Leaderboard

It isn't about my happiness making anyone happy. My happiness is just as contingent on the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ as anyone elses. Being happy is not a relative thing. Lakumi, I am not talking down to you, I am trying to teach you and anyone else who will listen, true principles. That is all that I can ever do. I don't suppose for a second that I am better than you. I can guarantee you that I am not. You and I are equal. You are just as valuable and loved by Heavenly Father as I am. Heavenly Father is just as involved in your life as He is in mine. His love is perfect and it doesn't stop, ever. But, there is a Plan of Happiness which has been created by our God. I'm telling you and anyone who will listen that such a thing exist. God has created a plan that if we follow it, we will find true joy in life. We are here so that we might have joy. Furthermore, I am not even say that I got it all figured out and I'm just this awesome dude. I don't have it all figured out. I'm not this super awesome dude. I'm a weak man but there are things that I am certain about because I have experienced them in my life and I possess some truth that I can profess. But in the end I am in constant need of the atonement of Jesus Christ. Being uncomfortable with large groups of people is not a detriment to you. God accepts you. But, He invites you to follow Him and see if His plan will do as it has promised. He will sustain us and give us strength to overcome our weaknesses. He will make our weak things strong. I am no socialite. I don't have to be. I don't love being around a bunch of folks. I'd rather stay home and do my thing. I would be perfectly fine with just being at home and doing my thing. Our Father knows us and He knows all of these things and He is willing and able to work with us. If we put our trust in Him and strive to live our life according to His plan then miracles can and do happen and we can be changed for the better. -Finrock

Well sure, not everyone is an extremist. However, this view--that tradtional marriage activists are haters and bigots who should be astrocized--is gaining traction. It's becoming less extreme. Nobody has said that most LBGT folk want to bankrupt us. Yet, this statement puts us on the defense--as if we had made that accusation. Even Bill Maher, who is much more sympathetic to the LBGT cause than to that of religious folk, states that there is a 'gay mafia.'

Good Afternoon Lakumi! I hope you're having a fine day. Finally we are enjoying some warmer weather here in Michigan. Your post is propagating a lie. When I say that your post is propagating a lie I feel no animosity, ill will, or anger towards you. I am not even judging you. I am simply trying to tell you the truth even though I have very little hope that you will accept the truth. The notion that homosexuals are a repressed minority is a lie. It is this ideology, this lie, that is being propagated and accepted by society to the detriment of all. There are men and women who refuse to ignore the truth that gender matters. It is a truth that cannot be changed that only sex between a man and a woman produces a union that can result in creating life. There is only one biological system where each gender has only half of what is needed to produce the final product. Only sex between a man and a woman produces this essential union. The principle of heterosexual sex is the only way that humanity propagates and it is this truth that differentiates marriage from all other relationships. There is nothing wrong with people recognizing and wanting to uphold this eternal, unalterable truth. People who support true marriage are not bigots. Supporting true marriage and denouncing the lies of the same-sex ideology does not equate to bigotry or to a majority repressing a minority group. The same-sex movement is the not same, in any way, to the equal rights movement. Gender matters. Governments and humanity have supported true marriage institutionally because of its unique and vital position in sustaining society. Because God has blessed us with an abundance of knowledge and technologies, wealth, and power our society has the luxury, but not moral right, to institutionally sustain non-heterosexual unions. If a principle is true and right then it should be able to sustain itself no matter what. If our society did not have the wealth, technology, and power that we have now then society would quickly find out how foolish it is to institutionally support non-heterosexual marriages. If our species were on the brink of extinction would society still call those who support true marriage between a man and woman bigots and repressors of the minority? I doubt it very much. Societal support for non-heterosexual marriages would cease to exist because they would realize that society, humanity, cannot survive any other way. I am not a bigot because I am against same-sex marriages. I am not hate filled. I am not narrow minded. In fact my whole motivation for speaking out against same-sex marriages is because I know where true happiness and joy is to be found. They are to be found in the principles of gospel of Jesus Christ. There is no other way for mankind to find true joy, true peace, and true fulfillment. I love God and I love my brothers and sisters in the world. I desire for them to know who they truly are and what their purpose here on life is. We are children of Heavenly Father. We, all of us, have come to this earth because we wanted to become like Heavenly Father. All of these things are distractions and they are pulling us away from our true purpose. These issues are blinding us to what we ought to be doing. I am an advocate for people coming unto Christ and becoming like Him in all things. I don't care whether I am popular. I don't care what others think of me on this forum. I'm not here to be liked or to have my ego stroked. I simply want to stand for what is true and what is right. I am motivated by my love of God and of all men. -Finrock

It's also a very simple thing to recognize that a couple that has put together a tithing envelope for each of the past 4 months but forgotten to submit it while they were at church is really making four separate payments and showing a pattern of paying their tithing. The problem with your "it isn't a big deal" argument is that it cuts both ways. It isn't a big deal, and it wasn't a big deal until the bishop made it a big deal. And my recommendation to appeal to the stake president is certainly an appropriate and measured response. Getting the stake president involved and explaining, "we don't understand why our four months of tithing are only being considered one payment simply because we forgot to bring the envelopes to church with us." Is the next appropriate thing to do when the bishop and the members can't resolve the issue. That is part of the stake president's calling and hardly qualifies as "railing against the bishop." Also, I have to disagree that just because we only get one side of the story means that we have to advising to get the stake president involved is irresponsible. Afterall, the first thing the stake president should do when he gets that call is get a full understanding of both side of the story. Something that we are not in a position to do. Saying, "we don't know all the details of the other side of the story so you should just do what the bishop says," sounds fairly ludicrous. Lastly, "it isn't a big deal" is a terrible justification. It isn't a big deal to you. But to amanda and chris, it is a big deal. Whether or not you agree with them shouldn't determine whether or not you validate their feelings. And it's a little disingenuous to tell them not to make this into a big deal when it was the bishop who turned this into a big deal. (how's that for two sides to the story?)

The issue at hand is that, although they have paid four months of tithing, they did it all on one day, and so their bishop is claiming that the clock is reset. They now need to make monthly payments for the next 5 months before he will qualify them for a temple recommend. amandaandchris aren't disputing that they need to pay six months of tithing. The disagreement is occurring because, by their reckoning, having paid four months of tithing already means they should only need to pay two more months of tithing as per their original understanding of the instruction given by the bishop. The bishop, on the other hand, is claiming that because they have only paid tithing on one day for a four month period, that they have only just begun their commitment to paying tithing. While I agree that the bishop has the privilege of asking for a commitment of six months of tithing to demonstrate a commitment to paying tithing, I adamantly disagree that it is within his stewardship to dictate the schedule on which those payments must be made. (I have known multiple people who write a single tithing check per year. When they file their taxes they write the appropriate check, submit it to the ward, and don't worry about it again until the next year. Among these people have been bishops and stake presidents)

The way this is written is confusing. It sounds like the bishop is looking for (minimally) a 6 month patter of paying tithing. Yet you refer to having paid four months' worth of tithing. If that's the case, 4 months is not 6 months no matter whether it's separate payments or lump. And January to April is not six months. Could he be concerned (given something in your history), that you may just be coming up with a one-time sum in order to get your recommends to get sealed, but then will revert back to your old patterns once the sealing has been accomplished? Nothing personal, but these kinds of behaviors do happen. Perhaps he's looking for more than just a dollar amount satisfied.

I learned to NOT swear in the Marine Corps (Doggone, Dagnabit, Durn, Dratted, Crackbaby, Knucklehead, Individual). 3 months of invective above a g-rating = pain and suffering = some SERIOUS Yosamite Samming it. And then, of course, I learned how the F-word can replace all previously used adjectives, and F+A = most adverbs. Sailors still have the gold ... But making a sailor blush earned big time brownie points with those above. So I left the USMC with a rather limited vocabulary. When I started my family, I reinvoked bootcamp rules with swearing. With the caveat that swearing in Chinese was okay. Nothing sounds better than Chinese swear words. They have a British Ingenuity in their composition (blanch. Wow. That\'s colorful. And anatomically impossible. I hope.) AND Chinese is a tonal language! Honestly, you can say words like peace, love, & happiness and make them sound like you are about to die. Screaming. My current employment is a mix of both. Absolute lack of profanity + Absolute lack of being able to use multisyllabic adjectives. Q

Yep that was fixed today.

The font is changed! Wahoo! Much simpler and less busy now. Thanks!

...just downright good. Attend in person if at all possible. What is being said is truth. It is true. I just needed to state the obvious and use bandwidth.

My favorite response to an invitation is from Phoebe on Friends, "I wish I could, but I don't want to."

You may have been, I wasn't. I think you mistook my aside as a comment on the general topic at hand. There is a reason my initial post, in this particular exchange, talked about "in American society" rather than 'in The Power of Everyday Missionaries.'

We took care of that requirement in the first estate test. That phase of the testing is over! This life, the second estate test, is to see if we will do the things we are asked to do based in faith in Christ. Why do you think we have to retake the first estate test again? The desire of the heart test is more of a test of how badly one wants it. It is a priority test which requires a spectrum, the spectrum being from carnal to spiritual. Where on the spectrum do we stand, more or less on the carnal or the spiritual side. Elder Bednar stated this very clearly in the April 2013 conference; "And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41). The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh." This life is not a test based in quantity of knowledge. Let me ask you, is the level on one's intelligence in this life a talent, a temporary gift or is it self? In other words, if someone is born with Down's syndrome, is that self or the body, just speaking of intelligence alone? Then, likewise, when someone is born with great intelligence in this life it is a temporary status, a talent which is part of the test, where much is given much is expected. All the variance in intelligence is taken into account at judgement day. The level of intelligence in this life itself is not the test, it is what we do with what we are given temporarily. Intelligence in this life is simply a stewardship, it is not ownership!!

"Sorry, I can't make it to the extreme odor." Refuse to clarify or explain further. If they invade your personal space, lean in close and say "Hail Hydra".

Boycott is different from taking someone to court. Our country was founded on the principle of freedom OF religion. Setting out to destroy businesses because their owners don't agree with your lifestyle is just as wrong as real discrimination based on rase.

Only one who has experienced true joy can understand true joy. Those who have not experienced it may wallow there in the mire claiming they know what makes them happy. But they cannot possibly know this unless they have experienced something beyond the mud. All mankind is in this state, to an extent, as we are all, relatively, wallowing. Only God truly understands joy. Point being: No one knows what would or could truly make them happy. And discomfort is not the antithesis to happiness. Most things that really bring happiness in life require some level of discomfort. If everyone took upon themselves the attitude that being uncomfortable was indicative of continued misery then not much would ever be accomplished in life...not the least of which is the creation of life itself, a decidedly uncomfortable thing, and yet one well known to bring, perhaps, one of the greatest joys known in life.

And I find it almost insulting for people to tell me that I am not truly happy unless I embrase something they believe. If the church gives you all the joy in the world then be happy in your life. But you can't possibly know what makes me happy-for instance I really feel uncomfortable in church a lot of the time due to my rather avoidance of large amounts of peoples. I understand what makes me happy and my persuit of it will take me in a vastly different direction. Your happiness doesn't make me happy. But it makes many others happy so it is a good thing, at the end of the day. And no believing in traditional marriage doesn't make you a bigot, saying "hey I believe in this" doesn't, its when you go to someone and say "I hate you because you're gay" along those lines. Know what I mean? I don't think you're a bigot because you came to share your beliefs to me-you came to me as a gentleman and we're having a dialog. No bigotry here.

I agree, it also goes without saying that we need to be careful of what we desire. Other then questioning the strength of our desire, I just don't see the purpose of questioning whether or not we should desire based on things we don't know and purposely may never know (see Faith) in this life, once those desires are aimed in the right direction.

Haha. What a perfectly awesome way to diplomatically brush someone off. I love it.

I am very glad you added in the idea of working one's desire. Sometimes there's a perspective that desire is simply based on who we are, like we have no say in it. Desire is a choice. As we stand, most of us would not desire to be in the Celestial Kingdom. Neither would a toddler desire a difficult but satisfying career. Things change, and they change on choice. There is no standing still. We either work our desires towards Gods' will or away from them. If we trust Him and thereby work our wills and desires to align with His, we will someday all arrive where we will be suited for that state of a fullness of joy.

A child staying out of the road in spite of their not truly understanding the danger is not a guess. The child still has the ability to choose to obey their parents. And a choice not to obey their parents might lead to tragedy, despite whether it is a choice, guess, or simple intimidation. Regardless, staying out of the road is better for the child and it is wise for the child to trust their parents in this regard, whether they understand it or not. The level of our understanding as compared to God's is so much more so significant than a small child's understanding is to ours that the very idea that we can or should understand before obedience is almost laughable. The thing is, I don't entirely disagree with you, or think every point you're making is invalid. We agree, for instance, that our overall paths will be determined by our own agency. But that agency, as I see it, is to be guided by a strict trust in God, not by a strict adherence to what we do and do not understand.

To be blunt, I understood what Traveler was saying and found it a bit condescending. Perhaps not all will desire exaltation, but as I stated in my response, it's the reason we all chose to come down here in the first place. On top of that it's something our Father in Heaven wants for each of his children. Remember he looked on our spirits and declared them Good. I find this way of thinking antithesis to the 'Good News' and totally pointless. We don't send missionaries out to warn people that they might not want to return to their Heavenly Father because we might not like living with him. It also ignores the principle that desire leads to faith. It's a little odd to question someone's desire after they have worked that desire to point of faith in G-d. Aren't we glad that Aaron didn't say.."are you sure you really know what you desire, because living with him might be hard work?" Why do I think we naturally want to return and become like him? It's simply because his joy is fuller and greater then ours and he wants us to share in that joy.

My favorite is tarnation. I wish tarnation was still a commonly used euphemism.

But it is the bishop's call to make, regardless of other's points of view on it, and railing against the bishop will do no good for them, even if you are right. Humility and submission are always better for our spirituality than frustration, anger, and a general kicking-against-the-pricks. Whereas there are times when it is appropriate to call a bishop on a bone-headed something or other, it would require a great deal of care and humility to do so, not to mention a high level of spiritual maturity. In this particular case there are a few things that I think would contend against doing so. First, timing of temple attendance is not really important. A wait of another six months will in no way hurt them, and the choice of humility and dedication will be for their good, even if the bishop is being a bone-head. Secondly, even if the OP completely agrees that the bishop is being a bone-head, they may be entirely mistaken. We are getting one perspective -- theirs -- and it may not be entirely accurate, laden with lack of understanding, or general bias. We simply cannot see the overall picture, so a recommendation to go back and fight against the bishop seems fairly irresponsible -- particularly in light of the fact that nothing will come of it except further frustration and hurt feelings. Frankly it's just not that big of a deal. Bring a check to the bishop monthly for 6 months and go to the temple. Pretty simple thing, really. It cannot possibly hurt for them to follow the bishop's counsel on this, whereas it could very much hurt for them to fight against it, even internally.

I don't believe that sustaining my bishop requires me to succumb to his will when he's being a bone head. In fact, I believe that sustaining him would require that I do my best to help him see that he's being a bone head so that he can be a better bishop.

I dunno, demanding a reason sounds like the confrontation you're interested in avoiding may have already been brought to you. But you can test that out and say "Sorry, we have other plans". If there's still a problem, then someone is itching for a confrontation, and you might as well take the opportunity to set expectations that could last the next long time. (In other words, either schmooze and placate, or let her know you're not feeling close, and not really in the market for feeling closer any time soon.)

I think there is a misunderstanding. We will receive according to the desire of our heart - not the desire of G-d. (See D&C 137:9) I believe that part of the Plan of Salvation is to gain knowledge from which we may define our desire. It is about agency and choice. How can anyone make a choice in ignorance? I do not believe for a second that the agency G-d gives to man requires that we makes blind choices of ignorance. In fact I believe that is the essence of Satan's efforts and in part why he is called the deciever.

I think what Traveler is getting at is illustrated by the sorcerer's wish in Disney's Aladdin. He saw the "phenomenal cosmic power" and craved it. He wished it and got that AND "itty-bitty living space". I don't think anyone would say that the whole package was his desire. Or as another example, how many people do you know that want to be millionaires? No, I mean really want to be a millionaire for the rest of their lives? Just to clarify, I'm talking about people who want to buy used cars, learn to fix things themselves, do without the latest gadgets (or even any version of the gadget, as the case may be). If they want a high-paying job to pay for it, do they want the whole package? Do they want their profession to always be "on", so that when they're not "on the clock", they're learning more about their trade and gaining the skills that keep them in the competitive minority? Or how many people want to be as skinny as that actress on tv eating a pizza and downing a soda? Would they still want to be as skinny as that actress if they saw she maintains that weight by really eating lower-calorie meals, exercise, and NOT by eating pizza and soda. So, bringing it back to Traveler's example, how many people really want to be citizens in the Celestial Kingdom if they find out that the glory is really service? Or that the price of admittance is discipline? Or that our final rest is actually really hard work? Or that a lot of our endeavors involve exactly that gospel principle that I find so frustrating!? I think Traveler has a valid point that in order to really desire it, you have to recognize the whole package and desire the whole thing.

Your bishop has the authority to enforce the standards of worthiness to enter the temple. Asking you to pay tithing consistently for six months seems to be well with in the bishop's calling on this matter. If you and your spouse wish to get to the temple I would encourage you to follow your bishop's council

Maybe it\\\'s shared Pacific Rim & diplomatic corps upbringing, but I don\\\'t catch defensive or aggressive tone in any of what Annatess has written! In fact, I catch a lot of humor, introspection, \\\"lightening\\\" (adding turns of phrase / colloquialisms to keep a topic light instead of bogging down in bum bum bum seeeeeeerious.), and bon homie. I do believe she\\\'s dead on, in that we read tone through cultural spectacles. I moderate on a forum that has not only has no italics, bold, or other font modifiers (so I\\\'m constantly capitalizing all of my accent words even off forum;, I promise, I don\\\'t have a weird shouting disorder!), but that also went from regional locations to national. We had a HUGE problem (and lost about 5,000 members) during the first 6 months. The single reason, given 50 different ways, was cultural variation. Northeast tended to be blunt, northwest tended to be wordy and beat around the bush, Midwest kind and to the point, etc. but out of 9 different regions, EVERY region hated the way other regions gave advice, even when it was the same advice they themselves were giving. Don\\\'t even get me started on regional variations between spanking & timeouts, breast feeding v formula, etc. Oy. Vey. People were seriously ticked that last month (preconversion, years ago) \\\"everyone\\\" responded with \\\"Yep! I\\\'d pop \\\'em on the bum!\\\" and now this month people were saying \\\"How DARE you strike your child?!?\\\" It\\\'s been years, but about twice a month we have a \\\"Why are people so mean?\\\" Q pop up from a new member. It\\\'s actually the KINDEST forum I\\\'ve ever been on (all of us are vipers over here in LDSnet by comparison ). It\\\'s just huge, and nationwide with a few UK & Russian peeps for even more cultural misunderstanding. Q

Yes, boycotts/patronizing businesses is a form of speech. I just see their tactics (boycott all the suppliers, too and keep a running list, etc) as bullying which I have a problem with. They expect tolerance but don't show it in return which is quite hypocritical in my book! So ya, I find it 'unbelievable' that anyone would find this level of behavior acceptable.

Second what Iggy said. I also think resorting to that level of 'communication' reveals their maturity level.

In my humble opinion: Cursing, Cussing, Swearing is never appropriate at any place of employment. Using curse words just shows that you have a very limited vocabulary. Please don't curse, swear around me. or Swearing and cursing is offensive and I know that you don't wish to be offensive. Is what I used when I was a bartender/cocktail waitress (did that work for 12 years) and when I worked in an office with all women!! Within a week pretty much all of the foul language was gone. As for that language at lunch/meals. Get up and sit elsewhere. When asked, be honest and say that the foul language is inappropriate and unwanted.

When I worked for the Navy I heard it all. Now working for an LDS foundation..none at all. :)

The language is pretty bad where I work at.

I understand your words, but not your overall point in response to my initial comment as they don't address it. That fact that your husband is gung ho about football has zero bearing on the propriety, in American society, of discussing religion in various contexts versus the propriety of discussing football in various contexts. Nor does it mean your hypothetical did not include a reference about talking about football, to wit: Does this mean your analogy was solely about him talking about football? Nope. Of course I never claimed it did. I responded very specifically to a specific portion of your analogy by saying it's worth noting that there isn't equivalency between talking about football and talking about religion in certain contexts in American society because the propriety of the two topics is not the same. Unless the chapter includes a discussion on the propriety, in American society, of discussing football versus religion in various contexts, it also has zero bearing on my comments concerning the issue. You seem to be trying to make a point that The Power of Everyday Missionaries is not just about talking about Mormonism, that it's about a more inclusive package of behaviors about having the Church infuse your life and come through in your interactions with other people, this doesn't particularly bear on my earlier comments. I feel like it's the equivalent of: You: "Being healthy is part of an comprehensive lifestyle. Like eating healthy, such as eating more fish and less beef, and more non-starchy vegetables. Also exercising regularly..." Me: "It's worth noting that apex predator fish can have higher mercury levels than some other fish." You: "I'm not saying that being healthy is all about eating fish." Me: "You did mention eating fish which is why I pointed out that some fish have higher mercury levels than others." You: "Health isn't just about eating fish, it's part of a comprehensive lifestyle." Maybe we're just talking past each other? So to be perfectly clear: I am not saying, and did not say, that The Power of Everyday Missionaries focuses solely on talking about religion. I am not saying, and did not say, that your analogy focused solely on talking about football/religion. I am saying, and did say, that the propriety, in American society, of talking about football versus religion in certain contexts is not the same. I am saying, and did say, that your analogy did mention talking about football, which if we do a find/replace, makes an equivalent hypothetical that includes talking about religion. I am saying, and did say, that #3 creates an issue with equating talking about religion with talking about football in American society. I am not saying, and did not say, that #5 makes it a worthless analogy or explanation of the concepts in The Power of Everyday Missionaries.

That's also hyperbole. Are you unaware of what hyperbole is?

No, Wing, you are wrong. Those of us on forums know way more about your relationship and your characteristics than you could ever hope to know.

To be honest, people that obsess over football (or any sport) annoy me. Mormons that obsess over mormonisike that annoy me even more.

Yeah...me too...for the same reason--Anatess told me I had to be happy.

Before I moved to Florida I worked for a major mobile company at their head quarters. Even though the CEO was LDS it had to be the most foul language ridden area I've ever worked. Lots of LDS there too, but people just get used to it I guess. The only thing I won't tolerate is too much "G-d" and "Jes-s". My usual response is "Are you praying...or talking to me?" Here in SE Florida language is still pretty bad but you get used to it. My wife works in a Hospital and has been shocked at the foul language coming out of medical professionals. She was actually reported for cussing out a nurse, everyone knows she's LDS and never swears so they dismissed that pretty quick. Her lack of swearing makes her stand out. Welcome to the real world

Words you could not imagine spoken lol

Just came across this: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gay-activists-aim-to-shut-down-oregon-health-food-store-over-owners-support/ Unbelievable!

Bottom of the page. All the way down there. A little to the left there is a tiny change theme button.

"Genocidal" may be too strong. However, their litany of alleged crimes against them is lengthy. The article I read lamented that government leaders regularly compare them (LBGT) with pedophiles. That same writer said he fears that even a meaningless glance he might make could be misconstrued, leading to an angry--possibly violent--encounter. Additionaly, they are quick to tie the rhetoric of some ministers with acts of violence and murder committed against them. Bottom-line: traditional marriage advocates are like the KKK to them. We are in the wrong and must be re-educated. My concern then--what is the agenda now?

How do you know me? How do any of you know me?! Who's watching me?!?!?! But seriously... glad my antics bring some joy to someone lol so... lamb dance...

(1) Baked potato bar. Bake several potatoes, and then wrap them in foil as soon as you pull them out of the oven (or microwave, if you're a procrastinator). Pull together some toppings -- homemade or canned chili, cooked broccoli, diced ham, black beans, diced red peppers, sour cream, cheese, chopped green onions, etc. Something for everyone. (2) Spaghetti Pie, bagged salad, garlic bread, a bag of frozen veggies, simple dessert. (3) Mac and Cheese, or Mac and Cheese. (The second one I usually make with sharp Cheddar and smoked Gruyere.) These are sure-fire crowd-pleasers for kids. Throw together a salad or some veggies, and you're good. (4) Baked Mexican Penne. Somewhat fusion-inspired, goes together easily, is hearty, filling, and a good one-dish meal, though some people might like a salad to lighten it up a bit. If kids are sensitive to heat, just use mild salsa. This dinner also converts well to baking in a Dutch oven, for camping. The last time I took dinner to a friend was after her baby. I did the baked potato bar with some cookies (I think), a jar of homemade canned applesauce, a bag of apples (maybe oranges?) for her kids' lunches, and a small bag of my homemade granola for her for breakfast (I happen to know that she loves the granola, so that was just a special treat). I also always use disposable dishes. It costs me a little extra to keep a stock of foil casserole dishes, but it's worth it so that the person I'm taking a meal to doesn't have to worry about returning dishes, and I don't forget to get them, either.

I'm feeling a bit ill at the moment. *cough* *cough* :)

The LDS concept of the end of days or the last days as I understand is as follows: #1. The Restoration. I believe that this is a somewhat fluid term because there is a beginning of the restoration that will reach its climax or conclusion with Christ being restored and recognized as King and the G-d of this world. However, the restoration will signal the beginning of the last days: Dan. 2:44 – G-d will restore his kingdom (which will never be destroyed) at the time when the Roman Empire will be divided first into two kingdoms (the two legs) and then weakened (clay mixed with stone) resulting in 10 weaker kingdoms. Shortly after the Kingdom of G-d is established (small stone) the kingdoms that remain of the Roman Empire will all fall and the reign of kings in the fallen empire will end forever. Isaiah 2:2 & Micah 4:2 – G-d will move his people to Utah. The translation from scripture is “Top of the Mountains” The word Utah comes from the native tongue of the Ute people which literally means “Top of the Mountains”. Matt 17:11 - John the Baptist will come before all things are restored Eph 1:10 All things will be gathered together #2. The Return of Israel to the Promised Land and the restoration of Israel. The scripture is vast but often given through symbolism. Two important books of Ancient Scripture are the Book of Isaiah and the Book of Ezekiel. Part of the symbolism deals with the “Sons of Zadok” in association to the temple and the particular roles of two particular tribes of Israel – The Jews and Ephraim. Ephraim being the house of Joseph that will be separated from the Jews and among the Gentiles. Ephraim will be the means by which the Jews will gain control of Jerusalem. #3. Matt 24:14 - Missionaries sent to all the world to testify of the restoration and the coming of Christ. It is the LDS concept that this is taking place. Many LDS believe that the dramatic change in the number of Missionaries by lowering the age requirements is an indication that events are accelerating. It is believed that the last nations and peoples to hear will only have a very short time to listen then all missionaries will be called home. It is my speculation that when this occurs that the time of Jesus’ return will be in less than two years (closer to one year). #4. The Rise of Babylon – there is much in scripture and in LDS doctrine (restored scriptures) concerning Babylon – we may want to discuss this separately. But as I understand Babylon was the ancient symbol of banking and the evils of worldly living and specifically creating debt. It is my understanding that one of the indications that Jesus will soon return (perhaps within a few years or months) is the collapse of nations to dept. It is interesting to me that is Islam the prime symbolism of Satan and his influence was the institutionalization of debt. This is why Islamist terrorist attached the twin towers of New York as a symbol that they intended to destroy the institutionalization of debt in the world. #5 Revelation chapter 11. LDS believe that two prophets of the LDS faith will be called on a mission to Jerusalem for about 3 and ½ years. The will protect Jerusalem with divine power and will testify of Christ. They will eventually be killed in the streets of Jerusalem where they will remain for 2 and ½ days (the exact time may be problematic because the ancients did not know how to use the number 0). #6 – The sign of Christ (Matt 24). I speculate that this sign spoken of was that same as the sign of his birth. In other words a new star. This speculation of a new star – I have wondered to be a super nova. At the time of Christ the star the super novaed was about 600 light years from earth and caused half of the earth to experience the ozone fluorescing causing light to continue (without shadows) when the sun set over the entire western hemisphere. When Jesus returns I speculate that again there will be a super nova within 400 light years which will cause the earth to catch on fire and melt stone. This will destroy all that do not come under Christ’s immediate protection. This I believe will be the event the many Christians call the rapture except it will happen when Jesus comes and not years before. Anyone that is not caught up and protected by Christ will be destroyed. The Traveler PS - I am sure you all understand that this is a thumb nail summary and not a detailed description of my LDS understanding.