bytebear

I find the idea that the Earth had a baptism of water to be a beautiful doctrine.

I've done LA to Logan, and hit as many temples as I could.  LA, Newport Beach, San Diego, Redlands, Las Vegas, St George, etc.

As to the creeds being an abomination, my take is this.  I believe the Lord warned against wolves entering in with the sheep, and as such, they began to deceive the church members and after time introduced ideas not in accordance with doctrine.  The creeds themselves are abominable for two reasons.  1) they canonized doctrine without authority.  No apostle nor prophet wrote them. and 2) they contain canonized concepts that are simply false (not all, but some).  And so the Lord looks upon them as incorrect teachings, canonized without His authority.

Here is what our official Topical Guide lists as Bible verses to reference.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/tg/apostasy-of-the-early-christian-church?lang=eng&letter=A

 
changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant, Isa. 24:5.
this people draw near me with their mouth, Isa. 29:13.
darkness shall cover the earth, Isa. 60:2.
a famine … of hearing the words of the Lord, Amos 8:11.
his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, Matt. 13:25.
saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many, Matt. 24:5.
shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, Matt. 24:24.
his disciples went back, and walked no more with him, John 6:66.
shall grievous wolves enter in among you, Acts 20:29.
there be divisions among you, 1 Cor. 11:18.
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him, Gal. 1:6.
who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey, Gal. 3:1.
shall not come, except there come a falling away first, 2 Thes. 2:3.
some having swerved have turned aside, 1 Tim. 1:6.
giving heed to seducing spirits, 1 Tim. 4:1.
all they which are in Asia be turned away from me, 2 Tim. 1:15.
Who concerning the truth have erred, 2 Tim. 2:18.
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power, 2 Tim. 3:5.
turn away their ears from the truth … unto fables, 2 Tim. 4:4.
profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, Titus 1:16.
From whence come wars and fightings among you, James 4:1.
false prophets also among the people, 2 Pet. 2:1.
being led away with the error of the wicked, 2 Pet. 3:17.
now are there many antichrists, 1 Jn. 2:18.
many false prophets are gone out into the world, 1 Jn. 4:1.
certain men crept in … denying the only Lord God, Jude 1:4.
which say they are apostles, and are not, Rev. 2:2.
thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, Rev. 3:16.
to make war with the saints, Rev. 13:7.
 

As to the creeds being an abomination, my take is this.  I believe the Lord warned against wolves entering in with the sheep, and as such, they began to deceive the church members and after time introduced ideas not in accordance with doctrine.  The creeds themselves are abominable for two reasons.  1) they canonized doctrine without authority.  No apostle nor prophet wrote them. and 2) they contain canonized concepts that are simply false (not all, but some).  And so the Lord looks upon them as incorrect teachings, canonized without His authority.

Thank you all for all of your responses thus far. This question reached a conclusion/answer in our Ward recently.
Last week in Ward Council, with Stake Leadership there (Ward Conference), this topic was brought up in a big way. Our Bishop sat quite as we all talked about it. Once we had finished our thoughts, he said (paraphrasing):
"I love the priests in our Ward (with tears starting to come), this problem is not from a lack of understanding that they should go, they are very painfully aware that they should be going on missions... it is a result of them struggling with personal problems - sin and being too nervous too fully open up about it and get things back on track."
Tender/sad moment for him.

Your body is a temple.  And it truly is.  And we should respect it as such.  I think if one of our temples were sold, or lost to another church, we would want the space and building to be treated with dignity and reverence.  I see the same with any human body.

I think there is more to think about. The 8 witnesses were physical witnesses.  They handed the plates but no angels, no visions.  The 3 witnesses were spiritual witnesses with angelic visions.  I believe that the Lord often has a spiritual (Melchizedek) aspect and a temporal (Aaronic) aspect.  Also, three witnesses may also have been required in a similar way that Peter, James and John were special witnesses of Christ.  Maybe it required 3.

All speculation of course.

I think the "men on the moon" story was a joke that was take seriously only by anti-Mormons.

I take it the subject changed from garments?

I take it the subject changed from garments?

I was going to suggest the Getty Center.  Definitely a thing to do in LA.  So much better than the standard tourist stuff.  Also the Huntington Library and botanical gardens in Pasadena are spectacular.

I think it's more than that.  Policies of who could go on a mission changed, I think in the late 90s to early 00s.  At that point, anyone who had broken the law of chastity was basically guaranteed they could not go on a mission.  That was relaxed a little in around the mid 00s and then came the apocalypse.
They started asking a WHOLE LOT of unrelated gospel questions to determine if one could go on a mission or not.  Anyone who had any number of physical, mental, or emotional difficulties was barred from going it seems at the Stake or higher level (Bishop have no say in this).   Those who are borderline on certain things might or might not go.  Sometimes they are given trial missions (2-3 month missions on a trial basis) and if they do well they can go...however...these individuals are HIGHLY discouraged from going already.
These measures got MUCH more strictly enforced when the missionary age went down.  I'm not sure if there is so much that the youth are dwindling as much as it is that these restrictive policies are cutting down the numbers so strongly as to cause this dwindling.  I think they were reinforced and focused on when the age went down because of how many young men were trying to go on missions and to try to get a handle on the numbers.  NOW...I think it may be more of a detriment than helpful...that may just be me though.

A couple things to consider.  The church has much more strict requirements to serve a mission. 30 years ago, when I was on my mission, there were missionaries who really shouldn't have been there, for emotional reasons, or because they had fairly sinful pasts.  One missionary was an alcoholic and the mission president would check on him personally.  Back then, the idea was if you were a wayward child a mission would straighten you up.  That just isn't the case.  So, yes, a lot more missionaries either don't go or return home early.  That coupled with a casualness of sexuality, where kids are far more prone to get into trouble before age 19 (now 18).  Probably another reason they lowered the age, honestly. 

One of my best friends had OCD, really bad, and had a ton of quirks.  He sadly passed away about 4 years ago.  After dealing with him for so long, I can handle any one's quirks.  So I feel like I am immune to such behaviors. 

It reminds me of how a social group I would hang out with, dinner parties, movie nights etc.  It was large enough that people would come and go over the years.  One guy showed up, and he was a bit socially awkward, and kind of odd, and of course, you wanted to avoid him.  Well, I eventually got to know him and found out he has Asberger's syndrome, which explains the quirkiness, and he ended up being a great friend. 

So, my advice is this.  Grin and bear it, and maybe get to know people you normally would avoid.  Most people just want to be listened to, and to have a friend.  So be a friend, even when it's uncomfortable.  And you will learn to adapt to annoying people, and maybe make a friend or two in the process.

A couple things to consider.  The church has much more strict requirements to serve a mission. 30 years ago, when I was on my mission, there were missionaries who really shouldn't have been there, for emotional reasons, or because they had fairly sinful pasts.  One missionary was an alcoholic and the mission president would check on him personally.  Back then, the idea was if you were a wayward child a mission would straighten you up.  That just isn't the case.  So, yes, a lot more missionaries either don't go or return home early.  That coupled with a casualness of sexuality, where kids are far more prone to get into trouble before age 19 (now 18).  Probably another reason they lowered the age, honestly. 

Like so many things related to the great plan of God, there is a spiritual and a physical aspect (physical death/spiritual death, spiritual creation/physical creation).  It makes perfect sense to me that there would be a spiritual atonement in the garden, and a physical one on the cross.

Why do people live unhealthy lifestyles, even though they know what to do to be healthy?

We continue to have the same personality, and temperament in the next life.  If you are resistant to repentance now, you will be in the next life, and so we will be free to chose but I think people who have chosen in this life will not be suddenly persuaded, just because they are spirits. 

If you can't resist the temptation now, how can you trust each other for 50+ more years?  Because there will be times when temptations come around.

Only when it involves a president who is a Democrat.

Sometimes I forget what it's like to live in Utah.   I live in California, and have for about 20 years, but I grew up in Salt Lake City.   I have a ROKU instead of cable, and it allows me to watch pretty much any news broadcasts in the country, so last night after my local news ended, I switched over to KUTV (I think), and the headline was "first audio interview with the victim."   Here in California, this is a non-story, as in, no one at all would have heard of it, or even cared.  So, it was a bit shocking that the news was covering it so salaciously.  It came across as more gossip than news.

One thing I note is that the church didn't select these men because of their cultural and ethnicity, nor were they picked on the color of their skin or their ancestry.   They were chosen by the Lord to fill a very real global need as the church expands into South America and Asia.  They were the right people for the right job.  Just read their resumes, and see what their strengths are, and it's pretty clear why they are where they are.  And it has nothing to do with ethnic diversity within the hierarchy.

Most people don't have a psychologist or therapist.  Going to an ecclesiastical leader (of any faith) is often their only option, so it's important that church leaders at the local level are trained and understand their role and responsibility to help the member find the right resources.  No different than a teacher, or even a boss.  Their primary role is not to give counseling in any professional manner, but they can and should counsel people whom they attend to, supervise, whatever.
 

Our house lives in anarchy.