Whats in a Name?

[_Gazelam]

I didn't say you had a Black son. And the question is not racist, and neither am I. The point of the question is that there is a vast cultural difference between you and the house guest.

Gaz

[_MormonMendacity]

I didn't say you had a Black son. And the question is not racist, and neither am I. The point of the question is that there is a vast cultural difference between you and the house guest.

Gaz

But your question has nothing to do with the original thought of god's conditional love for his children. A renter is not the same as one of my children and probably wouldn't be treated the same. However, to answer your diversion, I can be considerably tolerant of other cultures and, if I needed to, I would put the rules before the "black renter" and we would part company if he wouldn't comply.

Again, that has nothing to do with how I would treat one of my children, particulary if I was Master of the Universe. I would not let pique about his culture affect my love for him.

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Gaz, you say in your beginning post:

As the crown of womanhood is in the giving of life, the crown of Man is in the giving of a name; conferring upon posterity the family name. Ceremony and ritual often accompany this.
By declareing a name upon the child, the Father declares the child his, making the child heir to all that he has, Declareing he will love and protect his progeny because the child is a manifestation of his own flesh and blood. (Bold added)

Is the above your own thought? Or an amalgam? It seems to give no consideration of daughters. Traditionally they take on hubby's name. Although currently some women retain their 'maiden' name.

"Making the child heir to all that he has". Is that legal state stuff, biblical/theological stuff, or parental choice? What if the child and father are total absolute strangers who NEVER connect in any way, except by DNA??? Other than DNA, heir to what??? Seems too many square pegs for your neat round holes, Bro. Respectfully, Roger

[_Gazelam]

What is your belief concerning Hell? Why was Satan cast out, along with his followers? What was the problem with his viewpoint, and why are those like him to be cast out with him?

Gaz

[_Gazelam]

In John 17:19-23 Christ declares the goal of the gospel. it is the desire of The Father that the children become one with him, as Christ was.

through baptism we change our family name from Adam to Christ. through adherence to the family values, we become an heir to the family inheritance.

If the child makes himself a stranger to the Father, he receives no inheritance.

Gaz

[_MormonMendacity]

What is your belief concerning Hell?

There is no objective evidence that there is a hell. There are only mythologies passed on through traditions about hell. When someone can produce an objective, repeatable test for the existence of hell, I will have a reason to accept that hell exists. (Can I say "hell" this often in the Celestial Forum?)

Why was Satan cast out, along with his followers? What was the problem with his viewpoint, and why are those like him to be cast out with him?

It is a myth that there was a Satan, a casting out and any followers. It could be just as equally correct that God is the embodiement of Evil in this world. For all we know, liars developed the scriptures to deceive us into believing that Satan is God and God is Satan.

According to the mythologies, Satan wanted to return all spirits back to god. Seems noble to me. Seems that is what a real god would want. Come to think of it, it seems illogical for god to create imperfect beings and then damn them if they didn't do what he says. Satan sounds like a truly loving brother. He wanted all of us to come back to god. Good for him!

I am much more inclined to believe that God gave us free will and rejoices in the complete usage of it. That humans must be responsible for the benefits and consequences of free will. That if a God exists, he rejoices in every aspect of his creation...even the parts that religionists have villified.

Thanks for interviewing me!!!

[_Roger Morrison]

In John 17:19-23 Christ declares the goal of the gospel. it is the desire of The Father that the children become one with him, as Christ was.

through baptism we change our family name from Adam to Christ. through adherence to the family values, we become an heir to the family inheritance.

If the child makes himself a stranger to the Father, he receives no inheritance.

Gaz

Hi Gaz, i'm not sure how you connect yer dots? As i understand your ref, Jesus wants the world's inhabitants to come together under the 'umbrella' of "God's" love so that "they may be one" in purpose. That being to be their "brother's keeper" so non will suffer the pains of injustice, poverty, greed as they enjoy their time and space in the family of humanity. Wherein the greatest serve, not exploit, the less-great...

I think one thing that seperates us, is You tend to think of some other, after-death existance having more significance than this-life?? Sort of living for the future?? 'That' immortality concept, does base Christianism. LDS and nonLDS.

I happen to think "THAT" "emphasis" is wrong. There might well be another existance. If-so, not-so...ipsofacto...let it be!

AS I UNDERSTAND Jesus' teachings HE "emphasised" this life. The now today existance, and how that can/will be improved by living the "two new commandments" he intoduced. These were/are to replace eye-for-eye vengence that had been their way of life since the 'cave'... That we still kill each other to settle disputes indicates: lack-of-faith-in-Jesus'-teachings, ignorance of, or indifference to, his teaching.

I can easily conclude he failed to take "his people" beyond the teachings of the Scribes, Pharasees and Sadducees. So we have today a Judeo-Christian society compromise, wherein "two masters" are successfully served to the benefit of the great/strong at the expence of the humble/weak...

So, i just have difficulty thinking in terms of:

through baptism we change our family name from Adam to Christ. through adherence to the family values, we become an heir to the family inheritance

That all seems so irrelevant to my current thinking. Keep in mind, i was once where you now are, although not with some of yer thoughts :-)

Aaanywaaay Bro, religious thought, no i correct myself, THEOLOGICAL thought, LDS and otherwise, IMSCO contributes little to practical Jesusism. Warm regards, Roger

[_Gazelam]

We are both correct in a sence.

The now thing has everything to do with the future. D&C 88 talks in depth on this very issue.

vs 3-10 expresses the scope of Christ as the creator and upholder of all things.

vs 11-14 expresses it in relation to us

vs 15-32 express how this affects our physical bodies through the sanctification process.

vs. 33-42 explains why.

Check it out Roger, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Gaz

[_Roger Morrison]

Good AM again :-) Gaz, i'll be 'bold'....

We are both correct in a sence.

The now thing has everything to do with the future. D&C 88 talks in depth on this very issue.
Yer right there! Only fools would deny that, and we ain't no fools. Right?
vs 3-10 expresses the scope of Christ as the creator and upholder of all things.
Somebody/thing did it!
vs 11-14 expresses it in relation to us
I can go along with 11-1/2way13. I don't see "God" sittething upon a throne?!
vs 15-32 express how this affects our physical bodies through the sanctification process.
To a TBM this may seem to be more than theological gibberish. Personally i have never, even when a TBM, been very impressed by terms such as "sanctification, piety, holiness, C&E-made-sure etc." A turn-on to some, it's a turn-off to other more pragmatic, down-to-earth types. Ya know what i'm sayin'?
vs. 33-42 explains why.
Some interesting terminology here, and going on to v50! Seems a reiteration, and rearrangement of common thoughts? Kingdoms, thrones, glory... "The earth rolls upon her wings..." nice poetry! The Sun is masculine, the Moon feminine--really??

Check it out Roger, and you'll see what I'm talking about. I don't see how this impacts Jesus' two new commandments?

Gaz, i get from reading this, and much other D&C writing, it seems to be all about "me"? What "I" have to do for "me" to be exalted. There seems little about 'others'? Except possibly how 'they' are evil influences that impede LDSism--the restoration; and will be punished for doing so.

Of course this is not without appreciation of their (LDS) good works. But even there, in inner-circles, it is VERY often for Missionary purposes. I hope you won't deny that.

Check it out from my perspective to see a broader, more "other" oriented picture that i happen to see as being more in line with Christ's two new commandments...

Gaz

It seems LDS shares much with other fundies and EVs. That is getting people into heaven, as if that trumps Jesus' message of serving the needs of those living a hellish life in their mortal, daily circumstances.

In so doing, i respectfully suggest, you've all missed HIS point. Think that over in yer classes, and while taking the sacrament today, Bro. Warm regards, Roger

[_Selah]

I recently heard (water) baptism put so incrediably amazingly - it is the wedding ring of Christianity. Just because you are not wearing your ring doesn't make you any less married. :)