Leaderboard

No. Not any more.

I'm not a church member. I'm Pentecostal. However, it's a safe bet that what I am going to recommend to you is something members will agree with--PRAY TO GOD ABOUT THIS! You know He is real. You've gravitated to Christian beliefs quite naturally. Ask the God you now believe is real what He wants you to do. Family is super important. Ultimately, though, you will want whatever God has for you. Catholicism directs worship to the true God. It is not false. There are former members here, and you will almost never hear them criticize their former faith. However, if the Latter-day revelations are true, then God will want you with them. Another help might be to read Bible. Catholicism and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints both believe in them as scripture. So, read it deeply, and ask God to reveal truth and direction to you. BTW, your post leads me to believe you want to eventually join this church. Other members will pick up on that. That may be right. However, I also sense that you want to be sure. So, pray for direction and read the Bible. Blessings on your journey!

I recently posted this as advice to a different poster asking similar questions. I hope it proves helpful: 1. Ask open questions and be ready for answers you do not expect. For example, if a church member says, "Yes, I am born again. Jesus has forgiven my sins, and I expect to live in Heavenly Father's presence forever..." then accept that this poster embraces the Evangelical term 'born again.' Don't respond, "BUT you don't believe in being born again...salvation by grace...etc." On the other hand, it would be reasonable to respond to the unexpected answer with, "Great! Tell me how that happened for you." I'll never forget having missionaries visit my house, and after sharing a bit about my own conversion asking them to bear their testimonies. They were so happy to do so, and a measure of trust grew between us. 2. Believe that it is the Holy Spirit who converts. We share the messages God gives us, point to scriptures as appropriate, but, especially when we visit another's "house," we do not push, badger, pressure, or manipulate people to make confessions they are not prepared to sincerely give. Billy Graham openly admitted than only about 10% of those who went forward for salvation at his meetings made their way to a church. He chose to be thankful for that 10%, hoping the others had at least received truth that could work on them over time.

Someday I would really enjoy a sit down with you for a couple of hours. When people make promises to me or to others that they do not keep - I get a little ticked. When someone says they will pay for something and don't - I have a big time trust problem. But it is not about money - it is about trust. If someone borrows something - I expect it back. I am still having a problem with myself because I borrowed something from you - and you did not want it back. My little universe is out of balance. When I am at a store and someone has placed something on a shelf that it does not belong - I have to take it and find where it belongs and put it back. My wife is the opposite - if she decides that something she put in the cart is not going to be purchased, she will just put it on some random shelf and it does not bother her at all. In fact it bothers her that I have obligation to put it back where it belongs. I have learned to deal with most things - but when someone says they never do something - and I see them do it that at every opportunity - I have a real big problem loving them. I have gotten past the hating them thing - but I cannot say I love them for it or despite it. Except for the wife - she is the only mortal person that I can honestly say I have complete charity and unconditional love for. There are many others that are close - but I have found that trust is the element that is necessary - if I cannot trust someone; I have not yet learned how to unconditionally love them. The Traveler

One of the worst things you can do is give your kids a lot of money; they haven't earned it, they don't respect it and will blow it really fast. If you give your kids a lot of money, put stipulations on it like they can't touch it until they are 40 or something.

She's doing great, thanks for asking. Still high energy, but she's increasingly doing better sitting for long periods of time. I just got to make sure I have the right activities to keep her active mind busy. My issue now is I got to help my wife get motivated to go back to church. It's been just my daughter and I who have been back to church so far. I took such a long break from church, it's been somewhat detrimental to my wife's development in the gospel. She converted when we were dating, we attended church together for 4 years, but then I took my 4-year sabbatical from church, and she in turn stopped attending as well. I never stopped attending as a matter of not believing in the church (more so just not believing in myself), but unfortunately partly due to that period of inactivity my wife has become somewhat skeptical of religion in general. I shared my testimony with her last night while laying in bed stating why I believe in the church, and I felt the Holy Spirit present, but it may take some patience and work to help get us back where we once were.

Two boys throwing glitter all over the place-boys being rambunctious boys trying to burn off energy. Boys not obeying teacher in putting away glitter and cleaning up their mess when teacher says so-spoiled brats who need some stern discipline-both from the teacher and from parents. Ever notice has the vast majority of ADHD cases are boys?? Hmm . . .maybe it's not a "real" thing except a way to codify, disobedient boys. Teachers can't or won't discipline children anymore. They think a kid needs to be "talked to", he needs to "explain his feelings" . .which is the wrong approach-and typical for women (no offense). Why did the boy throw glitter . . .b/c it seemed like a cool thing to do! And of course it was . . .it was glorious! Why does the boy not obey? Because no one taught him in no uncertain terms that he will obey his mother-either through removal of privileges, toys, games, etc. or buy being sent to their room, or by even simply taking a stern and firm tone with the kid. Parents get down on their knees and talk "nice" like they are begging a king for he to obey . . .and they wonder why the kid doesn't obey . . .well you treat him like a king and a king can do whatever he wants. The boys aren't the problem-it's society and parents.

We are taught that men are to preside and provide for their families. In an ever changing world where gender equality is the new task force of current philosophy I am left reserved to defend gender roles in the traditional sense. Men and women are indeed equal partners in the home and society. Each has their advantages and skills. But I am getting more troubled with this movement in gender equality in the workplace. I am all for both men and women in the workplace- we need both sexes. Im even for more equal pay, especially for single mothers raising children. But the flip side is the trend to make "all" jobs as equal opportinity and equal pay. D9nt get me wrong, if a women wants to be a lumberjack and she can handle a heavy chainsaw and axe everyday then by all means- go for it! But, the reality is that in general, men are biologically at advantage on average amongst all jobs. It has nothing to do with sexism, its just reality that God created the male to be a worker to provide for and protect his family. So, why do we feel so threatened by this fact of reality? Why are we so concerned to try to even up the genders in the task of "providing"? Its not like we can engineer the women to bulk up the needed 35% muscle mass to get them on par with the male anatomy. I was reading one study that suggested that what was needed is to get men to work less so that women arent at a disadvantage! No joke! Another article and study about women soldiers on the frontline in war proposed that in order to equalize the roles, perhaps men soldiers in training should be held back while women get extra training so that they were more equal in the end. I think we are taking this "equality" well beyond the equalness God sees in his children and their roles. God never meant that we should be equal in "all" things. Obviously our creations are similar and yet very different. In the church we see this in practice all the time. A typicsl "work project" carried out by the elders quorum to reroof a house will see pretty much all men doing that work whereas with a funeral almost all of the meals and compassionate care are handled hy women in the relief society. We all have work, its just so different as viewed through Gods eyes.

@anatess2 You think me wrong, but then mostly agree with me. I said that Republicans and Democrats could solve the problem but have not. As for legal immigration, it could work much more efficently than it does. Further, the system could be amended to allow for Mexicans to work legally in this country, and then return home when their employment ends. As for President Trump, I hope you are right. As for congress, I wish you were wrong.

That's my husband's boat when he comes with me and daughter: "I'm here to support my girls". And support he does. And people thinks it's awesome (cause my husband is totally awesome).

Can't argue with prayer! Welcome, @ConfusedCath! I can't tell you how any given Latter-day Saint will act, but I can tell you that there's no shortage of members who are the only member in their family. No shortage of wives (and children) who come without their husband (father). And there are husbands and fathers who attend without the rest of their family. Nothing in the Church is intended, taught, or designed to discourage you from coming, let alone ostracize you for not raising your children in the faith. If you simply let people know where your family is as far as religion is concerned, they will not (or at least should not) do anything but welcome you in whatever services or activities you choose to attend. Further, your family can come with you (if they wish) and flat-out say that they're only there to support you, and not interested in conversion or learning more about the Church, and they too should be made welcome and not pressured. It is my observation that while there might be some people who are less than charitable, the majority of folks will just be glad you chose to come and hang out with us. So take your time, and do what you feel is right.

Hi @ConfusedCath! Welcome! I am an LDS lady married to an non-denominational / Evangelical dude. We have a wonderful marriage and beautiful daughter, whom I'm raising LDS. I'm also a nerd who loves to understand different faiths, so I've studied Catholicism pretty intensely (which of course involves attending many Catholic services). Daughter has also visited a variety of churches with me (just last Friday we were at a Episcopalian church for Christmas hymn singing). A HUGE foundational part of marriage is respecting your other spouse, even when you disagree on matters. I love my husband and respect him fully, even if he's very "whatever" about Joseph Smith, and I think Joseph Smith is a prophet. He in turn totally respects me and my beliefs as well. Neither of us need to be silent or otherwise hide our beliefs from our daughter. She's still young, but starting to understand that some people have different beliefs and how we respectfully talk about that. For us, we also have the common core of important things like Christ, His atonement, prayer, etc. That is the foundation of the Gospel, and I'm sure what drew you to both Catholicism and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I will be honest and say that I mind more of His Truth and His priesthood in the LDS church than I do Catholicism or Evangelical, but I readily acknowledge that Catholicism and Evangelical do still teach many important Truths. I do still love modern-day revelation, pre-mortal life, and other doctrines not taught elsewhere. Ask God for peace and guidance. He will give it to you, His beloved daughter. Re coffee & beer: the Word of Wisdom is a promise we make with God, to avoid these foods, just as the ancient Israelites avoided pork. If I were to drink a coffee, then that would be bad because first and foremost because I would be breaking my promise with God. Whether or not the coffee is actually unhealthy isn't the point -- it's that I promised God I would pass on the coffee. My non-member husband has made no such promise with the Lord, and hence is not violating that promise if he drinks a cup, so he's not doing anything "bad" that way. Then you guys will talk about it then and cross that bridge then. Until then, it's not really productive to run each possible "what if" scenario. (I've mega been there freaking out and running "what if" scenarios) Not remotely ostracized. Nor would your husband be ostracized if he's Catholic or atheist. We welcome everyone. Heck, we had the ward Christmas party last weekend and I think people asked "how's your husband?"....4 different times? And they laughed when I was "Mr Grinch is hiding at home with ear plugs in because he hates Christmas music" (and then I got more serious).

I've disliked this song since I got old enough to understand what it was actually talking about. I suppose the fact that I roll my eyes at radio stations that don't want to play it any more shows just how much I despise SJWs.

The power of the Priesthood has been monumental in my life. Through it, I discovered the truthfulness of the gospel. Priesthood blessings opened up eyes to the power of God entrusted to men here on earth. And it really is a live, active, powerful, Heavenly force. I truly believe the worthy and most faithful Priesthood holders among us can move mountains if it is God's will. Honestly. I believe that 100 percent in my heart after experiencing the incredibly powerful Priesthood blessings of comfort I once received as a young man in need. That said, before I had the testimony I do now of the Priesthood, as a 19-year old I was somewhat skeptic if the Stake Patriarch's words were inspired in regards to warning me to avoid materialism. But even then, I took that part of the blessing seriously. It just made me think is all considering how the events unfolded shortly before receiving that blessing. Few things I respect more in this life than a worthy, Melchizedek Priesthood holder.

I feel sorry for you if that is what you really believe. I suppose that would be your attitude towards any priesthood blessing. I find it sad that someone in the LDS church would refer to the priesthood and it's blessings as "mystic" in any way. My experience has been in the testimony building category of hearing things come from the mouths of worthy priesthood holders who couldn't of themselves know what I needed to hear.

The Man. There are dumb men and there are dumb women. Women don't "contrive a device". They call men.

Injecting cynicism into godly things doesn't strike me as a very good approach either.

They might, but once they are told once they don't ask again or do not feel the need. Other times there may have already been a heads up with the individual talking about it already in various ways, even if not directly. They already know the reasons and maybe even discussed it and do not agree with the individuals ideas who left. The parents of an individual tend to know more than some individuals give them credit for. Sometimes rather than institute an argument on something they know they won't agree on, they simply try not to go into it with their kid. There are many various reasons why they may not wish to discuss it with family members, and far more often when they might know the reasons even if the individual who left thinks no one has ever seen these "startling" ideas they suddenly stumbled across. The thing is, MOST of these ideas have been around for over a hundred years. They are not new. What IS new is that most of those who lived through these things and could say...hey...that's not what happened...are dead. We are now in the realm of the historians and conjecture of what things were really like and how they occurred. As these things are not new, a LOT of the members have already read and seen these items. Many have probably actually been attacked by those who were aggressively anti-Mormon at some point of their lives (I know I have). Just because they aren't mentioning it or going over it in detail does not mean they have not heard these ideas previously. For some of them they may simply just not want to hear the same antagonistic arguments in their home from someone that would not listen to them anyways. It's one thing coming from others, it's another when your own family member hates your guts. This is also a reason that some family members may avoid the individual. It's not shunning or hate, they just don't want to deal with someone who is antagonistic or acts antagonistic towards them. It is easier to avoid than argue or confront in many cases. And again, for others they may just be letting the family member go their own way without causing too much friction. But, there ARE family members that will get into someone's face who is leaving the church as well. I'm certain there are also stories from those who left the Church regarding an aggressive confrontation or otherwise. There are probably as many ways that families deal with it as there are those who leave the church. In many instances it is probably similar to how we grieve, and in grief regarding a loss at time people have many ways to deal with it.

Or 55. The gift I would want to leave for my kids is assurance that their retirement and old age will be adequately funded. That way they can pursue a career that interests them and funds their lifestyle without all of the stress of planning the financial future. But no, I wouldn't fund the whole thing.

I generally save 50% of my take-home; I buy what I need, I save to provide a better lifestyle for my family. If you are giving away everything but your kids are going without shoes-you've got a big problem. I have no problem giving a generous fast offering, I have no problem helping other people out, volunteering my time, my talents, etc. There is no set metric-it's a personal decision. If you think you are materialistic, evaluate your life and determine if you are. And you have to evaluate what the money is used for. Just giving money is easy . . .actually helping someone out-that is the hard part. It's easy to donate money to the Red Cross, Wounded Warrior, etc. to make oneself feel good . . .except a good portion of the money gets sucked up into big salaries for individuals who fly on jets across the country-someone has to run the show and you won't get good people running the show paying them pennies. Actually helping out your neighbor-taking them a ham for Christmas, giving them a call when they need it-actually ministering to others-truly ministering-that's the hard part. Materialism is an attitude of "it's all about me, me, me" and it can be made manifest in many more ways than simply having money.

I'm not so sure you should be discussing deeply personal, sacred and spiritual experiences like the above on a public forum. Casting pearls before swine and all that. A blessing is for you and meant for you to interpret with your knowledge based upon Scripture, God's Word, his Prophets and the Holy Ghost-it ain't meant for the entire world. Why are you asking Billy, Bob, Joe, Sue and Mary who may or may not share your faith about something so spiritual and personal but not relying upon the actual means with which God has blessed you to find the answers-which are mainly the Scriptures, words of the Prophets and the Holy Ghost?

I hope to hit SLC sometime in 2019.

If you want to wear the skirt in the house, then you find a wife who wants to wear the pants. Hopefully, you're not going to whine and moan when she decides to ditch the pants to carry the baby for 9 months and recuperate from childbirth. They haven't yet found a way for the man to be the pregnant one. The fact of the matter is: In a household, if there is no food on the table because nobody wants to make the money to buy food, you don't blame the woman for it. You blame the man for it regardless of whether he wants to or is better at being the provider or not. If the children are not fed because nobody wants to cook the food, you don't blame the man for it. You blame the woman regardless of whether she wants to or is better at being a nurturer or not. This new-fangled - "I don't want to be forced to do something I don't want to do" is a luxury for First Worlders where "finding themselves" is made a higher priority than the welfare of the next generation. It being 2018 is completely irrelevant.

Only people without money problems have the luxury of claiming money doesn't solve problems.

You guys need to learn to speak Carb. He's telling MoE that Rob's statement that MoE quoted is why Carb has Rob on his ignore list. Get it? But, to be fair to Rob, I don't think he meant that MoE is biologically a better programmer than me. I think he simply meant that men are biologically more advantaged to be providers than nurturers because... well, they don't get pregnant. Modern technology - birth control pills, tampons, computers (the one thing that made work flexible - I was just watching a YouTube video of this single woman living as a nomad in her RV running 6 businesses from her computer) - has made that female disadvantage a whole lot lesser which is why women can now juggle a job and motherhood. Where I say that Feminism is cancer is this modern feminists push to abandon their responsibilities as Mothers as part of... muh, Patriarchy.

I disagree - I think he's saying that he ignores Rob because Rob makes such ludicrous statements - in seriousness, not in jest.

I challenge you too provide evidence of this. I would suggest that people in the church think it's righteous to be humble and that people in the church think it's righteous to be self-reliant and wise. Whether richness and/or poorness is the result of these "righteous" traits is often in question. But I doubt very much the wealth itself (or lack thereof) is viewed as anything more than evidence by most.

I can see the reasoning behind waiting till they were 55, but as of right now we have it set at age 25 for the trust to be accessible to our daughter. And granted there’s a monthly withdrawl limit set in place. We’d like her to have some of her trust to draw upon early on to help her get on her feet. We want her to value money but not stress about it.

I go with my two kids age 5 and 2 on my own as my husband isn't a member. I spend a lot of time sitting in the RS room and have the sacrament brought in there.

If Christ were to invite you to sell all your possessions, give the proceeds to the poor, and join Him in His work (He’s been known to do that), would you do so happily. Regardless of how we’re doing temporally, that’s always a good question to ask ourselves to evaluate how we’re doing spiritually.

We have a sizable trust in place right now for our daughter, along with some life insurance policies on both me and my wife. I worry if we contribute too much to the trust and our daughter found out how much is in there, she might rely on it too much rather than develop her own talents and work ethic. My wife and I have talked about this quite a bit as to exactly what age we want to allow her to start drawing on the trust, and what the monthly withdrawl limits should be.

Revision of my original statement If you have a Barn sized garage full of cars...I probably would consider that a tad materialistic. Perhaps a better thing would be to invest a LOT more into your children's future? Perhaps create a trust where they could draw off the interest when they get older so that they might have to work, but might never have to worry about starving to death? Devoting such resources though can be a VERY HARD thing to do. That's part of why I am still working at my age, because I was too materialistic when I was younger, and unwise with money. Thus in many ways, I am the hypocrite talking about this rather than someone who is truly been good or selfless in how they utilized their money in their younger years. Another thought... The more you make, the easier it is to save, but the harder it is to live off those savings when you get older and are more accustomed to a much higher standard of living. But, if you live as if you only had the salary that you started off with, and save the rest then it is far easier to live off that amount when you get older because you aren't accustomed to spending that much more.

Disagree. Personal decision. One may or may not be materialistic if one is saving a bunch of money. One may or may not be materialistic if one is giving everything away. It's about what is in the heart-do you have your heart set upon riches or not? And giving everything away may or may not be indicative of your heart. There are very good reasons to save a bunch of money-get out of debt for one. If you are drowning in debt you can't very well help out others.

Disagree. People save for a rainy day, big trip, retirement... If you are giving a significant amount to those less fortunate, that's a sign that someone isn't materialistic.

And I'm just gonna leave this here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/high-school-students-stage-walkout-to-support-teacher-fired-for-refusing-to

If you are saving half of your income, you are not particularly materialistic.

Mirkwood walking into Sunday School:

Fortunately, the antis are typically not smart enough to come up with the really hard questions.

I think a better response is that the church or many of its defenders (fairmormon) have completely acceptable answers to all the questions

CS Lewis has pointed out that one of the challenges of apologetics (defending the faith) is that you begin to lose the mysteries and cram God quite tightly in a box so you can have all the answers. Frankly, there are some things we still don't have the answers for, and cannot without further revelation.

For ME... I think my main motivators have been my wife and children. I would have stopped with my learning far before I did without my wife to look to, to support, and who encouraged me and helped me. My children are also motivators for me to do things I would not do on my own. I went on scout activities, young men outings, church dances as a chaperone and multiple other items I had NO DESIRE at times to go to or participate in simply because I love my children. They are a major motivator in my life. If I could do anything to spare them hardship in this world and make their life easier and better, and it was something in my capacity I think I might try to do that. If it meant misery for me, but a better life for them, I'd attempt to do it probably.

If you want to attend a Institute class, you're certainly welcome to. A big picture thing to remember though: classes (any class) are never suppose to be the mainstay of your spiritual development or to replace your individual study. You can (and should) study each chapter in depth as the Spirit leads you during your personal study.

Ask the basic questions, for several reasons: 1. They are honest questions that you deserve to have answered. Don't be ashamed of honest questions. 2. Many others might be sitting quietly, wondering the same thing, but too embarrassed to confess their ignorance. Be their hero. 3. Even those who know the answer, or think they do—even those who might be impatient at such a question—do well to review the basics, and often learn new things in the process. Ask those questions, ctr2961.

At one time of my life - I lived on the east coast with my wife and two very small children. We were in a twig that was not even big enough to be called a branch. We went through a time when there were more non-members than members coming to church (almost twice as many). This was before the 3 hour block and I was the SS president (without counselors). I had a jr SS president that also served without counselors. There were many Sundays when no teachers showed up. The jr SS president took all the kids under 12. I took all the kids 12 - 18 (which was about 25 kids and as I said - mostly non members) and then I left a lesson manual for the adults to have a discussion. It was only painful when I thought it so. We were only there 2 1/2 years while the twig tripled in size - mostly with new converts. Looking back - it was one of the best times for the wife and I. We were young (in our 20's) and too stupid to know better. I thought to add one other tid-bit. We built a chapel during the 2 1/2 years. This was during the time when most of the funds were raised locally. To help save money we volunteered some of the labor. I took all of my vacation for the labor - there was one week when I was the only one working (the wife was very pregnant and could not assist me). I felt very discouraged and upset over the others that promised and did not show. More than discouraged - I was angry and felt so much alone in service. A spiritual manifestation was opened up to me and I was reminded that the building was not for me or the members as much as it is for Christ. I also learned that the building would bring blessings not just to the church and its members but to the community and all - far beyond those I thought I served. The Traveler

A BEEFCHE RARE SIGHTING! Today is a red letter day!

My biggest issue with MormonStories is that they seek out those that have been excommunicated. I listened to his podcast on Dusty, a homosexual man set to be tried at a disciplinary counsel. The host got him all Riled up about the whole thing and started giving out the time and date of where the counsel was going to be and told everyone that they should go and “support”. A similar thing happened with Jeremy Runnels and it was a bunch of people cheering him on after he said “I excommunicated the stake president and resigned from the church”. Im sorry but this does t seem to be pro Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to me at all. You look at their comment sections in their videos and they are all full of either “we love you!” Or “The church sucks” comments. Want to know what kind of organization MormonStories is? Look at it’s followers There are answers, and they are GREAT answers. There aren’t ANY holes on the answers the church has for their questions. The whole backbone that supports these antis (or “unorthodox”) is the premise that the church is hiding things or directing its members away from these supposed “problems”. I read the entire CES letter and had a strong answer for all the questions he had. The reason people don’t accept them is because they don’t believe in God at all. It simply comes down to that. Every example of an answer to a “hard” question being rejected is because they believe in man more than God. They deny God’s hand was in the Book of Abraham, plural marriage, blacks and the priesthood, women’s divine roles, and all myriad of other topics. They choose to believe that man’s evil and manipulating influence is the main driver for this.

I'm bummed about 2-hour Church. But I'm hopeful that good things will come of it and we're gonna build new Sunday traditions. How's your daughter doing with Church?

Gag! At least splurge for a 6-pack of Henry Weinhard's!

I almost failed my medical school psych rotation. I refused to call homosexuality a normal variant. And I butted heads with one of the professors that was instrumental in coming up with the diagnosis and treatments of ADHD. Diagnostic criteria for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder These criteria are obsolete. DSM Criteria DSM IV - TR A. Either (1) or (2): (1) inattention: six (or more) of the following symptoms of inattention have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level: (a) often fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in schoolwork, work, or other activities (b) often has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play activities (c) often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly (d) often does not follow through on instructions and fails to finish school work, chores, or duties in the workplace (not due to oppositional behavior or failure to understand instructions) (e) often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities (f) often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that require sustained mental effort (such as schoolwork or homework) (g) often loses things necessary for tasks or activities (e.g., toys, school assignments, pencils, books, or tools) (h) is often easily distracted by extraneous stimuli (i) is often forgetful in daily activities (2) hyperactivity-impulsivity: six (or more) of the following symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level: Hyperactivity (a) often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat (b) often leaves seat in classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is expected (c) often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it is inappropriate (in adolescents or adults, may be limited to subjective feelings of restlessness) (d) often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly (e) is often "on the go" or often acts as if "driven by a motor" (f) often talks excessively Impulsivity (g) often blurts out answers before questions have been completed (h) often has difficulty awaiting turn (i) often interrupts or intrudes on others I argued that these criteria basically describe normal children. I ‘m pretty sure that she hated me and at one moment during an argument she blurted out “You have ADHD!” I laughed and took the C.

So, I recently read a question asked elsewhere by someone whose faith was shaken when he learned something from Church history which was surprising to him. Another poster wondered why this new knowledge had made him doubt. I took this to mean, "why had the OP not gained an unshakable testimony so that the new knowledge wouldn't leave him doubting?" (though it could have meant the responder thought the new knowledge was no big deal). Anyway, this (and some personal experience over the past few years) got me to thinking about this very topic. While it's inevitable we will trust in assumptions such as these to a degree (as there are an awful lot of individual truths of which you can seek a personal testimony), one should not let them be permanent - one should be continually seeking that personal testimony - starting with core things like the reality of God and Jesus Christ, the Atonement and Resurrection, the truth of the Church, the Book of Mormon, the prophet Joseph Smith, temple ordinances, etc. Perhaps it means bearing that testimony in prayer to God and asking him for confirmation, or if there is more for you to receive, or guidance on what you should do with this testimony.