Leaderboard

My son comes home in less than two weeks, so we will get to talk with him the week before he comes home, which we might have done anyway. This is our third son to serve a mission. Sister Vort is less than happy that this is happening only now. For myself, I sustain the Brethren in their decisions, but I think the not-calling-home business served an important function, which might be called cutting the umbilical.

The upshot here is this tells us that you've never actually been directly involved in buying illegal drugs. You're making a couple of assumptions here that aren't warranted, brother. The kind of reasoning you're using isn't happening in the mind of somebody addicted to the hard stuff. A pothead might do that with weed, maybe... but do you really think a heroin addict, meth head or crack addict is going to sit there and calculate how many doses he'll need over the next couple of weeks and make sure to buy enough to cover it? Expense, expense, expense. Buying a bottle of a couple hundred ibuprofen isn't even in the same order of magnitude of the cost of an equivalent stockpile of anything illegal. What gives you the impression they could afford it? In the latter stages of addiction we're talking about somebody who can't hold down a job, which m eans if they're getting money at all it's either form somebody enabling them or they're stealing/selling something to raise funds. Afford large quantities? I think not. So the user goes up to the dealer, and says "I want to buy a big stockpile!" The dealer will assume the user plans to start his own little business and ain't gonna sell. In fact, that's a good way to get killed. A user knows if he's caught with those kinds of amounts, he's gonna get charged with possession with intent to distribute. So you're envisioning a person who's addicted to meth saying "I'd better pace myself, this needs to last!" Yeah... that's gone in a weekend. @mirkwood, is that about right or am I way off base?

Dudes have issues with admitting they miss their Mommy in public. This policy change will help. Full disclosure: I'm having a 100% crotchety old man reaction to this news. I'm chock full of "kids these days" and "mollycoddling" and "never learned how to work" and "ain't got the maturity needed". I've watched the culture change, and while 60 might be the new 40, I'm afraid mid-20's are the new 18. It's just taking our U.S. humans longer to grow up and be ready for the challenges of adulthood. I'm even less happy when I think about why this is happening. But it's a reality with which the church must grapple.

Some people see this as a perk.

Indeed. One might buy 250 pills of ibuprofen, but one doesn’t usually then carry all 250 of them on one’s person during a subsequent quick trip to Wal-Mart. There’s “beyond a reasonable doubt”, and then there’s “inapposite, looney-tunes arguments concocted by someone who has a natural antipathy against cops”. Thankfully, juries can usually tell the difference.

God gave me this verse from Hebrews 13. 17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. I am going to try and be patient with my Bishop for a while.

It's not the "telling off" that's natural. What's natural is loving your son and wanting what's best for him. When you realize that an undisciplined child is disliked by almost everyone, and that many undisciplined children grow up into undisciplined adults—a sure recipe for a disastrous life—your natural love for your son will push you to discipline him. This does not necessarily involve "telling him off"; many argue that those parents who tell their children off are doing a poor job of instilling discipline. But in any case, good discipline will include praise for good actions and an insistence that the necessary good things be done and bad things never allowed, however you wish to enforce this. In today's western world, especially it seems in Great Britain, physically disciplining your child (e.g. giving a swat or forcibly removing the child from an activity) is frowned upon and even made illegal in some places. I'm all for people not beating up their children, but I find this anti-disciplinary trend deplorable, when a sincere and well-intentioned parent is legally prohibited from exercising discipline, under threat of imprisonment and loss of the child. Find an effective way to discipline your son, both positive discipline and negative discipline, and use it.

Ok, so I am not LDS, and I must preface this by apologizing for posting here when the thread is directed at Saints in the US. I do not mean to disregard or cause offense. I chose to weigh in because this is a topic that is of extreme importance to me as an American, as a Jew, and as a Rabbi with a decent sized congregation. Jews, particularly American ones, have a longstanding aversion to guns. According to a 2005 American Jewish Committee study, Jews have the lowest rate of gun ownership of among all religious groups, with just 13 percent of Jewish households owning firearms (compared to 41 percent for non-Jews) and only 10 percent of Jews personally owning a gun (compared to 26 percent). This is a point on which I strongly take issue. I am pro-gun, pro-self defense, pro-concealed carry. I carry everywhere I go, including the synagogue, and I was a firearms instructor for many years. So why do I feel this way and step away from the majority of Jewish sentiment in the US? There is famous Talmudic dictum: "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first. This statement from the Talmudic sage rava is derived from a Mishnah passage that permits a homeowner to kill an intruder in self-defense if the trespasser arrives in the night. Some Jewish gun proponents have argued that since the Torah commands self-preservation, acquiring the means for that preservation is also a religious requirement, with some going so far as to suggest that gun control laws prevent Jews from exercising their religious obligations. More than this, we know that דוד המלך (King David) protected his flock, and so, too, shall I. I will do what is necessary in order to keep my congregants safe. Just my .02

I like that the calls will be initiated by the missionary. This is for the missionaries, not the parents so much.

I can sympathize with that. I personally can't imagine talking to my parents every week. And doubt they can imagine talking to me that much. I'd have thought once a month would have been a compromise between more contact and cutting the cord. Part of me also thinks there's some wisdom in letting young missionaries get advice from their wiser parents. But the larger part of me thinks over how many adults I've met in my life that I would consider wise, and that makes me want to cut out all of the phone calls altogether.

First, that isn’t @mirkwood‘s argument. His argument is merely that people don’t go to prison for mere possession of illicit drugs. You are the one who brought up this apparent attempted murder case as a straw-man perversion of Mirkwood’s argument once he and I showed that your counter-example was not in fact an isolated case of mere possession. Second, at sentencing judges punish the person, not just the crime. That’s why prosecutors bring up criminal history at sentencing; and it’s why defense attorneys bring in weeping wives and children and trot out stories about how Guido—for all his faults—was always kind to animals, helped little old ladies across the street, and donated to the local PTA bake sale. There’s certainly a philosophical argument to be made that we *shouldn’t* look at mitigating or exacerbating character evidence during sentencing; but that’s not how the system currently works. And under the status quo yes, there are going to be startling apparent incongruities; because casual bystanders going off a 280-word article can’t possibly know the nuances and intricacies of a case the way the judge and jury do. Some of those incongruities may even be objectively wrong—but again, in most cases neither we nor the news writers who shape our opinions have anything like enough information to say that with any degree of certitude. I don’t know what went into this (thus-far hypothetical) attempted murderer’s getting such a light sentence; and frankly, given your strategic concealment on the Texas drug case you brought up, it’s going to be a while before I’m prepared to give much credence to any fact pattern you may hereafter describe.

As I study the scriptures, particularly using the Church's new home study method, and utilize the many resources for insights provided by the Church and its members, it has become increasingly apparent that the Son out-Jews the Jews. By this I mean that where the Jews are known for their double entendre and symbolism, the words and deeds of the Son are oft packed with many layers of meaning and symbolism. My desire for this thread is for participants to describe their favorite, and perhaps mind blowing multi-layered meaning and symbol-steeped passages of scripture.. This has the potential of being very interesting, at least to me, if not also develop our skills in coming to understand sacred writ after the manner of the Jews. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'm really excited about this. Homesickness was the hardest part of my mission, and it would have been a lot easier for me if I could have called home regularly. What a great change! https://www.thechurchnews.com/global/2019-02-15/latter-day-saint-missionaries-can-now-call-text-home-weekly-first-presidency-announces-49001

You're right, a neferious conspiracy of the youth to bring him down I'm sure.

For the record, I never found the two-year-old period to be "terrible". I thought my two-year-olds were utterly delightful, all five of them. So I'm not really sold on the existence of the "terrible twos". Maybe if you expect your two-year-old to be a miniature adult and instead he acts like a two-year-old, you might find it disconcerting. The problem there would be the parent's ridiculous expectations, not the child's behavior. I'm not a dog person, but I finally relented and agreed to do what I thought I would never again agree to do: Get a dog. But this time around, I figured out that the dog is basically a two-year-old in dog form. (She's actually two years old, so there's that.) When I realized that this animal was a permanent two-year-old and, though trainable, would never "get past" that level of understanding, it really helped me to relate better to the dog and temper my expectations accordingly.

Yes I am really looking forward to it, my brother isn't actually teaching the class (thankfully) but it is at the church where he is a minister so we will be in good hands .

What if the Mirror Universe in Star Trek... Wait for it... Wait for it... ...is the universe where Lucifer's plan was accepted?

IIRC, we have pretty clear statements that the sealed portion of the BoM includes a fuller account of the vision of the Brother of Jared; suggesting either that the 24 Jaredite plates were indeed included in that sealed portion or else that the Book of Ether is actually an abridgement of an abridgement. I actually agree with Rob that the presence of the repository in New York State does seem to suggest significant Nephite activity in the area at some point prior to the final battle. I can’t ridicule Rob’s suggestion that Mormon would rationally plan to move an entire nation four thousand miles to fight a losing battle, and then suggest as an alternative that Moroni would have rationally undertaken to single-handedly move many wagonloads of gold plates across four thousand miles of unknown or hostile terrain.

Maybe it's just me, but I really don't see any problem with missionaries talking with their families more often. Especially in such a family oriented church, it makes a ton of sense. There are so many other major issues we deal with in the world that a phone call once a week doesn't really scream the infantilizing of society to me.

Socrates 469-399 BC "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room."

I believe this is entirely accurate. I've seen the military shift to accommodate these changes as well. I suppose it's necessary if the "mission" is the main concern.

I'll be short for once. My favorite is very long, but normally not taken in the context of double entendre and symbolism...whilst I think the entire thing can also be seen as such for a pattern of our day... The Book of Mormon.

I’m not really excited about the phone calls. My wife is though... I actually had difficulty filling an hour of video phone call on Christmas. But I will start sending texts, GIFs, spiritual thoughts, etc... And I expect to be able to give advice and support in a timely manner. This should take some of the load off of the mission presidents. Or allow support for missionaries that have weak mission presidents.

Gauging reactions on Facebook, sports discussion boards, and general LDS-oriented discussion boards, it appears that men are ambivalent about the policy change, with many expressing reservations, while women are uniformly excited about it.

I only ask because we play with these concepts in the military all the time. I've seen both good and bad, but I'm not sure which way it's weighted. I'm sure someone has the statistics, though. I wonder if this was purely inspired, taking a stab at something, or the research shows a net positive.

The cause: homesickness is traditionally a MAJOR problem with missionaries. Now with kids raised in the constantly-connected-age, even more so. It was also strange to be preaching "family is super critical to us" and then "I'm only allowed to call my mom every six months"-- it's just a mismatch all around. And having parental support is not a bad thing (speaking in general here, don't get me started on the poison of helicopter-parenting). The effects: ... time will tell. Right now I know a lot of parents that are dancing and so excited to talk to their kids come Monday.

Guess Ill have to invest in an international phone service.

To be candid, cutting the cord (or the apron strings) is an appropriate metaphor. My sons enjoy talking with me, and I with them, but talking with their mother is a much more emotional experience on both ends. Both sides suffered and, I think, grew stronger from the lack of constant contact. But that's only my opinion. I fully support this change.

Hi, George. I do not have any sort of official explanation. I think of it like this: We open our Sunday services with a prayer in the sacrament meeting. We then close the sacrament meeting (but not the overall services) with prayer and proceed to Sunday School/RS-EQ and continue with our communal worship, closing those meetings (and our overall services) with prayer.

I'm personally not a big fan of the change. I think there are some missionaries that it will help, and it may keep them on their mission rather than coming home early. However, I also think there will be missionaries that will come home early that would have otherwise stayed on their mission. This will make it harder for them to leave home at home and focus on the Lord. During the first 100 years of the church, missionaries were lucky to get 1 letter a month due to slower transportation...and they did just fine. We are too worried about catering to the rising generation...and they are becoming soft because of it. That being said, the brethren never update or implement a policy unless they are all united on the matter. All 15 men have agreed to this change in policy, and knowing that any one of them has more insight and experience than I do is what enables me to accept the change. I know my comment may sound harsh towards the young people of the church...but I'm just old school I guess.

I wonder what the effects of this will be or what caused this change?

It doesn't say anywhere that a missionary *has* to call every week, or specify the time length. It's a flexible system to accommodate different family situations / personality types.

By "caught in the past" I mean they haven't progressed to a more complete understanding of the Plan of Salvation available since 1832 -1835 (when D&C 76 was revealed and first published in the Book of Commandments). Their view of Salvation predates the greater light and knowledge received in 1832 So, I see us as say much the same thing. But, if how you say it works for you, then great. [thumbs up] Thanks, -Wade Englund-

There you go. You weren't "naturally obedient" after all. Your mom has your dad to thank for it. And now look at how you talk so kindly about your mom and not as kindly about your dad, when your dad was the one that did the hard work of instilling character in you. And now you're wanting to inflict the same tragedy on your husband. Well, you got 2 choices - 1.) continue to spend only 1 hour a day on your own child, 2.) put your foot down and take full responsibility for motherhood in whatever way you can do so. All that has to do with upbringing. Every child has different personalities that impacts their reaction to how one is raised. That's why parenting is specific to the child. What works for one child doesn't always work for another. Your parent's disciplinary method worked on you, it didn't work for your sister. But to say, the child just naturally behaves himself is delusion.

Actually, that's brilliant. If you were three years old, then that's pretty harsh. But if you were eight-year-olds, that is the perfect example of making the punishment fit the crime. You abuse your bed, you lose your bed.

My mom is a Southern Baptist and she is crazy. Although, she wasn't overly possessive of me the way Jewish mothers stereotypically are but that's probably because I am her daughter. She has never let my brother go.

My dad never followed the concept of the punishment should fit the crime. I remember once he caught my brother and I jumping on my bed and he took the mattresses off of our beds and made us sleep on the floor with a sleeping bag for a night. He would come up with punishments whenever he felt like it, but we always knew it would be bad and he would follow through with it. Then there would be a closing lecture, where he explained what he was trying to teach us, which I usually zoned out for. Convincing my husband that me taking a sabbatical was a good idea was hard enough. I don't think he would be thrilled by the prospect of me making it permanent. It is true about me at least, I usually only had to be told once. My younger sister was a little terror though, even now I don't think she knows what obedient means.

That's a fictional show. There are all kinds of documentaries about this. This is a snapshot of one of them:

They don't really touch on it in the movie. But in the book, the twins' father died in the war and the peasant couple who found them on the road ended up raising them in their poor household because Suyuan's house in China was destroyed in the war and abandoned so they had no way of knowing where Suyuan ended up.

What a beautiful parsha is Bo! When we invite the L-rd G-d of heaven to come into our heart and our life, we feel His abiding love and shalom. He attends us daily and nurtures within us a deeper love for Him and for all His children.

Hey all - It's been quite a long time since I have been here. This place has definitely changed a lot. I am reintroducing myself. I am not sure if I am able to change my moniker lol. However, much has changed and am working and studying.

There is vastly more that we don't know regarding Satan and his fall than what we do know. The true depth of Satan's motivation is hidden from us, perhaps (probably) because we are mostly incapable of understanding the depth of hunger for glory and power. Satan is vastly powerful; I have little doubt that none of us is capable of withstanding his attacks on our own. Joseph Smith, even as a very young man, was one of the spiritually mighty of the Father's children, yet testified that Satan's power almost entirely overcame him, and that he would have been destroyed if not for God's direct intervention. I grew up believing and being taught that Satan was powerless over us unless we gave him power. Perhaps that is true. But I think there is a belief that goes along hand-in-hand with that, to the effect that Satan is a weak and pathetic being. The "pathetic" part is true, perhaps; but the "weak" is true only in comparison with the Father and the Son. Satan is powerful, and he will overcome and destroy us, each of us, if we do not guard against him. Not to be a scare-monger. I spend little time thinking about Satan. I recommend that course of action to all.

Really? At this point all I have left to say to you: It is impossible to have a rational conversation with someone who insists on being irrational.

Cringe.

Grateful am I in Your presence, Almighty G-d, who lives and endures, for You have returned my soul to me with compassion. Abundant is Your faith. In these still, quiet moments I am not asleep, and not yet awake. In the threshold of day and night, with the mixture of darkness and light, my body is once again coming to life. I am reborn, each day, from the womb of Your compassion. May all of my actions be worthy of the faith You have placed in me. With words of thanks I’ll greet the dawn.

While replying to Anatess, I realized that as a group we are down over fifty pounds in the first few weeks of 2019. Great job everyone!

These are some interesting ideas, Dennis; thanks.

I LOVE that book. C.S. Lewis really had a knack for expressing wisdom in a very accessible way.

Expecting the government to recognize what it morally right and then respect the same is about like expecting a hungry dog to recognize that is your cheeseburger on the plate and respect your right to enjoy it.

Years ago there was a very faithful and loving man in our ward who had a really large beard. When it came time to renew his temple recommend, the new stake president stated that he would not sign the recommend unless he was clean shaven. This man showed up at church with a clean shaven face and told us the story. One of the members mentioned that he didn't have to do that and that the stake president had no right to demand such a thing as there was no church policy against facial hair. Several nodded and agreed with that assessment. This man rebuked them and said, "Hey, I raised my hand to sustain this man as the stake president and thought that you all did the same." The truth of your situation is that your stake president was called of God to preside over your stake at this time. You will either sustain him in this calling or you will not.