captmoroniRM

In Brasil on good friday everyone makes a straw dummy of Judas and then beats the crap out of it.....

with 53 billion hits think of the ad revenue a company could make if they made a free download site and got paid by the ads generated.

To be completely honest, these discussions are a catalyst that gets my nose into the scriptures. I have a hard time just sitting down and reading them cover to cover, but responding to a particular argument or question gives me something to focus on. I am also here to bear testimony of Christ's church and his gospel, even if it is to other members who may need to be reminded of the "basics" even if they don't like it. Isn't the best way to meet someone where they are at is to focus on the basics and build them a solid foundation? The Church is constantly reiterating the same things over and over and over and over again: faith, repentence, obedience, tithing, fasting, etc. Additionally, with a constant influx of new membership, to put everyone on the same level. It elevates those who are ready for the Gospel milk, and humbles those who think they don't need it anymore. The new members get wisdom from the older members and vice versa. Thus everyone progresses at the same base level. It provides everyone to find the answer someone else may have already found. With that sure foundation, one can properly dive deeper into the gospel, and know for sure if something we find is in harmony with the doctrines of the gospel or not. That foundation makes it easier for us to teach our nonmember friends because Since when is doubt an inherent part of faith? Doubt is the antethesis of faith. Faith, by definition is a belief or hope in things which are not seen, but are true. It is the confidence that even though we may not have all the answers, we believe it is true. By your definition of faith means if we have faith in Christ that we acknowledge the possibility that Christ isn't true/real/reliable. James teaches us to ask with "nothing wavering." (James 1:5) Mormon tells us "Doubt not, but be believing...and come unto the Lord with all your heart." (Mormon 9:27) The faith of the stripling warriors so strong they "did not doubt, God would deliver them." (Alma 56:47). The Lord himself tells us "Look unto me in every thought' doubt not, fear not. I have faith in Christ. I know beyond any doubt that he is real, that he truly is the Son of God, and that I can rely on him in my darkest hour. Let me repost the verse with added emphasis on part of it. "Now these mysteries are not yet fully made known unto me; therefore I shall forbear. And it may suffice if I only say they are preserved for a wise purpose, which purpose is known unto God; for he doth counsel in wisdom over all his works, and his paths are straight, and his course is one eternal round. Suffice is defined as "to be adequate or satisfactory." It indicates no discomfort. Alma trusted the Lord, doubting not that his paths are straight, and if the plates needed to be kept shiny, the Lord had a good reason, even if it wasn't revealed to him. You misunderstood what I meant. Is there a forum president called by priesthood authority to preside over this board? Is there a board bishop? The site itself says it is not offically a website of the ChurchJust because many of men on here hold the priesthood and serve/have served in positions of leadership, does not mean any of them have the final word on doctrine. (I've heard bishops in Church teach some crazy things that are not doctrinally sound). In such an environment it is all the more important that we try and stick to the basics of what has been revealed as doctrine. We are all at different levels here. Some are more knowledgable about the Gospel than others. These forums are impersonal and it is hard to know where each person stands. While one user is off posting about whether or not God is an exalted man and how he became God, you may have some user who still needs to grasp the principle that God is our Father. It creates a huge disconnect, which does more harm than good. I disagree. Any degree of uncomfortability with the Doctrine or policy of the Church should drive us to find the answers and exercise faith that we will find them, and be willing to accept the answer "It has not been revealed" because often times, that is the answer the Lord gives us.

Gomer Pyle? not so much. Larry the Cucumber? Decide for yourself

Read the Pearl of Great Price, especially the Book of Moses.

Why should one be uncomfortable with the things we do not know or understand? Yes, we should seek to find the answers, but from the proper source. The Scriptures, and the words of the prophet are the most authorative source we have. We can sit here and debate the 'mysteries' of the gospel but we will come no closer to learning the truth than Laman and Lemuel did trying to understand Lehi's dream. They refused to seek out the Lord for answers. The Lord has revealed all that is necessary for our salvation, and it is found in the holy scriptures and in the words of the living prophets. Being uncomfortable with the things of the gospel we don't know shows a lack of faith in the Lord. Heavenly Father has promised that if any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God, and it will be given. It is one of the key principles this Church is founded upon. If we ask with faith, nothing wavering, we will be given an answer. Even if the answer is "not yet." One of the most profound scriptures is Alma 37:11 where Alma is explaining to his son the need to keep the plates clean and shiny and preserve them. Sure he gives some speculation as to why, but ultimately shows his wisdom in saying "Now these mysteries are not yet fully made known unto me; therefore I shall forbear. And it may suffice if I only say they are preserved for a wise purpose, which purpose is known unto God; for he doth counsel in wisdom over all his works, and his paths are straight, and his course is cone eternal round." Alma was not uncomfortable with a lack of understanding as to why the plates needed to be kept shiny. The Lord had simply told him it was important, and Alma trusted the Lord would provide an answer if one was required. Instead too many people, especially on this forum, dig for a few obscure quotes or scriptures and take the missing puzzle pieces and add their own opinion and insight into the mix. They seek out some "answer" to the things that make them uncomfortable. They need some logical explanation other than "that has not yet been revealed" or "I don't know." And you are exactly right. This is an online forum and not a gospel principles class. That is the danger so many people ignore. In a gospel doctrine class, the Bishop and his appointed sunday school leaders are responsible for moderating the classes and ensuring that pure gospel is taught. Sure some discussion is encouraged but there is a reason it hardly leaves the core principles. Living and understanding those core principles will bring us safety. Like wolves feeding on the edges of the flock, those who wander away from the safe and sure core are often lost. In an online forum, there is nobody with priesthood keys or authority to maintain the purity of the doctrine. Pam and the other moderators do their best, but they are not authorities on doctrine. That leaves too many people free to mingle the opinions of man with the teachings of the gospel. It leads to pointless debates like the real date of Christ's birth or if the sacrament is technically a saving ordinance. In such an environment, how much more ought we return to the basic teachings of Christ?

Wait for the temple marriage. You won't be sad you did. Show the Lord that you really want to do his will. Pray and maybe even fast that everything goes well. Demonstrate to the Lord that you want to be married His way and trust that he will open the way. The Lord is a miracle worker. And even if it doesn't happen in the timeline, would it even matter in the end? You waited another few months/weeks to be sealed to each other for time and all eternity. Sure it might complicate the logistics of the wedding and all the surrounding festivities, but that is all icing on the cake. Personally, I'd rather complicate things, wait a few weeks/months, and be sealed rather than deal with the already complicated logistics of a wedding, and then have to wait another year to know that we are sealed for all eternity.

Sure there is a place for you in the Church. The problem seems that you need to make a place for the Church in your life. Can it be hard for someone in your situation? Definitely. Will it require sacrifices? Yes. Perhaps you need to step back for a second and think about what is it you are wanting out of the Church. If you are just looking for a compatible social setting, you might need to rethink your priorities. While it is great to have friends in the ward and members to hang out with on a regular basis, but the reason we go to Church is to worship God and learn more about his ways, so we can make them our own. Also, be active about finding friends. The way you described your situation was very passive. Go out of your way to try and meet new people. Forget about the things that might make you seem out of place and seek to be an influence for good in the lives of those around you. Try taking the time to study your scriptures. Experience tells me that someone in your shoes hasn't cracked open his scriptures in a while. I challenge you to read them, and pray to your Heavenly Father and seek his guidance on what you should do. Seek his help for finding your place in Church. Heavenly Father would guide you better than any one of us here on this board. He actually knows you, the trials you may be facing. He knows your heart and your needs and will help you through anything.

Again, while it may impact those around you negatively, it is requisite that we reconcile ourselves with God because we have sinned against him. No matter how much one reconciles an addiction to pornography with one's spouse, the sin is ultimately against God. There is a huge different in how understanding this will strengthen someone who is fighting against such sins. If a person is only trying to overcome an addiction to pornography because it is hurting the spouse or the relationship, while noble the intentions may be, do not qualify as godly sorrow. Godly sorrow is a much more powerful than sorrow for hurting one's spouse. It is the realization that one's actions have offended the Almighty. It is a realization that humbles one beneath the dust, and instills a true change of heart and desire to turn away from the sin. It makes them want to change and seek the healing power of Gilead's balm!

To be honest, it is brilliant that the Church chose to go back to the basics for two years. Just look at how far some of the discussions on this site stray from the core of the Gospel's teachings. So many members in general try and be their own Bruce R. McConkie or Hugh Nibley, wielding History of the Church and the Journal of Discourses (among many other books) in debates on things that hold no importance in regards to our eternal salvation. So many members of the Church live their live son the fringes of the Gospel, where true safety lies in the basics such as faith, repentance, baptism, the commandments, and the atonement.

The Huckabee campaign spread anti-mormon arguments like the Jesus and Satan are brothers thing disguised as push-polling. That anti-mormon push-polling led to his wins in several states. Some of that anti-mormon push polling continued even after those states were already won. Maybe it wasn't vicious by common understanding, but I think it's vicious to attack and degrade anyone's religion.

"People have been predicting the end of the world for centuries." "But it keeps not ending." "So far so good." --Ender's Shadow, OSC. This prediction is gonna fall flat. No man knoweth the hour when the Lord shall make his return.

D&C 119: 4 - And after that, those who have thus been tithed shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever, for my holy priesthood, saith the Lord. Elder Oaks: “‘one-tenth of all their interest annually,’ which is understood to mean income.” The First Presidency has said, “No one is justified in making any other statement than this” (First Presidency letter, 19 Mar. 1970, quoted in the General Handbook of Instructions, 1989, p. 9-1), - Tithing "From this fulness, the Lord requires that we dedicate one-tenth to him." -- Spencer W. Kimball, October 1980 Conference. Ten percent is all the Lord requires to receive the blessings he's promised. There are countless references on LDS.org. All you have to do is search for them.

Have you told your wife these things instead of random people on an online forum? How about your Bishop? Are you trying to quit Pornography because it offends your wife, or that it offends God (there is a big difference)? The conflict you need resolved lies between you and the Lord, and you and your wife, and not us strangers. If you want to rebuild the trust with your wife, involve her with your efforts to repair your relationship with God. Be completely honest and open with her. Decide together what safeguards you are going to employ. At the same time, with pornography you need to be working with your Bishop. He represents the Lord as a judge in Israel and will help guide you through the repentance process.

It seems like I'm saying this a lot on here lately, but does it really matter who the sin is technically against? The Lord has said he cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance, and has commanded us to repent of all our sins. Sure some sins impact others around us more than others, but they are always offensive to God. Our priority should be to obtaining God's forgiveness. Often the repentance process involves seeking the forgiveness of those we've hurt because of our actions, such as a spouse who may be hurt by one's use of pornography.

No amount of physical evidence discovered by FARMs will prove the Book of Mormon is true or bring people to Christ. It is great to have supportive evidence, but ample historical evidence of the Bible's authenticity has done nothing to bring people closer to Christ. The best it can do is prove the books are old, or written by those we say it was. Furthermore, despite all the evidence they have uncovered, they are no closer to a definitive proof of the Book of Mormon. By divine revelation, I mean the promise that one can pray and ask God if the Book of Mormon is true, and receive an answer. God will reveal this truth to those who humbly for it with faith. With that answer, one will know for sure that Christ ministered to the people here on the american continent for themselves. Any archeological or historical evidence offered up in support of it, will only add to and strengthen that knowledge, and regardless of any "contrary evidence" conjured up against it, can be written off because the creator of heaven and earth, who knoweth all things was the one that told them.

believe it or not, I actually do wear a space suit and walk around with a giant robot. Klaatu Barada Nikto, gente!

The best evidence of Christ in the americas is the Book of Mormon, as far as I'm concerned. It's the only one that comes with a guarantee of divine revelation confirming its validity.

My first question would be, have you watched Monty Python recently? "I DON'T LIKE SPAM!!!!"

The real point is, if we have sufficient time to sit here and debate petty things like the real date of Christ's birth, what would be a better use of our time? How is our home/visiting teaching? How is our family history coming along? Could it be better spent developing and improving family relationships? It's these kind of pointless debates that resulted in abominable creeds of the apostasy and the bogus rules of the Jewish pharisees.

IDK. I'm kinda upset that the president brought all this rain with him to HI. He's been here a week or so now, and its rained almost every day!

I agree with you, PC. The issue of blacks having the priesthood vs acceptance of same-sex marriage are two complete arguments. Before they were allowed to have the priesthood, it wasn't due to unworthiness or any LDS doctrine. There was nothing sinful about blacks holding the priesthood. The Lord simply revealed that they couldn't have the priesthood. Letting them hold the priesthood was only disallowed because the Lord said so, through his prophet. People can come up with reasons why they weren't allowed, but in the end, it was the Lord's will. When the change came about, the Lord revealed to a prophet and said they could hold it. Even the change in the Church's acceptance of polygamy is a different argument. D&C 132 says that plural marriage is an aspect of the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, though not the defining or key aspect. God has permitted his people to have more than one wife in the past, but reserves the right to change it back to strict monogamy. In Jacob 2, the Lord explains monogamy is the rule, but explains that "if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people [to have multiple wives]; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things [monogamy]. Polygamy is only currently wrong because God as commanded us to stick with monogamy. The practice itself is not inherently sinful. Homosexual acts are, like you said, a violation of the law of Chastity. The Lord is explicit throughout the scriptures that any sexual relation outside of the bonds of marriage, (defined by God as between a man and a woman legally and lawfully married) is sin. Be it two guys, two girls, a hetero-sexual couple not married, or be it with one's self, it is, has always, and forever will be sin. God will not look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. Thus, it can be said with confidence that the LDS church will Never compromise its position on the issue. As for your question about if it did, would it be a sign of a new apostasy? Not neccisarily as Latter-Day Saints believe that the Great Apostasy didn't exactly end with the restoration of the Church. LDS members like the saying "the standard of truth has been erected." The LDS Church serves as a rally-point for those seeking truth in a world where Christ's teachings are still vigorously debated between the denominations. Even within the ranks of the Church you can see debates over various doctrines and teachings where people mingle the teachings of men with scripture. I'm convinced, at times, that the only reason the Church hasn't fallen into another apostasy is that we do have a Prophet who receives instructions and revelations to essentially reel the saints back in from time to time. Still, there are those who reject what Mormons teach and establish their own off-shoot groups that teach many LDS truths. RLDS (community of Christ) rejected Brigham Young as Joseph Smith's successor. FLDS, still embrace polygamy. There was a new offshoot in Cali a few years ago that broke away because they disagreed with minor changes in the Endowment ceremony over the years. It still happens, usually on a more personal level.

The night of my last reply, I read through some of that website's text. I have spent probably the last hour doing so again. Everything there doesn't pass the gospel "sniff" test. The conclusions being drawn from the essays on that site are not in harmony with what has been revealed as doctrine of the Church. The first reason why comes from scripture. Doctrine and Covenants 107 which reads: There are, in the church, two priesthoods, namely, the Melchizedek and Aaronic, including the Levitical Priesthood. Why the first is called the Melchizedek Priesthood is because Melchizedek was such a great high priest. Before his day it was called the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God. But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek, or the Melchizedek Priesthood. All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to this priesthood. In all the essays I read or the accounts referenced was there a statement as to which priesthood women held. LDS doctrine teaches that a man of 12 years or older can have the Aaronic priesthood conferred upon him. 18 year old men receive the Melchizedek. All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to the Melchizedek priesthood. That is the word of God, revealed through his prophets, and I give a lot more weight to that than a collection of essays by LDS Femenists regardless of how many degrees they may hold. The second conflict I see is their historical referneces of women recieving authority use the word "ordained" or "appointed." This creates an idiomatic disconnect between the two time periods. All the references of beign ordained are usually followed by "to a calling" or "to act as. (specifically references made regarding the organization of the Relief Society.) Ordain and appoint can have many uses in giving someone a task, calling, duty, or priesthood office. Technnically by definition, according to dictionary.com, it can mean to give to invest with ministerial or sacerdotal functions; confer holy orders upon, to invest with ministerial or sacerdotal functions; confer holy orders upon, or to order, establish, or enact with authority. To understand how ordained is used in conjuction with the priesthood, I point to the restoration of the Aaronic priesthood by John the Baptist. John declared "Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron." The language matches the words of how the priesthood is given today. You confer the priesthood upon them." Ordain is used to designate a specific office in the Church (which is why John did not "ordain" them at that time. It wasn't until the organization of the Church in 1830 that Joseph was "ordained" first Elder in the church. Thus, the priesthood is "conferred" and they are "ordained" to an office within the priesthood. Additional callings are ordinations are essentially ordinations, but one must have the priesthood conferred upon them first. Third, the many cited examples of women healing by way of the priesthood show no indication that priesthood authority was used, even with the washings and annointings outside of the temple. A few examples: Sarah Studevant Leavitt's laying hands on her daughter: She was commanded by a heavenly messenger to lay hands on her head and in the name of Jesus Christ and administer. It was through Christ's name that she was healed, and her faith in the Lord. No priesthood was used, despite the laying on of hands. 1849 Eliza Jane Merrick's annointing her sister with oil and praying for her to be healed-the oil was consecrated by priesthood authority (probably her husband as the account is not specific as to who she was talking to when she said she used the "oil consecrated by you") and the prayer was in the name of the Lord. No priesthood was invoked by her. It's only factor in the equation was consecrating the oil that was used for the healing of the sick and the afflicted. Joseph Smith once declared "respecting females administering for the healing of the sick he further remarked, there could be no evil in it, if God gave His sanction by healing; that there could be no more sin in any female laying hands on and praying for the sick, than in wetting the face with water; it is no sin for anybody to administer that has faith, or if the sick have faith to be healed by their administration" -- Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith Ultimately whether one is administered to by a male priesthood holder, or a woman with sufficient faith, it is the power of God that performs the actual healing. It does not even have to be the prayer of one who a member of the Church. If a Catholic woman kneels and pleads to God with unwavering faith that her child be healed, if it be the Lord's will, he will be healed. Priesthood authority is not the key component and never has been. Lastly, why would the Church choose to hide it if women could and did hold the priesthood since the 1840s like you claim? What purpose would it serve? If there were a change in the policy which has been clear to the saints and accepted by the majority for 180 years, why isn't there an official declaration like the big policy changes of the past, that was unanimously upheld by the 1st Presidency and submitted for a sustaining vote in a general conference? Why does every article found on LDS.org and every scripture regarding the priesthood in the standard works speak of only men holding the priesthood? That is because only worthy men have ever had, or will have, the priesthood conferred to them, and be ordained to one of its offices. That is LDS doctrine. While the essays you reference may quote Church leaders throughout its history, it conflicts with the doctrine of the priesthood in every way.

I think the record low is upper 50's but I'm not entirely sure. I'd have to check the climatology.

I joined the military 9 months into my marriage. Sure, my wife has always been stay-at-home so there was no career impact on her, but it had other serious impacts. She is the youngest of 8. All but 1 of her siblings and his family live within an hours drive of each other. Each sibling is married with kids, giving her 14 nieces and nephews in that same distance, plus a whole plethora of extended family (beloved grandma, numerous uncles, aunts, and cousins). Remember that no matter what challenges life throws at you, whether it be moving, or career changes, or whatever, the two most important things are your commitment to each other and to the Lord. You may have to sacrifice a good job to support your wife's residency in another state. You may have to sacrifice and live off of one income. She may have to sacrifice in delaying her school or studies for a time to help make ends meet. Seek the Lord's help and follow his guidance as you make important life decisions. Plan as best you can, and always keep your covenants to each other and to the Lord. But be prepared for twists and turns along the way. The Lord often has completely different plans for us that we have for ourselves. My wife has been a trooper with the changes she's had to make. She's had to put up with several months of me being unable to see her. She's moved 3 times since I joined. She has no family near us. She's become more independent and motivated. She's been blessed with good friends in each place. The challenges we've faced have improved our marriage and our relationship. The Lord has blessed us tremendously and we haven't been left wanting.