Lot was able to live a righteous life while surrounded by debauchery.
Are you sure about that?
Post by buffalo_girl »
Lot was able to live a righteous life while surrounded by debauchery.
I don't think I've ever seen God care when the majority has chosen to do something that was wrong or wicked--he still sends his prophets to tell them to repent. He still insists that those who know that something is wrong need to speak out and warn others.Thomas wrote:I think it is fine to use your political vote in opposition to gay marriage but I believe that battle has been lost. The majority have chosen it.sen6b wrote:Prohibiting gay marriage isn't forcing anyone into righteous behavior it's standing up for our beliefs and the fact that we think it's wrong, and enforcement of God's law is never wrong.
By enforcing God's laws, what exactly do mean? God does not force us to obey him. Why do we think we should take it upon ourselves to do it?
buffalo_girl wrote:Lot was able to live a righteous life while surrounded by debauchery.
Are you sure about that?
When did I say warning others is forcing them to obey?AI2.0 wrote:I don't think I've ever seen God care when the majority has chosen to do something that was wrong or wicked--he still sends his prophets to tell them to repent. He still insists that those who know that something is wrong need to speak out and warn others.Thomas wrote:I think it is fine to use your political vote in opposition to gay marriage but I believe that battle has been lost. The majority have chosen it.sen6b wrote:Prohibiting gay marriage isn't forcing anyone into righteous behavior it's standing up for our beliefs and the fact that we think it's wrong, and enforcement of God's law is never wrong.
By enforcing God's laws, what exactly do mean? God does not force us to obey him. Why do we think we should take it upon ourselves to do it?
If you think that since 'the majority has chosen it' the battle is lost, and even warning others is 'forcing' them to obey, I'd say you've been seduced by Satan's subtle influence(as so many are today) to view God's laws as "coercion" and an attack on our exercise of agency and Satan as the champion of Free Agency and freedom. @-)
Satan is turning things that used to clear and absolute upside down to where people call good evil and evil good; IMO, this line of thinking is a perfect example of that.
Moroni says, if you don't have the faith to be ministered unto by angels than you don't have the faith to be saved by Christ.36 Or have angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved?
37 Behold I say unto you, Nay; for it is by faith that miracles are wrought; and it is by faith that angels appear and minister unto men; wherefore, if these things have ceased wo be unto the children of men, for it is because of unbelief, and all is vain.
38 For no man can be saved, according to the words of Christ, save they shall have faith in his name; wherefore, if these things have ceased, then has faith ceased also; and awful is the state of man, for they are as though there had been no redemption made
My understanding from Jewish sources is that after Sodom and Gomorrah were nuked Lot's daughters thought that the world itself had been obliterated and they may have seen themselves as the last survivors; then they may have sought to start the world over again and seen their father as the new Adam.Lot's daughters committed incest with him--but of course, they'd been raised in Sodom and Gomorrah. IMO, it rubbed off.
Yes, I'm aware of that explanation, however, it only strengthens my position. Think about what they did. They took the matter into their own hands, ignoring their father's position of authority to spiritually lead and guide them--which didn't end even if the world had been nuked, and determined to get him drunk so they could have sexual relations with him--BOTH of them. This was incest and an absolute violation of their moral law. If they thought they were going to be a 'new Adam' and his wives, they were totally messed up--and IMO, it just confirms how the wicked, depraved values of Sodom and Gomorrah influenced them.Fiannan wrote:My understanding from Jewish sources is that after Sodom and Gomorrah were nuked Lot's daughters thought that the world itself had been obliterated and they may have seen themselves as the last survivors; then they may have sought to start the world over again and seen their father as the new Adam.Lot's daughters committed incest with him--but of course, they'd been raised in Sodom and Gomorrah. IMO, it rubbed off.
Thomas wrote: When did I say warning others is forcing them to obey?I said pretty much all you can do is preach the gospel. You cannot force people to be moral. They must have the choice. Yes it is possible to force them if you have the power but what good is it to you? That doesn't do anything for your salvation. Your salvation is based upon your behavior not the behavior of those around you. Focus on what you can do to come to Christ. Lot interacted with heavenly messengers. Have you? Because if not it is all in vain.Sorry if that is not what you wished to convey, but that was the message I read. You seemed to have a very fatalistic attitude toward us trying to speak up and stand against what is happening to our society.Moroni 7:I don't think anyone on this thread was suggesting we try to force people to be moral, if you got that impression from what I wrote, I'm sorry, that is not what I would ever suggest. Speaking up and voting or supporting those who take a stand against the moral slide taking place right now is not, IMO, forcing my values on others, it is trying to maintain the status quo--IMO, if anyone is guilty of trying to force their morals on others, it is the small militant faction of the LGBT community and their supporters who have been actively demanding that others accept their moral standard and calling anyone who opposes them 'haters'.
As for interacting with Heavenly Messengers being some sort of requirement to have the 'right' kind of faith, I disagree. Being able to be ministered to by heavenly messengers is one of the gifts of God, given to us singly or severally, depending on the will of God, as he sees fit to grant those gifts. It is not something we can or ought to demand as proof of our faith.Moroni says, if you don't have the faith to be ministered unto by angels than you don't have the faith to be saved by Christ.36 Or have angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved?
37 Behold I say unto you, Nay; for it is by faith that miracles are wrought; and it is by faith that angels appear and minister unto men; wherefore, if these things have ceased wo be unto the children of men, for it is because of unbelief, and all is vain.
38 For no man can be saved, according to the words of Christ, save they shall have faith in his name; wherefore, if these things have ceased, then has faith ceased also; and awful is the state of man, for they are as though there had been no redemption made
Of what value is it to stop gay marriage and after you die go to hell?
I think Moroni would disagree with your interpolation of his words. I would refer you back to your scriptures. Faith is not to have a perfect knowledge. Faith is to believe on things NOT SEEN. That definition of faith is not conducive with the demand that one must see heavenly messengers in order to be able to exercise faith that can save. Christ taught 'Doubting' Thomas that a witness of the Holy Ghost was more powerful than actually seeing with one's eyes, which is what we in this life would accept as a more sure knowledge. But, I've known many people who, when they lost their faith, also lost faith in the miracles they'd seen and which now they questioned. In other words, seeing heavenly messengers is not something we should put on a pedestal as 'better' than faith in things not seen, yet we believe--after all, Laman and Lemuel saw and interacted with angels and yet it didn't help them know the truth or be able to understand the things of God any better than the average unbelievers.
I don't think we are going to stop gay marriage by our disapproval of some of the highly sexualized displays in Pride parades, that isn't why we speak out. It is to let others like us know that it IS not right and ought not to be encouraged or promoted and they are not alone.
Moroni says, if you don't have the faith to be ministered unto by angels than you don't have the faith to be saved by Christ.36 Or have angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved?
37 Behold I say unto you, Nay; for it is by faith that miracles are wrought; and it is by faith that angels appear and minister unto men; wherefore, if these things have ceased wo be unto the children of men, for it is because of unbelief, and all is vain.
38 For no man can be saved, according to the words of Christ, save they shall have faith in his name; wherefore, if these things have ceased, then has faith ceased also; and awful is the state of man, for they are as though there had been no redemption made
My attitude comes from reading the scriptures. Have you read the Book of Mormon, Isaiah, Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel? Do you believe we live in the latter days? Speak up all you want. I'll quote Packer:" It is easier to change behavior by studying the gospel than by studying behavior." As I said, about all you can do is preach the gospel.AI2.0 wrote: Sorry if that is not what you wished to convey, but that was the message I read. You seemed to have a very fatalistic attitude toward us trying to speak up and stand against what is happening to our society
Thank you for your faith lesson. I implore you to study a little deeper than the primary version of faith. Start with the Lectures on faith and study the words of Joseph Smith. Try to determine, from what he taught, if you have enough faith to be saved. maybe if you won't believe Moroni , you will believe Joseph. Faith is just a word unless it can manifest itself in some form or another. That is what Moroni is trying to tell you. Real faith brings angels. Angels bring Christ. Christ brings you to God. That is salvation. Otherwise, all you have is a meaningless word.I think Moroni would disagree with your interpolation of his words. I would refer you back to your scriptures. Faith is not to have a perfect knowledge. Faith is to believe on things NOT SEEN. That definition of faith is not conducive with the demand that one must see heavenly messengers in order to be able to exercise faith that can save. Christ taught 'Doubting' Thomas that a witness of the Holy Ghost was more powerful than actually seeing with one's eyes, which is what we in this life would accept as a more sure knowledge. But, I've known many people who, when they lost their faith, also lost faith in the miracles they'd seen and which now they questioned. In other words, seeing heavenly messengers is not something we should put on a pedestal as 'better' than faith in things not seen, yet we believe--after all, Laman and Lemuel saw and interacted with angels and yet it didn't help them know the truth or be able to understand the things of God any better than the average unbelievers.
Does it take faith to stand in God's presence while living or dead, when all who die will stand before God whether they had faith or not? Think about that and ponder on what this scripture means as well:LOF pg 19
34 The reason why we have been thus particular on this part of our subject, is, that this class may see by what means it was that God became an object of faith among men after the fall; and what it was that stirred up the faith of multitudes to feel after him; to search after a knowledge of his character, perfections and attributes, until they became extensively acquainted with him; and not only commune with him, and behold his glory, but be partakers of his power, and stand in his presence.
Now the words of Joseph Smith again:John 17:3
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent
LOF pg 61LOF pg 25
55 Let us here observe, that after any portion of the human family are made acquainted with the important fact that there is a God who has created and does uphold all things, the extent of their knowledge, respecting his character and glory, will depend upon their diligence and faithfulness in seeking after him, until like Enoch the brother of Jared, and Moses, they shall obtain faith in God, and power with him to. behold him face to face.
So, I guess you can worry about whether people are going to be gay when the scripture say most the world will be destroyed because of wickedness or you could worry about whether your ambitions about being saved are vain because you have not beheld the face of God nor given your all in sacrifice to the Lord like Abraham, Job, Joseph Smith etc.8 It is in vain for persons to fancy to themselves that they are heirs with those, or can be heirs with them, who have offered their all in sacrifice, and by this means obtained faith in God and favor with him so as to obtain eternal life, unless they in like manner offer unto him the same sacrifice, and through that offering obtain the knowledge that they are accepted of him.
9 It was in offering sacrifices that Abel, the first martyr, obtained knowledge that he was accepted of God. And from the days of righteous Abel to the present time, the knowledge that men have that they are accepted in the sight of God, is obtained by offering sacrifice: and in the last days, before the Lord comes, he is to gather together his saints who have made a covenant with him by sacrifice. Ps. 50: 3,4,5. Our God shall clime, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him. He shall call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that he may judge his people. Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant unto me by sacrifice.
A quick question, was incest listed as a crime against God's laws then? I have noted that Ham's sin may have been raping his father and in this case Lot's daughters raped their father as well; yet in this case it appears they lived as a family unit afterwards. I will note that Abraham and Sarah were siblings but they married, and Adam and Eve's children had to marry each other, unless one buys into the idea that hominids existed at the time that intermarried with Adam and Eve's children.Yes, I'm aware of that explanation, however, it only strengthens my position. Think about what they did. They took the matter into their own hands, ignoring their father's position of authority to spiritually lead and guide them--which didn't end even if the world had been nuked, and determined to get him drunk so they could have sexual relations with him--BOTH of them. This was incest and an absolute violation of their moral law. If they thought they were going to be a 'new Adam' and his wives, they were totally messed up--and IMO, it just confirms how the wicked, depraved values of Sodom and Gomorrah influenced them.
Post by Hogmeister »
Recent discoveries (ancient texts) shows that Ham's sin was in trying to "steal" the priesthood for himself and his posterity. He stole the priesthood garment, given to Adam by God and passed on to and worn by Noah. Thus uncovering Noah's nakedness. Makes more sense knowing this that the said curse pertained to the priesthood.Fiannan wrote:A quick question, was incest listed as a crime against God's laws then? I have noted that Ham's sin may have been raping his father and in this case Lot's daughters raped their father as well; yet in this case it appears they lived as a family unit afterwards. I will note that Abraham and Sarah were siblings but they married, and Adam and Eve's children had to marry each other, unless one buys into the idea that hominids existed at the time that intermarried with Adam and Eve's children.Yes, I'm aware of that explanation, however, it only strengthens my position. Think about what they did. They took the matter into their own hands, ignoring their father's position of authority to spiritually lead and guide them--which didn't end even if the world had been nuked, and determined to get him drunk so they could have sexual relations with him--BOTH of them. This was incest and an absolute violation of their moral law. If they thought they were going to be a 'new Adam' and his wives, they were totally messed up--and IMO, it just confirms how the wicked, depraved values of Sodom and Gomorrah influenced them.
By the way, aren't Lot's daughters ultimately married to their father in the next life?
While some rare societies have allowed marriage between siblings, do you know of any which allow marriage between a parent and full blood child? I don't. During early biblical days incest laws were different from later times, probably out of necessity, people married within their own clans, however, by the time of Moses, incest was listed as forbidden among the Children of Israel.Fiannan wrote: A quick question, was incest listed as a crime against God's laws then? I have noted that Ham's sin may have been raping his father and in this case Lot's daughters raped their father as well; yet in this case it appears they lived as a family unit afterwards. I will note that Abraham and Sarah were siblings but they married, and Adam and Eve's children had to marry each other, unless one buys into the idea that hominids existed at the time that intermarried with Adam and Eve's children.
Why would you think this?By the way, aren't Lot's daughters ultimately married to their father in the next life?
Your very right, and really they dont want marriage equality, eventually they want to do away with the definition of marriage family.sen6b wrote:Exactly!! They say they want EQUAL rights which would mean the same for everyone. But they don't want us to have our freedom of religion unless it's in agreement with their lifestyle. Or our freedom of speech unless it's pro gay. Otherwise, it's " hate speech" or " bigotry".shestalou wrote:Maybe in Utah the majority doesnt want it but do not say anything against gays here or you will be looked down upon by everyone, you cannot say anything in opposition anymore, they have won. :ymdevil:
Post by brianne541 »
sen6b wrote:Exactly!! They say they want EQUAL rights which would mean the same for everyone. But they don't want us to have our freedom of religion unless it's in agreement with their lifestyle. Or our freedom of speech unless it's pro gay. Otherwise, it's " hate speech" or " bigotry".shestalou wrote:Maybe in Utah the majority doesnt want it but do not say anything against gays here or you will be looked down upon by everyone, you cannot say anything in opposition anymore, they have won. :ymdevil:
Post by buffalo_girl »
Fortunately, we aren't that bad.
LDSFreedomForum.com and its admin / moderators do not necessarily agree with all content posted by users of this forum.
The views and content on this site reflect only the opinions and teachings of the authors of the respective content contained herein.