<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Larry King Rule</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/</link>
	<description>A Mormon Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:12:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Whatsina Name</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48563</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Whatsina Name]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 03:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was reminded once... No matter what we feel is important to us here, will very likely no longer carry any weight at all... in the next. In fact, we are so concerned whether we will be able to use all the parts of our body for what it is intended, once it is resurrected, I think we will be highly shocked to find how truly un-important all of this will even be.

Because there will be new knowledge and understanding so far beyond what can even began dream of here, we will laugh with embarrassment, if not mourn for all the lost time and energy wasted worrying about it now.

I have been paralyzed from the waist (waste?) down for 23 years. I had a few short years of marriage and sex  before losing it for time. Trust me when I tell you this thought has crossed my mind a time or two. Nevertheless, after having two &quot;miracles&quot;, born after being completely unable to produce children for 5 years, and still not able to &quot;feel&quot; the parts that are needed to feel the joy of physical intimacy, I have a deep understanding of the importance of sex. Thus I do not take it lightly.

I just have come to believe that what is in store for the faithful after the resurrection and things have been made &quot;right&quot; again, is just not even in our realm of fantasy and imagination. It will simply be perfect, whatever it is, and however it is done.

But what do I know... I am just another person looking for the right questions. I do not even hope to find the answers anymore.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was reminded once&#8230; No matter what we feel is important to us here, will very likely no longer carry any weight at all&#8230; in the next. In fact, we are so concerned whether we will be able to use all the parts of our body for what it is intended, once it is resurrected, I think we will be highly shocked to find how truly un-important all of this will even be.</p>
<p>Because there will be new knowledge and understanding so far beyond what can even began dream of here, we will laugh with embarrassment, if not mourn for all the lost time and energy wasted worrying about it now.</p>
<p>I have been paralyzed from the waist (waste?) down for 23 years. I had a few short years of marriage and sex  before losing it for time. Trust me when I tell you this thought has crossed my mind a time or two. Nevertheless, after having two &#8220;miracles&#8221;, born after being completely unable to produce children for 5 years, and still not able to &#8220;feel&#8221; the parts that are needed to feel the joy of physical intimacy, I have a deep understanding of the importance of sex. Thus I do not take it lightly.</p>
<p>I just have come to believe that what is in store for the faithful after the resurrection and things have been made &#8220;right&#8221; again, is just not even in our realm of fantasy and imagination. It will simply be perfect, whatever it is, and however it is done.</p>
<p>But what do I know&#8230; I am just another person looking for the right questions. I do not even hope to find the answers anymore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faith-Promoting Rumor &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The TK Smoothie Rule</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48562</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Faith-Promoting Rumor &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The TK Smoothie Rule]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2006 04:05:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48562</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] In light of Ronan&#8217;s helpful rules on cultish behavior and public orthodoxy, my brother and I have developed yet another rule by which to measure our collective worth; especially in light of our place among the religions of the world. Introducing The TK Smoothie Rule. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In light of Ronan&#8217;s helpful rules on cultish behavior and public orthodoxy, my brother and I have developed yet another rule by which to measure our collective worth; especially in light of our place among the religions of the world. Introducing The TK Smoothie Rule. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: By Common Consent &#187; &#8220;The Scientology Rule&#8221;; Or, Don&#8217;t Be Cultish!</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48561</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[By Common Consent &#187; &#8220;The Scientology Rule&#8221;; Or, Don&#8217;t Be Cultish!]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 07:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48561</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Some time ago I introduced the &#8220;Larry King Rule,&#8221; which states that the veracity of any given Mormon doctrine can be determined by imagining how President Hinckley would respond to it on Larry King. It assumes, of course, that we are honest in public about our doctrines. I have no reason to believe that President Hinckley wouldn&#8217;t be. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Some time ago I introduced the &#8220;Larry King Rule,&#8221; which states that the veracity of any given Mormon doctrine can be determined by imagining how President Hinckley would respond to it on Larry King. It assumes, of course, that we are honest in public about our doctrines. I have no reason to believe that President Hinckley wouldn&#8217;t be. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48560</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:48:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48560</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J. Stapely, that is an anemic rebuttal.  I did not say that the details are known.  Sex in heaven may be of the Cacoon variety (see movie if you don&#039;t know what I am talking about) for all I know, but it will be there.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J. Stapely, that is an anemic rebuttal.  I did not say that the details are known.  Sex in heaven may be of the Cacoon variety (see movie if you don&#8217;t know what I am talking about) for all I know, but it will be there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J. Stapley</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48559</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J. Stapley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stephen, if you are asserting that people attack each others with weopons and kill each other in heaven, then I believe that you are mistaken.  If not, then you need to revaluate your argument.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen, if you are asserting that people attack each others with weopons and kill each other in heaven, then I believe that you are mistaken.  If not, then you need to revaluate your argument.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48558</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:23:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48558</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The rule I use to determine if something is God-like is to look at how hard satan tries to thwart and manipulate it.  Money, power, and sex are satan&#039;s favorite tools here on earth.  Why?  Because he can never really have any of them.  In heaven, thrones, principalities, properties, and propogation are God&#039;s.  The details of such things are not ours to know right now.  But to suggest that sex is a fleeting thing is to suggest that war is fleeting thing.  Simply tis not true.  Wars and sex happen in heaven.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The rule I use to determine if something is God-like is to look at how hard satan tries to thwart and manipulate it.  Money, power, and sex are satan&#8217;s favorite tools here on earth.  Why?  Because he can never really have any of them.  In heaven, thrones, principalities, properties, and propogation are God&#8217;s.  The details of such things are not ours to know right now.  But to suggest that sex is a fleeting thing is to suggest that war is fleeting thing.  Simply tis not true.  Wars and sex happen in heaven.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sultan of Squirrels</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48557</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sultan of Squirrels]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2006 04:44:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48557</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[k. thanks for the responce. makes sense too.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>k. thanks for the responce. makes sense too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CS Eric</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48556</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CS Eric]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:33:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48556</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sultan,

That is a different question.  This is just my opinion, but I believe Heavely Father looks for reasons to bless us.  If your marriage, any marriage, is a righteous one, then I believe you will be blessed accordingly.  Is the marriage a loving one, where the husband and wife love, support, and are faithful to each other?  If so, then blessings are sure to follow.

So the question is, what kind of blessings?  I have heard it said that celestial blessings come from celestial living, or by living the celestial law.  For marriage, we usually think of marriage in the temple as &quot;living the celestial law.&quot;  But you and I both know many marriages where the ONLY mark of &quot;celestialness&quot; is that the ceremony was in the temple, otherwise, they are at each other&#039;s throats, or are otherwise miserable.

It is my personal opinion that there are more blessings for a happy marriage where the ceremony was not in the temple than for a miserable one where the ceremony was.  The ideal, is for a happy marriage where the cerremony was in the temple.  But we cannot all have the ideal, sometimes no matter how hard we try, and I believe there will be allowances for that.  Some will never marry, some will marry outside the temple, some will never have children.

I don&#039;t know how Heavenly Father will make it up to those of us who didn&#039;t have the opportunity for the ideal, but I believe his infinite justice and mercy somehow will.  The atonement doesn&#039;t just reconcile our sins, but Alma 7:11-14 teaches that it makes up for everything.  Mrs CS and I haven&#039;t been able to have children, for reasons beyond our control.  I believe that if we are faithful we will somehow be blessed.  Will we have children in the afterlife by means of &quot;celestial sex&quot;? (to get back to the original topic)  I don&#039;t know.  Will those who did not marry in the temple but otherwise have a &quot;celestial marriage&quot; have to repent of where they had the ceremony?  I&#039;m not sure that repentance is the word I would choose, and personally, I&#039;m not willing to speculate more than I already have, other than to say that situations like that are what temple work for the dead is for.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sultan,</p>
<p>That is a different question.  This is just my opinion, but I believe Heavely Father looks for reasons to bless us.  If your marriage, any marriage, is a righteous one, then I believe you will be blessed accordingly.  Is the marriage a loving one, where the husband and wife love, support, and are faithful to each other?  If so, then blessings are sure to follow.</p>
<p>So the question is, what kind of blessings?  I have heard it said that celestial blessings come from celestial living, or by living the celestial law.  For marriage, we usually think of marriage in the temple as &#8220;living the celestial law.&#8221;  But you and I both know many marriages where the ONLY mark of &#8220;celestialness&#8221; is that the ceremony was in the temple, otherwise, they are at each other&#8217;s throats, or are otherwise miserable.</p>
<p>It is my personal opinion that there are more blessings for a happy marriage where the ceremony was not in the temple than for a miserable one where the ceremony was.  The ideal, is for a happy marriage where the cerremony was in the temple.  But we cannot all have the ideal, sometimes no matter how hard we try, and I believe there will be allowances for that.  Some will never marry, some will marry outside the temple, some will never have children.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know how Heavenly Father will make it up to those of us who didn&#8217;t have the opportunity for the ideal, but I believe his infinite justice and mercy somehow will.  The atonement doesn&#8217;t just reconcile our sins, but Alma 7:11-14 teaches that it makes up for everything.  Mrs CS and I haven&#8217;t been able to have children, for reasons beyond our control.  I believe that if we are faithful we will somehow be blessed.  Will we have children in the afterlife by means of &#8220;celestial sex&#8221;? (to get back to the original topic)  I don&#8217;t know.  Will those who did not marry in the temple but otherwise have a &#8220;celestial marriage&#8221; have to repent of where they had the ceremony?  I&#8217;m not sure that repentance is the word I would choose, and personally, I&#8217;m not willing to speculate more than I already have, other than to say that situations like that are what temple work for the dead is for.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sultan of Squirrels</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48555</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sultan of Squirrels]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 05:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[okay. thanks for the lawerly resposne. I didn&#039;t mean it like that thought. I meant more do people think god actually frowns on you for marrying outside of the church? because that just doesn&#039;t sound right to me. I would hope I am able to go to the temple with my future wife. but if I or someone else wasn&#039;t able to and fell in love with someone outside of the church I don&#039;t see God frowning on that. I guess my question was more about afterlife repentance than repentance here on this earth.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>okay. thanks for the lawerly resposne. I didn&#8217;t mean it like that thought. I meant more do people think god actually frowns on you for marrying outside of the church? because that just doesn&#8217;t sound right to me. I would hope I am able to go to the temple with my future wife. but if I or someone else wasn&#8217;t able to and fell in love with someone outside of the church I don&#8217;t see God frowning on that. I guess my question was more about afterlife repentance than repentance here on this earth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve McIntyre</title>
		<link>http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/29/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48554</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve McIntyre]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 01:53:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2005/12/the-larry-king-rule/#comment-48554</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m surprised it hasn&#039;t been mentioned, but in Holland&#039;s talk, &quot;Of Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments,&quot; he points out that at no point in this life will we be more like God than when engaged in the act of procreation (when married, of course).

This doesn&#039;t necessarily prove that we will or will not have sex in the afterlife, but it&#039;s worth thinking about. In fact, the whole talk is devoted to the idea that sex is holy and sacred; indeed, as Holland puts it, it is a &quot;sacrament.&quot; Whether or not the sexual act has anything to do with eternal life is uncertain, but I think the talk at least reinforces the LDS stance that sex is not inherently dirty or unholy, but rather, quite the opposite.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised it hasn&#8217;t been mentioned, but in Holland&#8217;s talk, &#8220;Of Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments,&#8221; he points out that at no point in this life will we be more like God than when engaged in the act of procreation (when married, of course).</p>
<p>This doesn&#8217;t necessarily prove that we will or will not have sex in the afterlife, but it&#8217;s worth thinking about. In fact, the whole talk is devoted to the idea that sex is holy and sacred; indeed, as Holland puts it, it is a &#8220;sacrament.&#8221; Whether or not the sexual act has anything to do with eternal life is uncertain, but I think the talk at least reinforces the LDS stance that sex is not inherently dirty or unholy, but rather, quite the opposite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

