MikeUpton

I like to think of trials as something God has allowed to be in our way. I think this is similar to what you're saying about "trials just happen." I find it points to his mercy and kindness still because of the nature of eternity vs what trials do for us (cause us to be humble where we might not otherwise be, perhaps inspire others to righteousness even through hardship, or cause us to depend more on Heavenly Father.) If all things in my own life were something I could have easily dealt with, I know its in my nature that I would have never bothered to seek the Lord or his will in the first place. I'm just being honest. The gospel fits together perfectly like this, as my understanding of the plan of salvation increases, it leads to a better understanding of all other things I seek to understand. All truth seems to fit together in a perfect and beautiful and profound manner. It is another witness to me that the Church is true. Once you've received that witness of the truth by the spirit, sometimes you do have to trust. You find something that seems odd to your natural understanding, but the Lord has said is yet true. And you're patient with it, seeking light about the matter from the Lord. Finally, when he opens to you, you can again see this new thing you've learned is also correct, it fits in, and it is also beautiful.

I have several friends from Iran and I love them all. I think of my friend Stationary Moghimi... he's a really good friend, but I have not talked to him lately because I have been very busy. He's awesome though. The women I have known from Iran were all very beautiful.

I believe you are correct.

i thought were were going to start a new thread about certain issues, not another one of generalized bias against the church.

yea, I meant temptation vs. the actual sin. Edit: this is a helpful point however, taking responsibility for their one's own life would lead to less of a problem in this area of blaming God or perhaps temptation to. However often things happen in a person's life that have nothing to do with the choices they've made. So, while not everything in a person's life can always be said to be a product of that person's choice, however, how one deals with such issues can be said to be directly affected by their choices and attitudes.

For an experienced hacker, the following list applies. Difficulty of hacking Linux OS/Apache: Difficult. Difficulty of hacking php/other server side programming language: Moderately Difficult. Difficulty of hacking Windows desktop OS: often close to trivial. Edit: If I were running the Church's twitter account I'd post on it using nothing less than one of the BSD variants, or a very secure Linux.

MikeUpton says: Which version of the Bible? Not the KJV, and I don't know about the NIV, but definitely the Jive Bible.

Thanks Hemi, that is exactly one of the things that helped in my own life. I've been through very difficult times, but I've learned to be thankful for trial. I had a long prayer with Heavenly Father about it, and I thanked him for the adversity in my life, because I know that in the eternal perspective of things, forever is a very very long time, and a bit of trial in this life in order to help me find a better reward in the next through humility and character development is so essential for me. I can see my pride now, I can see that I don't always want to say "thy will be done, Lord," and in this light I will be forever grateful to God for allowing me to experience hardship.

This talk is becoming one of my favorites. Thanks for this. I believe you were inspired to post it.

I like joint hairs.

I think his point was more that it would be in very rare cases, as an exception and not a rule. Thats what I thought anyways, when I read his post.

I have never once seen it happen. I have heard of it happening a total of once on my mission, before this discussion. I know a LOT of mormons.

There is a very large difference between anti-anything and offhanded bigotry. A very big one. I posted that article to show, yes there may be a problem with some prejudices in some communities with a large population of narrow-minded LDS, but its a far far cry from one to not trust outsiders, to take the steps to write and publish books and pamphlets, produce videos, and hold meetings against a given group. Therefore, Snow's point is valid. The terms you are addressing the issue is far too black-and-white. The fact that it is openly addressed by our leaders in condemnation of the members who are participating in any level of bigotry again backs up the fact that we consider it wrong on any level for us to behave this way, and again backs up the point Snow made.

Like I said I don't really pay so much attention to what others are doing. So I haven't exactly thought of where the line was. And by saying what I said, it doesn't mean I am saying its ok. I just pointed out there were degrees. I dont feel I have to defend the actions of any LDS who makes whatever decision he's made by whatever degree he's rested on. It wasn't my decision. The potential of something bad happening is exactly that: a potential. God also created our bodies and all the things that are in the earth, and gave us the gift of free agency, provided all of these things to us with full knowledge that hey, we have full freedom of choice, we have potential to go about killing each other, misusing the things of the earth, etc etc. Well, potentially. I'm no extremist too, I visit restaurants that sell liquor to people. I don't feel I'm wrong in doing so. But I know the difference between visiting the Olive Garden and going into a bar or strip club. Olive Garden is a place of business designed around the concept of eating their food. The focus of the other places are inappropriate.

It brings to mind a joke many have probably already heard: A Wall-Mart store that sells husbands has just opened in Dallas, TX where a woman may go to choose a husband from among many men. Among the instructions at the entrance, is a description of how the store operates. There are only 6 floors. It states that the attributes of the men increase as the shopper ascends the flights. There is, however, a catch.... As you open the door to any floor you may choose any man from that floor, but if you go up a floor, you cannot go back down except to exit the building. So, a woman goes to the Wal-Mart Husband Store to find a husband...... On the first floor the sign on the door reads: Floor 1 - These men have jobs. The second floor sign reads: Floor 2 - These men have jobs and love kids. The third floor sign reads: Floor 3 - These men have jobs, love kids, and are extremely good looking. "Wow," she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going. She goes to the fourth floor and sign reads: Floor 4 - These men have jobs, love kids, are drop-dead good looking and help with the housework. "Oh, mercy me!" she exclaims, "I can hardly stand it!" Still, she goes to the fifth floor and sign reads: Floor 5 - These men have jobs, love kids, are drop-dead gorgeous, help with the housework, and have a strong romantic streak. She is so tempted to stay, but she goes to the sixth floor and the sign reads: Floor 6 - You are visitor 3,456,012 to this floor. There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please. Thank you for shopping Wall-Mart's Husband Store. Watch your step as you exit the building and have a nice day!

It does seem there would be an issue of degrees there. Wines and coffee one thing. But a Mormon running a strip club? If his bishop found out he wouldn't be Mormon for long.

I don't think its a good thing personally, but this sort of practice is not limited to the LDS, there are many from other Christian churches or most religions included with this sort of practice, selling things or otherwise participating in business practices they don't believe in. Its roughly the same as the stereotypical Hindu who owns a liquor or other convenience store. (If those reading get upset with the stereotype, you haven't been to Sacramento, California. One of my best friends growing up was Hindu and his parents had such a store as well.) Their own religion might prohibit them (to an extreme point of even no kissing scenes in movies) from viewing some of the media they often sell in such a place. What I do is try to cast the beam from my own eye first, before I can see clearly to remove the splinter from someone else's.

Here are the words of a Latter-day apostle on the subject we spoke of, those in predominantly LDS communities who shun those who are not a member of our church: full article available here: LDS.org - Liahona Article - Doctrine of Inclusion

This starts off to be a little different take on a response perhaps, but I think it fits in the end. When I was as young as 11, I was offered cocaine by a fellow classmate. I said no. Several times when I was a teenager, I was offered marijuana, each time I turned it down. (I was also less active as a teenager, this was just in my nature, though I was less active I still believed in the Word of Wisdom) I did have my faults, that just didn't happen to be one of them. Through late teen years I was especially approached many many times about marijuana. At 17 I attended a Metallica/Guns n' Roses concert, and stood in general admission pretty close to the front, not too far from the bands. Major contact high, but I was offered marijuana there too, and I turned it down. When I was 17-18 i would hang out with my friends and there was a couple times they'd all start drinking in front of me, not only drinking, but continuously whining about how I wasn't drinking with them. I had a lot of history with these friends, needless to say, or I wouldn't be friends with them for long. I turned it down then. When I was 18 I got active in the church. Once or twice or perhaps three times I'd hang out with them, stay the night, there was peer pressure to use marijuana, but i did not touch it. Here's my point: I may have been a teetotaler on my own, growing up, not caring to partake of alcohol or illicit substances or whatnot, but over the years there is something I have learned: that is, we are not alone in the world, there are literal unseen forces constantly with us. I dont know about places like Olive Garden or whatnot, don't mistake that I am being too extreme on this, but I have learned it is not ok to have been hanging out with my friends when they did that sort of thing, whether i partook of their behaviors or not. We are in a constant struggle between good and evil, and when we surround ourselves with such substances and places we are opening ourselves to an attack of dark spirits that is needless, and ought to be avoided. Those who value the light of truth and understand the importance of influence whether behavior seems to be immediately affected or not, they will agree that we ought to keep ourselves well clear of places of spiritual darkness. edit: and those of you that do not understand the abundance of unseen evil lurking in such places, it is wise that you pray to become aware of those forces and how they might influence you.

why is there no laugh button??

Thanks PC. I appreciate the well thought out and gentle answers. It would be very difficult for me as an LDS to explain in this case then, exactly why the intended effect of that statement is so inappropriate (while not necessarily the statement itself). It seems more wrapped up in fundamental belief systems than I'd realized. The effect the statement is used for is uncalled for and uncouth. From far back as I remember my church has taught me about Christ, the sacrifice he made, has taught us to worship him, reverence his teachings, love him. We are every bit in awe and wonder of him, I believe, as any other Christian sect might be. We do believe literally that as it says in John 14:16, he is "the away, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by (him)". We just do not happen to believe he is the exact same person as the Father, but literally the son of God. Its pretty much the only difference in our view that I can think of. Like you said though, it would be difficult to explain to someone. Impossible to explain, I think, without the assistance of the Holy Ghost. I have a tendency to respond like this to certain people when I think civility would be lost on them and undeserved. Especially because some people try to manipulate you by their expectation that you would feel compelled to be civil. (although a reaction to the opposite is still a reaction more than an action.) I do not know whether I am correct in this, but I do remember Christ was for the most part gentle, but very sharp with certain others who he felt needed it. I'll admit I was somewhat hard, for example on AJ in the other thread he posted on book of Mormon contradictions with the bible, but mainly because I felt a need to point out exactly what he was doing. I have no real ill feeling towards him and I feel that I can say I do love him in the manner Christ affords one through his grace to all those who pray for charity.

no laugh button, but a more than adequate response.

(new subtopic so double post, if this is bad sue me) There was a story going around my mission that went something like this: On my mission there was a prominent anti-mormon couple who lived not so far from the mission president. Not too long before the mission president before mine finished his mission, he sent a thank you card to the anti mormon couple, thanking them for all of the work they did against the church. The reason was, he said, that every time they went about working against the church, it raised awareness of the church amongst the people, and they ended up getting a lot of baptisms from the publicity. As I remember hearing, the anti-mormon couple was pretty upset.

Good points, and it taught me why this argument might seem convincing to someone who was not familiar with the Church. We also do not see Christ and Satan as equal, not because of the question of their creation, but due to their choices. We believe Christ is literally the Son of God and part of the Godhead, but he achieved this status because he was the only one righteous enough. Satan, as spoken of in the scripture i posted from Isaiah, fell because of the choices he made to become who he is. The question of whether Christ and Satan are spirit brothers is used for one effect by anti mormons: to devalue the belief that the LDS have of Jesus Christ. Because of how shocking it sounds to say so and so are related in a familial sense. For anybody who believed Angels were a different species than man, but were brothers within their species, you could have someone say these people believe such and such angel is the brother of Satan, its a shocking thing to say and seems to devalue the people's belief in the first angel. Or perhaps if you were of the belief angels and humankind could call each other brothers and sister, you could say Mother Theresa was the sister of Satan and get the same effect on a smaller scale. Its still a stupid point though, and its done all for show. There's no merit to it whatsoever. Think about what it sounds like when you say Satan is a son of God. Mormons do not believe whether or not someone is created devalues who they are. So in this case anti mormons are apparently leaving things half in the context of Protestantism, half (in the most negative perspective possible) in the context of Mormonism, so their point is fully out of context anyways, and gives the wrong impression.

We actually do view this process as sanctification. LDS.org - Ensign Article - Fire and the Holy Ghost Edit: we use many terms in lds theology for this: baptism of fire and the holy ghost, sanctification, conversion, born again, a mighty change of heart, etc.