RipplecutBuddha

just a re-post of my earlier comments. The benefits of MJ can be found in several other activities/herbs/medicines. As such, the recreational use of it is unjustified IMO when weighed against the long-term impact of regular use. In the areas where it is clearly demonstrated to be an effective medicine for specific treatments, I'm all for it so long as the use is monitored as would any other doctor-prescribed medication.

Larry, Curly, and Moe? What about the Three Amigoes? or the Three Musketeers? (which I thought was odd...that a musketeer would use a sword rather than....say....a musket.....) The Three Tenors? Daniel Radcliff, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint?

it's the epic beard.....because these guys are sooo busy, they simply cannot take the time to address the facial hair....or other possible hygene matters....*shudder*

I would watch it....but only if they remembered to go into the future and kill captain Kirk before he and his gang did the slingshot around the sun to go back in time for a couple lousy whales....

Maybe that dude in Arizona can send some of his 'no' balloons up....

The LDS Church does exist legally, as it was formally organized April 6 1830 with six members participating in the first meeting conducted by Joseph Smith Jr. This process was required for the state of New York to recognize the Church as a legitimate religion. I cannot think offhand if the church has ever been challenged on its legal identity since that time, so yes, the church is a legal identity by trademark and copyright, but it is also a religion in practice, doctrines, rules, and behavior. Someone either misuderstood the history of the early LDS church, or they were trolling for a flame war. Hopefully the first was the case.

Source please? I've never heard anything close to this before.

Sorry, but nothing sounds cool in Klingon...it sounds like someone has something stuck at the back of their throat.

*Pushes his finger salad away*

The general issue with many social matters is that they are quite contrary to the doctrines of the LDS Church. At the same time though, we need to emphasize that it is the sin that is evil, not the person, whether we're discussing homosexuality, mosdesty, WoW, or any other volatile social subject. As such, during many of the related threads, there's often someone that in some way is indicating that it's time the LDS church 'loosen up' or 'get with the times' as it were. This can be a strong point of contention for those that accept the Word of God as it is given to us, rather than as some would have it 'really' be. For myself, I tend to be better in these threads if I keep my emotional content in check, and simply address the facts of the matter in discussion. It's a tough thing to do though, just like a lot of other good ideas we ought to be doing.

There's a problem with the argument though. If MMJ were legalized for all the above-board reasons, then the only people who could get it would be those with an immediate medical need for its use. Meaning that all the recreational users would still be out in the cold legally....thus illegal MJ sales would continue. The crime associated with illegal MJ use would still continue. The LDS church has no problems with any legal medicine, so long as it is prescribed, and monitored by a medical professional for dosage and results of use. The LDS church has a serious problem with recreational use of ANY drug; legal, illegal, otc, or prescription. Regular recreational use of any drug (including alcohol) has a negative effect on the human body in the long term including MJ. I have known my share of pot-smokers in my life, and the effects are rather obvious. Even if it were legalized, I doubt the LDS Church would support the recreational use of MJ, since they don't support the recreational use of tobacco or alcohol as it stands now.

Christ taught that in old times, the law was to not commit adultery. But in his Gospel even thinking lustfully after a woman was a sin. Clearly our thoughts are important in the mind of Christ. Thoughts lead to actions, and if thoughts are not restrained, the action will happen eventually. Having said that, so long as it's just in our thoughts, we can pray for help to control them and take the sacrament to obtain forgiveness. If it's a constant problem, speaking with the bishop may be an option, depending on the individual.

The oldest humanoid races are found in africa. The Garden of Eden was in Missouri. Seems it could be either way, but since we aren't fully versed on exactly what process God used in creating our bodies, the humanoid races in africa could have been Adam and Eve's children, or they could have not been. Since plate tectonics have shifted the continents (and it's even mentioned in the bible) There's no reason to discard the thought that Missouri could have been an equatorial area at first. More to the point....what difference does it make? In my experience, people that bring up stuff like this do so just to get the chance to call anyone speaking favorably for the white race as rascist. Because we all know, you can't make fun of a white guy and be racist, because whites are racist, they deserve it. I doubt this is the case in the OP's situation, but these issues just turn me off inellecutally because there's no intellectually valid point or benefit to them in any way. Nor is there any spiritual benefit to them. If race shouldn't matter, why do we talk about it so much?

From one perspective it is more important to us because of what it represents regarding our faith. One thing being the fact that it represents the true love of God applying to all his children, regardless of where they are. Another thing it represents is the continuing revelation from God to his chosen Prophets on earth today. Yet another thing it represents is the ongoing process of expanding the volume of scripture as needed. Because all these things are mostly unique to the LDS church, the Book of Mormon is a very important volume of scripture. However, considering what the Bible contains; from Adam and Eve to the Law of Moses, to the very birth, life, ministry, and atonement of our Savior Jesus Christ, to the revelations regarding the last days....the Bible is rightly placed as a priceless volume of God's word. Doctrinally, there is no way to place one above the other. They support and testify of Jesus Christ as a unified record. Add to them the other volumes of LDS scripture; the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, and the testimony that Jesus is Lord and Savior of the world is an unmistakeable message that we have declared to the world from Joseph Smith's day to our time now. Revealed truth from God is a treasure, and because we regard both the Bible and the Book of Mormon as revealed truth from God, we treasure them both.

The food at hooters is good. It's not that good though....burger king makes better burgers IMHO, and buffalo wings....well, you can get them anywhere now. If you're looking for great food, there are lots of better places to eat.

Or, it could just need some time to mature. After all, the solution it's aimed at is a rather large issue in and of itself. Another possible direction is that it opens the way for other, simpler theories in the future. Being predictive is tricky no matter what, and as far as we've pushed our scientific abilities, we're going to have to get used to the outer edges of wisdom. We know the limits are within us, but they're also built into the universe we understand. There may be no physical barrier to the universe, but the structure of the universe and our own mental limits provide far more formidable barriers as it is.

maybe looking at it differently will help. Why would someone feel cheated if they found out the one who baptized them was not living church standards at the time? What would be the cause of the baptism not being valid? In my mind, for me to feel that way I would have to conclude that other people's sins can have a direct impact on my own spiritual worthiness before God. The problem with that idea is that it is completely contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Law of Moses, and every other dispensation of the Gospel. A priesthood holder knows he isn't worthy to perform a baptism, but he lies in the interview, and the Bishop gives the approval. Once approval is given, the ordinance is valid. The new member's worthiness is determined in a completely separate interview, and at no point have I ever heard of a bishop telling a new member, "By the way, if we find out the man baptising you is unworthy, we'll have to do it again." The unworthy priesthood holder must answer for his sins. The spiritual implications of those sins lie with him completely, and with nobody else. Once again, an example from the Book of Mormon regarding this is helpful. King Noah was given the priesthood, but he soon became wicked. He chose his own high priests, and presumably gave them the priesthood himself. One of those high priests was Alma Sr. At no point do we read of Alma recieving the priesthood from anyone else, yet his baptisms were accepted of God. Thus we have an example of an unworthy priesthood holder passing on proper athourity to a man that later demonstrated his worthiness to act in the name of God. Your friend needs to resort to the primary answers, read the scriptures, pray about the question, and talk to the bishop. The feeling is very understandable, but as they think on how they felt during and after the baptism, what the spirit was like, that also will help bring peace to their heart about this.

The only records we keep on any proxy work are those you indicate. Vital information to specifically identify the individual, what work was performed for them in the temple, and what dates the work was done. We cannot record whether they accepted the ordinance as that act, we believe, takes place in the spirit world by the individual themselves. There's no way for us to know how many people have accepted the ordinance work we've done in the temples, Jewish or otherwise. Further, such information is not what we are concerned with. We are only concerned with extending the opportunity to the individual for a decision to be made. We do keep track of what proxy work has been completed, however those numbers never have been, nor will they ever be, included in the population counts of the church. As Vort has repeatedly stated, whether someone views proxy work as offensive, is entirely their choice, however they must make a decision as to why they are offended. A. They can be offended if they view proxy work in the temple as actual and effectual work done that has a real consequence upon the dead. B. They can be offended if the proxy work defiles and/or disturbs the deceased in any real way physically. Since most people offended by proxy work in the temple are basing their decision on an emotional response, rational thinking rarely enters into the discussion. It's pretty safe to say most non-mormons don't view anything we do in the temple as valid in any way shape or form. As such, option A. is not a rational conclusion. It's also quite clear that the LDS church never has, nor will it ever physically effect the deceased in any way. The only presence of the deceased during a proxy ceremony is their name; something that cannot be taken from a deceased person at all. Nor does posession of a deceased person's name influence their physical remains at all. As such, option B. is also not a rational conclusion. So long as opponents maintain that their dislike of the practice is emotional in its basis, I have no problem with it at all. This is why I support the decision to not perform the proxy work for Holocaust victims. If someone just doesn't like the idea of it, cool.

The problem I see is that ex nihilo requires a creation from nothing. Even in the big bang theory, all matter already existed in a super-dense packet of energy...that also already existed. The big bang theory is the release of all known existence, including time, from such a packet that expanded into the three spatial dimensions and one dimension of time that we recognize as the universe we are in. According to the known laws of physics matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed in any way at all. The big bang theory does not support creation ex nihilo at all. Thus if the laws of physics are correct, (and I agree there is a possibility that they could be wrong in this instance) there is no way that God could have created anything from nothing. Further, not all Christians subscribe to creation ex nihilo, and there are other Christians besides the LDS church that disagree with it. This depends upon your definition of all-powerful. For instance, God cannot commit the sin of blasphemy. Such an act is impossible for him to accomplish. There are other ways in which God can be all-powerful, yet limited. For instance the atonement of Christ; If there were a better way to atone for the sin of all mankind, don't you think God would have used it instead? The reason Christ suffered the way he did is that there is no other process whereby atonement can be accomplished. However, let there be no doubt that God fully conquered sin and death itself through that glorious act; a clear case of being all-powerful indeed. The human mind cannot fully grasp the concept of eternity or infinity. It is a limitation within our own minds. That doesn't mean it isn't there. The human mind likewise cannot fully grasp the glory, power, and perfection of God. That doesn't mean he does not posess such qualities. However, through the Bible we are given glimpses of the attributes of God here and there, for as Christ stated "This is life eternal, that they might know the, the one true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." Which is more plausible from what standpoint? If you are approaching the question from the viewpoint of religious faith, your conclusions will vastly differ from a similiar examination from the viewpoint of scientific understanding. Even adjusting your examination to different religious viewpoints will render different results. Ultimately the truth must come from God himself, as he is the source of all truth and knowledge.

Violence is part of real life. By sheltering kids from it, we are distorting their view of how the world is. I absolutely agree that the level of graphic depictions needs to be considered greatly. At the same time, I was probably five when I can first recall learning that Nephi cut off a man's head. The weight of the actual act never really occured to me though. Why? Because Nephi was commanded of God to do so. Thus the focus was on the fact that there are very rare occasions where God will command someone to do something that would otherwise be very very wrong. But, when God commands and man obeys, that man is always right. I would absolutely agree with the OP if the sole point of violence in the BoM was for the sake of violence alone. However, the violence is always used as an example of a far more important realization. The Bible does this as well, such as the example of Samuel, the prophet of God, who hewed King Agag in pieces before the Lord because King Saul failed to do so as commanded of God. Not only did a man cut off someone else's head, the prophet of God also cut up the rest of the man's body as well!! The lesson there? Thus sayeth Samuel "To obey is greater than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." Also as in David and Goliath, Samson, and the Atonement of Christ. Stated another way, if the Book of Mormon's inclusion of violence was akin to the inclusion of violence in, say, the Saw movies, then yes I would absolutely keep it from my kids. However neither the Book of Mormon nor the Bible are structured as a horror movie. Neither one uses violence to its own end. As such the education of children about the reality of violence, as well as the consequences connected to it serve to expand the understanding of children to a greater reality than what they would otherwise gain.

Are you wanting this because it's what you want to do, or are you wanting to do this so you can be like all your friends? If you truly feel the urge to continue your education, then work through the process with your husband. Despite not being able to bear your own children, there is always a high demand for qualified adoptive/foster parents. There are many children in this world that could benefit from a loving home. You can also look at finishing your degree as a part-time student. Yes it will draw out the expenses longer, but the smaller amounts will be easier to manage at the same time. You can even look at taking on-line courses offered thorugh the universities in your area. Back to my main point though, take time and prayer to sort out where you really stand with this. There are many options to look at in building a family with your husband. Gaining an education is wise and encouraged by the General Authorities, but make sure you're doing it for you. You have no need to justify your life, nor to use other's lives as a standard against your own. Heavenly Father knows your needs and desires. Take them to him and he will show you happiness you never imagined.

A further study of the term used in Genesis (I cannot place the word immediately, so someone may help me with this) also indicates that the traditional english translation to 'create' would also be accurately translated to the english word 'organize'. In some people's view, this would be the more accurate translation. As such, it may be that creation ex nihilo was never the intended conclusion. Even more interesting is the Law of the Conservation of Energy in physics which states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed by any means; it can only change from one form to another. All the same, a supreme being that can merely speak and have matter and energy obey his will is just as miraculous and marvelous in my mind as a supreme being that could create from nothing at all. I prefer the former myself as it demonstrates to me that God operates within the laws of the universe that we understand, even if said understanding reaches only to a very limited degree.

But only on altertnate back-to-back leap years with a friday the 13th in June on a full moon while a penguin is in office as president of the united states.

What you should know about 2011 is that it is a year that fits nicely between 2010 and 2012. The issues we are facing are the same that we have been counciled on for years if not decades by the General Authorities. The warning cry to always be prepared for the worst is not a new one, nor is it something only the LDS church has been talking about. Those who will hear will respond if they haven't already begun. Those who will not hear will not prepare, no matter what the warnings are, nor how serious the scene becomes.

I agree. I just wanted to be sure it had been said recently in the thread. More of a reminder than anything.