All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Having spent time with those of Islamic faith - I believe we have more in common with our Islamic cousins than we do with our Traditional Christian cousins. Perhaps the most power tool to convince our Islamic friends how close our religions are to each other is the Book of Mormon. I agreed to read the Quran if a Muslim would read the Book of Mormon. What I discovered is that the Quran is quite difficult to to read without constant input to help me understand context and intent. But more to my surprise I discovered that Muslims (especially from the Middle East) understand many things about the Book of Mormon than most members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For example: Many members struggle with Nephi cutting of the head of Laban because G-d commanded him. A devoted life long Muslim reads this in the Book of Mormon as a witness that to them that the Book of Mormon is of G-d and that Nephi was a prophet called by G-d. They agree that the sword of Laban would then become a sacred relic. That the sword was then presented to Joseph Smith is a witness to them that Joseph Smith was a prophet called by G-d. As another thought I was having a discussion about Sharia Law with a Muslim from Bahrain that was temporally living in Utah. We agreed that no nation on earth fully implements Sharia Law so I asked him where in the world I could go to see the best example of a society living Sharia Law. After thinking for a while my friend said - Here in Utah in the predominate LDS cities. Last thought - Muslims believe that at the end of time that Mohamad with come with Jesus to unite Christians and Muslims to restore all the laws and ordinances of G-d's truth. The idea of a restoration is something that is very interesting to them. The Traveler
  3. I bought some kitchen towels this past summer that had pictures of lemons and the saying “Easy Peazy, Lemon Squeezy”.
  4. Just_A_Guy

    Harry Reid memorial service: Chuck Schumer quotes 2 Nephi

    1. I would respectfully submit that this is too absolutist a position to take. A more accurate position is that during the periods when they are used properly, masks partially work (with “work”, in this case, defined as “limit the wearer’s ability to spread disease”—I think it’s been common knowledge for over a year now that mask don’t significantly protect the wearer). People on both sides talk about masking as if it’s supposed to be some sort of mystical rite that if used at all renders one wholly invincible for a day (or, by contrast, renders one essentially “infected” or “unclean” if it slips out of place just once. But really, it’s a choice one makes every minute of every day, during dozens or hundreds of discrete physical encounters or near-encounters with people and things; and “safety” isn’t an all-or-nothing characterization but a spectrum depending on the aggregate of all of those encounters. Think of it this way: If I were to say (and I’m sorry for the PG-13 nature of this analogy, it’s just the one that came most easily to my filthy mind) that “prophylactics don’t have a 100% success rate, so in my 100 sexual encounters a day I’m not going to use a prophylactic for a single one of them”—you’d say that was obvious nonsense. But the argument you deploy above kind of seems to be a variant of it—“since I can’t limit my transmissibility risk to 0%, there’s no point in me inconveniencing myself for the sake of lowering it to 75 or 50 or 25%. Now, if someone wants to say “I believe that the reduction in risk of transmissibility offered by a mask, in conjunction with the potential consequences to a person who gets infected from me, are not worth the personal sacrifices it would require for me to wear a mask at all”—that, I think, shows that some thought has gone into the decision; and I could respect that (I say “could” because so far it’s a hypothetical—I don’t recall dialoguing with *any* anti-masker who was willing to acknowledge that masks do anything at all. So far they all seem to stick with “it won’t do ANY good”, which strikes me as the result of an over-simplified calculus). 2. Agree. I suspect that my own mask is no more than 20-25% effective, if that. But ultimately, wearing one costs me very little. And while I don’t care what people think of my virtue, I do care that people feel comfortable around me. In the past I’ve cited Romans 14 and Mosiah 10 in defense of “modesty culture”, arguing that females in the Church should inconvenience themselves to a degree for the sake of not becoming a stumblingblock to their fellowsaints and in the name of bearing one another’s burdens. Having personally done that, I’d feel a bit hypocritical refusing to wear a mask to Church when for me, the cost to my convenience and health is so very low and I know that there are people in my ward who’s feel safer if I wore one. As you say—it’s an individual decision, and good folk will apply different praxes for different reasons. I just reserve the right to comment and criticize when some folks openly cite to/advocate a decision-making process that has some noticeable flaws. (Though I note that as a conservative Church member, I don’t think we—as conservatives—have ever bent over backwards to assuage the consciences of those who chose to decree that a particular bit of prophetic counsel. We didn’t buy their assertions that it was “just his opinion” or that even aspiring to obedience was unnecessary and even harmful. We haven't done that regarding the counsel about young men having a responsibility to qualify themselves to serve missions, or for young women to limit themselves to one pair of earrings, or for teens to avoid R-rated movies, or for young couples to have as many kids as they can, or for the Church membership to read the Book of Mormon through in a given year or participate in a social media fast or make a series of Facebook posts about gratitude. No, our counsel as conservatives has been “if you can’t, you can’t; but most of us can actually do more than we think we can, and if you can, then you should try.” We have pointed out that while we strive to love everyone, the church is a subculture and subcultures define their membership by who aspires to a set of standards. Jumping when the prophet says “jump” (or at least agreeing that we should jump, and encouraging and helping others to do so even when our own legs fail us) is a standard the Church has long maintained. Other Church members are always going to notice whether I seem eager to conform or eager to justify my failure to conform. And (within reasonable bounds), that is as it should be.) And, for what it’s worth—given what I took @JohnsonJones to be suggesting about anti-maskers and potentially trying to lump them into Harry Reid territory, I thought I was actually defending them with my comment about them being deceived!
  5. You make an interesting point. Everyone seems to talk about the sheep who wear masks and the selfish jerks who don’t, but in reality, some of the best people I know wear a mask-and some of the best people I know don’t. Humans are vastly more complex than we give them credit for.
  6. The Folk Prophet

    Harry Reid memorial service: Chuck Schumer quotes 2 Nephi

    I'm not quite sure how to parse this. Anti-maskers are deceived into thinking masks don't work? I'm a pretty rabid anti-masker myself. Don't get me wrong...I wear one in meetings when I can't socially distance. Because I believe in obedience. But here's what reason tells me: If I had the right mask and could, actually, wear it properly (washing hands first, applying a fresh, sanitary mask properly, and then leaving it alone the entire time I wore it), then...it still wouldn't do me any good in church because I have a 2 young children. If someone has the virus in church, what logic tells me, is that it's getting spread. My kids are touching stuff -- nay -- licking stuff. And they're ripping my mask off. And etc., etc. And I don't wear the right mask. Who does? And even if I did...others don't. And then..., you know, I don't wear it properly (how can I with children clawing at my face?, and I pull it down for the Sacrament, which lets the germs out/in as I touch the trays where other people are eating from...and etc., etc., etc.) And all that has nothing to do with what the institutions of science say and don't say. Throw in that side of things and my rebellion against "the science" in that particular thing is complete. So am I deceived in my anti-masking attitude? Shrug. Nevertheless, I will wear one in church meetings when I can't socially distance. I will follow the prophet. But no way am I putting on that stupid face diaper to meaninglessly virtue signal elsewhere. But I'll tell you what, some of the best, most honorable, intelligent, obedient, good people in my ward are some who have decided that wearing a mask in church isn't the path for them. I don't think I'll judge them. (I'm not saying you are judging...I just wondered wherein the conclusion stems from that those who, in my opinion, have very reasonable views on masks and the inefficacy of the practice are "deceived")
  7. I was joking. Traveler's response to your statement seemed almost a restatement of your words, so I thought I'd give yet another restatement and remark on how different all our near-identical answers were.
  8. Yesterday
  9. I was speaking in regards to the New Jerusalem. If you have a copy of The Coming of the Lord by Gerald Lund, he writes quite a bit on the topic in one of the chapters.
  10. good to talk to you. Just as a clarification - all things that G-d resides over are referenced in the scriptures as "Kingdoms" - including the "kingdoms" of glory in the resurrection. It is my understanding that all societies of this world (except that which is sealed by the Holy Ghost) are corrupted and will have an end and will not endure. If re rely on our understanding of governments of this world from which to draw a comparison - I believe the comparison will be lacking. It is hard for me to realize how citizens of a kingdom will be free and have liberty - but I think that in the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that we have possibly the best example. The Traveler
  11. NeuroTypical

    Gays and the church

    Wanting to develop a romantic dating relationship is a process of finding out each others' faults, and making conscious choices on what you can accept, what you can't, and what the other is willing to change. (And vice versa). So the young man in question figures out whether he'd marry someone who dresses like that, and he either risks a potential breakup by making it an issue, or he accepts it and continues with his relationship. Maintaining loving relationships can be similar, although the bar tends to be lower. You can be good friends with someone who does and believes things you don't do or believe. "You know how I feel about that stuff, but it's not like I have to go home with you, so we're friends even though you do that stuff." Again, people need to decide where they draw the line. If you only want to have loving relationships with other active believing LDS, who practice above what you believe is an acceptable level, then that's your call. Make your decision, let people know, and expect ties to be cut. I imagine folks with civility filters, who end up saying more than they want to say via facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, etc, are friends with people who already know that about you, and have decided to remain friends anyway.
  12. NeuroTypical

    What happened to the Third Hour articles?

    And I help as moderator, because we need to keep an eye on @LDSGator, and sometimes @mirkwood has to work his regular job.
  13. Civil wars have always been more brutal and intense than other ones. The GOP is learning that now in the battle between Trumpers and traditional conservatives.
  14. NeuroTypical

    Muslims and LDS: Beliefs, Values, and Lifestyles

    I might be wrong, but I'm not seeing this pamphlet intended to be a missionary aid, or something to help LDS folk convert Muslims better/quicker/more often. I think it's more of the church's decade-long concern about erosions of religious liberties, and finding allies where we can. Sort of along the same stripe of having the Baptist Reverend Al Mohler speak at BYU in 2013, where he said "I do not believe that we are going to heaven together, but I do believe we may go to jail together". Or when we partnered with LGBT supporters in Utah in 2015 to pass antidiscrimination legislation that protected religious freedom and LGBT rights. Or in 2019, when we continued the momentum on to the federal level, by partnering with churches, Christian orgs, LGBT groups, the 1st Amendment Partnership, the Alliance for Lasting Liberty, and others to pass the Fairness for All act. Of course, an increase in understanding and love for our neighbors can only help our missionary efforts. I just don't see that as the primary motivating force here.
  15. I am under the impression that Jesus will return as a King and law provider. And here I am, thinking that Christ will rule and reign over those who remain. How strange that we three should have such utterly different understandings of what will happen. I wonder which of us is right? Or maybe we're all wrong together.
  16. I think His return and how He will rule is beyond human comprehension. Like most of us here, I believe and hope He will return, but I don’t know the details of it. I’m very confident though that those of us who make it there will be stunned and humbled by who we also see there, and who we don’t see.
  17. LDSGator

    What happened to the Third Hour articles?

    @Traveler speaks for all of us here.
  18. Thank you. Yes this forum is no longer part of my official job with More Good Foundation. I do it because I've been around this forum for 20 years.
  19. Traveler

    What happened to the Third Hour articles?

    My impression of you as a person has just taken a giant leap. My parents taught me as a youth the the character of a person is most on display when they are doing things when they do not have to. For the record I have a Facebook account but I have never used it and it has been years since I have logged in - I will never log in because I have lost and forgotten it and do not care. Thank you for your efforts in managing this site. The Traveler
  20. I am under the impression that Jesus will return as a King and law provider. The Traveler
  21. Traveler

    Gays and the church

    Please allow me to explain my question - for this I will use another topic or choice but I think the basic principles are still the same. Before I get into the deep part of this - I would reference a discussion I had with a friend and police detective. We were talking about the "criminal mind" and he told me that humans are social animals and the so called criminal mind (with the exception of individuals with severe mental issues) will not continue or continue behaviors without being enabled by others. Even the most atrocious behavior will not continue unless there is a some kind of support for that behavior. In essence, intelligent species learn behaviors - both by individual experience (like touching something hot) and the reaction of others (like smelling so badly that others will shun or pull away). So for my example: let us take a single young man and a single young lady, both returned missionaries that are at the very beginning of establishing a "social" relationship - both looking for a compatible eternal partner (spouse). But during their "dating" process the young man realizes that the young lady that he dearly likes and respects is into faction and likes wearing classy outfits that are not compatible with the wearing of temple garments. The young man does want to continue to develop their relationship but how does he deal with the lady's fashion trend realizing that handled improperly - it could be a relationship breaker. In short how can he deal with what he believes is disrespect for temple covenants without alienating the young lady? Also keeping in mind that each individual has their Agency. We can also apply this issue across many relationships both in families and friends - how can we maintain loving relationships when there are conflicts with sacred covenants without encouraging the offending party that their behavior is not okay. Where is the line that someone crosses before we are willing to say - you should not be doing whatever it is that is not okay. For myself - I tend to lack what my wife calls filters and indicate that I am uncomfortable with their attitudes towards that which makes me uncomfortable. In other words I have difficulty with dishonesty with my own feelings and it is hard for me to hide my impressions - even if I am trying not to offend. The Traveler
  22. Almost a year ago the Board of Directors that is over the More Good Foundation made a decision that only certain projects would continue to be funded. It had to meet a certain criteria. Third Hour was not one of those that made the cut and therefore no funding. We have left the site open and we still post to the Third Hour facebook page because there were almost 100K followers to the fb page. They have also allocated more money for international projects since there are now more members out of the U.S. than in. As of right now there isn't a plan to shut it down and I have been promised that when that decision is made I will have notice to be able to inform those on the forum. @Traveler I have been the one running this forum for several years and yes I post here. I don't own the forum so therefore I have to go with the decisions made by the Board of Directors. Even my project of Ask Gramps that I have managed since "gramps" passed away in 2008 has had funding taken away.
  23. A new approach to killing with kindness
  24. Anddenex

    Gays and the church

    I'm honestly not sure why, when we have the light and knowledge we do (what has been revealed to the Church collectively), this is really such a hard argument. I'm not sure why "homosexuality" is some how put into a different category than the sin of adultery. One could easily say, who is an adulterer, that they received a revelation that God made them that way. They are both a sin of desire and predisposition. The natural man, even taking it from an evolved species, has always (in the primate species) not been monogamous. Yet, we are commanded to be with only one woman, and if we step out that is sin. Do you feel the same way about adulterers as you do homosexuals? If a unrepentant adulterer, were coming to Church (and we all knew he/she was unrepentant) how close would you keep that individual to your spouse? How tolerant would you be when he decides to sit by your spouse or try to visit your spouse when you are not home? These are general questions, not particularly pointed in your direction. The adulterer could easily say, and it would be more true, that he was born that way. Yet, being born a certain way doesn't disregard the commandments of God. Remember, God accepts all his children for who they are. He has even prepared a place for all his children who choose to live according to "who they are" (naturally) rather than according to who they are spiritually. God accepts his sons and daughters who live a life fit for the Telestial kingdom. God accepts his sons and daughters who want to live a life only for Terrestrial glory. What God is hoping and trying is that we rise above the natural man, and return once again to live with him. Sadly, our world's society and acceptance is making something gray that is actually black and white, or as the scriptures say, that which we can tell as the daylight at noon day from the dark night.
  25. scottyg

    7%. Oy.

    True. Permanent/long-term homeschooling is no small task. It is much different than a temporary 1-2 week switch to online learning due to high covid numbers.
  26. Backroads

    7%. Oy.

    By and large, I think my online school works best for those families that do have a parent who is at home full-time. 90% of the "can't get the schooling done" comes from families where teh parents are trying to juggle job responsibilities and hoping they can just catch up in the evenings or weekends with their kids' school. However, I think in order to make schooling more inclusive, some areas of homeschooling insist everyone can do it no matter what the rest of their live is like. I've even seen it come down to "you just need one or two hours a week". I have friends that homeschool their kids, and they'll be the first to say that it can't be done in anywhere near one or two hours a week and takes real commitment.
  1. Load more activity