rockwoodchev

Forgot to add, in case you are interested. The Greatest gift is that of Charity. You should have that as #1 and everything else is a distant second. Let me know if you need references. I'm not sure I can just cut/paste from the Seminary Manual here. Does anyone know if that is allowed? I just taught this lesson to the students this morning. Great lesson that they could really get into. Some of the gifts mentioned are fun to talk about examples where they've seen them done. Good Stuff.

The following is a good list by Elder Ashton. Let us review some of these less-conspicuous gifts: the gift of asking; the gift of listening; the gift of hearing and using a still, small voice; the gift of being able to weep; the gift of avoiding contention; the gift of being agreeable; the gift of avoiding vain repetition; the gift of seeking that which is righteous; the gift of not passing judgment; the gift of looking to God for guidance; the gift of being a disciple; the gift of caring for others; the gift of being able to ponder; the gift of offering prayer; the gift of bearing a mighty testimony; and the gift of receiving the Holy Ghost” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1987, 23; or Ensign, Nov. 1987, 20 ).

Here is a bit more information that was sent to me today. I'll get sources tomorrow. It appears that back in 2005, Sen Bob Bennett of Utah did a last minute amendment to a Farm Agriculture bill that insulates religious organizations from illegal activities of service workers. "churches already were shielded if they didn't know the person was illegal, so the only reason to have the amendment is to knowingly recruit illegal aliens. " US CODE: Title 8,1324. Bringing in and harboring certain aliens Title 8 section 1324 of US Code: © It is not a violation of clauses [1] (ii) or (iii) of subparagraph (A), or of clause (iv) of subparagraph (A) except where a person encourages or induces an alien to come to or enter the United States, for a religious denomination having a bona fide nonprofit, religious organization in the United States, or the agents or officers of such denomination or organization, to encourage, invite, call, allow, or enable an alien who is present in the United States to perform the vocation of a minister or missionary for the denomination or organization in the United States as a volunteer who is not compensated as an employee, notwithstanding the provision of room, board, travel, medical assistance, and other basic living expenses, provided the minister or missionary has been a member of the denomination for at least one year. It appears to me that the church asked a member of the church, to put in last minute provisions into a bill that would protect the church from being charged if a member of the church was caught doing work for the church while at the same time was here in an illegal manner. I'm still blown away by Elder Holland's comments in the article. That is the most worrisome portion of this whole topic. Elder Holland is saying that the leadership of the church knowingly sends people who are breaking US law into a situation where there is a good chance they will be caught and prosecuted. I wonder if my Bishop knew that I was breaking US law if I could keep my recommend. No matter what a person thinks of immigration law, the fact of the matter is that the law is the law. How many times on this forum do people talk about obedience to every jot and tittle. I don't understand. I trust these men to make decisions for us that follow laws. Not to blatantly break them.

Hey Ben, The only thing I'm thinking is on the news article from Elder Holland, it appears that these Elders are only called to state-side missions. In order for that to occur, they must mark the application somehow to show that they can't go foreign. I'm not sure how that could be asked. Maybe something like: Question 15-A: Are you eligible to hold a passport? Question 15-B: If you were asked for proof of citizenship when re-entering the USA, could you provide it? I don't think there is anyway to do a "Don't Ask" policy. They have to know to not do a foreign call. Also, what does this then say about the young men and the 12th article of faith. It doesn't seem well for a young man's worthiness if they can't live up to a "raised bar"

No. It sounds like they have a policy of "Ask, but don't tell anyone else". They need to ask the missionary if they are illegal so that they know not to send them foreign. If they called a young man living here illegally to a mission outside of the country, they would need a passport. They must be called to somewhere a passport is not required. Now, I'll bet these missionaries will be called to somewhere local, or they will be called to regional or 2-year stake missions. They will still be allowed to serve, but will be kept where they don't need ID to travel.

Hi, I wasn't thinking the comments that were amazing were the reporter from the Trib, but the comments from Elder Holland. I don't think they changed the quotes from him. It is interesting however that there appears to be Zero mention of this in the Deseret News. Isn't the fact that a missionary was arrested newsworthy? The young man was from Utah.

For me, this is really troubling. I'm not sure how to explain it. This is really stunning. I'm shocked at Elder Hollands statements that are just so blatant and disregard the individual. I'm not sure how this sort of thing occurs, but it really ticks me off. 1. The missionary should have been honest. 2. The BP should have known, asked, been aware of the situation. 3. The Church must know about these situations, as Holland clearly states that they are being sent to state-side missions. This is because the young man could not get a valid passport to go foreign. So, there is something on the form going into SLC with the application that indicates "Here illegally". WOW. WOW. WOW!!! 4. The church encouraged, in an Agricultural Bill, a rider to protect the church, but leave the poor missionary hanging out there. 5. The church then hides behind the bill when it claims it is the law, they are simply following it. 6. Then, this thing about sending an Uncle out to OK to pick up a missionary so he wouldn't be arrested as well. They don't even take responsibility for the missionary by seeing that he gets home ok, they send a family member. I think this is really a sad state of affairs. I thought we has "Raised the Bar"? How can we let a young man be a missionary, when he is breaking the laws of the land. Is the following statement no longer true? "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." Wow.

Papa Married a Mormon is one of the best books I think I've ever read. For the ladies, I think it is even better and my wife has gone crazy over the years trying to get copies to give her friends. I wish there was more information about the real story behind the books. Where in Utah did this all occur? It talks about Adenville, or something like that, but I've never seen anything about that. I think I'm going to pull these out again and read them. Great piece of Mormon/Utah history I wish were better well known.

I remember as a kid reading these books and thought they were just the greatest books ever. Do kids today still read these? I grew up in Utah and figured everyone knew about the books, but once I moved away found that many people didn't know about them. As an adult, I found that the author (Fitzgerald??) wrote an adult book called "Papa Married A Mormon". It was just a great book. My wife got me to read it. She bought copies for all her friends and they loved it as well. Anyway, does anyone else remember these books? I haven't read the kids series in years. I wonder if they are still available. If you've read them, do you think the stories were true. I felt like JD and TD were real kids. Hope someone else knows these books. They were awesome!

I would like to chime in and give a perspective that you might not have thought about. I would consider myself an prior very active member who is on his way out based on historical, doctrine, and policy matters in the church. I currently have a recommend, have a stake calling but would consider myself fairly inactive as far as belief goes, even though I attend my meetings about 50% of the time. In looking around the internet for places to hang out, I seem to find 3 categories. a. Places like here and Fair that are 100% pro-LDS. b. A couple of middle of the ground spots. c. Several ex-mo, never-mo places which are pretty harsh. I must say that the one place that makes me feel the most uncomfortable is here. It seems that I find the most judgmental, 1-sided, and rudeness here. As a person who finds himself as the 1, when talking about the 99, this is not a very friendly place to come. I'm actually wanting to find my way back. It would be great for me, and for my family. However, simple platitudes of "pray, pay, and obey" don't work for me. I am a deep thinker (or so I've been told), a reader of everything, and a questioner. I've been in your shoes, and now I'm in mine. If I know one thing, it is that while in the past I was able to say "I Know" or "This is a fact", those days are done. My point is this, for a group of people who want to help people, and you need to realize that for every 1 post, there are probably 50 readers, that often your answers are very condescending and rude. I've been banned twice here now for just asking questions. I think I've learned how not to phrase things, but when I listened to the conf talk where members were asked to be involved with blogs and forums, I wondered what the effect might be. I must say that so far, I don't think the 99 are doing much to help the 1. At least for me, I will come and lurk here every so often, but I find it tedious and so I leave.

I've always wondered about the accoustics in our bathrooms. It always seems like there is a slight echo in there. I think it is great that they chose to record music there. What a great story. Thanks for contributing.

Wow! What a complicated situation. Hope you work out the best solution for your family.

Great concept. I'd like to use this in a class.

I'm not sure that you can say this is an "Approved History Book" Just because it is sold at Deseret Book doesn't mean it is "approved". Actually, if you listen to the bushman interviews with John Dehlin, Bushman mentions that the church has gotten out of the business of releasing history books. One thing that amazes me is when some of you will mention that why would anyone read this type of book when you can just pray for a witness. With all the push in our church about keeping and reading history of the church. We study it once every 4 years, but in my mind, most people know very little about the history of our early leaders. In reality, there is very little that is in the official material that is even true. How many people know the real story about polygamy and polyandry? How many people know the real story about the peepstone and the "translation process" How many people know about the Kinderhook Plates? How many people know about the history about the Book of Abraham? It just seems weird that in books like our study guides like Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, not one single word is mentioned about Polygamy. But... when a book like RSR is read, it is all over the place. Crazy... For me... RSR cemented in my mind many problems with early history of the church. If Joseph Smith was willing to "lie for the Lord" about Spiritual Wifery, what else would he lie about? I've yet to answer that question.

One of the things that Bushman mentions in his interview with Dehlin, but I'm not sure it is in the book itself, is how well done the Brodie work is. I have to agree with him after working my way through much of her book. Many people call it "Anti Mormon", but I don't really get that. It feels to me that any book written by a member of the church is "OK", but if the same material is written by a non/ex mo than it must be "Anti". I just have not found that to be the case. Has anyone here read Fawn Brodie "No man knows my History"?

I have been told that if a person really wants one, they can go get another. For me, I was 16 and one Sunday morning, my mom came and woke me up and said, "Get your church clothes on, we have a meeting". We drove to a guys house and I got my blessing. At this point in my life, I was NOT prepared for a blessing of this nature. There is no way that I should have received it, I wasn't worthy, nor was I prepared. When I described this a few years ago to our stake pres, he said that if I wanted, he would authorize me to get another blessing.

I have read most of the book. I've also read No Man Knows My History I like Bushman but he tends to gloss over some things. For me it was a open discussion of things that have been covered up and whitewashed by the church. We simply don't talk about these things anywhere. 95% of church members don't know that Joseph practiced Polygamy, that he kept it hidden from the public, the church members, and his wife for several years. They don't know that he practiced polyandry and married several girls who were still in their teens. The Wives of Joseph Smith One of my favorite stories from the book is about during Zions Camp where the Prophet and a member of the camp got into a fight about a dog. I can't remember the details, but Joseph ends up throwing the camp bugle at the guy. Made me laugh very hard. I also think he has done a "ok" job showing the problems with the Book of Abraham. While Nibley has tried to discredit the docs found in the Met, it is hard to dispute the mere fact that the fragments shown in the BoA, have nothing at all to do with Abraham, but are merely funeral pics from Egypt. There is much better display of this at the wiki site which shows both an LDS as well as a non-LDS view. Someone else wrote the following on another space on this site, I think. IMHO, I think the best thing you can do is to listen to the interviews that John Dehlin does with Bro. Bushman. Library at StayLDS.com

It is also interesting to note that in the 1st version of the (the 1832 version) when he recorded the events he just refers to seeing "The Lord". Not 2 personages, but just "The Lord". It wasn't until 1835 that he reports that first one personage appeare4d and then another. It was in 1838 that he first reports that the first pointed to the other and said"This is my beloved son, Hear him". I have a hard time figuring out how he would miss something as important as how many people there were in 1832, but then 3 years later able to remember that there were 2 people. Anyone else able to figure that out?

It would take me some time to look through the CES Seminary OT Manual to find the section talking about portions of the OT may not be true. If it is important to you, please feel free to go onto the ceslds.org site and search around. If you need the username and password, let me know. As to the Tower of Babel, there is no way that could not have happened. The Tower of Babel is proven to have actually happened because of the fact that we have a group of people, documented and proven in the BOM that were actually there. The BOM proves that the Tower of Babel was an actual physical building and this was the source of the languages being confounded. Even though there has been zero evidence for this event, just like everything else in the BOM, it actually did occur, "because the spirit tells me so". How could anyone doubt? Donkey talking?? Well. there is just no way that occured. We have been taught many times that spiritual things are not to be taking lightly. God would not have done this because God is not a trivial person. Could you just imagine some guy going into see his Bishop. "Hey... God spoke to me through my Cocker Spaniel that I'm to be the next Scoutmaster" Bishop would fall over laughing and then put him in Primary.

I don't know about your memory. I went through for the first time in 81 and there were all kinds of penalties mentioned. That occured all during the 80's. The previous poster mentioning that the ceremony changed in about 90 is correct. The thing has changed many times over the years in response to ???? This was one of the things that bothered me at first. Still does. If it is right.. and in the temple... why would it change??? Doesn't make sense to have it change if the thing is from God. Never felt right about that one. Also... I don't think this thread needs to be locked. Good topic. If we don't discuss these things here, people will just go find another location on the net where these topics are more openly discussed. The whole ceremony is located on the internet. One thing that I wonder about is not know what you are committing to, until it is really to late to change your mind. I mean there is all this family pressure to go, everyone is there for the big day, but no one will tell you what you are committing to. Then... the big day finally arrives and it is BRAIN OVERLOAD. There is no way you can even grasp 1-2% of what is going on that day, and then it is Promise this, promise that, promise another thing.... with major commitments. I wonder how many people get in there and would actually say "Excuse me.....!!! No. I don't promise to do #2. Can I leave now?" Makes things very hard.

I remember that my seminary material from the church has a quote in it about the fact that we really don't know which stories in the OT are true or not. The Songs of Solomon are not considered doctrinal in the LDS church. I also think there would be some question about a donkey that talks. A prophet that sends out bears to attack children who made fun of his bald head, and several other stories. Then there are some stories that are just almost impossible to understand or accept, but we MUST accept them or else it throws everything else we believe in. We MUST believe in the flood, even though it is now considered impossible to inhabit the earth from a single spot. We MUST belive in the Tower of Babel because without it, the Book of Mormon would have something in it that was not true. Since the Book of Mormon is true, it provides backwards proof that the Flood and the Tower of Babel really happened. Really... Really.... Don't believe it?? Well... I have a hard time with it as well. I guess the answer to your question is... There are portions of the Bible that LDS doctrine accepts that are NOT true.

Funny, of all the ways that I would expect a prophet to reveal God's will to his people, having a televised conversation with Mike Wallace would not be it. It is amazing to me that people could think this is how Pres Hinckley would choose to communicate to all the members of the church...

We have a problem with this in our current ward. It is very obvious that the wife is being consulted on callings. She knows of many callings before the call has been made. It is very clear that there is pillow talk going on. I think this probably happens more often than not. Sometimes it is a good thing, sometime not. Often the wife of the Bishop has information about the women in the ward that the bishop doesn't know. It is often said that callings are more about information than inspiration and I think the wife of the Bishop knows much about what is going on in the ward.

So.... He gave a talk that he has since recounted, the church as said is incorrect and it has breezed the fan of controversy world wide. During the talk, he told the Bishop of his own ward to never plan an activity that cost as much money as one taken in the ward the previous summer. In my mind the Bishop would now be at will to plan an expensive trip. He was told not to by a GA, and the in the news paper, the instructions were re-counted. I think the Bishop now has free reign to ignore the advice given him by a member of his ward. Should take some of the heat off the planning committee for next year.

Joseph Smith also said: “We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them [even] if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself, should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told do by their presidents they should do it without any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves.” (Joseph Smith, Millennial Star, Vol 14, Number 38, pages 593-595).