JAHS

Don't like it. Brother Joseph is turning over in his grave if he hasn't already been resurrected.

Here's a list of some. They mostly align with the NIV except for King James and New Amer Std Bible Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." (King James) Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me". (New International Version) I've been out of step with you for a long time, in the wrong since before I was born. (The Message) Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me. (New Amer. Std Bible) For I was born a sinner-- yes, from the moment my mother conceived me. (New Living Translation) See, I was born in sin and was in sin from my very beginning. (New Life Version) I have sinned and done wrong since the day I was born. (Contemporary English Version) I know I've been a sinner ever since I was born. I've been a sinner ever since my mother became pregnant with me. (New International Reader's Version) Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me. (New Revised Standard Version) Since we normally use the King James translation did David's mother conceive him in sin?

For example. David said: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." (King James) Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me". (New International Version)

Apparently the following entry was recently made in the Church Handbook: 38.8.40.1 Editions and translations of the Holy Bible The Church identifies editions of the Bible that align well with the Lord’s doctrine in the Book of Mormon and modern revelation (see Articles of Faith 1:8). A preferred edition of the Bible is then chosen for many languages spoken by Church members. In some languages, the Church publishes its own edition of the Bible. Church-published editions are based on standard Bible texts. Examples include: The King James Version in English. The Reina-Valera (2009) in Spanish. The Almeida (2015) in Portuguese. Church-published editions of the Bible include footnotes, subject indexes, and other study aids. Generally, members should use a preferred or Church-published edition of the Bible in Church classes and meetings. This helps maintain clarity in discussions and consistent understanding of doctrine. Other Bible translations may also be used. Some individuals may benefit from translations that are doctrinally clear and also easier to understand. Examples of such translations can be found in the Church’s Holy Bible list. When members encounter doctrinal discrepancies between Bible translations, they should refer to the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, and teachings of latter-day prophets. _________________________________________ Wondering if this will actually help or add more confusion when interpreting scripture? Like it says, there are some scriptures where the meanings do change depending on which Bible translation one is using.

This may have already been answered. On the subject of what non-latter-day saints believe about the triune God. When Jesus was resurrected and showed His flesh and bone body to His apostles did He maintain that physical body when He ascended to Heaven? And if He did, does that now mean that the triune God that most Christians believe in now also has a body of flesh and bone? And if not why?

Why is the only possible partnership to create spirits seen as husband and wife? It’s not apparently needed in anything else, at least in the sense we need to know about it. It makes sense to me both male and female are needed (assuming doctrine is correct and that is how eternally speaking sexual identity falls into categories) when both sexes are being created if part of creation requires the sharing of some personal element, which idea I am very fond of (literally giving a part of yourself to your children to carry with them as an eternal bond), but not necessarily marriage depending on what being parents actually mean in a community of Gods (and gods?) that are one. Edited Saturday at 07:30 PM by Calm The D&C says about those who don't choose eternal marriage: 16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. 17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever. Exaltation means the ability to increase in glory by the creation of spirit children and in that way to have eternal increase. And there are those who do not marry according to God's law and are appointed angels to those who did do that. In order for those people to be angels to those who are exalted they woud have to be in the same glory in order to be angels to those people. I don't think the angels could be those who inherit a Terrestrial glory.

D&C 131: 1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; 2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; It seems pretty clear that there are three levels in the Celestial kingdom, but I have often wondered myself if that is what is meant in that scripture. If there are three levels in the celestial kingdom, who would be the ones who would go to each of the other two levels and what would they do there(ministering angels perhaps?) The Gospel Topics doesn't say anything about the three levels in the Celestial Kingdom. William Clayton is the one who recorded this statement made by Joseph Smith in an informal setting and it is possible that he was just referring to the three main degrees of heaven. Joseph Smith never talked about it anywhere else.

It's not a bad thing but I just can't imagine how a resurrected couple of exalted beings with bodies of flesh and bone can create spirits instead of flesh and bone children the same way mortals create children with physical bodies. Somehow they have to take a pre-existing intelligence and change it into a spirit child that has a male or female gender.

Why do you think it requires "functions of the celestial body" for the procreation of spirit children? After Eve took the forbidden fruit and became mortal, God said to her: "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children;" (Gen 3:16). If God is going to "greatly multiply" the sorrow(pain) associated with child-birth, does this not suggest that perhaps before becoming mortal, there was a way to do it without all the pain associated with a mortal life? I doubt there is any pain at all and can't see how it would involve a process similar to mortal birth; although it apparently does involve participation of both heavenly parents to create the spirit children. But not endless celestial sex as some critics like to call it.

When he says, "I take it " appears to be a guess rather than a statement of fact. The Matthew scripture just mean that no one can get married in heaven. It does not mean we can't be married in heaven which is true for those in the lower kingdoms. During the time of Jesus the terms "marry" and "given in marriage" would mean the same thing. A man married a woman, and the woman was given to the man for marriage. The tradition being that a father gives his daughter to marry the man. This happens in this life. So it is possible to be married in heaven for those in the celestial kingdom.

And here comes the expected empty apologies: Cincinnati and Arizona apologize for religiously derogatory language by fans toward BYU

It might silence a few, but not all. A persons brain is not fully developed until after 25. They don't fully understand the consequences of what they do or say. Skills needed to understand and manage emotions and impulses begin to mature between 13-20 and then later on complex functions like decision-making, problem-solving, and abstract thinking increase.

There seems to be cases where different translations can lead to different interpretations. Consider this verse in different translations: Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." (King James) Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me". (New International Version) I've been out of step with you for a long time, in the wrong since before I was born. (The Message) Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me. (New Amer. Std Bible) For I was born a sinner-- yes, from the moment my mother conceived me. (New Living Translation) See, I was born in sin and was in sin from my very beginning. (New Life Version) I have sinned and done wrong since the day I was born. (Contemporary English Version) I know I've been a sinner ever since I was born. I've been a sinner ever since my mother became pregnant with me. (New International Reader's Version) Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me. (New Revised Standard Version) The King James version refers to the fact that as a consequence of the Fall of Adam, sin is present in the world and therefore all children are conceived in sin. David's mother lived in a sinful world and therefore David was concieved in sin. He did not mean that it was a sinful act for his mother to conceive him(Heb 13:4). In Psalms 51 David is pleading for forgiveness from God after being with Bathsheba and is explaining to God that since he was born into a sinful world, he has a propensity for commiting sins himself. Here is a clasic case where a different Bible translation gives us a completely different meaning for a scripture.

Try not to get whiplash reading these two stories: ‘Moved beyond words’: University of Cincinnati officials grateful for Latter-day Saint food donation to Bearcat students in need Cincinnati fans engaged in offensive chants directed toward BYU during football game against Cougars Of course there will be apologies and fines but it will not change their behavior.

Actually, most of the time I don't think many people even notices if a person goes on a mission or not. I know I don't. I would like to have gone on a senior mission with my wife but she passed away too soon for that. I don't think God favors anyone based on missionary service. He knows our hearts and judges us based on who we become rather that what we do.