Jump to content

filovirus

Members
  • Posts

    629
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by filovirus

  1. Here is the scripture reference: Malachi 3:10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. 11 And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the Lord of hosts. 12 And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the Lord of hosts. I read this as a promise that there will always be enough, and that others will see Israel as blessed. I don’t see anything about promised riches. We also have this promised blessing: D&C 85:3 It is contrary to the will and commandment of God that those who receive not their inheritance by consecration, agreeable to his law, which he has given, that he may tithe his people, to prepare them against the day of vengeance and burning, should have their names enrolled with the people of God. Seems like tithing is there to prepare us as well.
  2. Sorry to hear of your struggles. Must have been tough. During my time in El Salvador I met many people who struggled financially their whole life. One family in particular was so poor that many times they were barely able to afford the leftovers of a chicken. This included only the beak and feet to feed a family of 5 for a day. I knew their situation would never change. They knew their situation would never change. They did continue to pay tithing with what little they had. And did so willingly. There is a mistaken idea floating around that members that pay tithing will always receive financial stability or even financial success. Temporal blessings. I don’t believe this is always the case. I don’t even believe this is generally true. But we have been promised that the windows of heaven will open. That we will gain spiritual success. That the promised blessings will be spiritual in nature. And that some of these blessings may not even be realized in this life.
  3. Do you really think the Church is missing out on your tithing? From the sounds of it, the Church doesn't need your tithing, nor anyone's for the foreseeable future. I'm pretty sure they have enough to keep the lights running. But maybe from a different perspective, you may be missing out on spiritual blessings that God has in store for you because of not paying tithing.
  4. You are right in that there will be exceptions, but right now our current council from a prophet of God is this: "that the Lord has asked every worthy, able young man to prepare for and serve a mission. For Latter-day Saint young men, missionary service is a priesthood responsibility." (Russel M. Nelson, Sat Morning Session, April 2022 GC). So the question that worthy, able young men should be asking God is this: I am planning on fulfilling my responsibility to serve a mission unless You have a different plan for me? But what is the parent's responsibility. In the same GC session, President Ballard said the following: "Fathers and mothers of these wonderful youth, you have a vital role in this preparation process. Begin today to talk with your children about missionary service. We know that the family is the most profound influence in helping our young men and young women prepare." (M. Russel Ballard, Sat Moring Session, April 2022 GC). What is the vital role? Help to influence young men and women to prepare. But I do not see it as failing for the parents if the son does not choose to serve a mission, as long as the son was taught correctly regarding the charge to serve. This would be teaching them correct principles, but allowing them to use their moral agency to choose to follow the voice of the prophets. Few knew the doctrine of moral agency better than Lehi and Sariah, yet they still let all of their sons choose for themselves whether they would or would not follow God. Do we fault them for Laman and Lemuel choosing a different path? I would hope not. Yet on the opposite side of the spectrum, Eli in the book of 1 Samuel failed to teach his children correct principles, and so his sons sins fell and his head and his posterity was no longer worthy of the calling he had.
  5. I don’t hold to this mentality. I am perfectly ok if any of my sons choose not to serve a mission. But what I hope I can say of their decision to go or not go is that I taught them God’s expectation that they go and that they have the moral agency to heed or not that expectation. As an anecdote, a nephew of mine just told his family that he will not go on a mission. He is a great young man whether he goes or not. My brother and his wife have raised him well and are great parents. I don’t feel they did not succeed as parents or as members of the church because my nephew is not going on a mission.
  6. My oldest son just turned 18 a week ago today. He still has one year of high school remaining, so 9 more months to consider a mission. He gets the usual pressure from church, but nothing above and beyond what most have experienced for the last 40 or so years. I have had a few candid talks with him about serving a mission. I always speak of mine in high regard. He knows that it is something God would want him to do if he is able, which at this point his health and well being is superb. He has some friends and family members who have served and some who have not. He sees that all are treated equally within the church. Some that served missions have left the church. Some that didn't serve missions have left the church. Both me and my wife are encouraging him, but ultimately we said it is his decision and his alone. Our bishop said that out of all the priests in our ward, he is only one that is highly motivated to serve a mission. All that being said, I do not believe an 8 year old understands everything that God wishes him (sorry, I am just speaking of young men at this time) to do. This is the responsibility of parents to continue teaching the things of God. It's also important to understand that when ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood, the person receiving this priesthood does not take upon him the oath of the priesthood. This only happens when receiving the Melkisedek priesthood. So I don't see it as a "commandment" that all young men serve a mission. But if the young man has full understanding of moral agency and a willingness to be a servant of God, I do think all young men should fulfil a mission whether they want to or not, because this is what God wants them to do. If any of my three sons chooses not to serve a mission, they will still be loved and not treated any differently than the others.
  7. You left out a portion. "Every worthy, able you man to prepare for and serve a mission." That's one of the reasons I hate sound bites, people just choose the words that support their version of the argument and forget the rest.
  8. Didn’t he come to prominence by refusing to use the pronouns that some of his students were asking him to use? Accused the Canadian government that it was a type of compelled speech if they made him do so.
  9. Do you mean Josiah? Hezekiah was about ~50 years prior.
  10. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/transgender-understanding-yourself/how-does-the-church-define-gender?lang=eng “Gender is an essential characteristic of Heavenly Father’s plan of happiness. The intended meaning of gender in “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” is biological sex at birth.”
  11. Calm, you are amazing. That is the one.
  12. I’m hoping someone can help me out. I’m looking for a book, but cannot remember the name of it. It just has a bunch of different gospel topics, maybe 200 or so. For each topic there is a list of accompanying scripture citations, as well as quotes from modern day prophets. The book is rather thick, probably close to 5-600 pages. I originally owned it about 25 years ago. If you know which book I speak of, please let me know.
  13. I said nothing of the kiss. I was solely responding that we as parents make lots of decisions on what we want our children watching. Rated R movies being one of them in my household. My question was, is this considered “boycotting”? And if so, who am I boycotting? Is it a boycot if it’s for religious reasons and not a boycot if it isn’t?
  14. I don't let my children watch R rated movies. Is this considered a boycott in your opinion? The reasons for not wanting them to watch R rated movies varies, but often times it is because of sexual situations portrayed in the film. Having someone drink a cup of coffee is drastically different than the sexual scenes depicted.
  15. Saul’s intentions were wrong. During the sacrifice, part of the animal was given to the Levite performing the sacrifice for him to eat. Usually part of the shoulder and head. The person offering the sacrifice was given the rest for his family to eat. Saul and his army spared the sheep and oxen so that they could offer them as sacrifice. This meant that they could consume the animals after they had been brought to the altar. Is was going to be quite a feast for the Israelites. Sort of a “spoils of battle” victory feast. Obviously this was not what a sacrifice was intended for. So in this case it was better that Saul and his army should have destroyed the animals in the first place instead of sacrificing them with unrighteous intentions.
  16. We don’t know if genocide was actually committed. Archaeology doesn’t support it. My view that is unsupported is that when the children of Israel are commanded to wipe out a city/race/people, it is actually the ruling class and armies we are talking about. By wiping out these two groups of people, it stops any coup or insurrection. It prevents any children of the ruling class from gathering supporters to resist or fight back. Killing livestock and burning fields makes the conquered dependent on food and sustenance from the sieging army. Again to prevent a rebellion. Notice in this instance both Agag, the king of the Amalakites, and the livestock are not destroyed. The king is the ruling figure. Makes sense to kill him. But Saul did not. The livestock in this instance is a little different. Saul was saving it for a sacrificial offering. This meant that it would be, in essence, a giant BBQ for Saul and his army. The sacrifice was saved for the feast in particular, and not actually for the Lord. Saul’s motives were called into question. Better to have obeyed than to sacrifice.
  17. When a person feels shame because they have been asked not to partake of the sacrament for repentance purposes; is the shame they feel caused by their own internal thoughts, or is the church culpable for shaming them? One if my childhood teenage friends said one of the things that caused him to leave the church was the shame he felt when he was asked not to partake of the sacrament for a period of time. He felt the whole congregation was judging him. To be honest, I didn’t even know and I’m assuming most of the congregation didn’t either. And if some did know, they didn’t care.
  18. I don’t understand this. What does this have to do with breaking marriage covenants? Please explain.
  19. Again, it's the people who change, or want to break the covenants they have made with the person they have married and with God. God will always hold fast to his portion of the covenant. Will God advise divorce? Yes, but only after covenants have been broken by one or both spouses by abuse, neglect, unrighteous dominion, etc, or just one spouse falling out of love with the other and wanting it broken.
  20. Can you point me to somewhere where God asked someone to break their covenants? Scripture or modern day prophets and apostles? I don’t think that is ever God’s will. It always seems to be us that break the covenants we make jointly with God. It’s our will, not His when covenants are broken.
  21. I think there are different repercussions depending on where individuals are on their spiritual journey within the CoJC. Those that have only been baptized have only covenanted that they are "willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins" (D&C 20:37) Breaking temple covenants will have different repercussions, the first two in specifically: To live the Law of Obedience and to live the Law of Sacrifice. Those deciding to take a break are actively choosing to be disobedient to many of the commandments that they have covenanted to keep. That is totally up to them. And they may perceive to themselves to have valid reasons. This leads directly to the second temple covenant that is broken; the Law of Sacrifice. We are asked to sacrifice our own intentions for those of God. We must bring a broken heart and a contrite spirit. This means more than just tithing, or keeping the Sabbath day holy, or living a monthly fast. This actually means offering up our will to God. Those taking a break, for whatever reason (and I can think of some pretty egregious reasons that members of the CoJC have done to other members), are putting their own will over that of God. Am I going to judge people for taking a break. No. I have family, friends and acquaintances who have taken breaks, left completely, and some that are even actively trying to lead members away from the CoJC. But I do hope they have contemplated what they are doing. "There is a law... upon which all blessings are predicated- and when we obtain any blessing from God, it is upon obedience to that law..." (D&C 130:20-21) "For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory" (D&C 88:22) I don't want to sound overbearing, but this is the doctrine that we teach in the CoJC.
  22. The biggest clash that evolution has with church doctrine is the "no death before the fall" teaching. This is where people get hung up.
  23. The worst is Elimilech and Naomi. They named their sons Mahlon and Chilion. Roughly translated to Weakly and Sickly.
  24. There is a fallacy in the OP’s thinking of 1 Nephi 3:7, similar to the missing dollar fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_dollar_riddle By using this scripture to apply to both of the different commands together rather than individually that were given to Adam and Eve, we are combining equations that should not be combined. Let’s take each command individually and see if this verse applies. Multiply and replenish the earth: Did God prepare a way for this commandment to be fulfilled? Anyone who says “no” is flat out wrong. Of course there is a way to fulfill it. We know this for a fact because we are here. Adam and Eve did multiply and replenish the earth. Do not partake of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil: Did God prepare a way for this commandment to be fulfilled? Anyone who says “no” is flat out wrong. Of course there is a way to fulfill it. Just don’t partake. Simple as that. These two commandments are not contradictory, even though we sometimes view them as being that way. Just because breaking one will lead to being valiant on the other does not make them part of the same equation, and Nephi’s promise is always in tact as long as there is a choice involved. So ultimately it comes down to choice. There is agency involved in the fulfillment of both. God prepared a way that each commandment could be fulfilled individually.
  25. “I’m very, very grateful that in the Book of Mormon, and I think elsewhere in our scriptures, the fall of Adam has not been called a sin. It wasn’t a sin. … What did Adam do? The very thing the Lord wanted him to do; and I hate to hear anybody call it a sin, for it wasn’t a sin. Did Adam sin when he partook of the forbidden fruit? I say to you, no, he did not! Now, let me refer to what was written in the book of Moses in regard to the command God gave to Adam. [Moses 3:16–17.] “Now this is the way I interpret that: The Lord said to Adam, here is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you want to stay here, then you cannot eat of that fruit. If you want to stay here, then I forbid you to eat it. But you may act for yourself, and you may eat of it if you want to. And if you eat it, you will die. “I see a great difference between transgressing the law and committing a sin” (Joseph Fielding Smith, “Fall—Atonement—Resurrection—Sacrament,” in Charge to Religious Educators, 124).
×
×
  • Create New...