Book of Mormon

[rabanes]

We are the Mormons. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

How 19th century of you. You would have been a great Danite. Maybe you could have run around with Orin Porter Rockwell.

I was referring, of course, to dopp's demonstrated inability to read properly as indicated in his discussion of other works which are far beyond you.

Ahhh, I see. Makes sense now. TY.

... you're certainly not the first author who has begged misreading in light of perceived unfavorable criticism or interpretation.

I think that was my objection -- I was not given a reading at all. :no: Obviously, as evidenced by my response, without cracking a single cover, it was assumed what might be inside those covers. That's all I'm saying.

I find that this demonstrates a lack of integrity on the part of the author - whether writing what he didn't mean in the first place, or insulting the intelligence of the reader - or both.

Again, that's not the issue. The issue is what was attributed to my books, without asking what was in them or reading them. Instead, assumptions (totally wrong) was made about their contents.

I could care less about your drivel, and have no interest at all in reading it.

Fair enough. Again, that's not the issue. To care or not care is fine. But to go around posting/assuming A-B-C is in said volumes and responding accordingly is certainly less than fair, balanced, or intelligent.

I enjoy RF for actual conversation and not the indulgence in spam.

You're a "Christian"? :help: IF that was a reference to my noting my books, such was not spam, but in context , necessary references to other comments, thank you very much. :yes:

So, are you saying we have another set of books we teach from?!

Stop playing your games. Just....dude, STOP it. Man, you guys really know how to irritate, waste time, and play semantic games, don't you? You're good DeepShadow, but I won't play. It's kind of sad, TBH.

Ok, you are a religion writer, but you only seem to write about mormons? Why? Why not catholics? methodists? buddhist? Muslims?

Dream, I have to ask: "What website are you looking at?" Certainly not mine. I have absolutely no idea how you can say, "you only seem to write about mormons." I mean, bro, please, do at least some looking at the subject matter of my books, then come back and ask me a legit question.)(

Remember in mormonism there are three levels of heaven, he is only referring to the celestial kingdom (the highest)

Now that IDEA (a Mormon) has come into the picture, I think we going to start to have some interesting conversations.

Though I have not heard that you have to be married to get into the celestial kingdom as what about people who have been through the temple and have been sealed to their parents?

Dream, you must be married for time and eternity in the temple in order to make it to the Celestial Kingdom and reach exaltation.

RA

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Dream, I have to ask: "What website are you looking at?" Certainly not mine. I have absolutely no idea how you can say, "you only seem to write about mormons." I mean, bro, please, do at least some looking at the subject matter of my books, then come back and ask me a legit question.)(

Actually I was looking at yours, the only religious one I could see was on Mormonism, the others were harry potter and some I hadnt got a clue what they were about.

Now that IDEA (a Mormon) has come into the picture, I think we going to start to have some interesting conversations.

We always do on RF!

Dream, you must be married for time and eternity in the temple in order to make it to the Celestial Kingdom and reach exaltation.

Yes we have figured that one out now! Yet another thing to be added to my list.....

 

[Watchmen]

You don’t think marriage is central? You think you can get to the celestial kingdom without a spouse? You think the priesthood is the only ruling force out there? You think motherhood holds no power? You think if it is not in the lesson manuals then we should not know it? Tell me, is everything in the temples in the lesson manuals? Is ther a lesson manual explaining all of the symbolism in the temple? To me, denying Heavenly Mothe, Her existence, and Her importance is on the same level as denying Heavenly Father. You clearly do not understand what marriage is all about. You clearly do not understand a lot of things.

Wow - you're making a lot of assumptions there. Take a deep breath and calm down, Sister. First, I didn't say any of what you're accusing me of. The issue is whether "Heavenly Mother" is a central teaching. I assert that it is not as demonstrated by the fact that it rarely comes up (if at all) in our current manuals or talks from GAs. You compare it to the sacredness of the temple. You might be right and I know that's a belief held by many as one explanation for why we don't have a lot of information about Her. However, in the current manuals and recent talks from GAs, there are countless times when the sacredness of the temple is as the reason for not talking about it much. The same can't be said of Heavenly Mother.

So, let me clarify what I believe (and again, I ask you to calm down):

1. Eternal marriage is central to Heavenly Father's plan

2. Yes - a person can go to the Celestial Kingdom without a spouse (remember: there are levels within the Celestial Kingdom)

3. I do NOT think the priesthood is the only ruling power out there

4. I NEVER said motherhood does not hold any power - I think quite the opposite in fact

5. I NEVER said that if it's not in the manul then we shouldn't know the teachings. I'm distinguishing between central teachings and peripheral teachings. In other words, those teachings that are routinely discussed week in and week out as opposed to those teachings that are philosophized about from time to time.

6. NO - everything about the temple is not in the manuals, but the manuals explain that it's because of the sacredness of the temple. The manuals do not make the same explanation about Heavenly Mother (but I'd love to be proven wrong about that)

7. I never denied the existence of Heavenly Mother

Please calm down, stop making accusations, and let me know if you better understand my position.

 

[Watchmen]

To obtain the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, a man must enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage, D&C 131:1–4.
(Guide to the Scriptures | MMarriage, Marry.:New and everlasting covenant of marriage)

PS - This life is not the only place in which you can be married.... although the sooner you find the joys in this, the sooner you can know heaven on earth

See bold. You do NOT need to be married to enter the Celestial Kingdom - only the highest degree.

 

[rabanes]

some I hadnt got a clue what they were about.

Ahhhh, okay, I think therein lies the problem. Those other books contain information on all kinds of issues relating to different religions, cults, the occult, pop culture, religious views, religion & society, etc. etc. etc. Hence, my title a religion journalist.

RA

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Ahhhh, okay, I think therein lies the problem. Those other books contain information on all kinds of issues relating to different religions, cults, the occult, pop culture, religious views, religion & society, etc. etc. etc. Hence, my title a religion journalist.

RA

Oh ok....

Just out of curiosity what are your own personal religious views?

 

[Watchmen]

This thread has taken an interesting turn and the information posted (including that from the LDS posters) is not entirely accurate. To simplify.

Anyone can get to the Celestial Kingdom which is exaltation. Marriage is not required. Marriage is only required for the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. We actually don't know much about the levels within the Celestial Kingdom.

People will see their friends and family after they die - sealed/married or not. The difference is that if the family is sealed then they will continue progression as a family unit. If not sealed then the family unit has ended ("until death do you part").

 

[Truth_Faith13]

People will see their friends and family after they die - sealed/married or not. The difference is that if the family is sealed then they will continue progression as a family unit. If not sealed then the family unit has ended ("until death do you part").

Thats not what I was told...on several occassions!

 

[doppelganger]

The difference is that if the family is sealed then they will continue progression as a family unit. If not sealed then the family unit has ended ("until death do you part").

What does that mean?

 

[Watchmen]

Thats not what I was told...on several occassions!

Is everything you were ever told accurate or are people mistaken sometimes?

One thing that gets taught from time to time is that a person in a higher kingdom can visit those in lower kingdoms, but not the other way around. If that's the case, who do you think those people are visiting? Strangers? Of course not. They're visiting friends and family from this life.

 

[Watchmen]

What does that mean?

Focusing on husband and wife, if they are sealed then they will continue to have the relationship and title of husband and wife with all the responsibilities and benefits that come from such a relationship. If they are not sealed then they might see and know each other in the next life, but the relationship and title of husband and wife will not apply.

I know you're a lawyer so think of it in legal terms. If the couple is sealed then they are still legally and lawfully wedded in the Celestial Kingdom under God's law. If they are not sealed then they are no longer legally and lawfully wedded - but that doesn't mean they won't see each other.

 

[rabanes]

This thread has taken an interesting turn and the information posted (including that from the LDS posters) is not entirely accurate.

And now suddenly, even the LDS don't know what the LDS believe. "Hello! Does anyone know what Mormonism teaches?!" :help:

Anyone can get to the Celestial Kingdom which is exaltation. Marriage is not required. Marriage is only required for the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom. We actually don't know much about the levels within the Celestial Kingdom.

I believe you are in error.

Entrance into the Celestial Kingdom (which has three tiers), is NOT full exaltation -- i.e., godhood. Exaltation is achieved only in the highest tier of the Celestial Kingdom. And to achieve that tier (exaltation) you MUST be married. I offer the following statement from the official LDS Church website, By Elder B. Renato Maldonado
Area Authority Seventy, South America North Area, titled "Messages from the Doctrine & Covenants: The Three Degrees of Glory":

We do not know much about who will inherit two of the three degrees within the celestial kingdom. However, much has been said about the highest level in the celestial kingdom, or exaltation, because that is where the Father wants all of His children to live (see Moses 1:39). The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that temple marriage is the key to obtaining exaltation...
​

I think Elder Maldonado knows what he is talking about. Is he wrong? He is the Area Authority Seventy of your Church and this is published in the Church's official magazine, Ensign, April, 2005.

And, of course, "exaltation," is full godhood, as noted by LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie: "That exaltation which the saints of all ages have so devoutly sought is godhood itself" (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321).

R.A.

 

[doppelganger]

I know you're a lawyer so think of it in legal terms. If the couple is sealed then they are still legally and lawfully wedded in the Celestial Kingdom under God's law. If they are not sealed then they are no longer legally and lawfully wedded - but that doesn't mean they won't see each other.

What is the justification for annulling marriages based on subjective beliefs about right practice?

 

[DallasApple]

I dont want to sound dumb..But can you get married again once your in heaven?

Love

Dallas

 

[painted wolf]

Actually that is what I was told on several occasions as well...
My parents divorced so we would essentially be split up in heaven. No longer family, just friends.
My mom and I could be the best of palls but she would no longer be my mother per say.

wa:do

 

[rabanes]

Oh ok.... Just out of curiosity what are your own personal religious views?

I think I answered that in POST #252. But again, I suppose closest would be evangelical, not fundamentalist. Fairly eclectic in my views regarding various aspects of the Christian faith. I've criticized fellow evangelicals before, as well as fundamentalists, where I thought there were problems. So, I try to be fair....some call that an equal-opportunity offender. LoL.

RA

 

[doppelganger]

Actually that is what I was told on several occasions as well...
My parents divorced so we would essentially be split up in heaven. No longer family, just friends.
My mom and I could be the best of palls but she would no longer be my mother per say.

That seems like a nasty thing to tell people.

 

[Watchmen]

What is the justification for annulling marriages based on subjective beliefs about right practice?

Either we're right or we're wrong. If we're right then it's not subjective belief, it's God's law and that's justification enough. Further, God allows all to be sealed whether in this life or the next (you're familiar with proxy work for the dead?), so everyone has the opportunity for the right practice. It's the same as the other ordinances of the gospel, such as baptism. It might seem to be an arbitrary and subjective way to show commitment to Christ - but if it's God's way then that's justification enough and if it isn't then...well, we were wrong.

If we're wrong then we're wrong.

 

[painted wolf]

That seems like a nasty thing to tell people.

It was a bitter pill for a child to have to swallow.

wa:do

 

[DallasApple]

That seems like a nasty thing to tell people.

It is its sad..

But I guess it could be some what of a motivator to try and work harder on making your marriage work...

Love

Dallas