bluedreams

What HiJolly said. They're quite different. For one: In one I was awake in the other I wasn't. And, at least for me the dreams were more symbolically oriented and meant to portray a message. The vision was more literal and meant to be a source of clarity and love. Who knows, It's not like I've had a plethora of either. None of them were super long or told me some crazy world changing news or anything (changed my world, just not too many beyond that). But from what little experience I've had, I would state there's a difference....similar to how Lehi's dream of the tree of life differs from the visionary explanation Nephi would receive about the tree of life (just not as cool ). With luv, BD

I was aware of that....that's why I stayed awake a few minutes. I didn't want to forget because it was beautiful and precious to me. By dead sleep, I mean I was on my mission, it was 2-3 in the morning, and it was after I was used to mission life. At this point I'd be knocked out cold. I wouldn't wake up easily at this hour. I'm also aware of the stages of sleep. I know that technically I was in REM sleep if I was sleeping. I know my dreams. I ha I dream alot and I'm usually vaguely aware of them. Some of my favorite dreams are what I call my "movie dreams..." Elaborate stories that I quite enjoy and feel like I should have gone to bed with a bowl of popcorn in hand. I've had nightmares. I've had sensual dreams. I've had those dreams where you show up naked. I know my dreams and I can honestly say this was different. THis was no run of the mill dream. No dream has ever come with a deep sense of the Spirit and with love so powerful that it helps to change who I am. Beforehand, I wouldn't have believed the difference between the two. Visions and dreams were for scriptures and other people. But not me. Yet I experienced both. They all tied together to give me one message that has changed how I viewed myself and assured me of the promises of the Lord among other things. I don't know everything. I don't pretend to understand entirely the concept of visions or the difs between a dream and a Dream. But I cannot deny my experience. I can't explain them away. I tried. A couple of times. The Spirit told me quite clearly that these were right...over and over and over again. Scot's talk was a culmination of this message that had been occuring more quietly over months of time. So If it was a "hallucinatory state" so be it. The hallucination was true and of the Spirit of God. That's all that matters. With luv, BD

Yes, I have....definitely 3 at least. They were extremely personal answers and like most answers from God were meant to guide and direct me as well as change my heart. They were sometimes almost ignored cuz they didn't seem super special. They were just really strange, really vivid dreams that had a message, didn't fade easily, and felt like I should write down. It was only till the last one that I really strongly believed they were something more. And when I did, my trust in their actuality was whimpy at times. I wanted what I saw so bad that I was afraid of it. That has diminished as my faith and trust has increased. The first two, it was right before I woke up up in the morning. The third woke me up from a dead sleep because of the overpowering sense of love that it brought to my heart. I purposely stayed awake a little longer, knowing that I shouldn't forget this. I then went back to bed and wrote about it in my journal the next morning. This dream had two main characters (not including myself) that linked back to the previous dreams. That's why it convinced me of the other two were something more than just vividly strong dreams. And E. Scot's talk, BTW, stung my heart hard. It was a continued answer to something I needed that was apart of those earlier dreams as well. They still seem far-fetched somedays, but I do not doubt them anymore. With luv, BD

No they are not, though they are correllated. To clarify: I could further clarify in stating, that forgiveness does not mean that Tanny should be with her boyfriend, but that it'll allow her to make a decision based on christ-like love rather than anger or fear. If it's based on love and concern, then the decision will be the correct one, best for both parties.To further clarify that, it doesn't mean love and concern will equal staying with him. Sometimes that best form of love and concern is to allow them their space in order to heal. I'm just very leery of any form of anger, resentment, fear, etc....no matter how justified it is. I've watched justified anger/resentment all of my childhood and have harbored some myself for a long part of my adult life. I was justified but it was not good. It never is. It blocks our vision far more than just in that specific circumstance. And most detrimentally, it limits our understanding of God. The best days of my life were letting those go. So let it go. Make the best decision after firm prayer with your Father. Trust Him first and foremost. With luv, BD

I'd read Pres. Uchtdorf's talf from this conference...especially this part: In general, you should or should not be with him. I don't know, I'm no judge of relationships described over the computer...from what you've mentioned, i wouldn't recommend it. But you should work to forgive him either way of his weaknesses. Never easy, but it's needed. In my experience, resentment clouds our judgments and actions. To understand what we need most, we must first learn to forgive, let go of hurt, and plead for guidance from the Lord. When we do so, we'll have better spritual strength to understand what we must do in our lives by having better access to the small promptings of the spirit. If we dont let go of anger or resentment, it will block out many of the quiet impressions that we need for understanding. With luv, BD

Art's one of my passion in lives....sometimes it spills out when I don't mean it to . But trust me....that's the least of my commentary for the man's work. With luv, BD

May he rest in peace. As for his art....no comment. I am not a fan to say the least.

I'd rather have someone be told. Secrets only lead to amplified later pain. I don't know the full circumstances to the problem. I'm sure the guy wasn't entirely the innocent bystander to sin. But if his timeline/description of events is even remotely correct, the girl's not exactly stable either. I very much consider myself a feminist....I also see myself as pragmatic. The relationship as described, though biased from his perspective still leaves the problem of her, very young, marrying under false pretenses, and probably with unresolved baggage from her past. Stats ain't pretty for that, plain and simple. I'd go with tell the bishop and no one else. It's no one's business, it doesn't need to become gossip fodder, and the guy might be wrong on a number of things in his story. But someone needs to know who's called to deal with such situations. I would hate to be that guy getting married. I would hate being that woman being married. It's leading to a world of pain, dissatisfaction, and at best some form of marital therapy....probably divorce. I would hope he'd also try to talk to her one more time at least as well. Even assuming this guy is a world-class hypocrite with one large beam in his eye and with an ax to grind against his ex, it doesn't change that the girl might still have some major problems on her plate too. There's no harm, in my mind, in telling your bishop and your bishop alone and maybe try to encourage her (by discretely talking to her) one last time to seek repentance as well. I love the temple and it covenants. I believe strongly that they should be entered maturely and not be defiled. But this isn't my worry. My worry is what it'll realistically do for the people involved in the situation. The worst case scenerio pre-marriage is far better than the worst-case scenerio(s) after IMO. With luv, BD

So this is probably one of the very few 11 page threads that I've read top to bottom. I find many of your experiences very interesting and enlightening and have enjoyed reading them. On this topic, I had the oppurtunity to teach someone who is transsgendered. It was a godo experience in many ways and I decided that the reason, in my mind, for the policy was based on the strong eternal nature of gender. One's gender isn't changeable, it concretely there eternally. The problem is when people come into a cloudy and imperfect world. There is no sure way to say whether a person is supposed to be a man or a woman in this world. Because of that I can understand the policy as a means to wait until all things are clearly revealed. Whether it's the body that's the mistake or the mental understanding of oneself it'll become clear one day. As for marriage. I have no idea. Personally, since it would be a civil marriage, I don't see why it would be a major problem. Legally it would be considered a heterosexual marriage. Eternally....that'll figure itself out, like most messy family situations. Funky town: The high suicide-attempt rate could be connected to a number of things. And the report doesn't support the idea of high rate post-op. It stated that post-op transgendered usually had lower rates of substance abuse and depression. i don't know the full signifance, but GID from what little I do know, seems to have diverse reasonings and experiences to lead to these feelings. Because of that, I would be hesitant to making sweeping decisions as to what GID is or how it should be treated. With luv, BD

One of my friends got hers without the immediate prospect of marriage or a mission. But that's about it. Over half of my single's ward RS has been endowed...but that's largely because they've gone on missions. With luv, bd

That was an interesting article. I didn't read all of it, just here and there. A couple questions that popped up for me: Why isn't this same disparity found in non-christian religions? I think this would be extremely interesting I had a little problem with the end note. I can't put my finger entirely on it. But I think it's moreso that its trying to legitimize traditional ideal of what equals masculine.

Mind you, this is from the perspective of someone who hasn't ever served in any said leadership callings. I just had the priviledge of sitting in a number of ward councils, even some PPC's, and work with the leadership. What I saw was that the best wards were those that had strong women that were utilized in their callings. One ward inparticular stands out to me and the RS prez is forever my ultimate example of how to serve. She was so utilized that in councils when there was a question about this or that and how to reach out to a family, people just naturally turned to her expecting an answer. We sometimes would call the bishop asking about someone and be referrred to the RS prez. And the ward was just superb in large part because of how each part worked together and was used. What you mention I don't think is the problem of the entire institution but how the institution is used within the community. It also shows a misapplication of what "leader" means. We, as people, look to much of leadership in a unilateral manner due to our culture. The words leader, power, and direction need to be examined and redefined within the context of the gospel. This, IMO, would alter how we look at leaders and our own callings. With luv, BD

Personally, I think that's what most feminists want nowadays. The freedom to define their lives as they will. There's extreme versions of feminists, but they're not what I'd call overpowering IMO. But yes, at the end of the day someone's going to have to do some work. I agree that this works best for the couple. With luv, BD

This begs the question of whether these roles are actually better suited for men and women. All cultures have different forms of gendered work (ie man's work and women's work). But each culture splits it differently. What is considered "natural" comes from a deeply ingrained way of life that we accept as normal in life. Whether these lines are actually good can also be in question. For example I read an article about starvation in ethiopia. The natural strains on the environment were exacerbated by very strict gender roles. I personally don't think we need as many different roles (on the temporal level) than we give to men and women. We see things differently, true, but I'd say both of these perspectives are equally needed within differing work, social, religious, and political environments. The reason we don't I think is less about what men and women naturally desire or are made for but that we've built systems around gender roles. These reinforce what is already expected in the society. With luv, BD

Me. But not because of the religions themselves (generally speaking), but interpretation within cultures that generally have women at a lower status than men. Religion isn't bad, it just collects a lot of baggage. Second class citizen/lower status may also go too far in description for a number of religions. It may be close to simply lower/different status. That's probably closer to some of the views within our own faith that can sometimes irk me. I'd also call it the pedastal effect. Women are placed on a pedestal, above many of the woes that trouble mankind.... ergo they don't have the same need to be engaged in solving mankind's problems, etc. It leads to distinctive moral standards....women expected to live a higher one than men and can receive greater social consequences when they fall short. It can also lead to an expectation of less sociopolitical engagement within the work and community environment. This to me stems from an interpretation of things like the family Proclamation to traditionalist familial relationships, which traditionally extolled gender roles that were scaled on status. Within the doctrine of the faith itself these things aren't found....but it's our culture's interpretation that bring status and stricter gender expectations to it. Basically we use religion to justify our worldly views of men and women. With luv, BD

No, I don't. when I was younger I sometimes woul have those "i can't believe I'm living" feelings. But I've never felt out of place time wise. Sometimes I would prefer a more natural life, closer to nature and wildness. But not entirely in another era. I was talking to my cousin about it with my cuz and we both had the same response: None other....though each period has its appeal, it has some major set backs. Especially when your a woman. And especially is I choose any American era as someone who is a minority/brown. Soon enough I could find times where being a minority isn't that big of a problem....but by then health SUCKS: plague, pox, typhoid, malaria, heck just relative poor nutrition is comong. And it still doesn't take care of the fact that I'm a woman. the vast majority of eras and societies prior to now have been highly limiting to women. I'd most likely live with little education, little choice in the direction of my life, and little oppurtunity to develop as I see fit...that's saying I survive past childbirth (going back to poor healthcare). I'm very aware that growing up where and when I am leaves me very privileged. I'm not really willing to give that up. With luv, BD

Yeah, I would. It has more significance to me than a lot of modern art that I've seen if only for the reason it that can actually be interpreted fairly easy. Though birt is a "natural process" it is here contrived creatively. The environment in created, the mode of birth is creative (especially in the U.S. where having a midwife and giving birth outside of a hospital is considered odd enough), and it's has symbolic route. Though I might not be a fan of a specific art form doesn't change the fact that it is art. As modern art goes, I actually like this more than a lot of other stuff that I've seen. I would not have done it...I'm not a fan of modern art in the first place. But I like the message and the symbolic process of humanity as its own art form. I also enjoy the indirect message of mothers not simply following the call of nature, but creators and artists of a new generation's life. That motherhood is taken out of simply a regular/natural process, but a dynamic one that takes thought and active work and creation from birth....something i think that is largely missing in our society now. So I like it for the message. With luv, BD

Are you asking just for the shock value of seeing people with an entirely different mindset? A mindset you might find weird and counter your own (ergo wrong in your book)? Just curious, That's what it reminds me of. Often the ideals of another when against our own can appear irrational and even a point of bigotry. I don't expect anything stated to change your opinion, but our belief isn't out of some instinctive feel of wrongness to homosexuality or sense of phobia. It stems from an understanding of human nature and our purpose here on earth which is stated in this scripture here: "For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father." So our purpose to overcome anything that keeps us away from God. What keeps us away from God is anything that doesn't fit the laws and ways of heaven. All of us fall terribly short. The homosexual doesn't have a corner market in carnality and fallen states. None of us are perfect and God's standard is perfection. Our purpose in this life is to learn to control our wills (that natural man) and become perfect through Christ. There's no other way to heaven. Only He can purify. All that is truly good points to Him. Anything else is vain, short lived, and crumbles over time (whether here or the next life, it doesn't really matter). Hell is simply a state without God and this purifying power. Are you going there? Yeah. But then again so was I. And so is your neighbor. And so is everyone else until they come to let go of sin and desire to yield to the way that leads to Heaven. The way of heaven isn't some mean and wrathful God. It is a state of love and peace and calm no matter our circumstances. There is nothing more freeing. It is when we are outside of that do we naturally meet the opposing force of anything from anger to lust to fear to loneliness. The more we find God the more we find the meaning of charity, peace, joy, and our truest character. The more we find "ourselves" the more we find the fickle world of human frailties, crutches, and wrongs that lead to our ultimate downfall. You are no more special than I. You are no more loved and desired of God than I. But only you can choose your destination. With luv, BD

I consider myself an environmentalist. I see scriptures supporting good stewardship all over the place and I try to keep a low footprint and not be excessive with what I use. But a number of the movements are a little out there IMO. For example PETA. I'm a vegetarian (but not vegan). I think that much of what's stated is basically true. But the mode of presentation and action is ridiculous and that there can be more moderate ways to be environmentally and ethically sound without entirely ridding of meat (even though I don't eat it myself). So I'm not about to join in anytime soon despite being veg for over 9 years. With luv, BD

Those are questions only God can answer. When I'm worried and feel that I'm not matching up to my potential I've often just prayed and asked if He was pleased with my actions. I'm honest with where I feel I've fallen short and my desire to do better as I do so. More often than not I get a calming answer that lets me know that I'm doinng okay. Those times when there isn't that immediately is usually when I receive small promptings and insights as to how I could better approach a problem. Either way, the Lord is far more forgiving than we often are for our short comings. With luv, BD

Personally, yes. The first thing that happened was that I simply couldn't look at certain things that I had prior. I never read or did anything horrendous. But things that were more on the vulgar or crude side became extremely uncomfortable. I remember one time soon after receiving my endowment, reading an article that half way through I just couldn't finish it. I knew logically that all of a few weeks prior I would have been able to finish it without a problem. But now the discomfort was permeable. I also began to have dreams that weren't just dreams and had a semi vision. But those are sacred and very personal and not for discussion over an open forum. In short it entailed my family and husband that aren't mine yet. Previously I can't say that I really ever had. Some of the other changes might of course just been from my mission....but I'm not sure. I knew that I was truly endowed with power from the temple without a doubt. But a lot of the spritual experiences on my mission I feel came from a very earnest seeking for the Spirit. I wanted to understand better how it felt like and the many ways it talked to me and to be in tune with it. It was such a great experience as I did so and I learned that the Spirit really isn't as silent as we often think of it. The more I studied out how He spoke to me and to people in general through scripture, the more I realized just how constant He truly was as a companion. To me I think that's the biggest lesson I've learned. That, yes, the temple did endow me with power. But to me it was power to better access gifts and blessings the Lord had already promised me. I right now work to maintain it by studying, praying, church, and temple. If I don't I lose it. It's a very contingent gift. With luv, BD

I'd probably tell him if it really matters if he understood what the garment means for someone LDS? I'd listen to whatever the answer is (no, or probably something wrong....just general likelihood). Than i'd tell him that I wear it as a reminder of Christ and my relationship to him. I tell him that they remind me of the gifts of the spirit and how I am to follow His example and seek after the Spirit in each moment that I'm alive. It was a reminder that I am not mine but the Lord's first. I'd then note that this theme is an entirely biblical concept and that just about any verse in the bible eventually talks about the garments to me because they are all describing the sacred covenant and relationship between humanity and God. At best, I'd hope for him to build a better respect for what the garment represent for LDS. I don't see the point in proving its right cuz he'll never see it. But he can come to better understand my view and love for something. I'd look for him to have respect for that with luv, BD

Personal sidenote: I wish I'd gotten an answer like that for the BoM. My answer was more along the lines of "duh!" To the main question, no. The scriptures outline a ton of different ways that we can recognize the spirit. The voice of God is varied and shows itself in various ways. A great list of some of those ways is found in preach my gospel on pg 96 (you can find it here I personally would recommend thinking about coming back. This is a small scale example of the problem you faced (and one that, honestly, is sort of stupid). For a while I had a problem with kneeling prayer. Which isn't usually a problem outside of your normal day, but it was as a missionary and it was actually screwing up my prayers because I was irritated by praying. This bothered me in and of itself. So I went on a search for everything that entailed kneeling in prayer. There's not much, and I found plenty of wiggle room for tons of other forms of prayer. But after it I found myself unbothered by when I kneeled in prayer. Often, I wanted to kneel in prayer because I then had a better understanding of the deeper symbolic meaning of what it meant to kneel. Again, this is a far smaller example, but when something bothers me, I take it as an oppurtunity to study it out. As I do, I come to a better understanding of what it is and in turn a deeper appreciation of my faith. The Temple is extremely deep and beautiful and at time overwhelming. It's one of those things that warrant lifetime study and not just momentary feeling. With luv, BD

I'm Just glad whoever wrote this isn't president. That's one big load of knee-jerk, excessively emotive based policy that won't work all that well in the first place. If one was, they can be impeached for reckless endangerment of the American people, right? For one cutting off our generous non-military aid pockets ain't going to do much (we spend around 23 billion dollars on aid....sounds big but it's only a tiny fraction of oru budget). cutting off Military aid/military actions may do a little bit more though considering we spend around 700 billion on that (give or take 10 billion...mostly give). Course it might not be too long till our military spending sky rockets again since we've decided to snub the world. It'll be interesting to see how long that will last before we start feeling some nasty effects from it. As it is we're already pumping tons of money into social security programs. The problem is that we don't do very well with that money. Although I don't think it will be in war that we'll feel the biggest hit. Many of these countries that we seem to want to cut all ties with happen to own a good chunk of our debt. And even more happen to be major trade partners. Sanctions never really helped anybody. Oil cannot simply be found, dug up, processed, etc overnight. I don't care if alaska is litterally an ocean of oil covered by a layer of icy dirt, it'll take time to replace Mexico, Canada, and Saudi Arabia's oil imports And I sincerely doubt we could do it within one president's terms without causing severe economic upheaval on an economy that's not doing so well in the first place. Isolationism won't fix the problems that our nation faces. When we were isolationist we still had plenty of problems coming our way. We just need to rearrange how we've come to balance our business. No need to go crazy and cut off our nose simply because things aren't going our way. With luv, BD

thanks. I haven't mentioned it much online. The only ones here who I'm sure knows are Morning Star and possibly Talisyn With luv, BD