Today is Judgment Day!

[SilverKnight]

Ah I see, your a well forget the rules if a man says other wise it must be so!

No, it's there job to speak under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost to clarify scriptures, there personal opinions are not inspired though.

Okay Guy, do you realize that D&C 84 came from Joseph Smith himself?

The prophet of the restoration was clarifying his own revelation.

Do you even understand what the purpose of a living prophet is?

So the whole idea that those ignorant of the law cannot be judged by the law doesn't ring a bell to you?

So yes, I would rather be a non LDS mass murderer like Hitler on the Day of Judgement, than a LDS who broke my covenants, and lied to God.

I don't know what kind of insane demon-haunted world you live in, but to even suggest breaking priesthood covenants could be even in the same league as the mass murder of innocent people is beyond ridiculous.

It is so outrageous it's not even worth discussing.

I guess it's better to have primitive zealots converting mormonism than Jihadist Islam.

Yes, making a promise to God and then breaking it is very very serious, outer darkness serious IMO.

BTW, I think just about every mormon on this board, and Thomas S Monson himself, would vehemently disagree with you.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Okay Guy, do you realize that D&C 84 came from Joseph Smith himself?

The prophet of the restoration was clarifying his own revelation.

WRONG, it's not Smith's revelation, it's Christs revelation given trough the prophet Joseph Smith! Prophets don't make revelations, they receive revelations from Christ, it's Christ will they are only the servant and the servant can make changes to the lords revealed will.

Do you even understand what the purpose of a living prophet is?

Yes I do, it appears that you don't if you think prophets make their own revelation, instead of receive the Lord's revelations.

Now at least I understand why you are so confused you think that a prophet is more than a man through whom God works, if you read the scriptures in detail and pray sincerely you will leave this incorrect notion behind.

I don't know what kind of insane demon-haunted world you live in, but to even suggest breaking priesthood covenants could be even in the same league as the mass murder of innocent people is beyond ridiculous.

The world that the Lord revealed through his prophets, "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." (Mat 10:33) breaking your covenants is denying Christ, which means he denies you. This has nothing to do with demons (but it appears that unless I disagree with you I am some kind of crazy, that's showing love to your brother!) it has everything to do with the scriptures, and until new scripture from the living prophet is revealed to amend this it stands.

Do you hold the Priesthood? If you do how long ago was your interview?

The idea that breaking the priesthood covenant is an unforgivable sin has been covered in every priesthood interview I have been in. They make sure that you understand 100% the seriousness of the promises you are making and the consequences of breaking those holy promises to God. So unless you do not have the priesthood, I do not understand how you are unaware of this.

It is so outrageous it's not even worth discussing.

You are completely right, you have nothing to discuss here because you have nothing to support your wrong position. What I have said is plain, simple, and the standing doctrine of the Church unless something has changed between last Wednesday (when I was interviewed to be ordained as an Elder) and today.

I guess it's better to have primitive zealots converting mormonism than Jihadist Islam.

So now I am a Jihadist! ROFL

You don't even know me but apparently your ego is big enough to allow you to make such a statement about someone you do not know.

BTW, I think just about every mormon on this board, and Thomas S Monson himself, would vehemently disagree with you.

Well you are wrong, if you want we can write the Prophet and see what he thinks about the topic but this seems a utter waste of his time since he follow the scriptures.

Also it is very disingenuous to think you know the prophet so well to tell me what he would think. Your ego is far bigger than I though!

Also I can tell you that the my Stake President is a very devout Mormon he has called by a Prophet of God to lead our stake and ordained by the hands of an Apostle to do so, he agrees with me because he is the one who told me this last Wednesday when I was interviewed to be ordained an Elder.

So once again you are wrong, Mormons believe breaking your covenants is worse than mass murder, since breaking your covenants cannot be forgiven in this life or the next.

[LDS Guy 1986]

I have to disagree with LDS Guy on #1 going to Outer Darkness. I doubt that person had a sure knowledge of Jesus Christ etc. Do any of us, excepting some Apostles and Prophets, of course?

D&C 84:41 says whoever takes the covenant of the priesthood (which this man did to be able to get a temple recommend) and violates that covenant (which he does by abusing his family and being dishonest not only to his fellow man but to God (when he lied and said he was honest in his dealings with all men in his temple recommend interview)) he can receive no forgiveness in this life or the next. This means you are sent to outer darkness as a son of perdition, D&C 84 is very clear, and the Stake Presidency is very clear about this when you desire to be ordained an Elder (as I just did last Wednesday).

So ultimately I have the scriptures on my side, it's not about him knowing Christ, it's about him taking upon himself (of his own will) the Priesthood of God and violating the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood.

[LDSToronto]

So once again you are wrong, Mormons believe breaking your covenants is worse than mass murder, since breaking your covenants cannot be forgiven in this life or the next.

People who break covenants can be forgiven. Take the case of a temple-endowed who man commits adultery. He is excommunicated, and then re-baptized, and has his temple blessings restored. Happens all the time.

H.

[LDS Guy 1986]

People who break covenants can be forgiven. Take the case of a temple-endowed who man commits adultery. He is excommunicated, and then re-baptized, and has his temple blessings restored. Happens all the time.

H.

Yeah this is totally not germane and you know it Toronto, we are talking about a guy that never repented and hid his sins by constantly lying to the Church leadership.

Also when you are excommunicated and rejoin it is uncommon for your temple ordinances to be restored or for you to be allowed to attend temple again. Especially if you are abusing your family and lie to the stake presidency at least once a year!

So come on now and cut the silly stuff.

To quote my Stake President "Dead beat Dad's do not advance in this Church"

Added by Edit:

Also the scriptures disagree, sins against the Holy Ghost cannot be forgiven in THIS LIFE or the NEXT.

[krose]

WRONG, it's not Smith's revelation, it's Christs revelation given trough the prophet Joseph Smith! Prophets don't make revelations, they receive revelations from Christ, it's Christ will they are only the servant and the servant can make changes to the lords revealed will.

AHAH!

I have been saying exactly that for years, whenever anyone claims that JS later clarified that "hot drinks" in Sec 89 meant "coffee and tea," presumably of any temperature. (I'm going to assume you meant to say "cannot make changes..." above.)

But that's a different topic.

[The Nehor]

The purpose of this thread is to rank the following three hypothetical individuals appearing before the judgment seat of God:

Cool, I like hypothetical judgment since it's the only time I'm allowed to.

1. The man who is an active, tithe-paying, temple-attending, calling-accepting Latter-day Saint who verbally abuses his wife, berates his children, and is dishonest in his business practices.

"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." -Matthew 7:23

Of course dependent on repentance which you didn't specify.

2. The man who is not a member of the LDS Church, but who is honest and upstanding in his dealings with his fellow men, and who is charitable, kind and forgiving.

Too vague to answer. Does he cherish goodness or is he trying to be respectable? If he seeks happiness he will find it. If not, not.

3. The man who is not a member of the LDS Church, whose life is riddled with sin, but who is sorrowful and contrite over the sins he commits, and pleads for forgiveness.

The people Jesus came to save.

This is the way they appear before the judgment seat. There has been no intervening activity in the spirit world; no temple ordinances accepted by the non-LDS people.

Confuses the issue. If they didn't accept God's forgiveness then there won't be any.

How do these three people rank in God's eyes, and what scriptures would you use to support your position?

1. Telestial or Perdition (depending on if he repents in hell).

2. Terrestrial.

3. No idea, he seems to have found God but rejected God's ordinances when it was clear what they were. Will probably get off on an insanity plea.

[LDS Guy 1986]

AHAH!

I have been saying exactly that for years, whenever anyone claims that JS later clarified that "hot drinks" in Sec 89 meant "coffee and tea," presumably of any temperature. (I'm going to assume you meant to say "cannot make changes..." above.)

But that's a different topic.

First off explaining to later generations what the word hot drinks meant in 1830's is not clarification, and I wouldn't push your luck here,the Church might say your right, and flat our ban caffeine all together (which doesn't bother me cause I'm caffeine free anyway)!

Also if I recall it wasn't Joseph but later prophets that explained this because of confusion.

The point still stands clarifying a confusing word is totally different than changing an entire section of the D&C.

[krose]

Now for the original question...

Man #1: Reborn as a female peasant in a poor country to learn more humility.

Man #2: Reborn as a child who inherits a large fortune, to see if he continues to do even more good because he has more to give.

Man #3: Gets to repeat his life under similar circumstances to give him another chance to overcome his weaknesses.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Now for the original question...

Man #1: Reborn as a female peasant in a poor country to learn more humility.

Man #2: Reborn as a child who inherits a large fortune, to see if he continues to do even more good because he has more to give.

Man #3: Gets to repeat his life under similar circumstances to give him another chance to overcome his weaknesses.

I don't think this is what is asked, when it asks what would you do as god. It refereed to as god as he is understood by LDS theology.

So seeing that there is no reincarnation in LDS theology your answers are irrelevant.

It seems that what was really being asked is why is it an unforgivable sin for a LDS to break his covenants and not a unforgivable sin for a non LDS to be a genocidal maniac.

[zerinus]

1 Goes to outer darkness, he broke his covenants and repeatedly lied to Church (without remorse) after accepting the Covenants of the Priesthood in the Temple, according to the scriptures as I understand them, he has sinned against the Holy Ghost (as defined in D&C 84:41) and is a Son of Perdition.

The expression

[SilverKnight]

WRONG, it's not Smith's revelation, it's Christs revelation given trough the prophet Joseph Smith! Prophets don't make revelations, they receive revelations from Christ, it's Christ will they are only the servant and the servant can make changes to the lords revealed will.

<SNIP>

So once again you are wrong, Mormons believe breaking your covenants is worse than mass murder, since breaking your covenants cannot be forgiven in this life or the next.

Okay Guy,

I think I'll start a new thread outlining your doctrinal claims, and allow the members of this board (mostly all active recommend-holding LDS, professional apologists, and more than a few bishops) see if they hold up.

Should be an educational experience for you.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Okay Guy,

I think I'll start a new thread outlining your doctrinal claims, and allow the members of this board (mostly all active recommend-holding LDS, professional apologists, and more than a few bishops) see if they hold up.

Should be an educational experience for you.

See unlike you I don't seek the approval of man (for all I care every member of the Church could be against it, this isn't a democracy of God it's the Kingdom of God and Christ is King) so I is meaningless to me, I seek the approval of Christ, and no man can dictate that to me (except the living prophet through revelations from Christ), only the Holy Ghost.

You are very combative, over something that is so plain and simple.

If you do not want to accept the revelations of God, than don't, it is the exact and current doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and I know this is true because the leadership of the Church explained this to me last week!

[LDSToronto]

Yeah this is totally not germane and you know it Toronto, we are talking about a guy that never repented and hid his sins by constantly lying to the Church leadership.

You said: "So once again you are wrong, Mormons believe breaking your covenants is worse than mass murder, since breaking your covenants cannot be forgiven in this life or the next."

Read that ten times, and then tell me why my comments were not germane to the discussion.

Also when you are excommunicated and rejoin it is uncommon for your temple ordinances to be restored or for you to be allowed to attend temple again.

Absolutely incorrect. One can make an application to have temple covenants and priesthood restored, one year post re-admission. This privilege is granted by the First Presidency and is carried out by the Stake President under the direction of the aforementioned First Presidency.

Especially if you are abusing your family and lie to the stake presidency at least once a year!

Presumably, this person would not qualify for re-admission.

To quote my Stake President "Dead beat Dad's do not advance in this Church"

That is right - a father who does not pay child support can not hold a temple recommend.

Added by Edit:

Also the scriptures disagree, sins against the Holy Ghost cannot be forgiven in THIS LIFE or the NEXT.

LDS Guy, I'm not sure what experience you have, or what reading you have done, but if you do a little bit of research, you can find many GA statements about what it means to sin against the Holy Ghost. I get the feeling that you aren't completely informed on this topic.

H.

[krose]

First off explaining to later generations what the word hot drinks meant in 1830's is not clarification, and I wouldn't push your luck here,the Church might say your right, and flat our ban caffeine all together (which doesn't bother me cause I'm caffeine free anyway)!

Also if I recall it wasn't Joseph but later prophets that explained this because of confusion.

The point still stands clarifying a confusing word is totally different than changing an entire section of the D&C.

I hate to get even more off the subject, but I can't stop myself.

Actually, the interpretation came from a second-hand report of Smith saying that it meant coffee and tea because "what else do people drink hot?". But unless this and later statements rise to the level of new revelation, I would think the original words trump them. There is nothing confusing about the simple original wording, especially when we consider it was a common medical belief at the time that ingesting very hot or very cold substances was harmful. It's clear to me that "hot" meant "hot," and anyone who came up with clarifications later were no more inspired than those who came up with their own reasons (fence-sitters, etc.) for the priesthood ban.

Sorry Consiglieri. I'll shut up now.

[LDS Guy 1986]

LDS Guy, I'm not sure what experience you have, or what reading you have done, but if you do a little bit of research, you can find many GA statements about what it means to sin against the Holy Ghost. I get the feeling that you aren't completely informed on this topic.

I am sorry but a statement does not trump the scriptures, it they are inspired and publish this inspiration I will consider it and hope I will follow the prophets, but it is hard to follow the prophets when they do what the Bible warns false prophets will do which is change the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thankfully though, I can rest assured that while I know that there are members and even GA's who have differing opinions about the scripture they follow the inspiration of the Lord instead of there opinions and not become false prophets. So as I said before it's not germane to the topic.

[LDSToronto]

I am sorry but a statement does not trump the scriptures, it they are inspired and publish this inspiration I will consider it and hope I will follow the prophets, but it is hard to follow the prophets when they do what the Bible warns false prophets will do which is change the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thankfully though, I can rest assured that while I know that there are members and even GA's who have differing opinions about the scripture they follow the inspiration of the Lord instead of there opinions and not become false prophets. So as I said before it's not germane to the topic.

Well, as Copernicus said, "You can believe what you'd like; the earth still orbits the sun".

H.

[SilverKnight]

See unlike you I don't seek the approval of man (for all I care every member of the Church could be against it, this isn't a democracy of God it's the Kingdom of God and Christ is King) so I is meaningless to me, I seek the approval of Christ, and no man can dictate that to me (except the living prophet through revelations from Christ), only the Holy Ghost.

If you do not want to accept the revelations of God, than don't, it is the exact and current doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and I know this is true because the leadership of the Church explained this to me last week!

LDS Guy, I posted a new thread with your alleged 'exact and current' doctrines of the church:

Please feel welcome to defend to your claims there.

[LDSToronto]

I am sorry but a statement does not trump the scriptures, it they are inspired and publish this inspiration I will consider it and hope I will follow the prophets, but it is hard to follow the prophets when they do what the Bible warns false prophets will do which is change the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thankfully though, I can rest assured that while I know that there are members and even GA's who have differing opinions about the scripture they follow the inspiration of the Lord instead of there opinions and not become false prophets. So as I said before it's not germane to the topic.

Just in case you are open to further light and knowledge, Jeffrey R. Holland said, in April 2008 session of General Conference (emphasis added):

"the scriptures are not the ultimate source of knowledge for Latter-day Saints. They are manifestations of the ultimate source. The ultimate source of knowledge and authority for a Latter-day Saint is the living God. The communication of those gifts comes from God as living, vibrant, divine revelation."

You may consider reading this talk, and following some of the references.

H.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Just in case you are open to further light and knowledge, Jeffrey R. Holland said, in April 2008 session of General Conference (emphasis added):

"the scriptures are not the ultimate source of knowledge for Latter-day Saints. They are manifestations of the ultimate source. The ultimate source of knowledge and authority for a Latter-day Saint is the living God. The communication of those gifts comes from God as living, vibrant, divine revelation."

You may consider reading this talk, and following some of the references.

H.

And modern revelation becomes modern SCRIPTURE!!!!!

Way to take Elder Holland out of context!

[thesometimesaint]

Krose:

You might find this interesting.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Word_of_Wisdom/History_and_implementation

[consiglieri]

I hate to get even more off the subject, but I can't stop myself.

Sorry Consiglieri. I'll shut up now.

No problemo, mi amigo.

LDS Guy has that effect on people.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Doctor Steuss]

I would feel negligent in my duties if I also didn

[zerinus]

So D&C 84:41 is a lie?

The key to that scripture is, "and altogether turneth thereform," whatever that means. I don't think we can establish strict criteria for determining when somebody has stepped over the line, unless one has special mandate from the Lord to be able to detect it. I think the mistake you are making is in trying to reduce the detection of that sin to a computer algorithm. I don't think that can be done. When somebody commits that sin, the only people who are going to know it are the Lord and the person who has committed the sin, and a prophet with the right gift of discernment to be able to detect it. You can't establish predetermined criteria for identifying who has committed that sin. The closest you can get to it is the above scriptural expression, which I believe is deliberately left vague. When has somebody "altogether turned thereform"? How do you detect it? How do you identify it? I don't think you can, unless it is by a special revelation from the Lord.

[consiglieri]

As to the OP; I need a bit of clarification. Does #3 plead to G-d for forgiveness, or simply plead for forgiveness in a sort of abstract internal struggle with his conscience? Just want to make sure in case I get a wild hair and feel like digging through google my scriptures.

Great question, Herr Doktor!

(By the way, you just got honorary mention in a contemporary thread as the first of the Consiglieri Seven.)

Mister, we deal in lead.

But Number Three does plead to G-d for forgiveness, not just in some sort of abstract way. He is actually crying unto G-d for mercy as G-d stands before him.

What say you?

All the Best!

--Cap'n Poopie Pants (reboot)