking to see his son. This missionary is an adult, has prayed about it, and thinks that going home to be with his father is the right thing to do, and he would be willing to be re-assigned to the states because the cost of re-deploying back to Russia is cost prohibitive. He takes his plans to the Mission President (who holds his visa) and the mission president rejects the idea. While having interviews over the next 7 days, his father dies. Is it right for the Mission President to keep his missionary from seeing his father on his deathbed?

    Here is a quote from a talk from a General Authority that might help....

    To Act for Ourselves: The Gift and Blessings of Agency

    ROBERT D. HALES

    Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

    "Now, none of us are on the narrow path all of the time. All of us make mistakes. That is why Lehi, who understood the Savior’s role in preserving and reclaiming our agency, taught Jacob—and us: “The Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon.” That is the key—“to act for themselves and not to be acted upon.” "

    Source: http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2006/04/to-act-for-ourselves-the-gift-and-blessings-of-agency?lang=eng

  16. I am pretty excited. I've had the domain name now for 3 months, and have been picking out manufacturer suppliers for about the same time. Its nice to have funding up front for the inventory that I want to carry. I've made all my other websites fly, and I cant see why this one will not with the experience I have.

  17. I'm looking forward to the Merlot. $5 a bottle, but $13 to ship! Yikes! I don't think anybody has to worry about even the possibility of a slippery slope - at least until the shipping goes down. Further, I'm not sure how a $5 bottle of wine would actually taste. When I was not a member, I wouldn't even consider a bottle of wine under $15. Sometime I may try one though for fun to taste the difference. I for one think wine is healthy if it weren't for all the alcohol. I don't have a problem with this.

    When caffeine free Coke came out back in the 80's, a lot of people said similar things about it, like are posted on this thread about wine. I grew up with wine in the house, and my dad made his own wine and beer. I never got drunk off of it, but I did always have a small glass with my parents at the Sunday Dinner table. So, for me, its about the taste of a good wine, not the other stuff.

    JMHO

  18. Just got a call from my mom today. She and dad are gifting us kids a pretty substantial amount every six months for an undisclosed length of time. I am going to use that to start the business I've wanted to for a while now. Its definitely an answer to my prayers.

×
×
  • Create New...