tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post6476435211346351852..comments2023-11-02T07:25:45.884-05:00Comments on Mormanity - a blog for those interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: "Under This Head Ye Are Made Free"Jeff Lindsayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comBlogger96125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-5339771762711365712016-07-11T09:22:09.802-05:002016-07-11T09:22:09.802-05:00The following was taken from an article entitled &...The following was taken from an article entitled "The Fulness of Times" from the December 1989 Ensign:<br /><br /><i>Differences between Angels and Spirits<br /><br />The word angel means “messenger.” It is often used to refer to any heavenly messenger, but in the strict technical sense, as defined in Doctrine and Covenants 129, an angel is a resurrected or translated being with a body. There are also ministering spirits, who do not currently have bodies of flesh and bones. Such have passed through mortality and are awaiting the resurrection.<br /><br />The Prophet Joseph taught that there is an order that must be observed in the teaching of the gospel among beings of different types, and that Jesus himself observed it. The general pattern is for mortals to teach mortals, spirits to teach spirits, and resurrected beings to minister among other resurrected beings. (See Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 191.)<br /><br />There are times, however, when it is necessary for beings of a higher order to minister to beings of a lower. It appears from what has been revealed that if priesthood or keys are to be restored to earth, a resurrected or translated being is employed because of the laying on of hands; however, spirits can convey knowledge or deliver messages, but not lay on hands. (See D&C 129.) Because of the necessity of the ordinance of laying on of hands, we know that John the Baptist, Peter, James, John, Moses, Elias, Elijah, and any others who conferred priesthood and keys on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were resurrected or translated beings, not merely spirits.<br /><br />Usually, then, angels or spirits do not minister to mortals (especially if there are other mortals who can do what is needed), but when the need arises, the Lord or his angels give direct and personal guidance to the prophets. (See Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 265.)</i><br /><br />Actually, it is not clear in the Biblical text what form Moses and Elijah appeared in. However, they could not have been resurrected beings because Christ hadn't been resurrected yet, and He was to be the first.<br /><br />Because of our understanding of what happened on the Mount of Transfiguration, namely the conferring of priesthood keys, it follows that Moses and Elias would have been in bodily form for the purpose as translated beings.<br /><br />My only purpose in mentioning all this is that even though the Bible "actually says" that Moses died, such was not the case.<br /><br />(And there is the supporting biblical matter of John the Beloved, who still "tarries" on the earth, awaiting Christ's Second Coming.)bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-35887930388094794132016-07-02T08:13:01.716-05:002016-07-02T08:13:01.716-05:00Nor does the Bible say it was the resurrected Mose...Nor does the Bible say it was the resurrected Moses and Elias. Why would you assume it was? <br /><br />Nor does the Bible say that is what the <i>spirit</i> of Christ that preached to them that were dead, does it? But we know it couldn't be the resurrected CHrist that did it. So,...the Bible doesn't distinguish between spirts and resurrected beings who appear after their deaths. <br /><br />Thus, you assume that Moses was resurrected. It is an assumption. In no way supported by anything in the text. And yet, you accuse me of changing verses to say what I want them to say? <br /><br />Goodness...Mormons are experts at doing that. Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-16391247476886398202016-07-01T22:53:10.848-05:002016-07-01T22:53:10.848-05:00I suppose you are welcome to change any verse to s...I suppose you are welcome to change any verse to say what you want it to say. I was only showing you some things the Bible actually <i>does</i> say and, as usual, you deflected or ignored the point. It's a free world, I suppose.bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-20624727499689188952016-07-01T22:42:40.785-05:002016-07-01T22:42:40.785-05:00Besides, the Bible doesn't actually say it was...Besides, the Bible doesn't actually say it was the <i>spirits</i> of Moses and Elias. Why would you assume it was?bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-86112901868497839422016-07-01T22:29:36.654-05:002016-07-01T22:29:36.654-05:00Even in your D&C, Joseph Smith says that spiri...<i> Even in your D&C, Joseph Smith says that spirits not yet resurrected can appear to people.</i><br /><br />Yes, I believe that. Do you?bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-18947573443632883522016-07-01T22:26:42.824-05:002016-07-01T22:26:42.824-05:00Only if one believes that there is something left ...<i>Only if one believes that there is something left to be done, some unfinished business that wasn't taken care of on the cross, will one start searching for a "fullness." </i><br /><br />But there <i>is</i> much to be done. Not on THE cross, because Christ "finished His preparations unto the children of men." (D&C 19:19) He accomplished the Atonement. But He didn't walk away after that. He has a lot more to do, and all of it for our benefit. He didn't love us just once. He still loves us and wants us back home.<br /><br />But we have a lot to do as well. The main thing is repent. We also need to learn of Him. We need to be humble. In addition, we need to overcome our weaknesses, which we can't fully do without His help. He wants us to spread His word throughout the world. We need to love others as He loves us. We need to exercise faith. We need to follow His example in all things. We need to become "even as He is." We need to change, to "put off the natural man." It takes effort on our part as well as His. <br /><br />He will not make us do any of it, but He cannot give us everything He otherwise might if we don't. In fact, we probably won't want everything He <i>could</i> give us if we don't. It's up to us. He invites; We choose to either respond or not.bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-27701460920697086542016-07-01T22:18:27.605-05:002016-07-01T22:18:27.605-05:00I don't believe in a "fullness" of t...I don't believe in a "fullness" of the Gospel.<br /><br />You've made that abundantly clear, EBU. But there's still time. It could happen.<br /><br /><br /><br />I believe the gospel is complete in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is the "good news," which is what "gospel" means in the first place. You, of course, add other connotations to that word. I think you need to find a new word. <br /><br />You know...the Brits call a flashlight a torch. And we all call machines that take pictures a phone now. <br /><br />Sometimes we change the definition of words, but we don't change the word to catch up. This is what has happened. <br /><br />You don't really believe in the Gospel, Bearby, if the Gospel is what you say it is. You are using the same word, but the word is a emptied of its original meaning as an embalmed corpse is of its blood supply. And thus, it might behoove you to read Galatians 1.<br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-69682262502225913052016-07-01T22:14:26.154-05:002016-07-01T22:14:26.154-05:00Your question about Moses is kind of silly. It see...Your question about Moses is kind of silly. It seems to suggest that you think only a resurrected being can appear to others. But even in your D&C, Joseph Smith says that spirits not yet resurrected can appear to people. Remember...if you reach out to shake their hand, they won't offer their own hand back.Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-25142047014719042892016-07-01T22:11:32.676-05:002016-07-01T22:11:32.676-05:0018 "That they do good, that they be rich in g...18 "That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; willing to give the LDS church 10% of all they earn for life, willing to participate in secret rituals, willing to get married in a secret ritual for eternity, willing to wear the sacred garment as instructed, etc, etc.....<br /><br />19 "Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life." (emphasis added)<br /><br />I fixed these scriptures for you to accurately reflect Mormon doctrine. <br /><br />You're welcome. <br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-52818743276427159482016-07-01T22:07:55.441-05:002016-07-01T22:07:55.441-05:001 Timothy 6:16
"Who only hath immortality, ...<i>1 Timothy 6:16 <br /><br />"Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting."<br /><br />So, here is the passage in Timothy to which you refer, and interpret it to say that Christ only is immortal. <br /><br />But if we read in 2 Timothy 1:10 we find:<br /><br />"But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:"<br /><br />Whose death did He abolish? To whom did He bring life and immortality?</i><br /><br />First of all, the verse in Timothy is referring to God the Father, not the Son. And yes...Jesus did bring us immortality. But that proves my point. We don't have it in ourselves unless it is given to us. God has immortality as an essential and eternal aspect of who God is. It is part of his nature in a way it isn't a part of our nature. No one gave it to him. But it is his to give out. God ALONE possesses immortality.<br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-5362740883704120892016-07-01T22:00:44.669-05:002016-07-01T22:00:44.669-05:00I don't believe in a "fullness" of t...<i>I don't believe in a "fullness" of the Gospel.</i><br /><br />You've made that abundantly clear, EBU. But there's still time. It could happen.bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-68444623864138497342016-07-01T21:59:00.583-05:002016-07-01T21:59:00.583-05:001 Timothy 6:16
"Who only hath immortality, ...1 Timothy 6:16 <br /><br />"Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting."<br /><br />So, here is the passage in Timothy to which you refer, and interpret it to say that Christ only is immortal. <br /><br />But if we read in 2 Timothy 1:10 we find:<br /><br />"But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:"<br /><br />Whose death did He abolish? To whom did He bring life and immortality?<br /><br />Back in 1 Timothy 6:<br /><br />18 "That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;<br /><br />19 "Laying up in store <i>for themselves</i> a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life." (emphasis added)<br /><br />It seems to say here that something is done by someone that through their efforts they "may lay hold on eternal life." It actually says that. But you would have us believe are our efforts of no consequence at all?<br /><br /><br /><br />And, as long as we're talking about things the Bible actually says - since you seem to hold on to that and nothing else - what actually happened to Moses at the end of his mortal life?<br /><br />Deuteronomy 34:<br /><br />5 "So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord.<br /><br />6 "And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Beth-peor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.<br /><br />7 "And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated."<br /><br />So, the Bible says Moses actually died.<br /><br />How, then, did Moses (or Elias, for that matter) appear at the Transfiguration of Christ?<br /><br />Matthew 17:3 "And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him." The Bible actually says that. Neither of them (Moses nor Elias) could have been resurrected yet, so how could this be?bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-21210877815985399182016-07-01T18:42:20.504-05:002016-07-01T18:42:20.504-05:00The claim that a witness is reliable would seem to...<i>The claim that a witness is reliable would seem to be a proposition.</i><br /><br />Perhaps you could "propose" a better method for the convincing of others who were not able to be there?<br /><br />A lot of resources and efforts are expended to retain witnesses in temporal matters, so apparently there is some value in having them.<br /><br />No matter, the examples mentioned would never be sufficient enough for convincing others even with witnesses. There were even witnesses who saw some of these things and yet were not convinced.<br /><br />The best that can be done is to initiate a desire for others to know for themselves - to obtain their own "witness."bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-64739194584022507922016-06-30T20:28:49.183-05:002016-06-30T20:28:49.183-05:001 Nephi 7 and 8 speak pretty profoundly about the ...<i>1 Nephi 7 and 8 speak pretty profoundly about the importance and eternal nature of families. Right between the two chapters that describe the small plates</i><br /><br />Reading the doctrine of eternal family into these chapters is a real stretch. No one reading it would come away with the doctrine, unless they were first fully indoctrinated into the doctrine. <br /><br />I'm sorry. But this just isn't convincing. Chapter 7 gives the reason for going back to get Ishmael's family. God wanted Nephi and Sam to have babies in the land of promise. It doesn't say anything about exaltation. <br /><br />Reading the 'eternal family' doctrine into that is like reading it in the story of Rebekah at the well. Or even in the story of Sleeping Beauty. Or any other story in which a man and a woman fall in love. <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-5995002979820617672016-06-30T17:29:39.535-05:002016-06-30T17:29:39.535-05:00@bearyb 8:41 —
The claim that a witness is reliab...@bearyb 8:41 —<br /><br />The claim that a witness is reliable would seem to be a proposition.James Anglinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18266855639647700167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-76796807501141811802016-06-30T12:37:14.271-05:002016-06-30T12:37:14.271-05:00If you believe the Bible contains a fulness of the...<i>If you believe the Bible contains a fulness of the gospel as in "all information from God," how are we to understand the passage in I Corinthians 2:9? "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." Shouldn't God's preparations for us be a part of the gospel?<br /><br />If everything of eternal importance is in the Bible, why this statement?</i><br /><br />As I said to someone else: gotta watch for that Mormon paradigm you are stuck in. <br /><br />I don't believe in a "fullness" of the Gospel. Gospel is just an Old English word for "good news." The good news is that Christ died and was resurrected for us for the forgiveness of our sins. So says Paul in Corinthians. <br /><br />That is it. Period. <br /><br />Sure, that doesn't answer a lot of questions. But those questions and the answers to those questions have nothing to do with the good news of salvation. <br /><br />In that verse you quote, it is talking about the state of being for those who are saved in Christ. We don't know how good it is going to be. But that has nothing to do with the gospel, which is salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. <br /><br />Only if one believes that there is something left to be done, some unfinished business that wasn't taken care of on the cross, will one start searching for a "fullness." <br /><br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-79696442554984369832016-06-30T11:08:07.671-05:002016-06-30T11:08:07.671-05:00Isn't it amazing that we've been given suc...<i>Isn't it amazing that we've been given such an expansion of knowledge, line upon line, precept upon precept?<br /><br />Or, we could have just been given the Two Great Commandments. I think more is better.</i><br /><br />I absolutely disagree. First of all, it might indeed be better if the more you have is actually the truth. However, when John says that love is the fulfillment of the law, I think he really means what he says. When James says that pure religion is to take care of the widows, I think he means what he says. <br /><br />In Mormonism, taking care of widows is an expression of religion but it is not at all the religion itself. The Mormonism is a Kabbalistic-style attempt to make sense of a senseless universe by presenting us with a before, now, and after that stretches into eternity in both directions. Mormonism is the "vain speculations" that Paul speaks of, and warns us against. <br /><br />The servants of Satan will appear as ministers of righteousness. That means they will look like they are righteous people speaking God's holy truth. That means they will deceive people. It isn't the obviously wicked we all need to be concerned about. But Mormonism only concerns itself with avoiding the obvious deceptions of sin and wickedness. <br /><br />But Satan's servants do not come in this disguise. Jesus hung out with the sinners. The people Mormons are told to avoid, Jesus associated with. <br /><br />Satan's servants are usually the "righteous" religious leaders. The Bible says so. And these are the people Jesus reprimands time and again. <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-44846931547082461402016-06-30T11:01:04.842-05:002016-06-30T11:01:04.842-05:00The Mormon concept of Hell is nice. The Mormon con...The Mormon concept of Hell is nice. The Mormon concept of Damnation is not. Unlike in Christianity, the two are different. <br /><br />In Mormonism, one can be saved and damned at the same time. D&C 76 says all are saved. D&C 132 says those who are not exalted are damned. Since exaltation and salvation are not the same thing, one can be both saved and damned in Mormonism. <br /><br />This was Joseph Smith's way of reconciling the strong Calvinistic belief in heaven/hell which he inherited from his mother with the belief in universal salvation he inherited from his father's side of the family. <br /><br />It is really clever. Mormon missionaries can tell investigators that Mormons believe everyone will be saved. That sounds nice. And then, when the investigators become members, they can be taught that they will be damned if they are not exalted. If they fail to live up to all they've promised to do, they will be cut off from their families forever. <br /><br />So, I agree with James...Mormons have not better a system then the rest of Christianity. In fact, in some ways it is far more twisted. <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-38761682223507472032016-06-30T09:13:05.137-05:002016-06-30T09:13:05.137-05:00I do find the Mormon concept of hell much more tol...I do find the Mormon concept of hell much more tolerable than that of many mainstream Christian denominations. I don't understand how so many Christians can cheerfully swallow a doctrine which, if it were true, would mean that God was a cosmic evil power who would never deserve worship. The marketing advantages of hell as an infinite threat, to scare people into joining or remaining in the church, seem to outweigh the moral implications of hell. In fairness, though, I don't think that all that many Christians really take hell that seriously. Some do, however. That freaks me out. However religious they may be, they just cannot have thought very much or very seriously about what they claim to believe.<br /><br />The discussion about miracles and worthiness began with the Mormon concept of priesthood as a power, whereby for example a Mormon priesthood holder could expect to be granted miracles more often than a non-priesthood-holder, other things being equal. From there the discussion shifted to the issue of just what factors might make miracles more likely. I accepted faith, and the will of God, as important factors; I rejected priesthood and worthiness. So we came to talk about worthiness.James Anglinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18266855639647700167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-91278654292870897752016-06-30T08:47:10.911-05:002016-06-30T08:47:10.911-05:00@ EBU re: your True to the Faith quote -
Isn'...@ EBU re: your True to the Faith quote -<br /><br />Isn't it amazing that we've been given such an expansion of knowledge, line upon line, precept upon precept?<br /><br />Or, we could have just been given the Two Great Commandments. I think more is better.bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-26342495206687496782016-06-30T08:41:06.334-05:002016-06-30T08:41:06.334-05:00Another interesting quote from the link mentioned ...Another interesting quote from the link mentioned above:<br /><br />"The truth of Mormonism does not rest on reason. We do not draw our authority, our identity, or our mission from any set of propositions or from any interpretation of doctrine. We do not draw upon theology at all as justification for our truth claims. The truth of Mormonism rests on the occurrence of certain events. Chief among the founding events are these: the Father and the Son either appeared to Joseph Smith in New York or They did not; there either were gold plates holding a history of real people or there were not; apostles and prophets laid hands on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery or they did not. We can go beyond this. The truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ itself rests on the occurrence of events. There was a Man, Jesus, or there was not; He overcame the whole of sin and darkness in the garden or He did not; the tomb was empty or it was not. The truth of an event is very different from the truth of a proposition. The truth of propositions is established by reason and argument. The truth of events is established by witnesses. Because of the restoration of the true gospel, we are blessed with an abundance of witnesses. This is why the apostolic authority of special witnesses and the restoration of the gifts of the Spirit are essential to the true church. Scriptures also witness of these things, and we Latter-day Saints have an embarrassment of riches where scripture is concerned."bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-15371523142479902232016-06-30T08:28:36.262-05:002016-06-30T08:28:36.262-05:00"Among all the factors contributing to the Ap..."Among all the factors contributing to the Apostasy, three are preeminent: first, the loss of the understanding of the true nature of God and thus of our own nature and purpose; second, the loss of apostolic authority and the special witness it provides; and, third, the loss of the fulness of the gifts of the Spirit. It is interesting to me that these three things were among the very first restored in our dispensation. These three essential characteristics of the true Church bear directly on our experience and understanding of faith, reason, knowledge, and truth." <br /><br />Mr. Williams, from whose speech the above is found, needs a history lesson. The understanding of the nature of God evolved between 1830 and 1844, undergoing several permutations. The apostles were not called until 5 years after the establishment of the church. <br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-34684886504456526322016-06-30T08:23:30.079-05:002016-06-30T08:23:30.079-05:00The only logical reason you could pose such an arg...<i>The only logical reason you could pose such an argument is because of perceived differences of opinion as to what constitutes the "fulness" of the Gospel.</i><br /><br /><br />"In its fulness, the gospel includes all the doctrines, principles, laws, ordinances, and covenants necessary for us to be exalted in the celestial kingdom."<br /><br />True to the Faith (2004) Lds.org<br /><br />Everything Before Usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-61641558798441453852016-06-30T08:12:55.195-05:002016-06-30T08:12:55.195-05:00And, EBU, before you make the claim that if the go...And, EBU, before you make the claim that if the gospel so narrowly defined was never lost and therefore didn't need to be restored, please consider at least this:<br /><br />"Among all the factors contributing to the Apostasy, three are preeminent: first, the loss of the understanding of the true nature of God and thus of our own nature and purpose; second, the loss of apostolic authority and the special witness it provides; and, third, the loss of the fulness of the gifts of the Spirit. It is interesting to me that these three things were among the very first restored in our dispensation. These three essential characteristics of the true Church bear directly on our experience and understanding of faith, reason, knowledge, and truth." From <a href="https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/richard-n-williams_faith-reason-knowledge-and-truth/" rel="nofollow">here</a>.bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-70879086846853201532016-06-30T08:01:13.287-05:002016-06-30T08:01:13.287-05:00@ EBU:
The ol' "fulness of the gospel&qu...@ EBU:<br /><br />The ol' "fulness of the gospel" argument again?<br /><br />The only logical reason you could pose such an argument is because of perceived differences of opinion as to what constitutes the "fulness" of the Gospel.<br /><br />Perhaps the gospel should defined very narrowly as only the main highlights of our need for, the availability of, and how we can access the Atonement of Jesus Christ. That seems to be the case in the scriptures I remember reading. That little bit covers a whole lot, though, and can even be shortened to the Two Great Commandments.<br /><br />So, in the interest of efficiency, why didn't God just tell us the Two Great Commandments and leave it at that?<br /><br />If the Bible and the Book of Mormon each contain the "fulness of the gospel" (as the Church claims), then the definition of "fulness" has to mean something other than "all information from God."<br /><br />If you believe the Bible contains a fulness of the gospel as in "all information from God," how are we to understand the passage in I Corinthians 2:9? "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." Shouldn't God's preparations for us be a part of the gospel?<br /><br />If everything of eternal importance is in the Bible, why this statement?<br /><br />There are additionally, of course, the examples I mentioned before where certain things were not even written down. If they were important enough to mention at all, why weren't we allowed to have them at that time?<br /><br />You speak as one of those mentioned in 2 Nephi 27:27 who say, in reference to the marvelous work and a wonder the Lord will do, "Surely, your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay."<br /><br />I suppose we'll all figure it out eventually.bearybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06489716403013822895noreply@blogger.com