Voting in the Deep South

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radix

It seems that Novato likes to come in, call people who do not vote like him/her self "uneducated" and then run and hide.

---

Radix,

I merely offered this for discussion, no EV has offered anything worth responding to, which is pretty normal for this site.

Regards,

Novato

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novato

Radix,

I merely offered this for discussion, no EV has offered anything worth responding to, which is pretty normal for this site.

Regards,

Novato

---

......I share your views as to the direction of this conversation...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russianwolfe

#1 They were not banned from the temple. As I said before, they did do baptisms for the dead and that can only be done in the temple.

#2 To take out your endowments requires that males have the priesthood. Since the policy, not doctrine, of the church was to not ordain them to the priesthood of God it required a revelation from God to change that. It didn't matter if the policy was of man or God, it would still require a revelation from God to change. And it was not until that revelation was received that the policy was changed. There is a long history of people advocating that the blacks get the priesthood. Hugh B. Brown a member of the First Presidency made an attempt during the presidency of David O McKay but no revelation was received and so the policy was not changed. And when the policy was changed, it was received during a time after the Civil Rights era when those who were denied their rights were guaranteed those rights by law and Federal enforcement. There was no outside pressure from any organization or govenment body.

How did the Southern churches change their policy of banning blacks? Can you tell me that it was done by revelation? Or by some other method? If by some other method, can you say that it was of God or of man? Or has the policy changed at all?

When I go the the temple today, I see people of all different colors in the temple, all worshipping together.

The priesthood belongs to God and it is only God who can make any changes to how it is administered. The judgement of whether the leaders of the church were right or wrong, is up to God not me. I do not speak for God nor am I privy to his thoughts or intentions.

But you have not answered my questions? How about the tribe of Levy? Can you see that if God has done something in the past, you should not be surprised if the does it now? Or are you going to continue using a double standard that is depended on social norms?

Marvin

---

You are living under the New Covenant dispensation. All Christians are priests to God, and none are excluded by race. You Mormons are not of the lineage of Levi, or Aaron, or Ephraim for that matter. You have taken the OT Covenant, modified it, and attempt to replace the New Covenant with this distorted OT "covenant." You do not rightly divide the Word of God, which is quite evident to any Christian who reads the BoM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novato

Radix,

I merely offered this for discussion, no EV has offered anything worth responding to, which is pretty normal for this site.

Regards,

Novato

---

No thanks to your insulting remarks.

Since you insinuate I am "seemingly uneducated", do you care to give us your educational background? I have stated mine.

BigJulie asked: "So, do you believe, as does my evangelical friend, that marriage ends at death?"

You know what BigJulie? I really dont know! But there is a verse that says something about not marrying in the afterlife? But I have never studied it or that subject so I dont know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdjhere

BigJulie asked: "So, do you believe, as does my evangelical friend, that marriage ends at death?"

You know what BigJulie? I really dont know! But there is a verse that says something about not marrying in the afterlife? But I have never studied it or that subject so I dont know.

---

I asked because you said this:"As a family, they would be together anyway as long as they were all in Christ."

But, I ask you---what recognition do you believe that God makes to families? Does he still recognize someone as your child, your spouse, your parent? Or are you just one big, blended family now?

This is a really interesting point to me because I think these family ties to go on beyond death IF we recognize the Lord's hands regarding His sealing powers. When we are baptized, we join Christ's family. Through an everlasting covenant, we are sealed to Him and He is sealed to us. He is the bridegroom, we are the bride. But, do you think that God divorces all who were brought together through him once they die so that He no longer recognizes your marriage/family?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novato

Hi All:

I must admit to a degree of puzzlement over the results in the Southern portion of the USA regarding the GOP primaries held there. It seems fairly obvious that Mitt Romney will win the eventual nomination, however I find the exit poll results quite fascinating in regard to the 80% of voters who align themselves to EV Christianity.

Since I have been many times in the South, and still remain puzzled by their, seemingly uneducated or uninformed, response to many things, I suppose I should understand the weirdness of their voting trends.



Novato

---

I see you still have not bothered to even apologize for your disparaging remarks. I have given my educational background, when will you lay out yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russianwolfe

If you believe that the OT Priesthood has nothing to do with the current day Mormon concept, then you don't really know as much about LDS theology as you think. But you still have not answered the question. Go back and read what I asked and see if you can actually answer the question I asked not one of your own making.

Marvin

---

OverTime Priesthood and Mormon Concept?
Hum, ah, What?
I've put on my thinking cap,(watch out everybody), and My TC aint workin very well, or as it says, "There aint nothin in common with the OverTime Priesthood, and Mormonism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radix

I see you still have not bothered to even apologize for your disparaging remarks. I have given my educational background, when will you lay out yours.

---

Hi Radix,

If I caused offence I sincerely apologise. However if you examine the OP more exactly you might see that I stated:

Quote:

---

seemingly uneducated or uninformed, response to many things, I suppose I should understand the weirdness of their voting trends.

---

The important word is seemingly.

My educational background is absolutely non-biblical. I have Masters Degrees in Political Science and Military subjects. I also have a, very old, BSc in Electronic Engineering. On a part time basis, just for fun, I completed a BA in History. One of the, very few, advantages of being a public servant. ( Smile)

Once again my apologies if I caused offence, that was not my intent.

Best regards,

Novato

What voting this year in the Republican Primary has shown us is that there is a strong core of conservative voters this season that are ready to support a candidate that speaks things that reflect their views.

The SC primary was interesting , in that it went strongly for Newt and when you go back into history the winner of the SC Primary mostly always wins the Party top spot on the ticket.

This year is a bit different however in that whereas most years we have but a single conservative alternative guy in the race, this year we have 2 that seek to be the conservative candidate, with a 3rd person (Ron Paul) also helping to split up the votes.

This has ended us up with a conservative vote that seems on the outside to be all split up.....and in truth it is.

The South votes so far show us that there is a strong conservative vote out there to be tapped.

But the many names still on the ballot at this point tend to mute the importance of the conservatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russianwolfe

If you believe that the OT Priesthood has nothing to do with the current day Mormon concept, then you don't really know as much about LDS theology as you think. But you still have not answered the question. Go back and read what I asked and see if you can actually answer the question I asked not one of your own making.

Marvin

---

So, you are a descendent from Aaron? Hey, neat! Do you observe the Seventh Day Sabbath, never kindle a fire on that day, or wear clothing not woven from more than one type of cloth? You don't eat hot dogs, right? Or, if you do, only kosher! Does you wife light the Sabbath candle Friday night? What do you think of Schneerson, was he the messiah? And Washington Heights is Zion, right?

Right, you guys have an OT priesthood!

BigJulie Asked: "do you think that God divorces all who were brought together through him once they die so that He no longer recognizes your marriage/family?"

I guess I have never really thought about it but the word divorce probably isnt the word I would use since God "hates divorce." I guess (and these are only MY thoughts) that, since we will be eternal beings after the resurrection, maybe we will not need to reproduce anymore? Matthew 22:30 says "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."
As far as I know, angels do not reproduce, but I have to admit I do not know a whole lot about what the afterlife will be like, exactly anyway. I only DO know that Jesus said in his Fathers house there were many room and that He was going there to prepare a place for us. And I DO know that Jesus was the first one to get a glorified body and that we as his followers are promised the same. The rest to me is just a lot of speculation and I have alot of questions when I get there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdjhere

BigJulie Asked: "do you think that God divorces all who were brought together through him once they die so that He no longer recognizes your marriage/family?"

I guess I have never really thought about it but the word divorce probably isnt the word I would use since God "hates divorce." I guess (and these are only MY thoughts) that, since we will be eternal beings after the resurrection, maybe we will not need to reproduce anymore? Matthew 22:30 says "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."
As far as I know, angels do not reproduce, but I have to admit I do not know a whole lot about what the afterlife will be like, exactly anyway. I only DO know that Jesus said in his Fathers house there were many room and that He was going there to prepare a place for us. And I DO know that Jesus was the first one to get a glorified body and that we as his followers are promised the same. The rest to me is just a lot of speculation and I have alot of questions when I get there.

---

I understand what Matthew said regarding marriage. I also talked to a greek professor about it and he stated that the "tense" of the words are lost in English. Hence, I believe that Christ was speaking strictly to those whom asked him the question.

Yes, God doesn't like divorce---and yet, while you see that marriage is eternal when it comes to Christ as the bridegroom and the church as the bride--somehow you believe (from this verse in Matthew) that God would end marriage (his ins***ution and creation) upon death. Yet, we have Paul telling us that the man and the woman are together "in the Lord."

I also don't understand the concept, that God, the great creator, would--upon perfecting our bodies--make the creation part of our bodies defunct. It seems just the opposite---that one of the grand purposes of His creation is that it goes on creating. We see that in the world today--unless you think that your offspring are merely the result of God speaking a child for you.

While "the flesh" seemed to take on a wicked tone under Plato and the Greek thinkers, doesn't God merely teach us that we are to overcome the flesh--that the spirit needs to control the body? And isn't marriage creating a proper confine in which our spirits control the body to do the will of God?

I will never fully understand a religion that sees pro-creation as wicked and something that needs to be ended with resurrection and creation as glorious and the very definition of who God is. It seems that those positions run counter to each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdjhere

BigJulie Asked: "do you think that God divorces all who were brought together through him once they die so that He no longer recognizes your marriage/family?"

I guess I have never really thought about it but the word divorce probably isnt the word I would use since God "hates divorce." I guess (and these are only MY thoughts) that, since we will be eternal beings after the resurrection, maybe we will not need to reproduce anymore? Matthew 22:30 says "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."
As far as I know, angels do not reproduce, but I have to admit I do not know a whole lot about what the afterlife will be like, exactly anyway. I only DO know that Jesus said in his Fathers house there were many room and that He was going there to prepare a place for us. And I DO know that Jesus was the first one to get a glorified body and that we as his followers are promised the same. The rest to me is just a lot of speculation and I have alot of questions when I get there.

---

I can't figure out why TBMs run away from 19th century mormon teachings.
They didn't bother to speculate. as far as Mormon men, it was glory days are a coming, and lots of sex too.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

I can't figure out why TBMs run away from 19th century mormon teachings.
They didn't bother to speculate. as far as Mormon men, it was glory days are a coming, and lots of sex too.:)

---

Anybody who says this is thinking in the terms of "mistress" and not in the terms of wives. In those days, it was not uncommon (and is still no uncommon) for men to have mistresses.

But, a wife, takes on a whole new level of responsibility. No run running around behind the back of your wife--no excitement there. And no birth control, really---so, with the kids come all the responsibility. Dad gets to take on more and more responsibility, needs of all the family members and everyone can see what everyone else is getting. There is no secrecy. Oh---and don't forget, the first wife has the say regarding to others. Gee---wouldn't it be fun to be a second wife or third.

True story---a woman shows up in SLC with nothing. Brigham Young sends her to St. George to be the third wife of a man (keep in mind, no welfare checks back in those days). On the way there, they stop the wagon for a while in a small town. A man comes up to the woman and asks what she is doing. She explains that she is on her way to St. George to be the third wife of someone. The young man states, "if you get off the wagon right now, I will marry you." She does and they do get married that day. That was my great, great grandmother. ;)

*whew*, the excitement and the romance of living in the wild west!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Anybody who says this is thinking in the terms of "mistress" and not in the terms of wives. In those days, it was not uncommon (and is still no uncommon) for men to have mistresses.

But, a wife, takes on a whole new level of responsibility. No run running around behind the back of your wife--no excitement there. And no birth control, really---so, with the kids come all the responsibility. Dad gets to take on more and more responsibility, needs of all the family members and everyone can see what everyone else is getting. There is no secrecy. Oh---and don't forget, the first wife has the say regarding to others. Gee---wouldn't it be fun to be a second wife or third.

True story---a woman shows up in SLC with nothing. Brigham Young sends her to St. George to be the third wife of a man (keep in mind, no welfare checks back in those days). On the way there, they stop the wagon for a while in a small town. A man comes up to the woman and asks what she is doing. She explains that she is on her way to St. George to be the third wife of someone. The young man states, "if you get off the wagon right now, I will marry you." She does and they do get married that day. That was my great, great grandmother. ;)

---

Good for you.:)

Wow, that's an interesting story, Julie. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

Wow, that's an interesting story, Julie. :)

---

Thanks Libby.

The fact of the matter is that people who want to criticize the early members of the church and their practice of pologamy often do what RealFakeHair does and act like the whole thing was sexual and these were a bunch of hyper-sexualized men running around having their way.

But anyone who actually reads the stories knows that for the most part, this was really hard living and a really hard time to be alive. Survival was the name of the game and many suffered greatly as they attempted to eke out an existance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

But anyone who actually reads the stories knows that for the most part, this was really hard living and a really hard time to be alive. Survival was the name of the game and many suffered greatly as they attempted to eke out an existance.

---

Bigj can you show me where polygamy was commanded for the NT church?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Thanks Libby.

The fact of the matter is that people who want to criticize the early members of the church and their practice of pologamy often do what RealFakeHair does and act like the whole thing was sexual and these were a bunch of hyper-sexualized men running around having their way.

But anyone who actually reads the stories knows that for the most part, this was really hard living and a really hard time to be alive. Survival was the name of the game and many suffered greatly as they attempted to eke out an existance.

---

You are right. The critics are in their ivory tower criticizing what they don't understanding while those who were there and living at that time had to live it every day. Funny how reality seems to trump the ivory tower every time.

Marvin

PS. Don't forget that polygamy was never meant to be forever in this life. It was alway for a time as the Lord told Jacob in the Book of Mormon. In the Bible, there was no need to command polygamy because everyone believed it was good and proper for a man to have more than one life when he became prosperous. What would have to be commanded was to have only one life, which is what Paul was doing when he told Timothy that one of the qualifications of a bishop was to be the husband of one wife. Different culture, different needs and different commandments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russianwolfe

In the Bible, there was no need to command polygamy because everyone believed it was good and proper for a man to have more than one life when he became prosperous. What would have to be commanded was to have only one life, which is what Paul was doing when he told Timothy that one of the qualifications of a bishop was to be the husband of one wife. Different culture, different needs and different commandments.

---

Hey Marvin can you show us where God commands members in the NT church to accept polygamy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Thanks Libby.

The fact of the matter is that people who want to criticize the early members of the church and their practice of pologamy often do what RealFakeHair does and act like the whole thing was sexual and these were a bunch of hyper-sexualized men running around having their way.

But anyone who actually reads the stories knows that for the most part, this was really hard living and a really hard time to be alive. Survival was the name of the game and many suffered greatly as they attempted to eke out an existance.

---

Yeah, no kidding. I have read some of those stories and life was extremely difficult, back then. I think the critics just like to talk about sex. ;) (and other people's underwear :p)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

Yeah, no kidding. I have read some of those stories and life was extremely difficult, back then. I think the critics just like to talk about sex. ;) (and other people's underwear :p)

---

Actually, since Mormonism is a sex-based cult, made so by the first Mormon "prophet," Joseph Smith, it is an integral part of the Mormon cult. When you can't get to the highest heaven without some strange, bizarre "temple marriage," and get a special name that your hubby can use to call you forth from the grave, you better bet we'll bring these things up.

As far as their underwear goes, it's just another example of what people will do to please their false gods.

Mormons don't like to discuss their esoteric system. They conceal their practices and beliefs, even from converts. That's why only 25 per cent of those converts baptized into the cult remain in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

Hey Marvin can you show us where God commands members in the NT church to accept polygamy?

---

God, of course, commanded monogamy in the NT. Smith was not happily married and wanted more and more women. He projected that onto his "god," and got a "revelation" commanding adultery. It's as simple as that.

He even said Emma was going to be "destroyed" if she didn't accept his adulterous relationships - however, he's the one that got destroyed. He should have thought a little more before cursing his own wife.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apologette

Actually, since Mormonism is a sex-based cult, made so by the first Mormon "prophet," Joseph Smith, it is an integral part of the Mormon cult. When you can't get to the highest heaven without some strange, bizarre "temple marriage," and get a special name that your hubby can use to call you forth from the grave, you better bet we'll bring these things up.

As far as their underwear goes, it's just another example of what people will do to please their false gods.

Mormons don't like to discuss their esoteric system. They conceal their practices and beliefs, even from converts. That's why only 25 per cent of those converts baptized into the cult remain in it.

---

Sorry, but this is ridiculous. It is not a "sex-based cult". The Church is built on the teachings of Jesus Christ, as provided by prophets of the Restoration.

There is a belief in eternal marriage, yes. There is a belief that spirit children will be created, in the Celestial Kingdom, but the exact process is not known.

Quote:

---

So, who invented the term “Celestial sex?"

Coexisting with these two deities was a limitless amount of cosmic spirit matter known as 'intelligence,' out of which Elohim and Heavenly Mother made countless spirit babies via celestial sex. —One Nation Under Gods, p. 285
∗ ∗ ∗
The quote illustrated above is a good example of how critics twist LDS beliefs into a form that makes them look ridiculous. Quotes made by early LDS leaders are often used to support the claim that Latter-day Saints believe in “Celestial sex.” It should be noted, however, that LDS leaders have never used the term "Celestial sex." This phrase was coined by critics of the Church, likely for its “shock value” in portraying the following concepts in LDS belief:

The belief that God the Father has a physical body.

The belief that there exists a Heavenly Mother who also possesses a physical body.

The belief that our Heavenly Father and Mother together are capable of creating “spirit children.”

Critics take these ideas and combine them, leading to a declaration that Latter-day Saints therefore believe in “Celestial sex.” Various anti-Mormon works then use this idea to mock LDS beliefs or shock their readers—though this claim does not describe LDS beliefs, but the critics' caricature of them.

The critics' ***umptions simply take what we know about our physical world and naively apply it to the afterlife. When one examines the critics’ point further, a key question ought to be raised: How does the union of two immortal beings in a physical manner produce spirit offspring? Latter-day Saint belief is that “spirit children” only receive a physical body upon being born on earth.

This question, of course, cannot be answered. It is pointless to speculate on the exact manner in which “spirit children” are produced, and to ***ume that this occurs through a process called “Celestial sex” is to apply a worldly mindset to a spiritual process. The bottom line: Latter-day Saints do not know the mechanism by which “spirit children” are produced, and no LDS doctrine claims that "celestial sex" is the means.

---

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_a...lestial_sex%22

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

Sorry, but this is ridiculous. It is not a "sex-based cult". The Church is built on the teachings of Jesus Christ, as provided by prophets of the Restoration.

There is a belief in eternal marriage, yes. There is a belief that spirit children will be created, in the Celestial Kingdom, but the exact process is not known.



http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_a...lestial_sex%22

---

Libby, thank you for posting this. It appears that there are some who are bent on twisting our doctrines to fit their owned warped paradigms. First, they must ***ume they really know what we don't know and second, they must ***ume that sex is some terrible, evil thing that God condemns rather than a means of pro-creation and, when part of the appropriate bounds of marriage (which God has set) one of the most wonderful parts of the human relationship which not only brings a husband and wife closer together but produces children, one of God's greatest gifts. My moments of greatest joy come the relationship I have with my husband (which includes sex) and the relationship I have with my children. When I think about giving birth to my babies, with my husband next to me---I just can't think of a time that I feel closer and more appreciative to God for my wonderful life! I get to have that now again renewed as I experience having grand-children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Libby, thank you for posting this. It appears that there are some who are bent on twisting our doctrines to fit their owned warped paradigms.

---

No BigJ we get it right and you don't like it. We are not the ones who believes that you and your husband will procreate spirit babies to populate your own world someday--that is what you belive. Your constant denial of what you really believe is getting tiresome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

No BigJ we get it right and you don't like it. We are not the ones who believes that you and your husband will procreate spirit babies to populate your own world someday--that is what you belive. Your constant denial of what you really believe is getting tiresome.

---

This is the utter deception of . They have two sets of beliefs. One for the general public which they use to proselytize, and the other for the inner core group of Mormons. It's a very sad situation. If you point out the one, they lapse into the other. The only hope is simply to tell the truth so that lurkers will be exposed to the true teachings of the cult:

Mormonism LDS Apostle Melvin J. Ballard (1873-1939) wrote, "What do we mean by endless or eternal increase? We mean that through the righteousness and faithfulness of men and women who keep the commandments of God they will come forth with celestial bodies, fitted and prepared to enter into their great, high and eternal glory in the celestial kingdom of God; and unto them, through their preparation, there will come children, who will be spirit children. I don't think that is very difficult to comprehend and understand" (Three Degrees of Glory, p.10).

Orson Pratt: "As soon as each God has begotten many millions of male and female spirits, and his Heavenly inheritance becomes too small, to comfortably accommodate his great family, he, in connection with his sons, organizes a new world, after a similar order to the one which we now inhabit, where he sends both the male and female spirits to inhabit tabernacles of flesh and bones" (The Seer, p. 37).

McConkie: "Every person married in the temple for time and for all eternity has sealed upon him, conditioned upon his faithfulness, all of the blessings of the ancient patriarchs, including the crowning promise and ***urance of eternal increase, which means, literally, a posterity as numerous as the dust particles of the earth."

Let's face it, this sounds like Roman mythology, and that's why the LDS like to conceal their paganistic beliefs.

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Apologette

This is the utter deception of . They have two sets of beliefs. One for the general public which they use to proselytize, and the other for the inner core group of Mormons. It's a very sad situation. If you point out the one, they lapse into the other. The only hope is simply to tell the truth so that lurkers will be exposed to the true teachings of the cult:

---

This is completely and utterly untrue. I have asked you multiple times if you will give full disclosure as to why the JoD has not been cannonized, and it appears it is you who refuse to give the whole truth.

Quote:

---

Mormonism LDS Apostle Melvin J. Ballard (1873-1939) wrote, "What do we mean by endless or eternal increase? We mean that through the righteousness and faithfulness of men and women who keep the commandments of God they will come forth with celestial bodies, fitted and prepared to enter into their great, high and eternal glory in the celestial kingdom of God; and unto them, through their preparation, there will come children, who will be spirit children. I don't think that is very difficult to comprehend and understand" (Three Degrees of Glory, p.10).

---

We have no idea and it has never been revealed how spirit bodies come to be through procreation, but as I explained, we--unlike you, do not see our sexualities as an evil thing to be done away with when we are "perfected" in our resurrected bodies. But, a resurrected body is not the same as a earthly body and spirits are not the same as a resurrected body--so, this is unknown to us.

Quote:

---

Orson Pratt: "As soon as each God has begotten many millions of male and female spirits, and his Heavenly inheritance becomes too small, to comfortably accommodate his great family, he, in connection with his sons, organizes a new world, after a similar order to the one which we now inhabit, where he sends both the male and female spirits to inhabit tabernacles of flesh and bones" (The Seer, p. 37).

---

Once again, can you please give full disclosure for regarding "The Seer"---as once again, this is not considered revelation, but discussion.

Quote:

---

McConkie: "Every person married in the temple for time and for all eternity has sealed upon him, conditioned upon his faithfulness, all of the blessings of the ancient patriarchs, including the crowning promise and ***urance of eternal increase, which means, literally, a posterity as numerous as the dust particles of the earth."

---

Yes, you can find this same promise in the Bible given to Abraham.

So, I have two questions for you?
One: Is it absolutely known HOW that spirit bodies will come to be? Why do you think it is through intercourse?

Two: Do you think human sexuality is a wicked and evil thing that God ends upon our death?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Two: Do you think human sexuality is a wicked and evil thing that God ends upon our death?

---

Sex is for reproduction within marriage.
As there is no marriage in the Kingdom, there is no sex. and no reproduction.

So I would not use the term "wicked" rather it's like a tool that is a moot point in the afterlife.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Sex is for reproduction within marriage.
As there is no marriage in the Kingdom, there is no sex. and no reproduction.

So I would not use the term "wicked" rather it's like a tool that is a moot point in the afterlife.

---

So, to you, God the great creator, upon perfecting your mortal body, takes away from it the ability to create. Is that your thinking? What about your other creative abilities? Will they be gone too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

So, to you, God the great creator, upon perfecting your mortal body, takes away from it the ability to create. Is that your thinking? What about your other creative abilities? Will they be gone too?

---

Nowhere in the Bible does it state that we will procreate spirit babies in heaven BigJ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

Nowhere in the Bible does it state that we will procreate spirit babies in heaven BigJ.

---

I had a grandson born on the 21, and a granddaughter born on the 23, of this month.
That's why I am hiding here on a Sa****ay here at the office.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

I had a grandson born on the 21, and a granddaughter born on the 23, of this month.
That's why I am hiding here on a Sa****ay here at the office.:)

---

I saw Billyray's link through you. ;). We are taught that we are the spirit offspring of God the Father even in the Bible. What we are not taught is how we are.

That said, I still find it fascinating that the critics of the LDS church seem to think procreation is a earthly thing that God would get rid of when perfecting our bodies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

That said, I still find it fascinating that the critics of the LDS church seem to think procreation is a earthly thing that God would get rid of when perfecting our bodies.

---

What about those who are in the Terrestial and Telestial kingdoms BigJ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

So, to you, God the great creator, upon perfecting your mortal body, takes away from it the ability to create. Is that your thinking? What about your other creative abilities? Will they be gone too?

---

yes....there is no reproduction in the Kingdom.

There is no marriage in the kingdom...

There is none of this limited relationship that we have now in the kingdom.

The way we are going to be is compared to the angels....the angels dont have children,,,they dont have a next generation....they dont die and need replacing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

yes....there is no reproduction in the Kingdom.

There is no marriage in the kingdom...

There is none of this limited relationship that we have now in the kingdom.

The way we are going to be is compared to the angels....the angels dont have children,,,they dont have a next generation....they dont die and need replacing.

---

It is not a matter of dying and needing replacing, but merely a great expansion through the great creator.

The kingdom of God is like a mustard seed....

To you, the great Creator of us all ends procreation with this life, to me--the procreative part of our bodies become useless. Interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

To you, the great Creator of us all ends procreation with this life, to me--the procreative part of our bodies become useless. Interesting.

---

What is interesting is the fact that you believe you create spirit babies in heaven when there is not a hint of this concept in the Bible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novato

Hi Radix,

If I caused offence I sincerely apologise. However if you examine the OP more exactly you might see that I stated:



The important word is seemingly.

My educational background is absolutely non-biblical. I have Masters Degrees in Political Science and Military subjects. I also have a, very old, BSc in Electronic Engineering. On a part time basis, just for fun, I completed a BA in History. One of the, very few, advantages of being a public servant. ( Smile)

Once again my apologies if I caused offence, that was not my intent.

Best regards,

Novato

---

I see that you have "seemingly" apologized. With all your non-Southern superiority, it is ashamed your still not able to recognize your arrogance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radix

I see that you have "seemingly" apologized. With all your non-Southern superiority, it is ashamed your still not able to recognize your arrogance.

---

Thank you for your gracious acknowledgement of my apology, true Southern courtesy, not.