cofchristcousin

This is interesting for me. Community of Christ used to have the 1 patriarchal blessing policy. Around 10 years ago it was opened up for Continuing Life Blessings and we can now have more than one, the decision made with Patriarch (called Evangelists now in Community of Christ). This is an area where our two faiths have closer similarities.

I don't believe depression has a purpose or is a punishment or is intended as lesson-teacher. In my thinking, it's when brain chemistry, and your life struggles cascade downward, each thing taking you a little lower. It takes meds, learning how to block defeating thoughts, coping strategies, and time and more time for your brain to heal and experience joy again. I think creating a support system of trusted friends and professionals helps you cope and find a balances place again.

I listen to this song based on that quote everyday. It's on my mixed cd in my truck.

My perspective is that Jesus actually lived the 2 greatest commandments. He Loved God, and He loved neighbors, even enemies. His close communion with God allowed him to know his own heart better, and to Love beyond his human defense mechanisms, self-centered and self-righteous motives. When Love is honest, humble, centered, then it is true, honest, pure from the toxic affects of being theologically comfortable, generous to the point of self sacrificing, faithful to the point of risking his own life in challenging conventional wisdom and the powers that Be, and more. I don't know how or why Jesus was able and willing to do this, but I'm grateful.

I came up an INFJ too. We tried this on my denomination's website and 5 of the 12 participating so far are INFJ. So I've got this theory brewing. Do you think certain kinds of personalities are drawn to churches with a compatible personality? or the opposite? Or... maybe INFJ's and those more introvert might participate on forums like this more than other personalities. We can use writing to connect but not be drained by alot of face to face interaction. just pondering... :)

Silence Luke 15 Prayers Here is a link to the acceptance speech.

I'm a moderator on the Community of Christ board, and I know the frustration of a person coming in to "set us straight" and be deceptive about their motives and background. Think Trolls. I didn't want to give that impression here, so I wanted to it to be clear what my affiliations were. The cousin part comes from visiting the Kirtland area. On one Priesthood retreat we visited the LDS village and the sisters greated us their "cousins". At the Temple I have overheard many a parent explaining to their children that our churches are cousins. I thought that was cool, not of the same household, but family at some level. So, I'm cofchristcousin, aka Stacie

I think you are probably right. I was addressing Hemi's statement. I don't know that there is a case here, it's above my head. My thinking is that the issue will come to another vote by proposition, and gay marriage will come that way. It might be less controversial if it comes by vote. The vote gets closer each time, this time 52-48 percent. Next time it will likely pass, partly because younger people largely have no problem with marriage equality. Each year there are more young voters.

Hemi, the quoted ruling is not all encompassing. The key is Strict Scrutiny. It's a legal term that has certain qualifications found here at wiki. wiki is easy, but you can verify it at a legal dictionary. Strict scrutiny - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The state can deny the fundamental right of marriage to a group of people if there is a good reason. We do not allow minors to marry. There are good reasons for that limitation of the right to marriage, that pass the test of strict scrutiny. In some places close relatives may not marry. There were good reasons for that limitation, but not so much now that there is genetic testing. If challenged, it is likely that close relatives would be allowed to marry. Today the question is asking if there is a good legal reason to deny same sex marriage. The reason must pass the Strict Scrutiny test. Tomorrow the question might be about polygamy, and those dynamics would face the strict scrutiny test.

First cousins can marry in some places. The reason for not allowing it has been based on the likelyhood of birth defects to their children. that was a compelling reason for the State to make those marriages illegal. I believe only 20 some states have that law. If challenged, I believe those laws would fail because modern genetic testing would protect the children. Polygamy adds more dynamics than simply a marriage between two people of the same sex. I do not know enough about the issue to stand for it or against it. My thinking is that it is a exploitive relationship for the women involved, but I don't know if my argument would pass the strict scrutiny test required by the 14th amendment. Regardless, gay marriage is decided on it's own merit legally. Slippery slope arguements are part of the public conversation, but not the judicial deliberations.

Animals do not have constitutional rights and cannot sign contracts as is common knowledge. This kind of rhetoric inflames an already difficult discussion and makes respectful dialog virtually impossible.

This is a real question, and is an issue for my church and on an individual level as well. If you define ill will and persecution of your/and my denomination as the cost of doing the Lord's work, How does one ever hear legitimate and deserved criticism of your actions? What breaks through that defense when necessary?

You are right in that I was wrong. :) The argument seems to be whether prop 8 revised the constitution which requires the 2/3 vote, whereas an amendment only requires a simple majority. The position put forth is that prop 8 took away a fundamental right and the proper and legal way to do that is by way of a constitutional revision. Is this your understanding of the question being debated Hemi?

It is a constitutional representative republic. A constitutional republic is a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.

The vote was not binding on the judicial process. They were just putting into the record a protest that constitutional changes cannot be made by a simple majority. and Prop 8 is viewed to have done that.

Last weekend my denomination held a class on the book of revelation. In the opinion of our Theologian the 7 heads/10 horns represented 1st century ancient rome. The book Amazon.com: Breaking the Code: Understanding the Book of Revelation: Bruce M. Metzger: Books explains this in further detail. At wikipedia, many interpretations are listed. This particular view is called the historical-critical view. The Historical-Critical view The historical-critical method treats Revelation as a text and attempts to understand Revelation in its first century historical context within the genre of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature. This approach considers the text as an address to seven historical communities in Asia Minor. Under this view, assertions that "the time is near" are to be taken literally by those communities. Consequently the work is viewed as a warning not to conform to contemporary Greco-Roman society which John "unveils" as beastly, demonic and subject to divine judgment. There is further information on these topics in the entries on higher criticism and apocalyptic literature. The acceptance of Revelation into the canon is itself the result of a historical process, essentially no different from the career of other texts. The eventual exclusion of other contemporary apocalyptic literature from the canon may throw light on the unfolding historical processes of what was officially considered orthodox, what was heterodox, what was even heretical. Interpretation of meanings and imagery are anchored in what the historical author intended and what his contemporary audience inferred; a message to Christians not to assimilate into the Roman Imperial Culture was John's central message. Thus, his letter (written in the apocalyptic genre) is pastoral in nature, and the symbolism of Revelation is to be understood entirely within its historical, literary and social context. Critics study the conventions of apocalyptic literature and events of the 1st century to make sense of what the author may have intended. During a discussion about Revelation on 23 August 2006, Pope Benedict XVI remarked: "The seer of Patmos, identified with the apostle, is granted a series of visions meant to reassure the Christians of Asia amid the persecutions and trials of the end of the first century."[30]

An honest question: If thinking it and feeling it are ok, but saying it in public is considered hate, when does it become hate? To Jesus, just thinking something was considered doing it.

Buttars, combined with the Utah legislature voting down the gay inheritance and visitation bills severely compromises the credibility that LDS are not anti-gay, just concerned about the redefinition of the word marriage.

I like to read all about the context of a passage, and put myself in the shoes of the first ones to hear the passage. I want to understand what it meant in the times and for the people who first received the message. It's an eye-opener and quite convicting sometimes. Other times mercy comes through that isn't apparent when read in a 21st century perspective.

Hi GNews4BadTimes, Cool name! I am a member of Community of Christ and can answer from my perspective. The LDS and RLDS, now Community of Christ were one for only 14 years. After the Nauvoo period and Joseph Smith, Jr was killed there were some people who did not follow Brigham Young. Eventually Joseph Smith III grew up, and agreed to lead a Reorganization of the Church. We have grown into 2 quite different denominations. We have never practiced polygamy, however we do have some members from polygamist tribes in India. They are baptized and full members, and they agree to not take any further wives. We don't ask them to divorce their current wives because divorced women would not be able to survive socially or economically in that culture. The Community of Christ and the LDS share scriptures in common. The Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants. Our Doctrine and Covenants is pretty much the same until the Nauvoo times, and from then on each of our Prophets have added counsel to the church. The Book of Mormon is not used as a test of faith. Some members believe it to ancient history of this continent, some see it as a spiritual allegory, and some do not use it at all. This is a current struggle in our denomination. As has also been mentioned, since reorganizing we have not practiced baptism for the dead or sealed marriages. We ordain women as well as men. Our practice of calling is different too. I believe in the LDS there are automatic callings to deacon, Teacher, priest, etc . In Community of Christ people are called at any time in their life, to an office appropriate to their gifts. A person might be called in their teens, or later in life, or not at all. I think we have a different denominational culture as well. There is not alot of oversight and authority over the members lives. Generally, we don't smoke or drink alcohol, and Priesthood must not do either. Forty years ago our leaders began a deep and faithful self-examination of what we proclaim as a church. We do not see ourselves as the one true church, and we are moving in the direction of focusing on the Kingdom/Zion lifestyle, and working in peace, justice and reconciliation. Hope this helps, and I can clarify stuff if there are questions. edit: Here is our most recent inspired counsel from our Prophet. I thought it might be helpful to get insights into where we sense God is calling us. Doctrine and Covenants Section 163

beloved, prodigal, peacemaker, exhausted caregiver

Those rights are built in to civil marriage, but require legal services and additional expenses for gay partners to have those same protections.

I'm glad to see these responses. The article had me concerned. My primary exposure to LDS is here, my denomination's forum and the prop 8 coverage. With a few exceptions, most people I have encountered in these places don't have an issue with the things named in the article.

Guv, at odds with most Utahns, backs civil unions for gays - Salt Lake Tribune Just wondering if you folks feel the article characterizes the Utah situation accurately. Do you believe most Utahn's would reject civil unions, with hospital visitation and inheritance rights?

Hi, The Lds are not the only ones with the "recovering" groups. I have run into recovering fundamentalists, and adventists and jehovah witnesses. I'm sure there are recovering community of christ groups. Even recovering Christians. Some are justified from their experience, when they are become captive to particularly legalistic church environments.