Leaderboard

BSA leadership told the Church (and numerous other stakeholders) that they wouldn’t change heir policy . . . And then they did, by ramming through a vote when they knew the Church delegation to the national board would be gone. BSA leadership told GSUSA that they wouldn’t admit girls . . . And then they did. BSA leadership heavily leveraged itself financially to build its Summit Bechtel location—which, frankly, they didn’t need; but which was a tremendous ego boost for the leadership. They have squandered vast resources of cash, property, and goodwill; leaving themselves now as socially and financially vulnerable and non-viable as they’ve ever been in their hundred-year history. And of course, the council burro-clowns are consistently about as helpful as another hole in the head; and the whole organization has been gouging its membership with useless program, manual, and uniform updates for decades. I have no idea exactly in what ways Ballard feels the BSA left the Church; but to my mind, it has little to do with gender issues specifically. It has to do with the fact that BSA leadership doesn’t believe in their own product. They are not trustworthy; they are not loyal; they are only occasionally helpful or friendly or courteous or kind; they despise obedience to any person, institution or principle worth obeying; they are unreliably cheerful; the opposite of thrifty; cowardly; filthy; and blasphemous. And in my (admittedly) limited experience with non-LDS scouting: the boys know it. They are dismissive of the vestigial character-building aspects of the program and largely see the BSA as a chance to get away from their parents and go play with knives and tell each other dirty jokes. We can, and will, do better.

I agree. Sometimes I don't know what I know. For me, faith is choosing which side of the logical battle in my head (and heart) to follow. There are things I can definitively say, though. When following faithfully, there are indications that He wants me to be where I am. Following the Law of Chastity as I understand it is His desire. God wants me to be a part of this Church. This is His restored church. These are just a very few things that He has made obvious to me, sometimes painfully. From that, I can infer other things.

I am a firm believer that we don't REALLY examine most of the words that come out of our mouth. And particularly when we are standing in front of 100-300 people. When it comes to bearing your testimony, people often mean what they mean. As you start developing your testimony, certain words may or may not find their way in and out as you seek to better define it. For me, I try not to use the words "I believe" or "I know". Believe seems to be too weak, know seems to be too strong, and saying "I have faith that..." is too wordy and almost denotes the same meaning as believe. Instead, I prefer to make declarative statements. Christ is our savior He did die for us This is God's church upon the earth Pres. Nelson is God's Prophet etc. I found that I am more comfortable making those types of declarations than I am the typical "I believe" or "I Know" But when other's say they "know" or "believe". Either those are accurate representations of how they feel, or they haven't thought about it enough to adjust their wording. In either case, don't tell a man to fix his tire when he is working on his engine.

When we see some children bear testimony we can see what they have been taught, and why they use the term "I know" at times. This is the language they hear, and this is the language their parents teach them. How many have actually received witness? Well, that is between them and God. Yes, human nature tells me the desire to conform is there also, but as others have shared it is not the fault of the Church. When I was fourteen our stake organized a youth event. At one point, on Sunday, we had fast and testimony meeting. After a few testimonies had been shared my brother turns to me and says, "Anddenex, share your testimony. The girls like young men who share their testimony." At this time, I wasn't sure if I had a testimony, and I didn't think it was right for me to stand and share a testimony so girls like me. However, the question presents a false dichotomy. Either Church members conform, or they are exempt. There are other reasons also, one being the Comforter has declared a truth. When the Comforter declares, witnesses a truth, that is knowledge -- not superstition or mere belief. It is knowledge. Here are verses of scripture to ponder: Moroni 10:3-5 - particularly verse five, "And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." (emphasis mine) 1 Nephi 10: 17 - "I, Nephi, was desirous also that I might see, and hear, and know of these things, by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is the fgift of God unto gall those who diligently seek him, as well in times of hold as in the time that he should manifest himself unto the children of men." (emphasis mine) Doctrine and Covenants 46: 13, "To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. (emphasis mine) Should we feel more compelled to testify that Jesus Christ lives rather than saying, "I know this Church is true"? If the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, has born witness of a truth, then we should have faith to use the proper wording -- I know. If you believe, then use the word believe. Do not allow the world to dictate what you (general) do or do not know. Do not allow the arm of flesh to dictate to you what you do or do not know, or what you can say with authority and power. It is the Spirit of Truth that gives authority and power. And always remember the following verse of scripture eternal life is to know God and his son Jesus Christ.

We are a big church, and I think the easy answer to this is of course some people testify just to fit in. That kind of attempted conformity is going to be present in every group religious or not. I wouldn't use the term compelled though, no one holds a gun to anyone's head and forces them to stand up and testify. That being said, some of us really know the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ restored in it's fullness. I have a sure testimony of this through the power of the Holy Ghost and I don't need to see God or the Celestial kingdom to have this knowledge. You (generic) don't have to believe me, you could even suppose it's a piece of undigested cheese causing delusions, but I have a responsibility to share that knowledge so that you (generic) can hear it and seek your own knowledge from the Holy Ghost. Perhaps we can quibble about what we mean by knowledge, but it doesn't change what has been revealed to me or other members. Also, testifying of Christ's church is testifying of Jesus Christ (at least in my experience, you are testifying about his works). Some testimonies could be clearer about this, and we definitely could do with less travelogues, but I don't think there is an imbalance in testifying about Christ.

I'm going to break this down, into the sentiment and words themselves. The sentiment: hopefully everyone in the chapel on Sunday truly knows that this is Christ's Church from the bottom of their hearts. However, every person in that chapel is human, and makes mistakes. There's probably some that do truly know from the depths of their hearts. There's probably some that once did, and still claim it, but honestly have gotten really distracted with rest of life. There's probably some that are deeply searching. And there's probably some that are just coasting. The words: humans are creatures of habit. It's just easier to get up there and say things in a pre-established way, rather than figuring out how to re-invent the wheel again and again. So yeah, there is that tendency to just say "I know the Church is true" rather than re-inventing the wheel to say the same thing. It doesn't mean that the sentiment behind it is shallow -- all sorts of people are going to get up and express those words. Some people are indeed say it from the depth of their heart. Now that being said, I do find many people whom do tell their stories and express that same sentiment with different words.

Once I start playing the “why did he say what he said?” or “what did she really mean” game, there’s no logical stopping point until sink into a sort of nihilism wherein I don’t believe anyone about anything. Speaking generally: sure, peer pressure to testify of the Church—or the Gospel—or Jesus—or one’s love for one’s family—is always a potential factor. But I think I owe it to most people to at least go into an encounter taking what they say at face value. If I want to dig a little deeper, and it’s important to me; I can always take them aside one-on-one later to ask them to clarify or provide additional perspective. Personally, I avoid the phrase “I know the church is true”—first, because I generally avoid the phrase “I know” in testimonies (I believe far more than I know); and second, because the more I parse the phrase the less I understand what “the church is true” actually means. (That the prophet is a bona fide prophet? Fine, say that. That there is safety in adhering to and living the lifestyle the Church promotes? Fine, say that. That the Church has a unique claim to divine favor and inspiration and authority? Fine, say that. But I don’t know what “the Church is true” means, anymore than I know what “the American Bar Association is true” means.)

Interesting comments on the Church's decision to leave the Boy Scouts... We Didn't leave the Boy Scouts, they left us So, what is going on here? In my experience, the Church allowed Gay Boy Scouts and Gay Boy Scout leaders LOOOOONG before they were actually legalized in Boy Scouts. I've had Boy Scout leaders over my boys many years ago who were Homosexual and had a CC that actually was bringing her girlfriend to church (note, I did NOT select these leaders as I was not in the Bishopric at the time or anywhere close to being in it or influential in it). The church allowed ANY boy, gay or not, to be in Boy Scouts. Is it really that the Boy Scouts simply allowed girls to be Boy Scouts as well...or is it something deeper. I find it IRONIC that so many complain about Boy Scouts allowing Boys who are homosexual or leaders that are homosexual into them when the Church has allowed or done this (at least in my area) blatantly at times over the past few decades before these were even items long before the Boy Scouts even had them as issues to consider. Luckily, there is a clarification specifically on what Elder Ballard is referring to... Which is interesting. I'm not sure what I think about it. They presented the reason they were leaving originally to be to make a program that catered to all the youth in the world...which I can see the benefits of. Scouting is not able to really be a program for a world wide church...however, this article (and admittedly it is from the SL Tribune which I have not heard great things about) indicates it was over something different. As scouting allowed the charter organization, and specifically the Church to make decisions on who to allow as members of troops as well as leaders, this should not have affected the Church in how they ran their program. They just come out with something saying that their troops will not participate in official programs such as the Boy Scout Camps offered by Councils and will instead run their own camps and programs and they could have kept going with Scouts just fine if this was truly the reason. I'm hoping the decision was still as they originally stated, in that it was the need for a world-wide program for all the members of the church. The program they have I feel IS inspired, or at least I felt it was inspired when learning about the basics of it (more this Sunday I believe for everyone out there), so I could readily accept that reason as the WHY they did it. This article leave me more wondering about it though. Not sure what I think about the article after reading it.

Thanks to my son, who made this a year or so ago. Shared without permission. I'm shameless. Certain people such as @MarginOfError may appreciate the exponential y-axis.

It has been my experience that we all tend to think we "KNOW" more than we do. I have struggled much what I think I know. It seems to me that I am constantly adjusting what I know. Or should I say what I think or believe I know. Even the things that I know often require some adjustment as my understanding of such improves. When I was in my youth a received a most profound spiritual experience whereby I came to understand that the Book of Mormon was brought to mankind through the power and revelation of G-d. I knew that the Book of Mormon came from G-d. But I did not understand all the things that G-d intended me to learn and know from studying the Book of Mormon. Therefore my understanding and "Testimony" of the Book of Mormon was incomplete. In error I though my testimony was sufficient because I had received revelation from G-d. Is it possible that we say "I know" when giving our testimonies concerning things that really have not come to know - YES, absolutely. At least I know I have done so and thinking I am quite smart - I have come to the conclusion that others may error as I have done. But now I give witness to something that I do know to be true. Just as it is true that there is only one true and living G-d; there is only one true and living Church of the one True and Living G-d. Just as there is one unchanging true and living G-d that has given us the Law, the Ordinances and the Everlasting Covenant - there is only one true and living church that remains unchanged in the authority (priesthood) by which the Law, the Ordinances and the Everlasting Covenant remain unchanged. The Traveler

Did you know she's afraid of sea urchins too?

My totally non-scientific assessment: Most LDS Christian Eagle Scouts: really don't care or are relieved for the same reason all other LDS Christian persons are. Majority of non-LDS scouts: really don't care or are relieved. Many of them want to go in a different direction than LDS Christians and see the split as a good thing. Boy Scout leadership is fretting out, as they have major $ problems. But that existed with and without LDS Christian troops.

Reaction #1: It's exactly this kind of elitist bullcrap attitude that makes me say "Good riddance" to BSA and the snobbish idiots who infest it. Reaction #2: On the other hand...they have a point. LDS troops are historically bad (both in the sense of being not good through the years and in the sense of being really crummy). Scouting was never allowed to operate in LDS troops the way it was supposed to, and the result was hobbled LDS troops populated almost exclusively by 12-14-year-old boys, lacking older boys as leaders, pretending to run a "boy-led" program when in fact the boys were just along for the ride. Reaction #3: They can rejoice all they want. In twenty years, BSA will exist as a pale shadow of its former self, if it exists at all.

I know the LDS Church is true.

That’s chocolate, not tableya but yes, tableya looks like that. Tableya is 100% pure raw cacao. So, to make it into hot chocolate, you put one “coin” into a kettle, add water (1 standard coin serves 4) then put on the stove. Once it’s almost boiling, you stir-stir-stir with a whisk until the tableya is dissolved and the water becomes your desired thickness. You can add sweetener or substitute all or a portion of water with milk. Some brands make single-serve sizes.

Could it be happening? Yes, I'm fairly confident that the probability of such a thing is much greater than 0. How common I don't know, nor do I have any good ideas for actually measuring how common it is. In short, I believe it happens. I believe it has happened to me. I'm not sure what to really do about if, if anything should be done about it at all. Overly compelled? I think there is some peer pressure (or similar) say that we know the Church is true, but I'm not sure how "overly" compelling that pressure is. Speaking only for myself, I have said that I know something is true when my confidence in that thing was really not strong enough to warrant the I know part of the statement. Some of that could have been the heat of the moment (sometimes emotions are running high during the testimony meeting). Some of it could be immaturity. Peer pressure like that was much stronger when I was younger, but now I don't feel the same need to live up to expectations. If my confidence is only I believe or I hope, then that's how I express my testimony, I feel less compelled to overstate my testimony than when I was younger. To @Just_A_Guy's point, this is certainly something I would only judge for myself -- whether I am overstating my testimony due to peer pressure. I don't want to set myself up as any kind of judge over whether someone else is overstating their testimony.

The descendants of Cain become metal workers, wood workers and musicians. Not rich. Not powerful. Yet, useful. Likewise, with Adam & Eve. They took the fruit, yet continued to offer sacrifices to God. They taught their children to do likewise. Out of ashes, beauty, no?

I'm trying to catch up on reading the Ensign. Last night I read an article from October's issue, linked below. I know it's not exactly addressing your situation, but I think a lot of the concepts and questions could still be helpful to you. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2019/10/dating-and-pornography?lang=eng

Who?

Hopefully often, then you go join.

I saw a similar thing with the same picture earlier today, except the women were the F-35 pilots and the cat was an A-10 pilot with the words Brrrrrrrrt.

OooooOOOOoooo. You said "LDS".

@Anddenex While on my mission I spent some time with Legrand Richards. In our discussion he made a most profound and interesting statement. Perhaps I may not remember it exactly but as best as I remember he said, "The only thing that keeps anyone from the church is sin". I know a young man that went through a divorce. He tried so hard to keep his temple marriage together - he believe the spirit was guiding him. He read scriptures daily, he attended the temple every week often multiple times a week. When he was unable to save his marriage he became very distraught. He thinks the church left him in his time of need. He has voiced to me that he is closer to G-d now than ever before - one problem - he no longer keeps the law or covenant of chastity. I personally think doctrine is overrated. Isaiah - through revelation and prophesy; instructs G-d's saints that man becomes separated from G-d not through doctrine and believing doctrine but by: #1. Transgressing the Law. #2. Changing the Ordinances and #3. Breaking the Everlasting Covenant. I have done this before but I would compare faith in G-d with faith in electrons. Because of our faith in electrons - we will use a switch to turn on lights whenever we need light. If the light does not come on - we do not lose faith in electrons - rather we change the light bulb. If the light still does not come on - we do not lose faith in electrons - rather we think the circuit breaker has cut off power. So we check and reset the circuit breaker. If the light still does not come on we do not lose faith in electrons - rather we think our light switch is broken. And so we continue to try many things without ever losing faith in electrons - perhaps concluding that something we cannot think of as the problem - but we never think or believe that electrons no longer work. This despite that we know very little about electron, have never seen one or understand much about them. We just have faith. Where does our faith in electrons (or G-d) come from? I do not believe it is because of doctrine concerning electrons. It comes from truth and being responsible - meaning the understanding that there is always a reason, weather we understand the reason or not. The opposite of logic and responsibility is the lack of faith and responsibility. Like my friend that refused to consider his own sins and desire to sin and break covenants - such that when the opportunity came - he took it. Rather take responsibility some exercise their agency and blame - either G-d, - specifically his Laws, his Ordinances and his Everlasting Covenant. The Traveler