Decisions decisions!
Posted on 08/15/2010 2:44:17 PM PDT by greyfoxx39
Lonesome Valley (Woody Guthrie)
You gotta walk that lonesome valley,
You gotta walk it by yourself,
Nobody here can walk it for you,
You gotta walk it by yourself.
There’s a road that leads to glory
Through a valley far away,
Nobody else can walk it for you,
They can only point the way.
Mamma and daddy loves you dearly,
Sister does and brother, too,
They may beg you to go with them,
But they cannot go for you.
I’m gonna walk that lonesome valley,
I’m gonna walk it by myself,
Don’t want to nobody to walk it for me,
I’m gonna walk it by myself.
Anybody else notice that microscopic asterisk Normandy just pinned on those million of "Families are Forever" bumper stickers? (Tantamount to those read light-years fast disclaimer at the end of a radio or TV commercial)
It now reads (Normandy style): "Families are Forever*"
(And then in microscopic fine print it says in the corner of the bumper sticker: "Families are forever, excerpt in perpetuant fall from grace by said spouse, whereby should a couple who is sealed for eternity in the temple, and for some reason said spouse falls from grace, then such sealing is no longer 'eternal' and said family is no longer 'forever' - together that is...as it would have no effect on the exaltation of the faithful spouse.)
Thanks for the legalistic disclaimer, Norm...we can always count on Mormons to get everything legally correct.
“I am sure you know that LDS doctrine teaches that only a man and a woman sealed for eternity can attain exaltation — or godhood. So exaltation cannot be achieved independently, by a man or a woman alone.”
Not Biblical.
“Neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man in the Lord”
Nothing to do with eternal marriage.
Male and female were created together and are intended to be together in the marriage relationship throughout eternity.”
Not Biblical.
Next.
“That’s the whole purpose of temple ordinances, to make the blessings of the gospel available to all.”
Not remotely Biblical.
“This vision was of the future — Joseph Smith’s parents who he mentions seeing in vision in the celestial kingdom — were alive on earth at the time of this revelation.”
Not Biblical in the least.
“The vision was given before the principles of baptism for the dead were revealed by the Lord — which no doubt was why Joseph Smith reports that he “marveled”, not understand how Alvin could be there without having been baptized on earth.”
Not Biblical at all
Next.
Normandy, you might try starting with the Bible to see what it actually says and then believe it, versus starting with what the mormon church teaches and reading it back into the Bible.
“Agreed, TN, and if you are not able to receive them while in this life, they will need to be performed for you by proxy in the temple.
“
Not Biblical in the least.
Temples are not Biblical for the Church either.
Next
You have to realize that Spencer W. Kimball’s book, The Miracle of Forgiveness, was written for LDS members. He’s talking to people who know about the gospel and choose not to enter into all the covenants — i.e. they deliberately choose not to marry, or not to marry in the temple.
Hi ampu,
Like I’ve said before, we believe the Bible is not the complete collection of God’s revelations. Many of the doctrines pertaining to eternal marriage, and proxy ordinances for the dead were revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith, and so are not found developed in detail in the Bible.
You will, however, find mention of many of some of these principles in the Bible. e.g. 1 Corinthians 15:29, 1 Corninthians 11:11
Normandy
And this matter how? Your statements are that these individuals - singles, spouses married to gentiles, etc can be exalted. Kimball denies that to be the case. You made it unconditioned for those to enter the covenants - just had to do their best. Can't have it both ways norm. Lots of single, temple recommend bearing, endowed mormons have died single - and by kimball's words - not qualified for exaltation.
“Like I’ve said before, we believe the Bible is not the complete collection of God’s revelations. Many of the doctrines pertaining to eternal marriage, and proxy ordinances for the dead were revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith, and so are not found developed in detail in the Bible.”
Actually, it’s worse than that Normandy. The doctrines mormonism attempts to attach to Christianity are in opposition to what the Bible teaches.
All of them. Therefore, they are false.
“You will, however, find mention of many of some of these principles in the Bible. e.g. 1 Corinthians 15:29, 1 Corninthians 11:11”
Normandy, Normandy, Normandy...
I Corinthians 11 is about women praying with their heads uncovered. It has nothing to do with “eternal marriage”.
I Corinthians 15:29 does not advocate baptism for the dead. In fact, this would have been the PERFECT PLACE FOR Paul to strongly teach this as a doctrine of the Church. HE DOES NOT. Nor does He ever mention it again.
This may make it clearer to you - a literal rendering of the Greek meaning of the passage:
“Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the hope of the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they then baptized for the hope of the dead?”
It doesn’t say people were being baptized for dead people.
Again, norm, start with the Bible first. See what it says. You keep bringing meaning into the passage that isn’t there.
best,
ampu
My best friend in college married an lds guy. She converted. they married in the temple. Six months later she came home to find him in bed with an other fellow. Strangely the bishop asked her to forgive him and take him back. I wont tell you her words (not ready for mixed company), he went on about a year later and married again in the temple. Go figure.
|
THE
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS SECTION 132
51–57, Emma Smith is counseled (commanded) to be faithful and true; 58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.
51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to aprove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.
52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.
53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been afaithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.
55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an ahundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of beternal lives in the eternal worlds.
|
O Brother; Where Art Thou?
Like PAUL and the ones he ADVISED against it?
(Sounds like he was the one who converted...as in perverted.)
Bill Clinton may be the one who is famous for the phrase, "it depends on what the meaning of is, is" but he wasn't the first to live by its principle...the mormons have used it since early times. "Precept upon precept".....
This is why Christians don't accept mormonism as Christian.
Really, the mormon church should just give it up...a name on a sign doesn't make a sect that of Jesus Christ.
Well well well, guess there was no class today.
And I was looking so forward to getting nailed...
bttt
Keeping on keeping on
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
