RipplecutBuddha

I tried some of these moves....now I have bad knees....

I told you that logo would short-circut you somehow

At my job, customer service is translated to mean 'maximize the positive potential.' In other words, make the interaction with your customer the best it can be from the start. That way, when they start getting angry, loud, etc. you can stay pleasant and direct. At the same time, we're given generous leeway in pleasing an upset customer. If they're upset about the prices (something us rank-and-file are unable to control) we can offer up to 20% off their ticket if needed. If they ordered a meal, and found it inedible, we simply don't charge them for it. Sure this results in higher food costs, but then it's the cooks and servers that need to pick up their game, so the guest really shouldn't be charged anyway. The only time I've refused service to someone in my diner/hotel is when they're clearly too drunk to stand, let alone be socially appropriate, when they're abusive and vulgar from the start of their visit, or when they're causing trouble with other guests or disrupting the entire diner. I have had to call the police as well....

My favorite comment on the youtube site is "They're taking the hobbits, two eyes, and God."

I find it easier to please people if I lower their expectations.

Yeah, but you're a mod so it's your job to know where stuff goes. I'm not, so I can still claim legitimate male brainlessness due to mediocre exertion over time. and....hopefully people enjoy the song anyway....hehehe

I'm not convinced that ten hours is enough time to discover where the hobbits are being taken. I may have to watch it twice.

My powers of observation are crippled due to having just got off of work. Thanks pam

Since I didn't see a music thread, I thought I would put this here. I finally listened to the new album out by Dream Theater called A Dramatic Turn of Events. Now, DT is my favorite band of all time, and this song isn't typical of their stuff, but I was blown away by it and I just needed to share it here with my friends. (The best part is that it's entirely in my vocal range so I can sing it too ) However, rather than torture you with my singing, here's the song called This is The Life. Enjoy. Here's the lyrics as well In the heart of your most solemn barren night When your soul's turned inside out Have you questioned all the madness you invite What your life is all about Some of us choose to live gracefully Some can get caught in the maze And lose their way home This is the life we belong to Our gift divine Have you ever wished that you were someone else Traded places in your mind It's only a waste of your time Some of us choose to live gracefully Some can get caught in the maze And lose their way home This is the life we belong to Our gift divine Feed the illusion you dream about Cast out the monsters inside Life begins with an empty slate Fragile left in the hands of fate Driven by love and crushed by hate Until the day The gift is gone And shadows remain Some of us choose to live gracefully Some can get caught in the maze And lose their way home Memories will fade Time races on What will they say After you're gone This is the life we belong to Our gift divine Our gift divine

The only thing that causes me concern about the material is that many approach questioning the LDS doctrines as though we never ask these questions of ourselves; as though we never examined the other (and varied) explanations of where the Book of Mormon came from. I myself have no problem at all with someone who disagrees with what I believe. The vast majority of planet earth happens to hold the same opinion in general, so it's not a rare event. I think it's the disagreements, when held respectfully, that can spur us to deeper investigations of our faith and why we accept such unique beliefs. Rather what upsets me, or in most cases leaves me disappointed in the result of someone's hard work in generating a book, is when the tone of the effort is thoroughly condemning of us. I think the reason for this could be attributed to what many Evangelicals see as the consequence of being a Mormon, as PC mentioned. Apostacy is not a good thing from any Christian perspective. However, the consequences of apostacy vary greatly between LDS and Evangelical ideas. When we discuss apostacy, the consequences result in a loss of glory and blessings. Yes we are damned, yet we can still be found in a place of happiness. It's a 'what could have been, what should have been' situation. For Evangelicals, when one discusses apostacy, the consequence is hell. It's hard to imagine a worse result. From that view, the strong language used makes some sense whether they're protecting their own, or seeking to bring us to their faith. After all, I don't think it would be right to want to see anyone in hell.

Some of them do go after other non-protestant Christian faiths, such as Catholicism, Jehovah's Witness, etc. It's these authors that I think fit into the mold I'm discussing. In those cases, I don't think it's so much the specific discussions they're interested in. All that's desired is to make their position stronger by assailing any dissenting views. I also think the practice is disgusting, whatever the rationale or goal may be.

I was perusing Amazon the other day to find books to load onto my new kindle. I was searching the LDS collections when I came across an anti-mromon book that had a fascinating review attatched to it. The last sentence reads; This book is clearly to keep Protestant flocks from looking too far outside their own world, not for getting LDS Christians to move away from their faith. This started me thinking, is there a chance we may have mis-interpreted the actual intent of Anti-Mormon authors? Are they all seeking to destroy the LDS religion, or are some of them instead seeking to bolster their own populations by painting a 'black sheep' as it were? For instance, could this explain why so many cling to the 19th century claims that have been addressed repeatedly to this very day? Is it possible some aren't so interested in the actual debate so much as they are interested in highlighting the questions to illustrate a percieved 'danger'?

Part of the repentance process is feeling true shame for our sins. As much as we seek to escape that, it is a necessary element. I'm not saying that we must parade our sins before men (that could not only wreak havoc upon already soft testimonies, but pervert the entire repentance process into a 'who's sins are worse' contest). At the same time, we need to acknowledge that our sinful acts were wrong and that sorrow and shame for them must be felt, else we don't truly understand how wrong they were in the first place. In my own experience, repentance means that doing, feeling, and suffering whatever must happen in order to recieve forgiveness is a must-happen scenario. I would rather not be judged of my sins by my fellow man, but I'm the one that made the bone-headded move in the first place. I brought it upon myself. Still, the shame we feel for our sins is but the most minute fraction of what Christ felt in the Garden. Christ is not asking much of us to obtain forgiveness. I'm not saying they should 'suck it up and deal with it' (even though that's pretty much what I tell myself), but I am saying that guilt and shame for sins is part of the repentance process, and praying for strength to endure what must be done to obtain forgiveness is the best course. Christ prayed for strength to endure the Atonement, surely we have the same right to call upon God in our extremity as well.

If you had taken the time to read the next line in my post, you'd already know that I agree with your statement. Way to be thorough.

Maybe if we remember that President Hinkley said this, as quoted from the OP "Now, brethren, I want to make it very clear that I am not prophesying, that I am not predicting years of famine in the future. But I am suggesting that the time has come to get our houses in order…There is a portent of stormy weather ahead to which we had better give heed...That’s all I have to say about it, but I wish to say it with all the emphasis of which I am capable.” My own father could see the very same problems building that President Hinkley saw. Countless people saw the same things, and also offered voices of warning. What I got from those talks was that we have been told to live in a prepared manner for quite a while, and yet too many of us aren't doing so. We're too busy living for now, rather than preparing for future events. For example, my younger sister and her husband had to live off of their saved money and food storage while he was out of work, nearly a year. The great calamities the prophets have been warning us about don't need to be world-wide in impact in order to throw our personal lives into chaos. How many members have faced foreclosure on a large home they didn't need and couldn't afford? How many members have had cars reposessed that they didn't need and couldn't afford? How many members lived off of their credit, rather than their actual income? Finally, how many of us really do try to heed the warnings and prepare ahead of time for temporal problems? We've delayed long enough, and now that the problems are becoming more and more widespread, how many of us would be in far better shape financially had we simply heeded the warnings all along? It turns out God really does know what's going on and how to survive the troubles of life.

I'll let Christ tell you what he thinks of fence-sitters Revelations3:13-16 13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. 14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. The entire validity of the LDS church rests upon the shoulders of Joseph Smith. If he was a real prophet of God, then the LDS church is necessary and led by Christ today, whose church we claim it to be. If he was not a prophet of God, then all his works are an abomination in the sight of God, for Joseph Smith, in this possibility, claimed direction and authority that he never posessed. This is why we have always been counceled to obtain our own testimonies of what really is true about the LDS church, especially Joseph Smith. Without the bedrock of personal revelation in our own lives, we will always be 'tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine'. It's hard to accept that life does come with absolutes, but it does and they apply equally to everyone. The LDS church is either the true Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, including all the implications that such a title generates, or it is not connected with Jesus Christ in any real way beyond the name in the title. You have to determine which is the case on your own. Everyone else has to, has always had to, and always will have to until the final judgement begins.

2Nephi 9:28 28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish. Here's what it all boils down to DKM88. You either have a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet or you do not. If you have a testimony that Joseph Smith truly was a chosen Prophet of God, then the Book of Abraham (by rational conclusion) is every bit true and accurate. This would mean that what you currently believe about the Book of Abraham is inaccurate. On the other hand, if you do not have a testimony that Joseph Smith was a true Prophet of God, then everything he said and did must be called into question. In or out, that's the choice. Prayerfully consider both and take the question to God the Father himself. When you are willing to accept the answer, whatever that answer is, he will give it to you in an unmistakeable way. Until then, you'll never know for sure. I should know. I spent six years not knowing for sure. I got my answer and you can too. We cannot prove anything to you here. If anything about the LDS church could have been proven true beyond rational question, it would have already been done. That's why religion (especially the LDS church) relies upon faith. If you cannot exercise faith, then religion will be a challenge to you no matter where you turn. The fact that your ideas have been consistently challenged since Joseph Smith's day shows there's more to the issue than what you've considered thus far. I would study it out further with serious prayer before reaching any conclusions.

The power of words has a spiritual impact in my view. Words mean things. Matt 12:36-37 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. As an old commercial on the radio said, 'Whether it's fair or not, how you speak says something about you.' If one is given to lighthearted talk about sexual topics, then that person can be seen as one who does not regard sexuality as a very serious issue. I use this as an example, but it ranges through vulgarity in general to sexism, racism, and any other potentially offensive attitude. If something is important to us, we tend to not joke about it. Having said that, I understand that there are exceptions, and they may be more pervasive than generally thought. At the same time, I'm talking about other people's perceptions rather than the real attitude of the one engaging in the light conversation. If all you do is tell sexist jokes at work, what are the odds people think you take your marriage seriously? Finally, I have no doubt Christ was posessed of a sense of humor. I seriously doubt he ever used it at the expense of an innocent person's dignity or self-image. On the topic of vulgarity, I'm of the common opinion that if that's all you can think to use to express yourself, it is a sad display of the lack of intelligent thought or effort of expression. I should know, I hear it all the time with the guests that check into the hotel.

When I reach the end of the rainbow, as fortune may intend, Murphy will be there to tell me the pot is at the other end. --Unknown

Since they both love us with their whole being, I don't see a way to love one more than the other. They each are doing all they can to bring us back to their presence. Loving one over the other does not seem to be productive beyond the fact that Christ constantly pointed our love and adoration to the Father rather than himself. I don't see that loving Christ as much as Heavnly Father (ie. with all our hearts and souls) would detract from the Gospel at all.

probably, but then at least I'll be getting exercise....no need in becoming a fat spirit

Haven't watched a single episode yet. Can't say I plan on checking it out, either. Well, maybe after I die. I figure ghost hunting will be a lot easier then.

I thought that General Conference talks were considered scriputre. We don't add them all to the canon of the Standard Works, yet they are scripture for the next six months of the year, or until the next GC.

So there's this dyslexic devil worshipper....seems he sold his soul to Santa.....

I own the DVD of the movie, and my take on it is quite different, though I understand where you're coming from. The reason I bought the movie is because it is a fair depiction of the cost of freedom in this world. Think on all the wars the Nephites had to wage in defense of their freedoms. Were they any less horrifying or violent? The truth is that freedom needs to be defended up to and including the use of extreme violence and war. Now, I don't watch Saving Private Ryan very often because it is a very violent film (I prefer comedies and sci-fi much more). At the same time, the violence in that film serves an important purpose in displaying what was needed to defend the freedoms of the European nations. War is not pleasant, nor should it be glamorized. However I feel it is a necessary element of this life and we cannot ignore it without risking our freedoms. Finally, not all violent films serve a good purpose in this way. In fact, I would say that most any other violent film would find me agreeing with you (Vort) completely in all aspects. The Saw series, Final Destination series, etc... Films that use violence and profanity as the core element are a tragic waste of time and talent on the part of all involved in the production. We are capable of far better.