Leaderboard

An irresponsable gun owner is a danger...

If you're gonna own a firearm, it's important to be responsible. I think we all agree on that. Nobody wants accidents with kids. I'm of the opinion that there is no such thing as a gun accident, only gun negligence. That said, here's my setup. My guns are only in one of three places. 1. In the gun safe (combination lock, and the combo is not written down anywhere.) 2. In my physical posession (either strapped to me in a holster, or in my hands, or being cleaned, etc.) 3. Locked in my car (I like this one the least. It's necessary because of the gun-free zones out there.) Kids are safe.

I'd be interested to hear the direct sources, if your bishopric has them--I've never heard anything like it in all my reading. I've been listening to conference sermons by apostles since 1979 (my birth year) on my commute, and am halfway through 1983. I have developed a huge love for both Elders McConkie and Petersen. If the allegations you cite are true, so be it. But if not . . . Both men deserve better than to be slandered over the pulpit by imaginative bishopric members--even well-meaning ones. And while President Packer has been openly referred to as something of a "grizzly bear", the idea of him becoming "enraged" about anything seems remarkably out of character and smacks of the Mormon liberals who habitually try to paint anyone who doesn't agree with themselves as completely and irrationally unhinged.

Here's one: ...Unlike local leaders, who maintain their normal vocations while serving in Church assignments, General Authorities set aside their careers to devote their full time to the ministry of their office. The living allowance given General Authorities rarely if ever equals the earnings they sacrifice to serve full-time in the Church.... http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/General_Authorities M.

Hedonism - May as well have fun

I agree in principle that LDS leaders are not personally infallible, but I think it's also important that we not automatically jump to the conclusion that a leader was wrong just because they said or did something that makes us uncomfortable--and especially when that leader guided the church into adopting a policy that was in place for over a century and the Lord specifically told a later prophet to leave the policy alone. It seems extraordinarily cavalier to simply say "I am not going to do a lot of research, but the Church is governed by men" and leave it there; particularly in light of Woodruff's and Uchtdorf's assurances that the Church will never wander off of its divine course. Estradling speaks astutely re burdens of proof, and to my mind hits upon the fundamental difference between orthodox and "heterodox" Mormons--the former believe the prophets are usually right until they are proven to be wrong; the latter believe prophets are wrong until they are proven right.

Well lets make sure we are not talking past each other. Saying the ban was put in place because Brigham Young was a racist... Is different then saying the Ban put in place because of the racism in Brigham Young's time. Both are speculative, but one attacks the character of Brigham Young the other does not. If you want to say the Ban was a mistake done by flawed humans then the burden of showing why God did not correct it belongs to you. David O Mckay is an example of the Church being ready to correct it and being told to wait. A case many find unlikely if it was a mistake in the first place. The idea that we as society became more racist or more intolerant between Brigham Young and David O Mckay is going to be a very hard sell.

Guns, Coins, Scout patches, Enemies

Bullets. I used to be big into tabletop war gaming. I have thousands of miniatures. Just no time to use them anymore.

I would go so far as the say that overall progress of the Kingdom is not requisite for it to be appropriate and perfectly acceptable. God's will and ways are His. We do not have to understand them. They do not need to make sense to us. He can do as He wills. Our place is to trust Him. Whether the choices seem to hurt or help per our perception--irrelevant. God's will is His. The bottom line is that when all is said and done, those who exercise agency to choose to accept God will be given all that He has. Those who did not will not. The rest is all pretty meaningless. Some had the priesthood, some didn't. Some had riches, some didn't. Some had polygamy, some didn't. Some had freedom, some didn't. Some had health, some didn't. And so it goes. All meaningless in the end. Did we choose Christ or didn't we?

They just contracted someone to get it fixed. I sure hope it's soon.

Of course every single one of these have nothing to do with the church now. :)

The very thought of that is absolutely terrifying. And less than 10 miles from your house? I'd be constantly worried and afraid.

The Mosiah version of the story sheds some light on this awkward phrase. In that version, the words of the angel are rendered, seek to destroy the church no more...and this even if thou wilt of thyself be cast off (Mosiah 27:16, emphasis added). Now, the meaning is clear. To paraphrase again, "even if you would rather be destroyed by the power of God, you are commanded to stop persecuting the church."

The world (and the web) is filled with a lot of noise. Two talks from last week's general conference come to mind that might help address some of the concerns. I highly recommend watching the videos and listen to these Apostles speak. The first one is a talk from President Uchtdorf: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/receiving-a-testimony-of-light-and-truth Here are some quotes: ". . . if you want to recognize spiritual truth, you have to use the right instruments. You can’t come to an understanding of spiritual truth with instruments that are unable to detect it." " . . . you must search the word of God. That means reading the scriptures and studying the words of the ancient as well as modern prophets regarding the restored gospel of Jesus Christ—not with an intent to doubt or criticize but with a sincere desire to discover truth." ". . . when you are trying to verify the truth of gospel principles, you must first live them. Put gospel doctrine and Church teachings to the test in your own life. Do it with real intent and enduring faith in God." “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God,” [Paul] wrote to the Corinthians, “for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” "I suggest that this personal testimony of the gospel and the Church is the most important thing you can earn in this life." "By the same token, if we remove ourselves from the light of the gospel, our own light begins to dim—not in a day or a week but gradually over time—until we look back and can’t quite understand why we had ever believed the gospel was true." "The Savior promised that if you seek, you will find." The second one is from Elder Andersen:https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/joseph-smith Quote: "Years ago I read a Time magazine article that reported the discovery of a letter, supposedly written by Martin Harris, that conflicted with Joseph Smith’s account of finding the Book of Mormon plates. A few members left the Church because of the document. Sadly, they left too quickly. Months later experts discovered (and the forger confessed) that the letter was a complete deception.You may understandably question what you hear on the news, but you need never doubt the testimony of God’s prophets."

Yeah, there's a Brigham Young quote along the same lines that the Fundies are very fond of using against orthodox Mormonism because they claim it's proof the Church went astray. Of course, you read the thing in context and it's merely a tautological warning that--under the old policy--if one married an African, one's children would be ineligible to hold the priesthood. Young's quote, at least, doesn't seek to bind the Church to the policy in perpetuity; and I'd be surprised to hear Petersen make an on-the-record statement to that effect.

I do completely agree about slandering the brotheren. They are such great men who love the Lord. McConkie's talk before he passed away has been one of the most moving ones I've ever listened to. My mission president never used the word "enraged." I got that from President Packer's experience with President Hinckley, when President Hinckley suggested modifying the garments and President Packer allegedly slammed his fist on the table in disagreement. I am going to edit my post to take out that word because I do completely agree with what you said about how that word is diametrically opposed to the love and peace of the bretheren. Thank you for pointing that out to me. That talk was given in my YSA ward in 2011. I've been out of that ward for over 2 years now. I did do my own research the past couple of hours. I think the confusion is coming from a 1954 talk that Elder Peterson gave to BYU. In it, he didn't say anything objectionable (I just finished reading it). But, there is a comment about a generation missing out on the priesthood should members marry interracially. That comment rings a bell to me. I remember something about that. Like you, I wish I could go back and re-hear how it was said. Sorry I can't be of as much help to you as you have been to me tonight. I'm glad we're getting the facts as straightened out as we can, though. :)

The suddeness of the Rapture will indeed cause these awkwards scenes. Why the surprise? God uses donkeys to prophesy to prophets, he uses an arrogant, impulsive strongman (Samson) to literally bring down the house on the Philistines, and he uses strange tongues to usher in the age of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2). I could go on with the seeminly odd things that God does in the Bible...but is this not enough to say that rapturing believers in the midst of life-saving, or otherwise desperate situation is not only likely, but given, should the Rapture prove to be true.

Yet that is what many Christians believe whether we believe it or not. I'm sure many think things we believe are quite ludicrous as well.

Source for first two: YSA bishopric during a 5th Sunday when all three spoke in sacrament meeting. The first speaker, second counselor, covered the history of the priesthood before the restoration and the restoration of the priesthood. The second speaker, first counselor, talked about the history of the priesthood in the church since its restoration. The third speaker, bishop, reiterated highlights of both counselors' talks and then emphasized the importance of the priesthood today. Thank you for the fact checks. :) Thank you for the spelling corrections. :) Source for third one: mission president.

I would like to point out that you can point out Brigham Young's racism all day, it doesn't actually prove that the ban was implemented because he was racist. I also don't believe David O. McKay's revelation to leave the ban in place is proof that the ban was enacted by God. It shows God did see it fit to leave it in place, one reason I could think of that God might leave a ban enacted by man in place is it's potential to cause a rift in the church at that time. This is one of those issue's that is on the shelf for me, and I'm perfectly happy with the "we aren't really sure" answer to be honest. I can see it both ways.

We don't like that term. We prefer "restorer".

Mormon.

I once saw a study that suggested sex scandals among priests was, populations considered, less than sex scandals among other careers. Nothing more than the media - driven drama of shock value.

I think a huge difference between LDS clergy (full time or not) and clergy in other church is that Mormons don't seek out such positions through education, degrees, scholarly knowlege, etc. You can't work your way up to a bishop, or get a degree in Apostleship.

Where I live, there is a gang I learned about in my gang awareness training put on by the Sherriff's department. They have a reputation that they pride themselves on maintaining. They attack in 4-man teams with shotguns, baseball bats, rope, and condoms. Their plan is the same everytime. Kill whoever opens the door with the shotgun: no time to respond to respond to that. (If no one answers the door, they shhot their way in with the shotgun.) Then, they storm in, tie up both the men and the women. They beat the men with the bats, to maintain their brutality reputation among the gang community, and rape the women. A four-man team with a shotgun, a baseball bat, and rope, high on uppers that take away pain, is not something any human being will ever defend against with martial arts, pepper spray, or a tazer. Especially because everyone who is sprayed or tazed always has 1-3 seconds to get a shot off before they hit the ground and are incapacitated. Even if you incapacitate one of them, the other 3 will get you. No, the only way you defend aganist that is a tactical shotgun or a pistol with extended magazines, and a planned out emergency response plan that your family practices during some family home evenings. That gang, that I learned about, is located < 10 miles from my house.

It's all my fault.....I started it.....:)

Some thought about the end of times. I am a 5th generation LDS. My grandparents often spoke of what I believe is the White Horse Prophesy : 1. Returning the Missouri (walking without modern transportation - not sure if anyone still believe this) 2. Ogden to Provo being urban like a single city (kind of there with this one). 3. A Great apostasy of the Last-days. Over 50% of the members would leave the church. (I think we are kind of there - maybe. Only about 40% of members of record attend or are considered active and less hold temple recommends or are temple worthy). 4. Civil war - Ex-members will enter into a war with the faithful members, blood will flow in the streets of Salt Lake City and the priesthood will protect the temple. 5. Gold and Silver will lie in the streets if Salt Lake City (and the world in general??) and will be worthless. Starvation will be rampant. 6. The government of the US will fall and the "Church" will be the only institution with enough power to uphold the constitution. 7. The Church will create the only stable government body in the world and will be the foundation of all attempts of Democracy throughout the world. (This one is rather interesting to me in light of the work Dr. Durham {professor of law at BYU} over the last 30 years). 8. A plague without cure will sweep over the earth. (Ebola? - I had thought this more likely be resistive to medication strains of common diseases.) 9. Massive world wide earthquakes and volcanic action. 10. Global flooding from the oceans. (There is a super volcano near the south pole under 3 miles of ice that is active - when it erupts it will raise the oceans from melted ice from 20 to 60 feet - this will displace or drown 80% of the world's population. It use to be that we needed a 2 year supply of food and other necessities now we speak in terms of a year. BTW one of the executive orders of Pres Obama was the power in a declared emergency to enter private homes or other places and commander any stock pile of emergency supplies. I am not so sure I believe these old notions. I am not going to present them as valid - but I find them interesting; especially considering what I have personally observed over the last 50 years. I have pondered and wondered if much of what we think will happen (such as missionary work to every nation, kindred, tongue and people) that we are looking for in the Last-days is actually take place in the spirit world. I am not saying that it is so but I believe it is possible that we could see all things fulfilled by April Conference of next year. My only input into all of this is - if you are not ready and worthy - do it now -- today!!! Even if the "end" does does not happen in our life time and may still be 200 years away.

We have a police officer who is still on duty. I leave mine in the car up until recently you could not carry in a Church unless you one duty. Now anyone can with a carry permit. Sadly there have been a number of Church shootings during my lifetime.

My son in law is a deputy and attends the other unit in our building. He is usually packing as well. No one knows this cause you can't see it with a suit on.....but I know it's there.

Ensign Ward...retired cop, I too carry. :) Love for my fellow man.

Farmington Ward and I carry and conceal....:)

Dune, loved the movie so had to read the book!