Leaderboard

You should maintain perspective on things. But beware of ideas that would discount the seriousness of sin as well. Per the handbook, you will not be given a disciplinary counsel for what you've given here as your sins. Nothing you've spoken of is an excommunication offense. This is not the way sealings work. For a sealing to be broken it must be officially broken by authorization of the first presidency. Talk to your bishop. He will counsel you through it. There is a balance that needs to be struck in your feelings. Yes, sin is serious. Yes, it causes guilt, and justly so. Yes, you should feel bad about it. Yes, you need to repent sincerely. But your concerns and fears strike me as extreme beyond what they should be. Your sins are not "pretty light stuff", but they aren't the end of the world either. And you can repent and you can be forgiven. What your sins are, however, is common. They are very, very common. That does not discount the serious nature sin. But you should understand that there are many, many, many men in the church who have struggled with the same. Many have overcome and some are now even your leaders, free and clear from such burdens. Sins can be repented of. And you can be made clean. As for how your wife will feel, that depends on your wife, and it is one of those "reap what you sew" things. That is one of the downsides of sin. It hurts others. Hopefully she will be understanding and forgiving. Ideally she will be. Talk to your bishop.

Complaining is quite off-putting. Perhaps you should work on that. I suspect you'll say it's just who you are and you can't help or control it. Baloney. We are who we practice to be as much as anything. Rather, we will become who we practice being. You may not be able to control yourself in speech as easily, as speech with careful thought tempering it is difficult. But in writing it is fairly easy. Re-read, re-think, and edit before posting. It's not that difficult to practice character when writing. It takes a moderate amount of attention, effort, and patience -- but those are worth practicing too.

You do realize that this article is from 2012 right? So this is not new news.

Besides the three "omnis" (knowledge, power, presence), it is helpful to know that traditional Christians of nearly all denominations believe that humans were created in time. We did not pre-exist, nor is their an eternal back-story for us--not even as some kind of intelligence. Yes, our future is eternal. However, we believe God made us "out of nothing." Okay--maybe he used dirt--but the dirt, he made from nothing. So...God is always above us. He is always Creator. We are always created. We do expect a glorification of our existance. We shall become godlike in many ways. However, we do not expect to become what He is. And, as the others have indicated, we do not believe God was ever what we are now. Trinity is tough to explain. Suffice to say, we believe God is one and alone in his ultimate deity. However, he is also three persons. There is no speculation here. No mother God, and no prior gods. To some LDS, it seems we are forever restricted, limited, and subservient. Traditional Christians have never felt that way. We are grateful for God's blessings, the promise of Heaven, the future roles we'll play. We expect no regrets whatsoever in heaven.

I don't think it is a stretch at all. He says he has been visitied and I have no reason to doubt him. In the world there are very few who behold angels, even with the eye of faith. And it certainly is a gift as Moroni testifies, "And again I exort you, my brethren, that ye deny not the gifts of God, for they are many: and they come from the same God." He goes on, "And again, to another, the beholding of angels and ministering spirits" (Moroni 10:8,14). Further, I have no problem with a person seeking any gift of the spirit. However, it is important to not look beyond the mark, which is Christ. We do this when we exclude him from our spiritual walk in any form or fashion. Yes, we have the right to the ministering of angels, but the right is different from the ability. God gives different gifts to different people. "But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will" (1 Cor 12:11). I do agree that we should work and obey God. But I see no problem with ministering of angels so long as Christ is at the center of what we seek and what we do.

This is why I believe that True Religion and True Science are complimentary. However, you have to understand that what they hear these days about Pegasus and Noah's Ark and all that is subject to our (tending toward literal) observations and interpretations, record keeping at the time, and scientific knowledge at the time.

I would argue that we should be more concerned with being ministering angel than in seeking them. Let God and HIs angels do as He will. Our "seeking" of ministering angels is not a special thing that we should be focused on. To me that is a clear "looking beyond the mark" thing. Our seeking of ministering angels should come down to nothing more than what we have been given. Serve God. Serve others. Keep the commandments. The angels will attend. The Ministering of Angels - Jeffrey R. Holland I think it's a bit of a stretch to think Lennoxlewy has been given a "special gift" because he's fascinated with something. I have been fascinated with many subjects over the years that have nothing to do with special gifts, unless of course fascination itself can be considered a special gift. The gifts of the spirit are also not magic. "...and they come unto every man severally, according as he will." Everyone has the right to the gifts of the spirit as we obey and have need, according to the Lord's will. Everyone of us may have the attendance of ministering angels as we serve God. But our focus should be to serve and obey God.

Thanks so much! I was looking at the new version of the KFD that combines all three of the transcripts so when I looked up roshith the only thing that came up was the KFD. I'm going to have to do more research, but from what the Hebrew breakdown says is "The head God created heaven and earth." I'd be interested in doing more research on "council of the Gods." The JST is interesting from what I've read from it. I'd be interested in using that as a supplement the next time I study the Bible.

I think part of the problem is that most of us don't understand the different disabilities/needs that some have. This is where ignorance comes into play. When I taught Primary I had a young man with Down Syndrome. Loved that kid. I really did. But I wasn't prepared in how to react to some of the things that he did. I finally sat down and talked with his mom in how to handle some of those things.

Hi Lennoxlewy, It sounds like you have been given a special gift. I think it can be a great blessing to you throughout your life. Let me just give you a couple of my thoughts. Angels may in special circumstances come and communicate in our language. However, Nephi talks about speaking with the tongue of angels (ie their language) and it is by means of the Holy Ghost. He says, "Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore, they speak the words of Christ" (2 Ne 32:3). Note that term, the power of the Holy Ghost. It is by the power of the spirit that they speak. This is the language of heaven. We must grow to learn how to understand/feel the spirit, by so doing we are communicating with heaven. Holy angels come in the service of the Lord. We are the ones who need to hear the truth from them. We are the ones who inhabit this mortal realm who need their support. I find it strange that you would tell them to go serve. They come to tell us and to deliver messages from the Lord to us. When we listen to them and do as they ask, we are also fellow servants. The Aaronic priesthood holds the keys to the ministering of angels (D&C 84:26, D&C 13). Angels are a stepping stone to help us gain more light and knowledge. But Paul in Hebrews puts the situation in the right order, he says the Son is superior to the angels (see Heb 1:5-13). It appears some of the Hebrews were focused on angels. So we too, must continue on the path, until we pass the angels and gain the "testimony of Jesus" and our eternal salvation. May the Lord bless you on that walk.

Jane, you are thinking theologically. In other words you are thinking intellgently and deeply about God. That's good. Do I feel small before God. Yes--and no. Like Isaiah, I might be tempted to fall down before God, and cry out for mercy. Yet, the Apostle Paul says we may go boldy now to the throne of grace. God loves me. His image is in me. I sometimes feel his presence. We are told we will see what he sees and know what he knows. We shall rule and reign with him. We'll no longer know sorrow, death, sickness or regret in the Kingdom. God's presence will provide light. In other words, we'll know him directly, whereas today we know him by the reflection of his created things. It is heady stuff. The short answer to your question is that the unredeemed me is small indeed. The born-again, Spirit-filled, heaven-bound me feels quite big. I am a friend of God, and a child of God. There will be no regrets.

By your own words, he should ignore your advice. I concur.

Oh no one could trick me, I am very suspicious lol More to the point, what does a single, crazed, introverted individual have to offer a family culture anyway? Oh I remember I had to be less well slinky because the missionaries never knew I had come so I always felt they started their day off kind of bummed out then realized to their shock and amazement (and I could see it on their faces) I had been there the whole time. It was like stepping into a whole other world of people, I even held my hands differently (the Namaste style). The only true craziness was me, and it's far (well as far as something can be in a large town). I was suddenly reminded about a talk a friend and I had, and how she said the church would boot me out and I remember saying how I'd want any talk that I might have given to rhyme...

The bloggernacle, with few exceptions, isn't much more welcoming to conservative/orthodox Mormons than MWS has been to OW. Millennial Star has had some thought-provoking posts recently on the "you attack, we defend--for a while" paradigm that seems to permeate the 'nacle and tends to lead to conservative burn-out.And it's worth noting that MWS doesn't exist merely to provide another forum for kvetching-- er, open discussion; and as far as I know, never claimed such a purpose. OW started a Facebook group for that--and after two years, it has garnered a little over one tenth of the "likes" that MWS got in two months. I can certainly understand why OW so desperately wants to turn the MWS Facebook page into its own mouthpiece to parrot its tales of woe and historical half-truths to a captive audience of actual believing, practicing Mormons that is tenfold as wide as anything it has managed to reach to date--but MWS' organizers are by no means "extreme" for their refusal to allow their resources to be thus hijacked. I'll take a look, thanks. You may be right, but my initial observation would be "if you don't want people to develop a bunker mentality against your ideas, don't try to assault/publicly humiliate them and don't pal around with people who do." It strikes me that the root of the problems bijulie cites are (unrighteousness use of) hierarchy, not patriarchy. I believe she even mentions an unpleasant run-in with an RS president. Ordaining women won't end that--unless you buy into the "females-are-inherently-more-righteous" argument that OW supporters are only to happy to mock when it is made by defenders of the status quo. The subtext I see in Otterson's letter is "this abuse-of-authority issue may well be a discussion worth having; but we won't be having it with them" (which should come as no surprise to OW, one of whose founders (Margaret Toscano, I believe) was excommunicated for trying to shame the church into "having a dialogue" on that issue).

I'll confess to being somewhat guilty. When Christians I discriminated against I am quicker to notice. However, I have enough confidence in myself to say that, at the end of the day, I come down on the side of individual freedom of association. That is, the government should not prohibit gay or Christian lawyers from practice. However, individuals would, in my world, be able to choose who they serve, who rents from them, and who they do business with. For example, it was not so long ago that many landlords (especially amongst those who owned one or two rentals) would refuse to rent out to couples who were obviously "living in sin." They lose a customer, but why shouldn't they have that discretion. Likewise, a homosexual should be able to choose a homosexual attorney, if they believed that such a lawyer would be more understanding. Obviously, it is not my world. Those days are gone. Still, I side with individual freedom--even the freedom to be foolishly prejudiced. Governments, on the other hand, should remain strictly neutral.

How can you truly repent if you continue to lie? How can you truly repent while trying to avoid the consequences of your actions?

I used to have one that looked very similar to this one:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865555292/LDS-Church-buys-farmland-Hauns-Mill-Far-West-Kirtland-property-from-Community-of-Christ.html “The Church recently acquired operating farmland and several other non-farmland properties located in Missouri and Ohio from the Community of Christ," LDS Church spokesperson Scott Trotter said. "Non-farm sites include the Haun’s Mill and the Far West Burying Ground in Missouri as well as the Joseph Smith Sr. home in Kirtland, Ohio." [...] When contacted by KSL-TV regarding the sale, the Community of Christ issued a statement that included, "Ongoing preservation is Community of Christ’s paramount concern for Haun’s Mill, the Far West Burying Ground and the Smith Sr. home in particular."

Will be going back to Hauns Mill later this year. We are curious to if anything has changed since we last visited.

None of us here can answer how your Bishop will handle this situation. Each of them are inspired to handle things differently. All I can recommend is talk to your Bishop as he is the only one that can answer your questions.

To expand on this a bit--in the US, lawyers are free to cease or decline representation of a client where (quoting Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.16, and most states have similar binding provisions): "the client insists upon taking action that the lawyer considers repugnant or with which the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement". It's bad business to turn down any client you don't agree with 100%, but the right to refuse to aid and abet conduct one finds repugnant is preserved in the American legal profession.

I like this post, because it is authentic. You ask questions, yet state the flaw you see in our thinking. Thank you. The answer I can give you is that the imagio dei--the image of God in us, is what makes us special. Besides, I suspect that even in LDS theology, that after exaltation, the very fact that God has been God much longer than the exalted one has been exalted, suggests that there will always me a measure of difference. Many here have told me that they will always worship God, even while they speculate on what the glory of their exaltation will be. It is enough for us traditionalists that we will be with God forever, that will will experience unfathomable intimacy with him, and that we will be glorified by him. How that all ends up looking is a matter we trust him with. Still, please know, that I understand the appeal of the LDS teaching on this.

Many people think the whole purpose of going to church is to be spiritually uplifted. While that can be a side effect if a person thinks that is the whole of the message then they don't understand the message. People that have that mindset quickly find that getting spiritually lifted at church can be a struggle. So they turn to solo pursuits to gain that uplift. But church isn't just about delivering the message. Its about living the message. Patience, kindness, forgiveness, service, and several other things are what the message tells us we need to do. Going to church and dealing with all the other people whom we wouldn't otherwise have to can give the us the chance to live the message. We all struggle with this to varying degrees at varying times in our lives. Some times we are the ones that need to uplift others and sometimes we give others the chance to uplift us.

Sure they can. But having been in different wards and branches in different countries, I can tell you that the "Mormon Culture" is not all the same. When I moved to Utah, I discovered a "unique" culture all its own. I personally do not equate this "culture" with what Zion is intended to be for surely in Zion all are equal in heavenly things. My wife is very independent minded and very introverted. She struggles in the company of fellow members in large numbers, especially in Relief Society. But she never hesitates to fill a need when she sees one whether in "church" or anywhere else in the neighborhood, in town or among strangers. One can be a private person and mourn with someone who mourns together. One can fast and pray for another and be of service to him or her without sounding a trumpet. There is something to be said, however, to being one heart and one mind with everyone is Zion. Surely in Zion, nobody is introverted. In the meanwhile, I sympathize with your plight. God bless you.

I would highly suggest using a Private Investigator due to the extensive nature of the search. Using different names over a 20 year period with a long rap sheet would be difficult for even those online services to track down everything entirely. A Private Investigator will have connections, pull strings, and get you every detail and piece of information he or she can from those case files. Normally I am all for being proactive and gathering information on your own accord but with that extensive amount of information I think it would be best to rely on a professional. Just my two cents.

My breakfast routine usually consists of putting a banana with frozen mixed berries in my vitamix with a little unsweetened almond milk and then I top it off with greens usually spinach or baby kale. I love my morning smoothies... I used to be afraid that the greens would ruin it, but they really aren't all that noticeable when you have rich colored berries to hide the green in a sea of purple. Sometimes when I don't want a smoothie for breakfast or I am missing a key ingredient I will chop an apple into chunks around 1 square centimeter each and mix them with chopped nuts such as almonds, walnuts, pecans and sometimes pumpkin and sunflower seeds. Then depending on my mood I will sprinkle this concoction with cinnamon or sliced strawberries and combine it all in one bowl with a little almond milk and eat it like cold cereal. In the colder winter months I am more inclined to eat oatmeal topped with chopped fruit such as apples or peaches, or sometimes just raisins or dates. I usually find adding nuts to this mix helps me feel like I'm getting more staying power and beneficial nutrients and taste along for the ride.

What about . . . Oh, say, a wedding photographer? Let 'em all work, I say; and let ''em be open and honest about their prejudices. The free market will sort out 90% of the rest of it.

I don't understand how you see MWS as an extreme group. Their mission statement reads: Mormon Women Stand is a collaborative online effort to join like-minded female members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who share a desire to make a public stand as witnesses of Jesus Christ and in support of 'The Family: A Proclamation to the World'. We believe standing together will reflect the divine nature and power that LDS women are endowed with to influence others for good. We unequivocally sustain the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles—commissioned by God and sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators. We support how the Lord has delegated priesthood authority to organize and administer the gospel among all of His children. What is wrong with a group that is standing together for the beliefs that many women in the church hold and that is supporting our leaders, supporting the Proclamation to the World regarding families and supporting the Priesthood as was organized here on earth under the direction of Jesus Christ himself?

+1. While I know there are things like this that do happen (I've been mistreated myself by ward leadership, and I'm not a female or a feminist) I find that when there is a consistent pattern of supposed problems like this (assuming it isn't all fabricated to get a rise out of everyone) then there's something amiss with the offended more than the accused offenders. For example, we have a family in our ward that has gone inactive because of "abuse". I have been personally involved in much of the effort around them and there has been nothing but love, invitation, kindness, help, service, etc., etc. shown towards them. But according to them they are constantly abused, belittled, judged, mistreated, berated, hated, and marginalized. It's easy to throw one-sided accusations at church leadership. I wonder what the local leaders would say were they willing to accuse back. I wonder what would really come out in an honest, fair, both sides, legitimate assessment. These are easy, safe attacks on the church. The best the church can do to defend themselves is with content like in this letter, because the bishops and stake president don't publish the issues, tell their side of the story, etc., because it would break confidences and offend even worse. The church is, and has been, working to solve legitimate issues. The letter makes that clear for anyone who didn't already believe it (not that those who didn't believe it before will believe the letter). Frankly, the church is, and has been, working to solve non-legitimate, irrational issues too. It will never be enough. The efforts of Satan to tear down the church can never be satiated. No matter how many policy changes, doctrinal alterations, and management re-orgs occurred (even up to and including replacing the entire leadership of the church with women) it will NEVER be good enough for those unwilling to humble themselves and look past human imperfection to God's will, ways and means. We live a spoiled-brat existence in these latter-days. The current cultural climate breeds entitlement. Entitlement is not God's way.

Just for the record here, I'm pretty solidly in agreement with mdfxdb here. In case anyone was wondering. :)

I was gifted an '06 Kia Spectre. The vehicle is stripped--power nothing! So, we're out on a family ride in the new car, and my oldest says, "Dad, could you unlock the window so I can roll it down?" I tell her it's not locked, and she insists it is--that it won't open. I tell her to turn the crank, and to put a little energy into it. She starts turning it, and exclaims, "WOW! This is so cool!"

No, there's a difference between simple belief and bigotry. Just because someone doesn't believe in same sex marriage doesn't mean they're gonna be all "god hates gays" thing. If these people were dedicated to pracitising the law fairly for all, then by all means they should. It is only if they do not should they be punished.

I have a basic question--especially for those who believe that we religionists have gotten the whole LBGT thing wrong: Do you believe that our views about marriage are so damning that we should not be allowed to practice law? In other words, are the barristers right in this action?

I know specifically some people like to give the catholic church a bad rep in this regard. It seems to me that despite everything, the vast amount of history and scientific discoveries from those periods are from monks and priests. Even in more recent times the father of the big bang theory was a catholic priest. Many perceive a gap between more recent scientific discoveries and theology that I don't believe exists. Often those who say these things interpret our theology in the worst possible way to make it contradict discoveries and maintain that our theology can not be interpreted another way.

Usually if they are doing a complete remodel of it such as with the Ogden temple, they will rededicate it. If they are just closing it for some maintenance etc...then no. I know the Boise temple has been rededicated twice. Once when they added an addition to the temple and again when they completely remodeled it.

So are we to assume that anyone intending to obey the law should not be allowed to practice law because they are prejudice against criminals? I would point out that traditional Christians would not protect by law those that disagreed with their interpretation of religion. The history of mankind has been to take political power and force those that disagree with you to suffer consequences of the law. Sometime I think that Jesus will be more disappointed from error of his followers in the law than in the mess the rest of humanity has made of the law.

That's awesome !!!

How about as a kid being scared of hippie teenagers...