Leaderboard

Ask, absolutely. Clearly but gently state the reasons why you feel the need to ask. Pester or demand only to change behavior that directly harms you.

Speaking from a "been there, done that" position, I suffered from an addiction as well. I also went through the twelve step program. My experience was that the adversary knew I wanted to repent and in my struggles, and he was constantly after me. The more effort I made, the more effort he made to tell me I will never be worthy. I was constantly racked by guilt and sometimes I still feel a degree of guilt. My sins are so many, I told myself; I don't see how God could ever forgive me. This lack of faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ kept me from feeling the spirit. But I kept working at it. One of counselors running the twelve step program took a special interest in me and we had one on one meetings apart from the regular twelve step meetings. This helped me to open up more. His love was the Holy Spirit manifesting Himself. My father was also a big help. We had daily devotionals together. We sang a hymn, we prayed together, we read chapters from several of the scriptures and other good books like biographies of the prophets. These devotionals would often take a couple of hours because we would also discuss what we read. Then we had a closing prayer. These devotionals helped me to learn that God did love me and that the Holy Ghost was there. More than this however, I came to understand that just quitting my addiction wasn't enough. I had to do something good to take its place, so I got involved in doing family home indexing. It is still not over for me. I still feel some resentments which means that I'm lacking in charity. I know I need to get over this in order to become one with Christ. Forgiveness and confidence in being saved only come if one is one with Christ. Oneness only comes if one has charity. As a character from "Night Court" said: I'm feeling much better now". The key to it all has been for me, to follow the recommendation in one of our hymns which is to "wake up and do something more than dream of your mansions above". Addiction has to be replaced with something in the way of service to others. Deliberate acts of love are the key to feeling the Spirit. I'm feeling love right now as I write this. I know the church is true and it only has the keys that will allow me to return to my Father in Heaven; but the keys only unlock the door, I have to actively walk through. Persevere my fiend. What you desire, feeling the Holy Spirit, will come. If something you did for someone else (even if that person is dead) makes you smile to yourself... That is the Holy Ghost telling you that you did good.

If the goal is to have the movie reach the broadest audience possible, it makes sense to use Amazon, Walmart, and other mainstream venues. Besides reaching non-members, it's also nice for us members whom live many hours away from Desert Book or other LDS stores. But in order to sell things at Amazon or other secular venues, you have to let those stores recoup their cost-of-doing-buincess. And while I would say that the film is mostly going to be viewed by members, that doesn't mean no non-members would see it. I took three non-member friends to see it in theaters, and can think of a dozen more friends to give copies to. I would LOVE it if I could convince my mother-in-law to see it (not likely, but would be nice). An non-Mormons do see it: just the other day my non-LDS husband was watch stuff online, and a commercial for the movie came on. He excitedly came to get me, saying "we saw that movie! It was very good, I'd like to see it again." My aim in sharing this movie is not directly to preach, but to share a nice feel-good-movie that I really enjoy. And then there's the added bonus of maybe convincing people that Mormons don't have horns :).

Oxford University.... is older than the Aztec Empire... It's the News you'll Never Use!

I think you see this as a far different conversation than I do. Maybe we just can't see eye to eye on this at all. But all I am saying is that people like to be understood. I am in no way trying to day you should agree with these ideas. I'm just saying that you will probably have an easier time conversing with people about them if you understand them. And once again I will state that just because an idea is logical, does not make it a good idea. Nor does it mean you should support it. For an example of a bad and logical idea, see a modest proposal

Yes, I don't know how a married couple could get past the first month without that happening. Why you ask, and how you ask are important though. A husband and wife should serve each other, but they have to each teach the other how best to do that, and each has to be charitable towards the limitations the other has, and work on their own limitations.

The Last Teddy Bear A troop of sadly sent bears An adorable soothing display Testaments of sorrowful prayers Arranged like a golden bouquet Of every size we possessed Large and small we lovingly gave The ache in our hearts was suppressed Left sleeping in peace at the grave The children left smiling with gifts The sad tokens of love that day Our spirits felt the sweet lift That ended our day the right way But oh, one teddy bear left I withheld it fearing the pain Reserved for feeling bereft My need for a keepsake so plain Over the years I've been blessed With many a squeeze for my grief I loan him to family when stressed To soothe them when needing relief So old my companion and I Still on my heartstrings he tugs Whenever I feel like a cry He’s there with unlimited hugs. Aeglyn April 2015

Outsider perspective...but I would strongly discourage "mixed orientation marriages." Davidstarfall correctly points out that such a union is unfair to the heterosexual, and probably guilt-inducing to the SSA partner. While still a difficult path, I am convinced the Apostle Paul would urge celibacy--perhaps with a mindset that, knowing there will be extra time, the LORD can be served with that much more intensity.

I'm sorry if it came across like this. That was not my intention. But to address that directly: While it was probably not intended, the comment to the picture probably was interpreted something like: "Those children have a sad, sad life, and its the fault of the parents". Which I'm sure anyone could be offended by. Also, I'm not saying they are justified in their jabs at LDS things or retaliation in general. They are most certainly in the wrong for that. And in case there is any confusion, I think carlimac is great and is trying to do the right thing.

If God is one, and is my Creator--THE Creator--then I will worship Him. He is good, He loves me--I will love Him back. I will do what He wants me to do. If I am asked, "To what advantage?" my response is to cut to the chase. "What if God is real--and He really cares?" If I believe that, then the question of advantage becomes meaningless. I will not ask my God to what advantage it is that I serve Him. If He wishes to tell me, then I will know.

The movie was not designed nor intended to raise money for charity... The move was designed and intended to be a missionary tool... To continue to raise the awareness of the Church in the world. The donation to the Red Cross while worthy in and of itself was secondary to the main missionary message. Having it available through many sources supports the missionary goal. Having those sources gain a bit of profit from it is a necessary step to having them available through those sources.

Asking for change is acceptable depending on circumstance. If you verbalise a concern or need to your partner, in hopes of change for a better quality of life, I think that's acceptable. Things become a little more tricky when you ask someone to change merely because you have. The big key factor, though, is how you approach and address an issue. I think with direct but gentle words, a resolve can almost always be had.

Well.. obviously God asks us to change.. so.. its unlikely to be inherently wrong or unfair.. but God can kill people too, so that's probably not the best example. I'd say that it can be perfectly reasonable and potentially really good for a relationship of any type to request that a person make changes. Ofttimes these changes may be made in exchange in some sort of compromise, so it can help if you volunteer to make comparable changes yourself (meaning.. ask them if there is anything you can change about yourself that may be beneficial for them in the relationship). This applies to small changes as well as large, or even changes that are somewhat arbitrary. For example.. it is not uncommon for wives to ask their husbands to leave the toilet seat down. Is it unreasonable to expect the husband to put it down when they are done? No. Is it unreasonable to expect the wife to put it down themselves before they use it? No. But ofttimes wives ask husbands to take the responsibility for the change in seat alignment. And this regularly involves a request in a change of the behavior. Now.. whether it is fair or unfair.. is highly subjective. I suppose it depends on how the situation is handled. Here is a great article I found on the subject. http://www.sunnyskyz.com/blog.php?blogid=610/I-Wasn-t-Treating-My-Husband-Fairly-And-It-Wasn-t-Fair This article talks specifically about a marriage relationship, but I think it can apply to any sort of relationship.

I'm not superstitious. I'm more just regularly stitious.

CONGRATS ON yOUR PENDING BAPTISM! And welcome to the forum too Here's link that explains the practical baptism stuff really well: http://www.ldspad.com/2007/10/04/a-converts-survival-guide-what-to-expect-at-your-baptism/ As to the jumpsuit, I don't think you *have* to wear it. It's more just a practical thing: an outfit that's not going to float around in the water. You sure as heck don't have to wear it the entire baptism service or take a photo in it (personally I like to bring another outfit for that, just for fashion reasons).

Do you count anti-superstitions? There's a member of our theatrical club who likes to shout "Macbeth" in a loud voice at the beginning of rehearsals. (Hot Potato Orchestra Scores, Puck will Make Amends)

When driving on Southern Caliofornia freeways, we ae not allowed to comment on how good the traffic is flowing, or it will immediately jam up.

I'm no fan either of psychology or of people who give sex advice. But I find myself mostly agreeing with what the author wrote. Sex is a sacrament of a sort, as Elder Holland said, and should be viewed as such. I really can't find very much that the guy actually wrote (versus what others might infer from what he wrote) that is objectionable. His line-in-the-sand timetables of "ten times per year" or whatever are bogus, of course, but I think his idea is generally sound. Marital sex is one of the greatest of God's gifts to us, and in general should be exercised often. (What "often" means is not something I care to explore too deeply, though perhaps ironically, I would agree that less than once a month is basically "sexless".) Of course, some people cannot enjoy this "sacrament" regularly because of issues of distance or, perhaps, health. That's too bad, but let's not pretend they're necessarily offending the Spirit of God. Even cases where both parties (NB: BOTH parties) simply lose desire for sexual relations may not be "something wrong", though that does set off alarm bells. But people are different, and perhaps some couples simply don't have much libido. I don't see that as a sin or offense against God, any more than skin blemishes or bad posture is an offense against God. I do think that sex is viewed in a very unhealthy manner by the majority of people, on all "sides" of whatever issue you care to bring up. That's a pity.

For all the good it does, it might as well be.

I've been told if you sneeze it means someone is thinking of you. If the palms of your hands itch you will be getting some money/ something of value soon.

There are some Russian superstitions my wife has carried over with her, and one of them actually seems to hold up - which is that if you drop a spoon, it means you can expect company will be coming that day. I'm the American, so it never works for me, but she's the Russian, and every time she drops a spoon, she takes note of it, and sure enough, company arrives later in the day. There are some others she observes. Also, every time we leave the house on any kind of trip, in addition to a family prayer, we always say "Se Bogum" which means "With God."

Uh...me. See post #7 for my thoughts on this matter: http://lds.net/forums/topic/28632-faith-without-works/

If it looks like fun .. I might consider it ..... Lol

That doesn't sound like a superstition. :) M.

I disagree with this author's overall point. He has equated THE Sacrament with A Sacrament, saying that all types must be "partaken of" regularly. Here is Elder Holland's original explanation of the term: There is nothing in there at all about it needing to become a habit or something to be regimented or kept track of. And with that, I think the rest of the article is pretty much left unfounded. Yes, intimacy is important for the health of a marriage and its members. But it is not sinful to let that aspect of a marriage dwindle a bit, just so long as you are as united as you can be in other aspects. My parents have been living apart for almost 12 years. My father has been trying to find gainful employment in the US during all that time, but has been working in the Middle East the rest of the time. By the definition quoted in the article, their marriage is completely sexless, they only see each other one month or so out of every year. But they are more united than they have ever been, I think.. having to manage their household, the family, and their lives just by phone and email contact, and they are making it work. They aren't living in a state of sin by omission. Neither are any other couples who may have grown together toward "sexlessness." Obviously there are exceptions, but that's because there are other bigger sins in the lives of one or both members. Pornography use might have a lot to do with most of these instances, I would guess. But couples who have one or more members who are suffering from depression or other prolonged illness, or disability.. these people are not to be held accountable before God for their sexlessness. Even less so by a blogger without a degree in counseling or psychology or any other certification, or any other kind of "wise fool."

Sometimes, when someone on the interwebs says something incredibly stupid, I will respond to them in the belief that they might listen to reason.

If every other religion jumped off a bridge would you want LDS members to jump off that bridge too? :) I'm just teasing, I couldn't help myself. :) M.

There is a scripture where Adam is asked, "Why do you offer sacrifice"? He answers, "I know not save The Lord Commands me". This is why we do things we may not understands, because The Lord commands us. In time spiritually maturer will come and the maturer of age will bring understanding will come. We do not live in the dark forever, though it seems at times we do. I would not drink milk if commanded not to. You are young...wisdom will come, I promise. God loves you enough to make it so...this is my faith that he will, as he has in my own life so often.

Pam, why do you believe that story? I have spent some time this morning studying it and I discovered that Joseph's brother William Smith corroborated the account with the following words: "The instrument caused a strain on Joseph's eyes, and he sometimes resorted to covering his eyes with a hat to exclude the light in part" I do not know if Joseph ever did anything like the above, but I do know the much more detailed accounts given by David Whitmer are not to be trusted or taught by men and women of sound understanding. Nor is there any corroborating witness given by Joseph or Oliver that anything like the above occurred, though it is entirely inconsequential whether it did or not. As for myself, I neither believe nor disbelieve he ever peered into a hat while translating. Insufficient evidence exists to make a sound judgement and it does not matter. However, I must echo my preceding warning that a Latter-day Saint must study carefully and teach more carefully with respect to these matters. As an illustration of my point. Say you trust the above account and consider it important to teach it to your children. Additionally, say you trust the source from which it sprang. These are some of the other teachings you will find yourself in company with: According to David Whitmer, the source of your information. After the loss of the 116 pages of the manuscript by Martin Harris, Moroni took the golden plates and Urim and Thummim from Joseph and never returned either of them. In the stead thereof, the prophet used a chocolate-colored seer stone to accomplish the remaining translation. Joseph repeatedly testified that both were returned to him. Who do you believe? For more than fifty years, David Whitmer rejected Joseph Smith and publicly taught he was a fallen prophet. Do yo believe that? David Whitmer held a highly rigid view of Joseph's translation; it was not a process that Joseph's mind participated in at all (which plainly contradicts DC 9), but it was pure dictation from God as in the case of Muhammad and the Quran. Whitmer claimed that if a word was misspelled by the recorder, Joseph would not continue until it was corrected. However, 3,913 changes have been made to spelling and punctuation in The Book of Mormon since its original publication so he was clearly mistaken. Do you believe he was correct? Whitmer also gave inconsistent accounts of the instrument used to translate. It is from him that the idea of the "seer stone" came. In different accounts, Whitmer sometimes claims the seer stone was used by Joseph, while elsewhere he claims it was the Urim and Thummim. He cannot get his story straight so you cannot agree with him on this point. Also of important note is the instrument used by Joseph to translate. I have heard it commonly taught by Latter-day Saints that Joseph used Urim and Thummim AND a seer stone of his own to translate. They are mistaken. Again, I will not deprive you of the search to find the truth for yourself. But I will point you to DC 10:1, invite you to compare its text with the original publication text, then study why it was changed and what Joseph learned in the years between the two publications.

Is this evidence of hate speak and discrimination against those who use the edit function? Surely we all have an equal right to use the edit function without running the risk of being unfairly slandered? :)

Well, I tried searching in there. It came back that I was not related to anyone. I guess they just have no information on me. But all is not unknown to me, as my uncle had tried to trace our ancestors back some, but he didn't get far. I know back to my fathers grandfather and have photos going back to 1870 or so, so I have some knowledge, but I do not believe we had any contact with the COJCOLDS or Utah. Other than I do want to move to Utah. dc

For me, it comes down to this: The purpose of the church in terms of two of its three fold missions (i.e. to proclaim the gospel and perfect the saints) is to prepare God's children for temple blessings; specifically eternal marriage/eternal families. As members, it becomes incumbent on us to support that effort. By a member of the church supporting gay marriage, they are in effect supporting something not only contrary to the purposes of the church, but something that is contrary to God's will for His children. There is no place in the new and everlasting covenant of marriage for a homosexual union. If a member of the church cannot find it within themselves to promote the gospel and the eternal ordinances, it seems to me, the least they could do is not support something to the contrary.

Ultimately the motive for all the hollering has nothing to do with equality or rights. It's about validation. It's a cultural war with the prize being the moral highground. In the past, Christians had it, the LGBT community wants it now. I once debated a gay man on similar issues and I told him that frankly I don't care who he spends his nights with, that it wasn't my business. He insisted that wasn't good enough. He insisted that I ought to be congratulatory and supportive of his decision to "come out" and that he deserved it from me in the same way the LGBT community deserved it from Christians in general. Failure to extend those kudos meant I was a homophobe. And so we see it here. That's why Islamic businesses aren't getting much attention even though they react the same way we do. It's because Christianity is the target. We shouldn't be at all surprised. The Scriptures warned us this would happen. Repeatedly.

Celebrating Easter and listening to General Conference was a great way to spend this sabbath day.

I've never really thought about it, but, all things considered, our celebrations of Easter and Christmas have absolutely nothing on how most other Christian churches celebrate Easter and Christmas.

Mary, Mary, Rising early, To the sepulcher, She meekly came. Mary, Mary, Running swiftly, “The tomb is empty!” She exclaimed. The stone that sealed, The holy chamber, Rolled aside, From where it’d been. Beloved disciple, Racing quickly, Looked inside, Yet went not in. Lying neatly, Were white linens, Wrapped together, They were not grieved. Then the one, Whom Jesus loved, When he saw, He first believed. Mary, Mary, Saw the angels, Sitting where, The Lord had lain. Mary, Mary , “Why thou weepest? Whom thou seeketh, Did not remain.” Then He spoke, And she cried, “Master!” “Touch Me not, My loving friend.” “Go tell my brethren, That unto my Father, Yea to your Father, I do ascend.” Mary, Mary, Told the disciples, That she did speak, To whom they adored. Mary, Mary, Oh blessed Mary, First to see, The risen Lord. David Allen Foust ©2014

easter blossoms soothing the ache of the empty crib

Living in a fallen state neither reconciles nor justifies sinful behavior. If it did, there would be no need for a Savior and the Atonement. Regarding the adulterous woman. The Lord did judge her, but He didn't condemn her--big difference! President Kimball asked, "But did the Lord forgive the woman? Could he forgive her [in her current condition]?" Then he says, "There seems to be no evidence of forgiveness. His command to her was, 'Go, and sin no more.' He was directing the sinful woman to go her way, abandon her evil life, commit no more sin, transform her life. He was saying, Go, woman, and start your repentance; and he was indicating to her the beginning step-to abandon her transgressions." Amulek taught that we cannot be saved in our sins. Think about the depth, breadth and implications of that doctrinal truth. We are members of the House of Israel. We are the covenant people. We are God's elect, as Paul refers to us. Do we as a people fully understand what that means? "A chosen people are called upon to make choices that evidence their covenant with Christ and their loyalty to the fathers. A chosen people are called upon to be true to their covenants. Israel is called to live the gospel.... Israel is called be the light to a world that travels largely in darkness." This cannot be accomplished with one foot in the covenant and the other foot in the world. Plainly put, righteousness requires obedience. If we do not understand the gospel, or worse, if we choose to understand only cherry-picked parts, then it is vital that we come to an understanding before it becomes "everlasting too late."

Been following this thread for a while. Not sure what to say until now. Being converted to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ as an adult, perhaps I see things differently than others. I have to ask, in all sincerity, how can anyone who claims to have a testimony of the divinity of Jesus Christ (and all that implies) stand up and proudly say he supports gay marriage (and all that implies)? The two declarations are diametrically opposed. In all honestly, it's beyond my ability to comprehend.