Laffopuritain

The church believes in Eternal Progression.

At a certain point, (when we are like God) progression will be exponential (children then grandchildren etc.), but up until that point, will progression be (is it now) linear or exponential?

Along with this same question, Does the effort required of us stay the same in order to progress, or does it increase as well. For example, Will you be expected to put forth more effort one year from now than you currently do in living Gospel Standards? Or will the same amount of effort, over that period of time lead to proper progression?

A few things.

I've been told (though I can't find an authoritative source- if you can, please do) that everyone will speak the language of Adam in the Millennium.

Also, that there will be no sickness.

Moroni 10:19, however says "...all these gifts of which I have spoken, which are spiritual, never will be done away, even as long as the world shall stand..."

The gifts it specifically lists are 'the ability to teach the word of wisdom,' 'the ability to teach the word of knowledge,' 'gift of great faith,' 'gift of healing,' 'work miracles,' 'gift of prophecy,' 'beholding of angels,' 'gift of speaking tongues,' 'gift of interpreting tongues.'

If there will be one tongue, how can there still be the gift of tongues (which, remember, is different from the gift of the seer)? If there is no sickness, how can there still be the gift of healing?

for example, let's say something costs $1.88. with a 6% sales tax, it costs $1.9928. Since you can't charge someone $0.0028, it is rounded up to $2.00.

Do this 100 times over the course of a year. and the items would have cost 188 dollars, 199.28 after tax, but you would have collected 200 dollars. where does the extra 72 cents go? to the government, or in the shop owner's pocket?

If Jesus lived today in America instead of 2000 years ago in Israel, would the parable of 'The Good Samaritan' be changed to the parable of 'The Good Illegal Immigrant'?

Luke 10:30-37

Let's say a couple is married by the bishop, but never brings the filled out marriage license back to the courthouse after the Bishop performs the ceremony. A few weeks later, they decide they don't want to be married afterall. Since they never turned in the paperwork, they were never married according to the law, and so do not need a divorce.

Is the sex they had during this time period "outside of marriage"? Will God hold them responsible for the temporal covenants they made with each other during the ceremony, even if the marriage was never legally finished?

Isn't Jesus' parable of the tares (allow the tares to grow with the wheat until the time of harvest) in direct opposition to Jesus' saying "if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."

One says to allow the bad to grow with the good, because if you get rid of the bad you'll also be hurting the good.

The other says not to worry too much about a portion of the good, because it is better to get rid of the bad so the rest of the good can survive.

What am I missing?

Is the Holy Ghost a person? If so, is he an angel like Jesus, or is he Jehovah explained differently? If not a person, is 'it' the influence of God?

What exactly is the Holy Ghost?

Is there a difference between the Holy Ghost and "your Bible-trained conscience?"

Feel free to answer if you're not JW, but Best Answer will go to a JW.

Was Elder Bruce McKonkie apostate when he stated the following, or am I the one that misunderstands the doctrine? I realize that even apostles can be mistaken, but the worship of Christ is at the very core of what I believe the church stands for.

"We worship the Father and him only and no one else. We do not worship the Son and we do not worship the Holy Ghost. I know perfectly well about what the scriptures say about worshipping Christ and Jehovah, but they are speaking in an entirely different sense - the sense of standing in awe and being reverentially grateful to Him who has redeemed us. Worship in the true and saving sense is reserved for God first, the Creator." (Bruce McConkie, Speech at BYU on March 2 1982).

How would Lucifer have taken our agency, if he had been given the chance?

1. Agency a real "thing" that can be taken or given at will if you know how- just like eyeballs.

2. He would have changed the makeup of our brains, so that our spirits could not freely use the potential for decision making we are given today.

3. He would have been more proactive in the governance of God's children- showing more miracles and ruling by fear etc.

4. Can you think of other possibilities?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/52379172-77/by...

is the title of this article, "Monson: Jake Heaps will have a monster year and 11 other things bound to happen" intentionally misleading?

Of course, the first thing you're thinking is that the article is claiming the Prophet has made a football prophecy. But then you open the article, and see the author is "Gordon Monson"

Was this done intentionally, especially since it was posted by the Salt Lake Tribune?

Is this being too bold? Or is it just right? Why don't we hear about the Apostles speaking to modern day apostates this way?

http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/UK/miscUK01.h...

"COPY OF A LETTER FROM JAMES J. STRANG

TO ORSON HYDE AND JOHN TAYLOR.

Philadelphia, August 30th 1846.

Messrs J. Taylor and Orson Hyde, -- Knowing from your public proceedings, as well as otherwise, that you and others associated with you, claim the right and are attempting to use the power of dictating all the affairs of the church of Jesus Christ in all the world, not under the directions of the first presidency thereof, but independently; I suggest to you the propriety of publicly shewing by what means you are authorized to act as leaders to said church, and offer to publicly discuss that question with you in this city, or any other proper place that will suit your convenience.

Your answer to this left at the house of Jacob Gibson on the N. E. corner of Third and Dock Streets, near the post-office, will receive immediate attention.

Yours respectfully, JAMES J. STRANG.

ANSWER TO THE ABOVE.

Sir. -- After Lucifer was cut off and thrust down to hell, we have no knowledge that God ever condescended to investigate the subject or right of authority with him.

Your case has been disposed of by the authorities of the church, and being satisfied with our own power and calling, we have no disposition to ask from whence yours came.

Yours respectfully, ORSON HYDE,

JOHN TAYLOR."

I heard it in a stake conference awhile back, and took notes for it. I would love to know where and when it was made, and possibly a link to the full talk. Of course, it is paraphrased because I don't take notes word for word.

"if you don't have faith to fail, you don't have faith that the atonement will cover your failings" -Brigham Young

My mother in law just got me a Polish CTR (Choose the Right) ring. It says "WS". Google translate says CTR in Polish is "Wybierz odpowiedni" Which is not WS. So what does WS stand for?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySN8Q4U6wys&feature...

The name YHWH, when translated in the King James Bible, is translated LORD. It is the same four letters that Latter-Day Saints pronounce "Jehovah." The church's doctrine says it is the being who came to Earth as Jesus Christ, and the same being who lead the children of Israel out of Egypt, (among other things) but not the same being as the Father.

How does this work with Isaiah 53 (as quoted in Mosiah 14 in the Book of Mormon)? Verses 10 and 11 (from the King James Bible- Identical to the same verses in Mosiah 14)

10Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

How exactly does the LORD (Jehovah) 'see the travail of Jesus' soul' (Jehovah)? Was Jehovah in heaven at the same time he was on Earth? That sounds like an important piece of the doctrine of the trinity to me- which the church teaches is false.

Or is this another instance of Divine Investiture or something, where YHWH here refers to the Father instead of the son?

- A member who doesn't understand

This last General Conference, president Packer said:

"Obedient to revelation, we call ourselves The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints rather than the Mormon Church. It is one thing for others to refer to the Church as the Mormon Church or to us as Mormons; it is quite another for us to do so.

The First Presidency stated:

“The use of the revealed name, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (D&C 115:4), is increasingly important in our responsibility to proclaim the name of the Savior throughout all the world. Accordingly, we ask that when we refer to the Church we use its full name wherever possible. …

“When referring to Church members, we suggest ‘members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.’ As a shortened reference, ‘Latter-day Saints’ is preferred.” "

Will the Tabernacle Choir change it's name to the "Latter Day Saint Tabernacle Choir?" Will the "I'm A Mormon" ads stop or change? If not, why? A Prophet of God has said that we shouldn't call ourselves Mormons, implying at the very least that we do so too much. If it is alright in some situations, how do I know when it is appropriate, and when it is not?

"I have been sustained as a Prophet, Seer and Revelator. I am a Mormon."

in Moses 1:1-6, Jehovah tells Moses that "thou art in the similitude of mine Only Begotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the Savior, for he is full of grace and truth"

Look at the references under 'saw' in verse 2 and 'almighty' in verse 3 for evidence that this is Jehovah speaking, and not Elohim.

I had a friend try to explain it by saying it was 'divine investiture.' Could someone explain to me exactly what this means?

I remember a quote from CS Lewis along the lines of 'we are continually sustained by God' in that we only CONTINUE to exist due to him CONTINUALLY allowing us to. If he suddenly decided we shouldn't exist, he could cease to sustain us, and we would cease to be.

I found a similar idea (since I couldn't find the CS Lewis quote) here

http://psalm42-2.blogspot.com/2008/07/god-sustains...

"All things are indebted for their existence to the continuous sustaining action of God exercised through His Son. Nothing exists of its own inherent power of being. Nothing in all creation stands or acts independently of the Lord's will. The so-called laws of nature are nothing more than the physical expression of the steady will of Christ. The law of gravity operates with unceasing certainty because Christ continuously wills it to operate..."

This concept does not seem compatible with the teachings of the church, to me, because the church teaches creation ex-materia; or in other words, The earth was created from pre-existing material, and not from nothingness.

Why then, does Mosiah 2:21 say in part "I say unto you that if ye should aserve him who has created you from the beginning, and is bpreserving you from day to day, by lending you cbreath, that ye may live and move and do according to your own dwill, and even supporting you from one moment to another..."

Doesn't this seems to support this protestant idea?

What do our spirits look like?

LDS.org, quoting the gospel principles book, implies that we will look like we do now.

"Discussion

• Read Ether 3:16. What do spirit bodies look like?"

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceI...

If this is so, what role do genetics REALLY play in how we look? If the way I look now is determined by how my spirit looks, it can't ALSO be determined by my parents' genes, can it?