LDS Freedom Forum

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:35 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:30 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:04 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 10:33 am

Very subtle with your straw man there.

Let me be very careful to avoid your stumbling block.

The scriptures talk about the worse sinners being thrust down to hell. Agreed?

D and C 76:84 "These are they who are thrust down to hell".
This is part of the vision talking about telestial kingdom. (verses 81 through 86)

So thus far we see that sinners who are thrust down to hell inherit the telestial kingdom.

Verse 106 readdresses this "These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work.""

Now note verse 89."And thus we saw, in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial which surpasses all understanding."

Verse 43 should also be mentioned "Who glorifies the Father and saves all the works of his hand, except those sons of perdition who deny the Son after the Father has revealed them.

Putting this together: All sinners that are thrust down to hell are saved by the atonement in a telestial kingdom whose glory surpasses all understanding.

That is what the scriptures say.

No where did I, or the scriptures say, that they will be saved in that eternal form. That was your straw man.

You didnt really clarify. In "the end" (which means at the end of the millennium after resurrection) God will not save those who are homosexuals into any region of heaven.

Wrong. Read DC 76. Homosexuals are not perdition thus they will be saved in a kingdom of glory. It really is as simple as that.

Cheetos doesn't believe in three kingdoms of glory. He is a heaven or hell (perdition, outer darkness) believer. This was hashed our ad infinitum on another thread.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:35 pm
Cheetos doesn't believe in three kingdoms of glory. He is a heaven or hell (perdition, outer darkness) believer. This was hashed our ad infinitum on another thread.

gkearney wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:38 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:35 pm
Cheetos doesn't believe in three kingdoms of glory. He is a heaven or hell (perdition, outer darkness) believer. This was hashed our ad infinitum on another thread.

So he rejects one of the fundamental beliefs of the restoration, the three degree of glory, does he?

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:35 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:30 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:04 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 10:33 am

Very subtle with your straw man there.

Let me be very careful to avoid your stumbling block.

The scriptures talk about the worse sinners being thrust down to hell. Agreed?

D and C 76:84 "These are they who are thrust down to hell".
This is part of the vision talking about telestial kingdom. (verses 81 through 86)

So thus far we see that sinners who are thrust down to hell inherit the telestial kingdom.

Verse 106 readdresses this "These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work.""

Now note verse 89."And thus we saw, in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial which surpasses all understanding."

Verse 43 should also be mentioned "Who glorifies the Father and saves all the works of his hand, except those sons of perdition who deny the Son after the Father has revealed them.

Putting this together: All sinners that are thrust down to hell are saved by the atonement in a telestial kingdom whose glory surpasses all understanding.

That is what the scriptures say.

No where did I, or the scriptures say, that they will be saved in that eternal form. That was your straw man.

You didnt really clarify. In "the end" (which means at the end of the millennium after resurrection) God will not save those who are homosexuals into any region of heaven.

Wrong. Read DC 76. Homosexuals are not perdition thus they will be saved in a kingdom of glory. It really is as simple as that.

Cheetos doesn't believe in three kingdoms of glory. He is a heaven or hell (perdition, outer darkness) believer. This was hashed our ad infinitum on another thread.

gkearney wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:25 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:04 pm
You didnt really clarify. In "the end" (which means at the end of the millennium after resurrection) God will not save those who are homosexuals into any region of heaven.

This is a false statement. Ours is a universalist faith we believe that all will obtain some degree of glory, even homosexuals.

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:37 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:35 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:30 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:04 pm
You didnt really clarify. In "the end" (which means at the end of the millennium after resurrection) God will not save those who are homosexuals into any region of heaven.

Wrong. Read DC 76. Homosexuals are not perdition thus they will be saved in a kingdom of glory. It really is as simple as that.

Cheetos doesn't believe in three kingdoms of glory. He is a heaven or hell (perdition, outer darkness) believer. This was hashed our ad infinitum on another thread.

Thats not quite correct. I still believe in different degrees of glory in heaven, just not three separate worlds for the differing degrees to go to.

Cheetos wrote: ↑April 18th, 2019, 12:49 pm I have my own personal view of heaven that doesnt include the three world salvation model.

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:34 pm
And if you carefully read the surrounding verses you will note that all those Christ saves are done so because of the gospel and are cleansed from all sin. There wont be homosexuals in heaven.

shadow wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 2:50 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:34 pm
And if you carefully read the surrounding verses you will note that all those Christ saves are done so because of the gospel and are cleansed from all sin. There wont be homosexuals in heaven.

I agree with you on this. I believe at that point people will have come to a complete knowledge of who they are and they will have repented of everything, homosexual or otherwise. They will have allowed the atonement to cleanse them. There will not be homosexuals in Heaven. There also won't be adulterers.

iwontbackdown wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 1:07 pm Nehor taught the same thing in the Book of Mormon. I think Mormon was warning us of members who try to lead us astray in the last days:

"And he also testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble, but that they might lift up their heads and rejoice; for the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life." Alma 1:4

I reject the word, "saved" implying that you will receive a kingdom of glory. Except for the Sons of Perdition, everyone will go to one of the three kingdoms of glory, even the worst murderers in history. We teach that unlike the Resurrection, men can only receive eternal life by Faith, Repentance and entering into the everlasting covenant of marriage in Christ.

Those going to one of the lesser kingdoms are not "saved" as Nehor taught. Only those entering into the marriage covenant, receiving the ordinances, and enduring to the end will be.

This church should only be teaching people on how to gain eternal life in the Celestial Kingdom. We never should help people to settle for anything less.

"Say nothing but repentance unto this generation; keep my commandments, and assist to bring forth my work, according to my commandments, and you shall be blessed." D&C 6:9

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 2:53 pm

shadow wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 2:50 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:34 pm
And if you carefully read the surrounding verses you will note that all those Christ saves are done so because of the gospel and are cleansed from all sin. There wont be homosexuals in heaven.

I agree with you on this. I believe at that point people will have come to a complete knowledge of who they are and they will have repented of everything, homosexual or otherwise. They will have allowed the atonement to cleanse them. There will not be homosexuals in Heaven. There also won't be adulterers.

So as one partially responsible for this sub thread let me clarify. Those who are homosexuals and/or adulterers etc in this life will go to heaven, meaning at least the telestial kingdom and its glory which surpasses all understanding. What it seems some are clarifying is "true but they will no longer be sinners" because of the atonement. I'm fine with that. In fact I just assumed that was obvious.

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 3:11 pm

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 2:53 pm

shadow wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 2:50 pm

Cheetos wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 12:34 pm
And if you carefully read the surrounding verses you will note that all those Christ saves are done so because of the gospel and are cleansed from all sin. There wont be homosexuals in heaven.

I agree with you on this. I believe at that point people will have come to a complete knowledge of who they are and they will have repented of everything, homosexual or otherwise. They will have allowed the atonement to cleanse them. There will not be homosexuals in Heaven. There also won't be adulterers.

So as one partially responsible for this sub thread let me clarify. Those who are homosexuals and/or adulterers etc in this life will go to heaven, meaning at least the telestial kingdom and its glory which surpasses all understanding. What it seems some are clarifying is "true but they will no longer be sinners" because of the atonement. I'm fine with that. In fact I just assumed that was obvious.

If they are no longer sinners then they aren't active homosexuals anymore and thus no homosexuality in heaven.

Absolom wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 5:30 pm I’m pressing for polygamy. I’m young enough that a second wife might make life fun.

dezNatDefender wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 7:52 am

gigarath24 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 7:43 am There is a precedent for monogomy (Book of Jacob, The Gospels, the Pauline Letters)
There is a precedent for a Priestesshood in the scriptures (Deborah in the Old Testament, Junia in Romans, Possibly the sister of Moses).
There is a precedent of the priesthood being extended (Only the sons of Aaron extended to all Levites, the Gospel in general being just for the Jews then extended to the Gentiles.)

There is no precedent, there is no reason, there is NOTHING that indicates that the Lord will ever accept homosexuality, pedophilia, etc. This is why same-sex marriage, or God forbid sealings will never occur. If the church accepts homosexuality then the church as we know it will be in apostasy. Everything the church has done thus far has precedent, acceptance of homosexuality has NO precedent.

To the bold, not there is not. People really need to understand the scriptures better. We don't know if Junia was even female. But if Junia was the only verse says that "Junia was of note among the apostles". Ever single translation, renders that to mean Junia was known to the apostles, not that she was an apostle.

In the old testament, the word prophet is used quite liberally. Basically anyone who had any modicum of spiritual ability was labeled a prophet. When you read the account of David or in Chronicles prophets are all over the place, at one point there was a group of about 400 prophets. David hide among prophets. A prophet was anyone who had a vision, or anyone who prophesied, a prophesy is simply a prediction one has that one claims is from God, i.e. a prediction from God. Of course using that definition (which is the definition the OT uses) women could be prophetesses. Plenty of women today are prophetesses, i.e. they predict things based upon a revelation from God.

That's not the same thing as Priesthood. No recorded instances of women holding the Priesthood, absolutely none. No recorded instances of women officiating in Priesthood ordinances, absolutely none.

To your second paragraph, you haven't read "Papa" Olslers theological groundwork. You haven't read the LGBTQ+ members who are laying a theological justification based upon OT, NT, BoM to allow homosexuality.

If you want to defeat your enemy, you need to know what they think and just saying "it's not gonna happen" isn't going to work to defeat the enemy.

passionflower wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 10:53 pm According to President Thomas S Monson, the definition of the title "prophet" is simply "an inspired teacher", and you can find that on lds.org. Heck yeah, anybody, male or female can be that in the church somewhere or in their home, they just aren't the "inspired teacher" for the whole church.

No woman ever ever was a Seer and/or a Revelator. To perform as such requires the Priesthood.

14 So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college;) and they communed with her.

15 And she said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Tell the man that sent you to me,

16 Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof...

passionflower wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 10:53 pm

dezNatDefender wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 7:52 am

gigarath24 wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 7:43 am There is a precedent for monogomy (Book of Jacob, The Gospels, the Pauline Letters)
There is a precedent for a Priestesshood in the scriptures (Deborah in the Old Testament, Junia in Romans, Possibly the sister of Moses).
There is a precedent of the priesthood being extended (Only the sons of Aaron extended to all Levites, the Gospel in general being just for the Jews then extended to the Gentiles.)

There is no precedent, there is no reason, there is NOTHING that indicates that the Lord will ever accept homosexuality, pedophilia, etc. This is why same-sex marriage, or God forbid sealings will never occur. If the church accepts homosexuality then the church as we know it will be in apostasy. Everything the church has done thus far has precedent, acceptance of homosexuality has NO precedent.

To the bold, not there is not. People really need to understand the scriptures better. We don't know if Junia was even female. But if Junia was the only verse says that "Junia was of note among the apostles". Ever single translation, renders that to mean Junia was known to the apostles, not that she was an apostle.

In the old testament, the word prophet is used quite liberally. Basically anyone who had any modicum of spiritual ability was labeled a prophet. When you read the account of David or in Chronicles prophets are all over the place, at one point there was a group of about 400 prophets. David hide among prophets. A prophet was anyone who had a vision, or anyone who prophesied, a prophesy is simply a prediction one has that one claims is from God, i.e. a prediction from God. Of course using that definition (which is the definition the OT uses) women could be prophetesses. Plenty of women today are prophetesses, i.e. they predict things based upon a revelation from God.

That's not the same thing as Priesthood. No recorded instances of women holding the Priesthood, absolutely none. No recorded instances of women officiating in Priesthood ordinances, absolutely none.

To your second paragraph, you haven't read "Papa" Olslers theological groundwork. You haven't read the LGBTQ+ members who are laying a theological justification based upon OT, NT, BoM to allow homosexuality.

If you want to defeat your enemy, you need to know what they think and just saying "it's not gonna happen" isn't going to work to defeat the enemy.

According to President Thomas S Monson, the definition of the title "prophet" is simply "an inspired teacher", and you can find that on lds.org. Heck yeah, anybody, male or female can be that in the church somewhere or in their home, they just aren't the "inspired teacher" for the whole church.

No woman ever ever was a Seer and/or a Revelator. To perform as such requires the Priesthood.

Fiannan wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 10:09 am

I PROMISE you that there will be bishops who will interpret it exactly that way, and I also strongly suspect this is EXACTLY how the First Presidency wanted it to be interpreted.

Maybe. Some believe recent changes are laying the groundwork for re-instating polygamy. Bet some LDS members who support gay marriage are not so kind to the idea of polygamy.

Believing Joseph wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 11:55 pm

passionflower wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 10:53 pm According to President Thomas S Monson, the definition of the title "prophet" is simply "an inspired teacher", and you can find that on lds.org. Heck yeah, anybody, male or female can be that in the church somewhere or in their home, they just aren't the "inspired teacher" for the whole church.

No woman ever ever was a Seer and/or a Revelator. To perform as such requires the Priesthood.

In 2 Kings 22, we have:

14 So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college;) and they communed with her.

15 And she said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Tell the man that sent you to me,

16 Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof...

Sounds like a revelator to me.

passionflower wrote: ↑May 10th, 2019, 11:52 am Another definition of "prophetess" is "wife of a prophet".

RocknRoll wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 8:55 am

justme wrote: ↑May 9th, 2019, 8:36 am There is so much apostasy on this thread and forum. Maybe it is time to change the name of the forum.

I wish there was another forum with so much ease of communication but where the people actually believed. Any suggestions?

You could try http://www.mormondialogue.org/