Vort

"Sin" is willful violation of God's commandments. Technically speaking, "transgression" is any violation of God's commandments. Thus we have John's formula: Sin is transgression of the law. Where there is no law, there is no sin. I suspect you are referring specifically to the transgression of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, as recorded in Genesis. Many LDS leaders and members have tried to make the argument that Adam and Eve's transgression somehow was not sin, because they were not capable of willful disobedience. In my opinion, the scriptures teach quite clearly that this is not the case, and that the act was a sin in any regular sense of the word. In any event, the consequences that befell Adam and Eve (physical and spiritual death) certainly are those associated with sin. But on this matter, we have only the highly stylized portrait given in Genesis. These symbols are not clear or specific enough to allow us to determine our first parents' level of culpability. Suffice it to say that Adam and Eve fell, as they must have done, and that they are revered by Latter-day Saints as among the greatest of all who have walked on this sphere. I understand that Catholicism divides sins into "venial" and "mortal". LDS doctrine is perhaps similar in some respects; we believe that all sins are forgivable through sincere repentance (and thus "venial" in Catholic terminology) except for denial of the Holy Ghost, through which one consciously, willfully, and permanently separates himself from God. That no repentance from such an act can be obtained should be obvious from the nature of what is being done. As for folding one's arms across one's chest: We are taught to be reverent when we pray and to assume a "reverent posture", including bowed heads, closed eyes, and folded hands or arms. We often encourage our children to "fold their arms", as it seems to prevent distractions from moving around. But there is nothing particularly significant in the act of folding one's arms, at least not that I'm aware of. EDIT: As for confession, you confess your sins to God and to those you have offended. That is all. The exception is when you have sinned with actions of such gravity that your very membership in the kingdom of God (aka the Church) or ability to participate worthily therein is jeopardized. In such a case, you need to talk with your bishop and/or stake president to rectify your standing in the Church. In concept, it is somewhat different from the spiritual cleansing of repentance, but in practice the two are closely related and tightly bound. Such grave transgressions include sex outside of marriage; murder; abuse of another, especially spouse or child; apostasy; criminal activity; and probably some other things I'm not remembering at the moment. It's not a long list, but it does include things that, sadly, are all too common among people today, even the Saints.

In at least three incidents in the New Testament, the Lord tells people that their own faith made them whole. Most people interpret that to mean that they were healed because of their faith. I don't think that's quite right. Matthew tells of a woman plagued by an issue of blood for twelve years (told even more dramatically by Mark), who sought to touch Jesus because she thought that by merely touching Jesus' garment she would "be whole". Either she touched the Lord and was healed (as per Mark) or Jesus turned around and healed her (according to Matthew). In either case, the Lord's words to her were interesting: "Thy faith hath made thee whole." Jesus healed her issue of blood, but it wasn't her touching of his garment, or even his words, that made her whole; it was her faith. Mark also tells the story of Bartimaeus, a blind man who importunes Jesus as the Son of David to restore his sight. The Lord does so, and in doing so tells him as he told the woman: "Thy faith hath made thee whole." The final example is perhaps the most instructive. Luke records how ten lepers, including at least one non-Jew (a Samaritan), begged to be cleansed. Jesus cleansed them, and they went their way rejoicing, but only one (the Samaritan) returned to glorify God and thank Jesus. The Lord noticed this discrepancy, and then said a very interesting thing to the returning Samaritan: "Thy faith hath made thee whole." But wait. If the Samaritan's faith made him whole, what made the other lepers whole? One possible answer: They were not made whole. They were healed of leprosy, but only the Samaritan was made whole. Being "made whole" has little to do with restoration of physical health or vigor; it refers, I suspect, to a spiritual condition of oneness with God.

We do use the term "partial tithing". However, I would note that, by definition, there is no such thing as a "partial tithing". Either you tithe or you do not. "Tithing" means "tenth". If you give a tenth back to God, you are paying tithing. If you give less than a tenth, you are making a contribution to the Church, but by definition you are not paying tithing. Not sure if this has direct bearing on the conversation, but I thought I'd throw it into the mix.

An angel is a divine messenger. We normally think of angels as being somehow "supernatural", such as resurrected or translated beings, but there is no reason you and I cannot be angels. The scriptures use the term in just that sense in many places. Consider that when John the Baptist restored the Aaronic Priesthood to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery -- the same Priesthood authority conferred upon our sons when they are twelve years old -- he said, "Upon you, my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys to the ministering of angels..." Our sons, and indeed all Priesthood holders, are given the keys to the ministering of angels. We are to be ministering angels to others.

Yes, for some reason the IMG tag is not processing the image correctly unless you go visit the URL, in which case it shows up. Strange. Apparently, the picture needs to be in your cache already. I wonder why? BTW, those models are amazing. How do you make them?

You're the high councilor assigned to the ward, volgadon.

What does the bishop's wife think?

Friends come and friends go, but a spouse is forever. Not to be flippant about a serious situation, of course. If a woman is married, it's hands-off (and eyes-off, and words-off). Otherwise, it's open season. If they're engaged, I would be especially careful, but the bottom line is: Until they're married, they are unmarried. In your position, my advice is to tell her honestly (but probably not completely) about your feelings and ask if there is any reciprocity. If so, go from there. If not, bow out gracefully. But don't tell your friend. It's not his business, and if your overtures amount to nothing, then nothing will have been gained by telling him. If things do get started between the girl and you, then hopefully your friend will take it well -- but if not, well, remember the first sentence.

I have paid tithing from my earliest childhood, so it has never been difficult for me. I would suggest that, after you get into the habit of paying your tithing, it likewise will not be difficult for you any more. Similarly, it's difficult to get up and go to Church on Sunday morning, until you're used to doing it. Then it isn't difficult anymore. Same principle.

Not at all. Rather, the "whining" about the ad campaign was that (1) I didn't believe it would be effective in reducing rape, and (2) that it primarily serves to foster an anti-male, feminist attitude toward sexuality in general and rape in specific by portraying men as rapists needing to be educated how to control the use of their genitals. Not to deny that this is exactly the case for some men -- but such men are not going to refuse to rape their dates because a poster they saw said it was bad. So ultimately, I think the only way the ad campaign is likely to be effective is in inculcating a feminist attitude toward men, sex, and rape.

Speak for yourself, Jen. All animals are perfect, but some are more perfect than others.

Good for you, Bini! Hope all goes well.

Now THAT is what I am talking about.

You want I should teach him a lesson? Non mi dimenticare. È la cosa nostra, amico.

You can do that? Heck, I nominate myself as the guy everyone pays money to.

I'm a stern but fair RS pres. I'm all for compassionate service, but my counselors will need to see to the doilies and centerpieces in our meetings.

For $2000, I'll build you an amp that goes to 12.

Here's looking at you, kid:

My point is: If we're trying to educate men not to have sex with drunken women because it's "rape" even if they say "yes" (because they can't legally consent), is it not still rape when women bed drunken men? (Answer: Yes.) Then why isn't that part of the campaign? (Answer: Because the campaign is not about preventing rape; it's about furthering feminist ideology, which denies the very possibility of a female raping a male.)

In the example I gave of some women in a previous ward, let me add that it was a relatively small group of women that engaged in such negative talk about their husbands. Only a handful, perhaps a half dozen or so. The women in general were not catty, at least not that we ever saw.

My landlord experience: In the last apartment we lived in, our stove top shorted out. We had two small children at that time, and being limited to an oven or microwave (or takeout, which we couldn't afford) seriously hampered our ability to feed our family. I did a cursory check to see if I could fix it, but the stove top was absolutely filthy underneath from years of use (before we got there), and I was not about to fiddle around with a 220-V appliance. I tried to clean out the gunk, but it ended there. We notified the landlord, not once, but several times over a period of WEEKS. No action, not even a response. Finally, in frustration, I called my mother (who owns rental property) and explained the situation to her. She said: "The law is on your side. Give them a letter tonight telling them that you are buying a new stove for your apartment and that you will deduct the cost of the appliance and installation from your rent until you have been repaid." So I did. I delivered the letter to the manager (a really nice guy, btw) the same evening and prepared to have Sears install a new oven the next day, which was Saturday. Lo and behold, at 7:00 Saturday morning, who shows up at our door but the landlord, carrying his tool kit! It took him until noon to fix the stove top, but by that afternoon, we were once again eating food cooked on our own stove. (Kind of funny: When we left the apartment after 1.5 years of living there, we cleaned it so thoroughly -- took the two of us 24 solid hours because it was so filthy -- that the landlord wrote us a letter of appreciation, inviting us to live there again if we came back to the area and offering to write us a letter of recommendation if we wanted. So apparently, he didn't hold the threat against us.)

Thus lending credence to the theory that women dress to impress other women. This is almost certainly false. If you live in a Western society, odds are close to 100% that you wear a dress or pants along with a shirt or blouse. Your dress is almost completely determined by your society, men and women. Even your colors and patterns are socially determined; I bet you don't wear bright orange and fluorescent green as casual wear around town, or nice plaid pants when you go out. And arguing "I don't like those things!" is a non-starter. Why don't you like them? Is there something intrinsically bad about plaid or green? Of course not. You don't like them because your culture does not recognize them as conforming to an acceptable norm.

When was the last time you saw a woman convicted -- heck, charged -- with rape for having sex with her drunken boyfriend?

I a previous ward, my wife noted that a group of the sisters seemed to enjoy sitting around bad-mouthing their husbands, and about very personal issues: hygiene, job, even sex. My wife took some pleasure in talking nice about me, and shortly the women stopped talking badly about their husbands -- at least in front of Sister Vort. I understand this type of thing is not uncommon among women, based on what women in my life (wife, mother, sisters) have said. I have never experienced anything similar among a group of men. In some ways, we seem to live in different worlds.

Men who want to rape their dates will not be deterred by a four-color poster telling them not to.