Church to Celebrate 40 years since lifting the ban. He is what I hope happens.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

So are you of the opinion then, the only way to eternal life and everlasting joy for us humans had to include restoring polygamy and instituting the priesthood/temple ban due to race?

Kind of a, God had to do it that way to adhere to eternal laws, type of reasoning?

I cannot be sure but I suspect yes.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Yes.  Indeed it appears that God only wanted less than 1% of His children to actually participate in The Plan of Salvation while in the mortal state.  

Yes, just like he wanted to lose a third part of the hosts of heaven by presenting a plan he knew Satan and his minions would dislike.

Most people just do not want to rule the Universe which is fine. I hear even the lower kingdoms are nicer then this screwed up world.

[The Nehor]

47 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Maybe so.  Does the bible specify throughout the world's history we'd see very few people accept Christ?  if so, where?

If so, it also makes one wonder, how seriously ought we to take the Bible.  For God must care about humanity, or else he isn't.  

The Book of Mormon does. He cared enough to have me wander through freezing rain knocking on doors in the mostly vain hope someone would listen to his message. 

[stemelbow]

26 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The scripture is in Matt. 7: 13-14. I'm not sure I understand your wondering though.

Its interesting in context to consider Matthew was written at a time when Christians (which they likely weren't called at this point) were such an extreme, misunderstood, and perhaps even persecuted minority, but within a few short centuries (if centuries could be considered short), they were a majority in the empire.  It went from a very strait gate and narrow way, to a very wide gate and broad way.  But with that said, I get that if the Bible speaks to all times and all people it is saying very few will believe in Christ at all.  Then again, though, that brings up the question of what to make of Christianity generally.  My question had asked, does the Bible speak to the world and its history on this front.  Will there be times when accepting Christ is easier than at other times?  Or in some locations it works but in others it does not?  

 

Quote

 People have agency to choose to follow Christ or not.  If few accept Him, that has no bearing on whether or not God wants them to accept Him.  

I do get a bit skeptical when people presume to speak for God like this.  

Quote

There is a difference between reporting what will happen, and causing or wanting it to happen.  I think you are conflating the two.  

I'm not sure what you're talking about. But that's ok, it doesn't sound like it's what I'm after.  

[ksfisher]

32 minutes ago, california boy said:

In the graph that you posted, Mormons are the least liked Christian religion among

 

As I said earlier, I don't think this is exactly what the survey question was measuring.

However, your comments do bring this scripture to mind

"And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were ^afew, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon ^ball the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw."  (1 Nephi 14:12)

 

I don't think that God is interested in the popularity of His religion.  I think what pleases Him most is when those who have made covenants with Him keep those covenants. 

[stemelbow]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I cannot be sure but I suspect yes.

Surely living by faith might mean we simply cannot be sure, right?  Interesting take, The Nehor.  you're wrong, but interesting nonetheless.  

[The Nehor]

Just now, stemelbow said:

Surely living by faith might mean we simply cannot be sure, right?  Interesting take, The Nehor.  you're wrong, but interesting nonetheless.  

No, you can be sure and still need faith. I have met several people who know the gospel is true but do nothing about it in the same way I know people who know they should eat healthier but instead choose to kill themselves slowly or people who know they should save money for retirement but would rather splurge now and eat dog food when they are old. If knowing something is true always impelled us to action and we acted rationally on that knowledge human history would be very different.

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

The Book of Mormon does. He cared enough to have me wander through freezing rain knocking on doors in the mostly vain hope someone would listen to his message. 

Or you did it in hopes to please him, but failed to so please him.  I hate to throw doubt into you, but I doubt it'd stick with you anywho.  I'm just saying he might have had you doing something more useful for those couple of years if you'd but listen.  But as it turned out you were trained in some way to think walking through freezing rain hoping someone would listen was what he wanted of you.  And felt strongly about it.  

Hey, i'm not hating.  I did the same, although our weather extremes went from frozen to what I considered unbearably hot.  My wife thinks I got lucky (and in more ways than I, I'd agree) though cause she went through 1.5 years of sweating with no relief seeing as most buildings had no AC.  

[The Nehor]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Or you did it in hopes to please him, but failed to so please him.  I hate to throw doubt into you, but I doubt it'd stick with you anywho.  I'm just saying he might have had you doing something more useful for those couple of years if you'd but listen.  But as it turned out you were trained in some way to think walking through freezing rain hoping someone would listen was what he wanted of you.  And felt strongly about it.  

Hey, i'm not hating.  I did the same, although our weather extremes went from frozen to what I considered unbearably hot.  My wife thinks I got lucky (and in more ways than I, I'd agree) though cause she went through 1.5 years of sweating with no relief seeing as most buildings had no AC.  

No, he was happy with it. He told me so.

[california boy]

15 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, just like he wanted to lose a third part of the hosts of heaven by presenting a plan he knew Satan and his minions would dislike.

Most people just do not want to rule the Universe which is fine. I hear even the lower kingdoms are nicer then this screwed up world.

Yeah I am one of those guys.  The Celestial Kingdom seems like a series of endless meetings and lots of responsibility.  Deciding when to set off an earthquake, flooding the entire earth killing millions of people, answering people who loose their keys constantly.  For heavens sake, can't you keep track of your keys yourself?  

The other options are looking pretty good to me.

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

As opposed to that dull restoring the only way to eternal life and everlasting joy which is unamazing, uninspirational, and a little boring.

Exactly! 

[stemelbow]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

No, he was happy with it. He told me so.

Well, my man, you should be prophet, because such explicit claims to speak to God never comes from our fearless leaders--unless you equate the still small voice or strong internal impressions as God saying so.  If so, then meh...Hinckley told us that wasn't really a voice of any kind so it wasn't God speaking to you/him/us.  

Quote

Now, if a problem should arise on which we don't have an answer, we pray about it, we may fast about it, and it comes. Quietly. Usually no voice of any kind, but just a perception in the mind. I liken it to Elijah's experience. When he sought the Lord, there was a great wind, and the Lord was not in the wind. And there was an earthquake, and the Lord was not in the earthquake. And a fire, and the Lord was not in the fire. But in a still, small voice. Now that's the way it works

Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, San Francisco Chronicle, Sunday Interview, April 13, 1997, by Don Lattin

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

They are wrong and I am right. It is quite simple. Try and pay attention.

By that standard and I am deciding that you do not exist and you are a product of my deranged imagination. I am going to call a therapist to get help so I can utterly destroy you. Thanks for helping me reach this breakthrough.

Let me know if you need any pictures or mementos of me for a voodoo doll.  

[stemelbow]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

Yeah I am one of those guys.  The Celestial Kingdom seems like a series of endless meetings and lots of responsibility.  Deciding when to set off an earthquake, flooding the entire earth killing millions of people, answering people who loose their keys constantly.  For heavens sake, can't you keep track of your keys yourself?  

The other options are looking pretty good to me.

lol.  my sentiments exactly.  Once I stopped and wondered why we were all striving for eternal boredom and endless haughtiness, I realized, I guess I'm one of those lesser telestial or terrestrial souls.  Can't really change that, might as well look forward to it with glee and make a heaven out of the hells with whoever is lesser like me.  

Edited April 20, 2018 by stemelbow

[california boy]

19 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Its interesting in context to consider Matthew was written at a time when Christians (which they likely weren't called at this point) were such an extreme, misunderstood, and perhaps even persecuted minority, but within a few short centuries (if centuries could be considered short), they were a majority in the empire.  It went from a very strait gate and narrow way, to a very wide gate and broad way.  But with that said, I get that if the Bible speaks to all times and all people it is saying very few will believe in Christ at all.  Then again, though, that brings up the question of what to make of Christianity generally.  My question had asked, does the Bible speak to the world and its history on this front.  Will there be times when accepting Christ is easier than at other times?  Or in some locations it works but in others it does not?  

 

I do get a bit skeptical when people presume to speak for God like this.  

I'm not sure what you're talking about. But that's ok, it doesn't sound like it's what I'm after.  

The majority of God's children will probably never even hear of Christ.  And even if they do and reject the message, it really doesn't matter does it.  They will all get the chance when they actually know that Christ exists.  This earth has little to do with all but a fraction of a percent of God's children.  Seems like a big todo over very little results.  

[california boy]

22 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

As I said earlier, I don't think this is exactly what the survey question was measuring.

However, your comments do bring this scripture to mind

"And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were ^afew, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon ^ball the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw."  (1 Nephi 14:12)

 

I don't think that God is interested in the popularity of His religion.  I think what pleases Him most is when those who have made covenants with Him keep those covenants. 

Well that seems to be pretty apparent.  God has worked pretty hard to make his religion and what it stands for disliked.

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

To be sexist and racist, a policy has to be aimed against women and blacks respectively as inferior beings to men and whites. No LDS priesthood policies were ever directed against women or blacks; they were not anti-woman or anti-black despite anyone’s errant beliefs about gender or racial superiority. Hence the essay condemns “ideas about racial inferiority” without condemning the ban as anti-black.

 

This is consistent with celebrating the 1978 revelation rather than either apologizing for or condemning the ban.

The policies were "aimed against" women and blacks very specifically.  And you can't tell me you aren't familiar with teachings about blacks being inferior, as well as women.  The way you are trying to twist the meaning of essay isn't reasonable.  Give me the language in the essay to support your reading as I'm not seeing it.  

[CV75]

1 minute ago, hope_for_things said:

The policies were "aimed against" women and blacks very specifically.  And you can't tell me you aren't familiar with teachings about blacks being inferior, as well as women.  The way you are trying to twist the meaning of essay isn't reasonable.  Give me the language in the essay to support your reading as I'm not seeing it.  

You clearly don't understand what I'm actually posting.

Edited April 20, 2018 by CV75

[Jeanne]

14 minutes ago, california boy said:

Yeah I am one of those guys.  The Celestial Kingdom seems like a series of endless meetings and lots of responsibility.  Deciding when to set off an earthquake, flooding the entire earth killing millions of people, answering people who loose their keys constantly.  For heavens sake, can't you keep track of your keys yourself?  

The other options are looking pretty good to me.

I have not..even in my TBM days, seen anything I wanted in the CK.  Just let me visit family and I am okay...don't want to live with a lot of them.. 

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Again, repentance is not apology, and one certainly does not share the same attitude in seeking them. You may find that arrogant (and immoral, and hypocritical and dangerous, oh my!), but it's the message of the Beatitudes. Your lack of appreciating the difference, and inability to offer a scriptural precedent for institutional apology, undermines your rationale. Focus on that as to why I don't believe an apology is needed; evidently it's a bit easier to digest. I showed you how you misrepresented Church leaders, but if you don't want to admit it you don't have to apologize.

Not sure we're getting anywhere close to a productive or interesting back and forth.  I have no clue what beatitude you think supports your idea that apologies are not scriptural.  Lots of people had a hard time with the Elder Oaks statement a couple years ago about the word apology not being in scripture as well.  I find the entire gospel message supportive of the whole idea of apologizing and making things better wherever possible.  

To try and extract some kind of technical argument out of a core gospel ideal is a problem with religion.  Religion should not be about technicalities and legalistic interpretations, its should be about about loving, serving, doing good and promoting peace.  

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

In the graph that you posted, Mormons are the least liked Christian religion among

Total Population

Protestants

White mainline

Black Protestants

Catholics

Unaffilated

Came in second place amongst Jews, Atheists and Agnostics.  No other Christian religion is thought of in such a negative light.

 

We weren't the least liked among unaffiliated.  And the poll does not say that we are thought of in a negative light.  It says that out of the roughly 3,000 people they surveyed, we were thought of in a neutral light.

Quote

I am not sure what your question has to do with what we are talking about how the church is viewed by those outside Mormonism.  Convincing others that racism, multiple wives and preventing children of gay parents from being baptized is a good commandment revealed by God has proven to be difficult both outside the church and also many within the church.

You said "if God did institute these doctrines, then it has put the church in very unfavorable light with the majority of Americans.  Kind of an odd plan for getting your children to find and embrace His church."  I'm asking if you have any evidence support your assertion that it is odd for God to act in such a way.  

 

 

[bluebell]

59 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Its interesting in context to consider Matthew was written at a time when Christians (which they likely weren't called at this point) were such an extreme, misunderstood, and perhaps even persecuted minority, but within a few short centuries (if centuries could be considered short), they were a majority in the empire.  It went from a very strait gate and narrow way, to a very wide gate and broad way.  But with that said, I get that if the Bible speaks to all times and all people it is saying very few will believe in Christ at all.  Then again, though, that brings up the question of what to make of Christianity generally.  My question had asked, does the Bible speak to the world and its history on this front.  Will there be times when accepting Christ is easier than at other times?  Or in some locations it works but in others it does not?  

 

I do get a bit skeptical when people presume to speak for God like this.  

I'm not sure what you're talking about. But that's ok, it doesn't sound like it's what I'm after.  

That promise appears in more than just the bible and applies to all of God's children, not just those living on the earth at a certain time.  Even right now, when more people probably know about Christianity than have ever known in the history of the earth, the majority reject it.  

[Glenn101]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Came in second place amongst Jews, Atheists and Agnostics.  No other Christian religion is thought of in such a negative light.

And this is indicative of what in God's eyes?

Glenn

 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Yeah I am one of those guys.  The Celestial Kingdom seems like a series of endless meetings and lots of responsibility.  Deciding when to set off an earthquake, flooding the entire earth killing millions of people, answering people who loose their keys constantly.  For heavens sake, can't you keep track of your keys yourself?  

The other options are looking pretty good to me.

I can promise you that if that is what it is like I will be joining you pretty quickly. Except for the earthquake thing. I would have fun setting off an earthquake.

Edited April 20, 2018 by The Nehor

[The Nehor]

57 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Well, my man, you should be prophet, because such explicit claims to speak to God never comes from our fearless leaders--unless you equate the still small voice or strong internal impressions as God saying so.  If so, then meh...Hinckley told us that wasn't really a voice of any kind so it wasn't God speaking to you/him/us.  

I know right?

I made sure I always had my phone on me for months before General Conference and they did not call me be an Apostle. Probably got rejected due to the new Affirmative Action policy.

 

Oh, and the apostles do have revelations other than what Hinckley described. Hinckley was talking to a disbelieving audience and while revelation often comes as he describes I do not believe it was exclusively that way for him. I know it was not true of his apostles.