Leaderboard

We're very sensitive to the charge that even our Tri-une God is not really one. I referenced earlier that Jews (and Muslims) reject the Trinity as a monotheistic construct. Since our faith is rooted in Judaism the criticism hurts. We know we believe in one God, that the three are one, yet, as you say, it's hard to explain. Yet, no Christian I know of would ever entertain belief in an actual tri-theism. So, we ignore the criticism, feeling relatively safe in our long history, our thoughtful theology, and our personal experience of worshipping one God--be that God Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Along come the LDS, saying that the persons are actual beings, totally separated. Only their will unites them. Our insecure monotheism goes into defense mode, and we run away, uttering mean words like "heresy," and insisting that's not us. Poets have written poetically of the Trinity. Song writers have composed beautiful songs. Catholics often declare the Trinity a Mystery that is wondrous. Yet, when the common Christian encounters a Jehovah's Witness, a Oneness Pentecostal, or an LDS missionary--all who question our Trinity, we have a hard time explaining what we know in a way that is simple, practical, and "reasonable." Yet we treasure our belief. it is sacred, because it concerns who God is. The difference may seem slight to many LDS (and some trinitarians), but we already feel close to the monotheistic border. Your doctrine threatens to pull us to a place that we fear is no longer a "one God" worship. I'm not defining your teaching, but expressing our perceptions.

Of course we rely on scripture--in conjunction with the whisperings of the Spirit. The disconnect between your notion that a scholarly analysis of scripture will inexorably lead all good-faith Bible students to identical theologies, versus the cacophonous reality, is a major reason for Joseph Smith's retiring into the woods in the first place. The apostles taught the saints of their generation all that they needed to know to be saved. So too did Moses, and Abraham, and Adam. Abraham's "supplements" did not, by virtue of their existence, contradict the teachings of Adam; nor did Moses contradict Abraham; nor Jesus, Moses. Deuteronomy 4:2 specifically prohibits adding to or diminishing from God's commandments--at that point (traditionally) the Pentateuch--and then along come Joshua, Samuel, Nathan, and a slough of other major and minor prophets who spent the next thousand years doing just that. And were they justified? Yes, because they acted not of themselves--but at Jehovah's command. The Judaizers' additions were obviously not authorized; their position was contrary to the decision of the apostolic council at Jerusalem where the saints' obligations vis a vis the Mosaic law had already been decided. Was Peter authorized to "supplement" Paul's epistles by warning the Church against those who would misinterpret them? Because, he did. Was Apollos authorized to teach in Ephesus and Corinth after Paul had already preached in those cities? Because, he did. Supplementing is not per se contradiction. If it were, Paul wouldn't have written three epistles to the Corinthians, or two to the Thessalonians, or two to Timothy; and Peter and John would have contented themselves with one canonized epistle each.

At that age (10) children are very impressionable. I believe that receiving the card from her teacher made her feel special and wanted and she changed her mind about homeschooling, it is normal.

There are a lot of variables here. I agree with the idea of having a family council and maybe even a family fast about it. Get everyone on the same frequency. Church councils work this way. The General Authorities will table a matter if unanimity can't be reached rather than force someone to decide something under pressure. Unanimity is one of the signs of inspired guidance given to a group. That said, when the Spirit speaks to the person who holds the keys of presidency in a council and indicates the way to go, and he reveals that to a council over which he presides, it's the duty of the council to set aside doubt and move forward. That can happen sometimes. In a bishopric, matters about calling and stuff, ordinations, etc. can involve some deliberation. Consensus comes eventually. I have learned that, when consensus doesn't come, the Lord doesn't want the decision to be made at that time. Other times, the bishop would receive revelation and the other counselor and I would receive an immediate confirmation of a decision and sustain the Bishop's action. As the father in the home, you have the right to the inspiration and the right of presidency. Your daughter doesn't hold those keys. In a ward, a Primary Teacher doesn't come to the bishop and tell him to release her and call her as the Young Women's Presidency because she had a revelation. She doesn't hold those keys. If your heart tells you this is right and it confirms your daughter's feelings, great. If not, you have the right to revelation and her revelation won't override the one God gives to you. If she's inspired, you'll be inspired to arrive at the same decision. If not, remember, you're the "bishop" of your home. I can't think of a Ward or Stake Council that would go against the inspiration of its presiding authority.

I would do a FHE on D&C 8-9, Gal 5:23, 2 Tim 1:7, etc, and then commit to all three of you taking the matter back to God. If there is no agreement, then ultimately you are going to have to decide whether you and your wife are going to "pull rank" on your daughter or not. How confident are you in your daughter's ability to receive revelation about stuff like this? Has she successfully done it before?

I have reservations confessing to a Auxlillary Leader.

I don't know if I've posted this on here before, but I have a southern sister-in-law who jokingly points out that you can get away with anything insulting if you add "bless his/her heart" to it. "That boy's a real idiot, bless his heart." and so forth. Of course it doesn't play in writing. You have to have the tone, and, of course, a southern accent helps. :) Maybe that's the solution: "Nonsense, bless your heart." No?

Zucchinni is always icky when mushy. I cut it in julienne strips, toss with your favorite oil (avacado oil) and Italian Seasoning and roast on a cookie sheet until crisp tender. I also cut it into bite size chunks (1/2 in.) and put it in homemade spaghetti sauce. Its also good in Homemade Mac N Cheese. You back the Mac N Cheese, then add the Zucchinni slices on top for the last few minutes and top with cheese. My family will eat it fried. 1/4 inch thick slices, dip in egg, flour, salt and pepper to taste and then fry in oil in a frying pan. Will your husband eat salads? Shred the zucchini and add on top. Jerry Seinfeld's wife wrote a cook book about hiding veggies in other foods. I bought it. I don't use all her recipes but I use her ideas with my own recipes. Such as, pureed cauliflower in Mac N Cheese or pureed spinach in brownies. That's all I can think of off the top of my head. If I think of something else I'll post again.

I've noticed some posts and disagreement, earlier in the thread. There was an event where a woman anoints Jesus's feet, which is criticized instead of giving it to the poor. I think that good acts should not be solely condemned just because something else that is good was done instead. (Just another thought to add) Matthew 26:6-13 Mark 14:3-9 Luke 7:36-50 John 12:1-8

Good one...."The" begins with a T. :)

Yardbirds

Definitely spend time and pray about it, bring it to the lord. Something that you may consider is that in a public school setting you learn how to interact with other people, often in an environment (Much like the world at large) that has a pecking order. They learn to get along with people you may not get along with so well, and how to make friends (Important skills), read social cues, Learn generational unique lingo, and to guard their trust so as to not get hurt. The disadvantage is that it can be uncomfortable to some, or they could become the bully themselves, or resign who they are to some idea "nerd", "dumb", "athletic", "un-athletic", "funny", "trouble maker", etc... It's a great learning opportunity for skills that might not be developed as well in other settings. The major advantage to homeschooling, if the parents are able to provide proper guidance in learning is that generally a better education can be provided (Statistically higher scoring). (I have seen many homeschooling parents who do less than a stellar job though, so it's important to know your own limits in what you can provide educationally)

But TFP, don't you also believe that turning to God, also means accepting "some man" as in Joseph Smith and "a committee of men's views" like words from modern day Prophets, if one wishes to become a member of your church. Yes, you believe that these "men" speak for God, but they are still men. M.

Miami, the pictures you posted made we weep. I pray these horrific murders stop and we do something about this. That is nothing but pure evil and murder.

Could you try a compromise, and homeschool at least until Christmas break, then re-evaluate? She may be confusing excitement about having what seems to be a really nice teacher with revelation. If you and your wife pray, and still feel that homeschooling is what you are being lead to do, then present your daughter with the offer of a "trial run". That way everybody has a chance to see what homeschooling is actually like, what the actual pros and cons of it will be for your family, and if it turns out to be a bust you can put her back in public school.

I've been a branch president and had to do these kinds of interviews before. I'm also a parent with five children. I would urge you to talk to your parents privately first. Then have them go with you to see the bishop. If you truly have an addiction to pornography, you won't beat it alone. Parents can help you. You'll need an "accountability partner" and they'd be your best choice. Satan tells you that you have to deal with this alone. The Lord would broaden the circle of care and let you know you have support.

Good questions. Should we trust the new revelation? John 14:26-27 supports the idea that the Holy Ghost will teach us all things and bring all things to our remembrance. I'd suggest studying out any new revelation carefully and praying about it. Why don't the NT authors already say A, B, and C? Wouldn't it be incomplete? This is largely because we do not have complete records of everything that was taught. We have the four gospels explaining aspects of Christ's ministry and fortunately so, because any given one misses aspect covered in another. Does this make them invalid? No, it merely suggests that different authors had different hi-lites or priorities they felt impressed to recount in more or less detail or simply missed. Aside from the acts of the apostles and the revelation of John, the rest of the NT is essentially comprised of letters to differing people and congregations. Again they obviously weren't meant to cover every possible moral and doctrinal issue, but each had specific areas of emphasis needed by those they were addressed to. For instance the opening verses of 1 corinthians begin with greetings, followed by the introduction that Paul is writing to them to help clear up confusions (a common theme... perhaps apostles are useful for clearing up confusion and contention) that have arisen among them. With that preface it makes perfect sense that he is not planning to break-down every detail of the gospel ad infinitum, but to address the concerns (or points of doctrine) which they are struggling with. I don't recall any of Paul's, John's, James', Judes or Peter's letters beginning with something to the effect, "Behold this letter contains the fullness of the gospel and doctrine of Christ, once having read it you will understand all the mysteries of God and His covenants with mankind". A Gospel doesn't have to contradict the Bible to be a false Gospel. It just has to be a different Gospel than the one the Bible teaches. Here is the real crux of the matter. How many divisions of the Catholic church are there? How many protestant groups? How many other Christian churches? How many non-denominational non-organized study-it-yourself groups? They all dispute just what it is that the bible teaches. The Nicean creed is not biblical... so surely any one who accepts it is following another gospel. What about the age and mode of baptism? The bible does not say specifically it should only be done for adults or babies, by sprinkling or immersion. It gives evidence of how it was done, but it doesn't lay out exact rules, so how can you know if a particular baptism meets the criteria of this gospel? What about marriage? I don't recall the bible stating a specific marriage ritual, but we know marriage is important for procreation otherwise we are under condemnation of fornication or adultery. How do you know if the way you're married is biblical enough to be of this gospel? I could go on, but I think you get the point. Going back to the idea of one kingdom verses multiple; how can you be so sure that the multiple is not what was taught? I cited scriptures that would support the idea. The bible makes it just as likely as not that there are multiple kingdoms, it is just that the single Heaven and Hell idea is the prevalent one in Christianity outside of Mormonism.

Realistically, awkward is part of it. It always has been, and always will be. It requires honest and sincere humility to confess, no matter who you are, and it's part of (in my opinion) why we are to confess. If someone can go in and confess a serious sin to their bishop and not feel awkward about it, there's a problem.

If the op has a TRUSTED YW advisor, I don't think it's a bad idea to let her know the situation--but understanding that such a conversation is preparatory to, not a substitute for, talking to a bishop. Let's face it--a teenaged girl talking to an adult male about her porn addiction is, while not inappropriate, undeniably awkward. IMHO every effort should be made to make her feel comfortable and prepared for such a conversation.

It's wonderful that you are considering joining the Church. It's great that you have an understanding of the Bible enough to ask good questions. Most of all, it's great that you sincerely want to do the Lord's will. I think that last one is the most important. Think for a moment about the way Jesus asked for a commitment from people. He told some of them to come and follow him, right that minute. Imagine that you lived in that time. All you could see concerning the Lord during his mortal ministry was that he was an itinerant preacher who taught some familiar things and some things that seemed to defy the old ways and the old teachers. The "experts" and the learned men of his day dismissed Jesus. They used their scriptures to prove to themselves they should be looking for another Messiah. Imagine you had heard all the hearsay. You heard that Jesus did miracles, that he healed people, walked on water, and fed a multitude with only a few loaves of bread and some fish. You didn't see those things. You can only accept or reject the testimony of those who say it happened. Then you talk to your clergymen and they said that Jesus was a phony and a fraud. The anti-Christian literature of the day sounds a lot like today's anti-Mormon literature. The Pharisees spread the word that Jesus was from a disreputable family, who left home in shame when Mary got pregnant out-of-wedlock and went to Egypt. While in Egypt, Jesus picked up a few magic tricks that fooled the unschooled rubes. Now imagine that you've heard all of this anti stuff and yet, when you hear him teach, you feel something special. When you practice his teachings, you feel closer to God. Imagine that, in this moment, he asks you to forsake all and follow him today. How would you decide? There isn't time to spend months researching it. Even if you did, there's so much conflicting material, you can't figure out if it's true or not. But there he is asking you to follow him right now. How do you decide? In my experience, you have to trust your heart. You pray about it and trust that God won't lead you astray. You will never know all that you might want to know beforehand. The time for the decision is now. What you have to do is ask God with sincerity and promise you'll follow whatever he tells you--and mean it. You'll find that your answer about what to do will come. Trust in God. We ask people to study, ponder, and pray. Asking God is important and it sounds like you've done a lot of the first two steps already. If Jesus asked you to follow him today, would you do it? The invitation to join the Church comes from him also. Pray. Maybe do a day of fasting. Then act on the answer that comes. Don't be afraid. You don't have to trust us. You just have to trust what God will tell you.

Awww, bless your heart!

Yeh I respectfully say that you are an idiot just doesn't cut it. :)

This would solve all the problems. Instead of calling it medical marijuana, give it some fancy sounding medical name and no one would know the better.

I left for a while because I felt like my internet persona was becoming more and more contentious and cynical and it was carrying over into my real life. I think these forums can shape us both good and bad and sometimes we don't see it. Just felt like a break to regroup was necessary.... I try to avoid current events that center on politics....now and try harder to express a more Christ like attitude in my posts and be less judgmental.

My opinion and my rant........ I think some people come here and see the bickering in some of the threads and I think they get tired of it and it drives them away. (I could be wrong). I think other new members come here thinking this is a different type of forum and leave cause they see there are some opinionated people here. Myself, I don't get into some of the discussions cause I have no desire to. Joseph Smith once said something to the effect, teach the people correct principles and let them govern themselves. Myself....I love the church and the teachings. I love serving in my calling and listening to the Leaderrs of the church. I support them and I will stand alone as President Monson taught cause I know how I want to live my life and I am not going to lower my standards. Steps down from soapbox......Thank you :)

Thank you

Before you go, pray for the strength and courage to confess, ask for the Holy Ghost to help you. You can do this!

It is... Because most of the posters are good members otherwise but they get on a topic that pushes their buttons and... well they stop playing nice with others

Over-moderation or too many rules? Personally, I believe it is not a problem with over-moderation at least not with regards to posters but yes with threads. There are members who attack and are plain mean and unfortunately ruin the experience for the rest, that's where I think perhaps the mods should step in and deal with the particular member/s in question rather than close a good thread but like I always say, not our site, not our rules.

The scourge of our time. Lost of sexual issues out there. So anyone that has a spouse cheat on them or anyone that is struggling with a sexual addiction is not welcome to ask for advice? Obama sucks....there I said it. ..thanks

I think a combination of format changes and problems (i.e. your post didn't show up in 'View New Content' no matter what the settings are) and over-moderation have choked some of the life from the forum. I enjoy discussing and helping people with real world problems but allot of things that people go thru are off limits now. I also enjoy debating politics but the over regulation makes me hesitant to post anything. The world is getting worse, our problems are getting more challenging so where do LDS people go now to discuss real issues and get advice in an anonymous public forum...not here. There is no purpose in anonymity here because what we discuss here is the same issues we discuss face to face in Elders Quorum and Relief Society and in halls between classes. It's sad because I can't find any other forum that offers active level headed moderating that has as diverse contributors as this site once had. If I want to discuss politics the only forum I've found contains a bunch of wacked out conspiracy theorists that while claiming they are LDS think the church itself is part of the New World Order, if I want to discuss challenges with living the gospel I'm stuck getting advice from cultural Mormons. I really like the people and moderators on this site but the tighter rules and format issues have taken a toll.

You say to your children there are many different types of love and while the church thinks men shouldn't marry men or women marry women we should still welcome all our brothers and sisters without judgment

Right. Well, my prudence and the prudent use of marijuana are not the same. I do not suggest cautious and prudent use of marijuana at this time in history. I suggest avoiding it like the plague. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your question/comments though. I see. Yes, I did qualify a future possibility of prudent use thereby. That being said, as for me, I will consider it a valid treatment when and if the church puts out some sort of statement clarifying that it is acceptable to use as such. Until that time, I'm probably going to remain on the "avoid like the plague" fence somewhat. I can imagine scenarios that would change my mind without a specific church statement. (Like a new disease that is specifically cured only by marijuana or something - I mean, common sense is common sense, right?)