How Can I Navigate My Path With The Course With These Issues?

[Anonymous]

Per SilentDawnings request, here are the things I’m talking about.

1. Temple ordinances: I think they’re great, even though I don’t think they’re required for exaltation at all. Joseph Smith’s oldest brother Alvin apparently didn’t need them at all according to a dream or vision Joseph had, but the book Saints make it seem like baptism for the dead had to done for Alvin anyway. I don’t buy it. I believe that all people in this world and the spirit world (of all religions, denominations, no denominations, whatever) who eventually become filled with charity and know God (Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, Heavenly Mother, the entire Heavenly Family) will gain eternal life, although temple ordinances can help many people reach that point. The Book of Mormon and the Bible hardly ever mention the temple, although the Bible and the Book of Mormon talk about the Mosaic Law with all it’s laws and ordinances, which was supposed to lead to the same thing I mentioned above, I believe. Unfortunately living that law became an obsession, which led to its corruption. Christ during his ministry and after his resurrection even seemed to teach the same thing I believe.

2. The law of chastity: It’s seems to me the law of chastity much more adaptable than many people realize. In the church, it’s often taught that it’s always rigid. You already know my leniency regarding porn and masturbation, so we don’t need to get into that. Polygamy seemed to change in the church, although men sealed to one wife can be sealed to another one after their first sealed wives die, which seems weird to me. Whether Joseph Smith was commanded by God to practice or not, or if Joseph sinned in how he practiced it…I just don’t know. I have two nephews that are members of the church. The older brother is gay and lives with his boyfriend in LA and his older brother that lives in Utah is bisexual. I support both nephews in their lifestyles. So, I’m closeted gay lifestyle supporter, although I’m not sure how to more open about it without raising red flags with family and friends that are members of the church. I’m grateful that the policy about gay couples’ children not being able to baptized unless the children were 18 was changed and the teachings regarding gay members of the church have softened over the years, but I don’t believe all gay members of the church will be happy living celibate lives.

3. I don’t believe the prophets in the church, outside the church, and in the scriptures are perfect sources of truth. I don’t believe the scriptures, even the Book of Mormon, are perfect sources of truth, although most members believe the Book of Mormon is a perfect sources of truth or at least preach that. The prophets or any type of messengers of God are always evolving and as a result so do the scriptures. I believe that Joseph Smith said that any revelation might have come from God, the Devil, or himself. So I believe that with any messenger, as the rest of us. I believe God or the Heavenly Family, although sometimes I wish they could reveal everything to us at once. But then maybe that would cause too many problems with us. Even scriptures in the Bible seem to contradict each other with events that happened.

4. I don’t believe God changes, but the Jehovah or Jesus Christ from the Old Testament seems to be so different from the Jesus of the New Testament. The Old Testament God seems quick-tempered, jealous, slow to forgive, and a war-monger. The New Testament Christ seems patient, forgiving, and slow-tempered, non-violent, except for clearing the money changers and freeing the animals from the temple. I’m trying to make sense out of a teaching that came from either Brigham Young or Joseph that said Heavenly Father was another Savior as well and progressed to where Jesus Christ is now. Either Heavenly Father doesn’t change or He progressed to where He is now. It would’ve helped if either teaching was never mentioned or if the statements are much clearer.

5. There is a lot of Us Versus Them and the end of the world in church and scripture teachings, so I’m trying to make sense out of some of that. But maybe some of that isn’t always meant the way those teachings come across.

6. I don’t know how to make sense out of the historical Jesus versus the scriptural Jesus, but that isn’t a huge issue for me.

7. I sometimes wish in church teachings there could be some emphasis that sometimes mental disorders are the cause or gives people tendencies for people doing bad things or sinning, but then maybe the leaders are afraid they’re condoning sinning, which I understand, but…sigh.

8. There is way too much prophet/leader worship, which for me led to my faith crisis. I don’t mind the church being structured the way it is, however. There are some leaders, like Uchtdorf and a few others, who try to emphasize following the Savior much more, but there’s still too many that over-emphasize following them even if inspiration seems to be telling you differently.

Well, that’s the majority of it anyway. Other stuff I can deal with on my own.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for putting these up. I am not feeling well. I will revisit them tomorrow. I hope the writing them out helped a bit.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, it has a little bit. I hope you get well.

[Anonymous]

Hello,

Thanks for writing them out. I will provide my .02.

1. Temple ordinances: I think that they were something Joseph Smith implemented to connect people to the scripture traditions and to past generations. I think the motivation behind the practice is divine – and fairly universal. I think that they have a more powerful impact on some people than others.

2. The law of chastity: There is a lot going on with this principle.

A) I think the core motivation behind this law is “how to treat the key partner in the family unit” – which is a loaded question in and of itself. I feel that P & M becomes an issue when it replaces the emotional connection induced by intimacy.

Yes, the sealing to multiple wives in a lifetime thing is annoying because it only goes 1 way. I would like to know why it is the way it is and what the divine motivation for it is, but at the end of the day I think it is just a holdover policy that isn’t important enough to the general authorities to ask God about and receive revelation on.

3. Prophets & Scriptures: I don’t believe that perfect sources of truth exist in and because of mortality. Period.

Therefore, every prophet was a person motivated to share a message in the best way that they knew how and that information went telephone-style through the ages. I think that scriptures contain the writings of prophets tuned to their specific time and concerns (which do cross generations in some instances). I think that our church privileges the main books of scripture in our canon – but that we actually don’t have an specific cannon. We are more open to the idea of ongoing revelation and personal revelation – which on some levels means our church believes that each person defines the cannon for themselves – which may include Harry Potter, Star Wars, Gandhi, Mother Theresa, Brene Brown, Steven R. Covey, the 12 apostles, Chieko Okazaki or Lord of the Rings just to name a few of the endless options.

3A: Communication from God: I don’t know how much God talks to us. I believe that humanity craves a relationship with God and spends a lot of time defining the attributes of God. I choose to believe that there is a power greater than humanity, and this is God.

4: God Through the Ages: Because humanity is defining how they perceive God, it’s going to look different through the ages based on the priorities of the time. The more telling question to me is “How do I perceive God?” and “What am I going to do about it?”.

5: Us Vs Them & The End of the World: Okum’s razor suggests that the narrative in the scriptures was written to unite people and create communities – fear, religious differentiation and common beliefs are the way to do so. I personally believe that God has very little to do with the themes of “Us vs Them” and “The End of the World” – but I am a rebel and I know it. Just because someone said that God said something doesn’t make it so (or for further mind-bloggling – not so).

6. Historical Jesus vs Scriptural Jesus: I haven’t researched it enough to have an opinion. I am pretty sure that we didn’t get the full story in the scriptures, and that there are messages and nuances lost in cross-cultural communications.

7. Mortality Factors: Here is where it gets interesting…

A) We strongly believe in agency. We strongly believe in “Spirit over Physical Body” – the divine imperfect spirit enters the mortal body to master it – that is the plan of salvation. BUT science is leaning towards saying that the physical body has as much or more control over the spirit… (just a tad confusing)….

There is also the pyschological component – a person will give up on a goal if they believe that they cannot achieve it or lose motivation to keep trying. It is hard for the church org to distinguish when a person cannot control themselves vs when a person doesn’t want to control themselves and calls it not being able to control themselves. It is more optimistic and produces a better outcome if the church teaching leans towards encouraging and teaching a person they can control what they do.

C) How do you distinguish a mental chemical atypical balancing act with a spiritual strength/weakness or an environmental cultural teaching? I think that this becomes splitting hairs at some point, but it is still a valid question that theology used to answer for us… This is at the root of questions about ADHD and ASD, among other mental concerns. Epigenetics (the study of what kicks genes into activation) has further muddled the situation by starting to identify potential genetic triggers – things that are written in the genetics that MAY happen given specific environmental conditions.

8. Prophet/Leader Worship: People need different things. I need the space to be a deep thinker and determine my theology – for lots of people, that is too scary or just doesn’t work for them. The church organization as an organization needs followers to pass it along to the next generation. It also needs to solidify and convey a message that is distinctive (for example Temples), but not too distinctive (for example Return to Bible tradition concepts). At the end of the day, its your skin the game, not theirs. I get to choose the degree that I privilege their knowledge in my life – some things I have taken away and those have become important to me, others not so much.

It’s all a growing process under imperfect conditions…

[Anonymous]

Ilovechrist77 wrote:

Per SilentDawnings request, here are the things I’m talking about….

Pleased you took my advice, as this is what I did. However, I think maybe you put too much out there for people to respond to all at once. I think I wrote all mine in a journal and then made each one a thread over a period of time…you might consider the same so people can respond in bite-sized pieces.

On that note — I have a question…you mentioned all belief-related issues you are having. I didn’t see anywhere that you are having trouble DOING the religion (maybe I need to read other threads again). Do you feel capable of living the gospel the way Mormons conceive it (I am a Mormon, but now look at other Mormons objectively, hence my language) even though your beliefs are different? Does this cause tension in certain ways? That is where I find most people have trouble.

For me, simple divergent in my beliefs and Mormonism is something I can be comfortable with. AT first it hurt like HE double hockey sticks. I felt like a traitor at church, and empty inside.

But now I feel at peace.

I feel there are some false assumptions we make when it comes to religion. One is that you have to believe all or most of it to be an active participant or even be comfortable with yourself and the experience. I don’t believe that’s true anymore. Think about any corporations for which you’ve worked — in my experience, I disagree with 25 to 75% of their leadership style, initiatives, philosophy, and sometimes, practices at any given time. Yet I manage to function, get good performance reviews, have won awards, and receive promotions. Been with the same organization for 25 years as a result. I think how we manage these situations is a kind of template for how we can manage our volunteer church experience. We need to get comfortable with the fact we don’t believe everything the group to which we belong does.

For me, I keep my mouth shut around people in power at my work, but have close friends with whom I can be candid. That helps. For a StayLDSer, this means sharing your naked truth here, within site mission guidelines, while being silent on controversial topics at the local level. I also consider my silence and sometimes even support for initiatives I don’t really agree with as a form of political savvy — something I feel I must do to survive in a world where there will always be diversity of opinion. So, in a way, learning to hold divergent opinion at church, while still being politically correct helps me self-actualize. I’ve seen how ridiculous and self-destructive certain people have been in my work, and at church, when they openly defy ideas, principles, programs, initiatives that there is no hope in changing as a lone voice in the wilderness. I don’t want that to be part of my character. I want to be effective in maintaining my personal relationships in my family and the community, while still holding my own hard-won perspectives (which, by the way, are open to influence in the future).

Anyway, when I read your list, I saw a lot of divergent beliefs, and I accept that we all have those. Without addressing those divergent beliefs, I think your challenge is to learn to be comfortable not believing everything while still being a participant, at some level, in the church.

The other fallacy I see here is that people think they have to be “authentic”. Being authentic is great — when it’s possible. When it’s not, diplomacy takes over. I think authenticity is a luxury few of can have in ALL corners of our lives. I can’t even say what I nakedly think to my own wife on certain subjects. I suspect most people would have similar experiences within valued relationships.

None of this means you have to give unfettered loyalty or commitment to the church, or even your work organization. I think there are ways of staying connected but with boundaries set. This eases the tension between personal belief and organizational imperatives. But those boundaries need to be discussed on a case by case basis.

Anyway, those are my thoughts…interested in what others have to say.

[Anonymous]

Temple Ordinances: Are great in concept. Ideally, they bind families together in eternal commitments of love and mutual support.

Law of Chastity: I believe that children born into 2 parent homes tend to have a more stable support network. I believe that complete fidelity in marriage helps to keep these relationship stable.

Prophets and Scriptures: I think the words “wisdom literature” are good descriptors. Lots of good people in their good faith, best attempt at drawing closer to God.

God: There may be an objective God out there somewhere, but He seems to never (or at least almost never) communicate himself through objective means. This means that He is always perceived and interpreted through the minds and hearts of people. Some will be very certain that he said X and others are equally convinced that he said Y.

Us vs. Them – End of the world: The more marginalized a group is the more it will empasize an end of the world scenario were the order of things is overturned and the members of the marginalized group are revealed to be the true victors. Group dynamics, competition, and hyperbole rule the day here.

Historical Jesus: In reading the scriptures with my kids I sometimes point out that the author of this gospel was not present at the event being described. How did he know what happened? Either the story was relayed by someone who was present to the author or it was written down by someone who was present and incorporated by the author or it was passed down orally and written down at some point. Jesus was an iconic figure that started a movement. It is reasonable that some of the things attributed to him may be “larger than life” retellings. We see many of these same things happening with the narrative events of the restoration and pioneer migration of the church. Almost every miraculous account, upon closer inspection, seems much more ordinary for many of the individuals present in the moment.

Agency: Our church overplays agency and uses it as a foundational doctrine. People who do not feel that they have had significant freedoms of choice in their lives will have a harder time in our church.

Prophet worship: Hiram Page found a seer stone and produced revelations, this was a major challenge to the leadership of JS. When JS died and his likely successors Hiram and Samuel Smith died soon after it created a succession crisis that nearly broke the church. Our church has developed a strong hierarchy with clear lines of succession in order to minimize factions or schisms. This can be as much a good thing as it is a bad thing. When the prophet signals a direction we can be a remarkably nimble organization. President RMN is demonstrating this for us right before our eyes.

Ultimately the undercurrent running through all of these issues is that it can be hard to sit through a meeting where the lesson is that XYZ is literally true (and presented as the most obvious and most rational perspective) and your eternal happiness depends on your allegiance and obedience. Is that any more uplifting or spiritual than cheering on your favorite sports team? What if you do not even like sports? There are some tactics and coping mechanisms that can help for people that feel disillusioned.

[Anonymous]

Ilovechrist77 wrote:

4. I don’t believe God changes, but the Jehovah or Jesus Christ from the Old Testament seems to be so different from the Jesus of the New Testament. The Old Testament God seems quick-tempered, jealous, slow to forgive, and a war-monger. The New Testament Christ seems patient, forgiving, and slow-tempered, non-violent, except for clearing the money changers and freeing the animals from the temple.

There’s an infinite number of approaches, but to name a few…

The first of the three marks of existence in Buddhism is impermanence. One perspective, suffering is caused by attachment. If we attach ourselves to an impermanent state we experience suffering when that impermanent state inevitably changes. In the context of a faith transition, if we’re attached to a rigid, unchanging doctrine we will experience suffering when that doctrine changes.

A different take. Perhaps god cannot change. Perhaps that is what defines god, that which does not change. In your examples of the old and new testaments perhaps the nature of god remained the same but our understanding of the nature of god changed.

Ilovechrist77 wrote:

5. There is a lot of Us Versus Them and the end of the world in church and scripture teachings, so I’m trying to make sense out of some of that. But maybe some of that isn’t always meant the way those teachings come across.

I feel like this is a part of the human experience, something that will always be with us, a part of natural human development and progression. I’ve found it helpful to process by recognizing that everything has its place.

Ilovechrist77 wrote:

8. There is way too much prophet/leader worship, which for me led to my faith crisis. I don’t mind the church being structured the way it is, however. There are some leaders, like Uchtdorf and a few others, who try to emphasize following the Savior much more, but there’s still too many that over-emphasize following them even if inspiration seems to be telling you differently.

I struggle with this too, but I try to remind myself that everything has its place.

I think some people genuinely need leaders to look to and there’s nothing wrong with that. In a way it can help people’s faith. People can’t see Jesus, so people look to someone that they can see. A prophet becomes this tangible thing that we can see, in a way he becomes evidence of people’s faith.

Also, I think we all experience insecurities. A voice that speaks with authority can help calm those insecurities.

[Anonymous]

AmyJ wrote:

C) How do you distinguish a mental chemical atypical balancing act with a spiritual strength/weakness or an environmental cultural teaching? I think that this becomes splitting hairs at some point, but it is still a valid question that theology used to answer for us…

The answer to that question has many implications but I also wonder… do we seek the answer to that question to learn something about ourselves or do we seek the answer to that question so we’ll know how to judge others?

Applied outward:

That person did xyz but they have a mental illness, so I’ll be more lenient when I determine their culpability.

That person did xyz and they don’t have a mental illness, they are without excuse.

Applied inward.

I did xyz but I have a mental illness. I’ll try to be better but I have to recognize that I have limitations and I should adjust my expectations of myself.

I did xyz and I don’t think I have a mental illness, I am without excuse. I’m a bad person.

[Anonymous]

I wanted to wait until I had time to answer, so here goes. In context, I am what most would consider active, I hols a TR (that I don’t use much) and I have a fairly high profile calling.

1. Temple: I’m pretty much with you. I don’t believe baptism is actually necessary for salvation or exaltation, and the argument could be made either way from scripture. I’m pretty much universalist – I do believe all or almost all people will eventually be saved. Putting on my apologetic hat (rarely worn) I think Joseph was very concerned about Alvin because the predominant teaching among all churches of his day was that Alvin was going to hell because he was not baptized. I think Joseph, like most of us, saw what he wanted to see. I am open to the idea that what Joseph saw (if he actualy saw anything) was a future time after whatever needed to happen for Alvin happened.

2. I think it’s perfectly OK to say you have a close relative who is gay and that you love him like we’re supposed to love all people. I have heard many people say very similar things from the pulpit, including a member of the stake presidency (who has a niece who is gay) at the behest of the visiting GA. As to chastity in general, there is definitely a de-emphasis on the idea of masturbation as a major sin. All three of my sons who did missions were not asked the question by either their bishop or SP, and since the last one the standard questions came out and it is not included. I agree, chastity is much more adaptable than commonly believed and I believe in relation to chastity and some other commandments that we tend to conflate repentance and penance too often (and penance is not actually part of LDS theology).

3. I also believe prophets are fallible and that most of what they say is simply their own opinion – this includes ancient and modern prophets.

4. I don’t necessarily buy that the Jehovah of the OT is Jesus of the NT. I mostly don’t believe in the God of the OT, preferring to believe and hope that God is a loving parent.

5. Us vs. them. I’m able to ignore it for the most part, although I will almost always speak up when someone in class starts in with anything related to how we’re better than X church because we believe Y.

6. I’m not really sure what you mean about historical vs. scriptural Jesus, except I am open to the idea of a symbolic Jesus/Messiah (or in other words that like the Nephites and Lamanites he did not actually exist).

7. I think this does exist, especially in leaders like JRH. I believe the church leadership, like the general populace, is coming to a greater understanding of mental illness all the time.

8. There is too much prophet worship. I wish the leadership would be more direct about it. Were I prophet for a day one of the first things I’d do is tell people not to stand when I enter the room, and please don’t sing that song.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

AmyJ wrote:

C) How do you distinguish a mental chemical atypical balancing act with a spiritual strength/weakness or an environmental cultural teaching? I think that this becomes splitting hairs at some point, but it is still a valid question that theology used to answer for us…

The answer to that question has many implications but I also wonder… do we seek the answer to that question to learn something about ourselves or do we seek the answer to that question so we’ll know how to judge others?

Applied outward:

That person did xyz but they have a mental illness, so I’ll be more lenient when I determine their culpability.

That person did xyz and they don’t have a mental illness, they are without excuse.

Applied inward.

I did xyz but I have a mental illness. I’ll try to be better but I have to recognize that I have limitations and I should adjust my expectations of myself.

I did xyz and I don’t think I have a mental illness, I am without excuse. I’m a bad person.

I now have a vision of Flip Wilson’s Geraldine running through my head. “The devil made me do it!”

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

AmyJ wrote:

C) How do you distinguish a mental chemical atypical balancing act with a spiritual strength/weakness or an environmental cultural teaching? I think that this becomes splitting hairs at some point, but it is still a valid question that theology used to answer for us…

The answer to that question has many implications but I also wonder… do we seek the answer to that question to learn something about ourselves or do we seek the answer to that question so we’ll know how to judge others?

Both. The judgement we extend towards ourselves is an extension of the judgement we pass on others and how we define what we expect from them.

It also provides guidelines that we want to communicate about others’ expectations on our behavior before we fail those expectations.

nibbler wrote:

Applied outward:

That person did xyz but they have a mental illness, so I’ll be more lenient when I determine their culpability.

That person did xyz and they don’t have a mental illness, they are without excuse.

Applied inward.

I did xyz but I have a mental illness. I’ll try to be better but I have to recognize that I have limitations and I should adjust my expectations of myself.

I did xyz and I don’t think I have a mental illness, I am without excuse. I’m a bad person.

I think the “without excuse” way of thinking leads down bad paths. If we can’t provide a mental narrative (excuse) to explain their behavior, we are uncertain of how to proceed around them, so we cut them off and condemn them. When we can’t provide a mental narrative (excuse) to explain our own behavior, we tend to engage in negative black and white thinking that shifts our uncomfortableness we feel about our behavior from guilt into shame.

Notice that in the examples provided, the mental narrative that explained the behavior also started a conversation on what actions to take next to act on. For working with others, I think that the non-condemnation of the person allows both parties to work on communicating future expectations. For working with ourselves, the expectation adjustment goes along with setting goals to improve our behavior.

[Anonymous]

1. Temple Ordinances.

Let me say this before I start. What I am about to tell you is something that is very sacred. It is something that I do not share with many people… but in your case… I don’t think my wife will mind.

My wife is the Great Granddaughter of Ephraim Knowles Hanks. If you have seen the movie “Ephraim’s Rescue”… you will know who he is. If not… he was one the people who rescued the pioneers in the Martin Handcart Company. The movie plot can be read in wiki here–> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephraim%27s_Rescue Bottom line was he had the gift of healing… and of raising people from the dead.

Special gifts run through this family. My wife is no different… she has gifts that were given to her in her childhood. One of those gifts is that the veil between this world and the next… is very thin for her. She has the ability to see those who have crossed over to the other side. It started with her seeing family members when she was a child. She saw them… heard them speak… and spoke with them.

Of course… she got the typical response from family members as most people would get… “No honey… there is no one there.” So she learned not to say anything about it from then on. She would just ignore the fact she could see them and would not engage them.

After she met me and we were married… I had revealed to her my experiences with those from the other side and shared that with her. I knew many people who had that gift. Many were not in Church… but that did not matter to me. So after me telling her about my belief system and that things like this were a gift from God… she let me know what she sees and experiences inside the temples. And since she has been using her gift more often… it has only increased.

So… I now read what you wrote:

Quote:

Joseph Smith’s oldest brother Alvin apparently didn’t need them at all according to a dream or vision Joseph had, but the book Saints make it seem like baptism for the dead had to done for Alvin anyway. I don’t buy it.

and realized that your conclusion was not totally accurate.

My wife is also a hospice nurse. So she is with her clients within the last months, weeks, and days before they die and crossover. She sees their family member come and minister to them and often will ask her to do some special for them… which she does. There have been some who just after 30 days of their death have come to her and asked her to do their work. She lets them know that she is required to wait a year before the work can be done. And believe me when I say that when it gets close to that one year mark… they are coming and reminding her.

There have been times when we are in the Temple and she can see them kneeling at the alter with us as we seal either a husband and wife together… or one child or a family. She watches the them waiting in line to get baptized… and then all crowd into the confirmation room to be confirmed. Often they have shared their joy with her after an ordinance is completed by bringing very strong emotions of an over abundance of love and happiness… which causes my wife to cry. They also let her know that because this ordinance is done.. they can now progress. They are so happy to be progressing and until their ordinance is done… they can’t progress.

She also sees those from the other side who are assigned as temple workers. She watches them bring those in from the other side and directs them where to go.

So as I understand it… to be able to progress… the ordinance must be done. So Alvin would have been waiting anxiously to get his done.

[Anonymous]

(Moderator Note) Let’s be sensitive to everyone when we tread into who can and can’t see beyond the veil. I am happy to approve a post if we can be respectful of all options in the area of visions and insights. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Thanks, everyone, for the comments. AmyJ, I love what you had to say here,

Quote:

5: Us Vs Them & The End of the World: Okum’s razor suggests that the narrative in the scriptures was written to unite people and create communities – fear, religious differentiation and common beliefs are the way to do so. I personally believe that God has very little to do with the themes of “Us vs Them” and “The End of the World” – but I am a rebel and I know it. Just because someone said that God said something doesn’t make it so (or for further mind-bloggling – not so).

Thank you. I’ve never thought of it that way.

Right now I just try to navigate what I can. With my nephews’ sexual preferences I realize my parents and brother and sister-in-law don’t believe living a gay lifestyle is good, but my nephew’s boyfriend is welcomed into the family.

[Anonymous]

MrNirom, I appreciate that too. I apologize if I might have have offended you. I think that’s great you and your wife have the spiritual gifts necessary to see and experience the things you two have been able to. With Alvin’s situation and temple work in general I really wasn’t trying to say that nobody might need to progress. I was just saying I don’t believe everyone needs that to progress to where God wants them to inherit eternal life. I believe many can do that with the temple and some without. Can we agree to disagree?

[Author]

Posts