Matthew0059

THANK YOU!!I stopped discussing Avatar because no one else seems to agree with this assessment. Then again, I take this kind of evaluation to every movie that comes out nowadays and very, very few pass the "good doctrine" test.

I would appreciate it! I am looking for gun clubs in my town (Fort Collins) and am not finding anything... The closest thing is in a town called Greeley- 45 minutes away by car, and I'm on bike.

antoine- Structurally, the best example (IMO) that I think of is the famous quote "wickedness never was happiness" (Alma 41). Essentially, Satan offers counterfeits for every good thing GOD gives us. Also, Moroni 7:16-17 explains further: I think the problem lies in defining and discerning what a "good" feeling is versus a "bad" feeling- in other words, how do we tell if a feeling comes from GOD or Satan? Moroni explains that anything that persuades us to believe that "inviteth to do good" and to "believe in Christ" is from GOD. The devil's counterfeits take our focus off of CHRIST and doing good for others and transfers it to ourselves- that is, I feel good because of this carnal feeling that doesn't enlighten the mind.

I do intend to practice target shooting to keep my skills sharp- but the entire reason for owning a gun is to have it in case I ever have to use it. I'm not particularly drawn to the idea of shooting targets, and I HATE loud noises (like gunshots...). I do like hearing about Nessie and Bigfoot...

I am in the process of learning about firearms to defend myself. I realize that, if I ever used the very thing I will be spending weeks to learn about and acquire, I will very likely be using it to kill someone. I do not want to kill someone.Ergo, I "pray" (hope to the LORD; I used the word "pray" figuratively) that I never have to use a handgun to protect myself from harm. When I finally acquire my chosen weapon, I will more than likely literally pray that I never have to use it to kill someone. Is that difficult to believe?

Suzie-What you say about killing for "sport" being evil is, I believe, an eternal principle. The hunting I am talking about is solely for sustaining my own life. I intend to learn the basics and become proficient (and use as much of every animal I kill as possible), and then hunt no more unless I absolutely have to for food. If nothing happens in the world; if society does not degrade and the systems we've set up for growing and eating food continue; if the prophecies in the Book of Revelation do not happen in my lifetime, I will never have to hunt again after learning how to. Unfortunately, I don't believe that will be the case. I aspire to be like Nephi. When his family was starved, the LORD revealed to Lehi where Nephi should go to hunt and get food- that is, he revealed where to go to find an animal to kill so that his family could eat its meat and live. Hunting for food has its proper time and place. Hunting for sport is wicked and I will never do it.

Loudmouth_Mormon and Soulsearcher, I thank you for your advice. I live in Colorado- I don't intend to carry in public. That may change; if so I'll have to get a concealed carry license. Luckily, the county I live in seems to have a sheriff that doesn't get in the way of the process. LM, I have thought a great deal about whether I could take a life. In self-defense, I believe I could- if I wasn't constrained by the Spirit not to. I pray that day will never come- yet I cannot, in good conscience, prepare to get married and start a family in today's society and not acquire the means to physically protect and provide for myself and my family. Soulsearcher, I hadn't thought about archery/firearms clubs. I'll have to look into that.

I don't "hate'm" on you, Snow. I am tired of your rudeness and belittling attitude, but I don't get worked up at all about you anymore. I grew up in this regard sometime last year. My feelings towards you now are anxiousness and worry.The current topic is so far off-topic and unhelpful, and has created so much contention, that I think this thread needs to be closed. That was the point of my past few postings. My offer was serious. I plead with you, brother, not to throw away your good gifts. God bless.

Snow, your constant rudeness and belittling lack the very essence of critical thought and frank dialogue. You insult everyone who believes differently than you on certain subjects. You do this more and more openly and proudly over time. I for am shocked that you admit that you mock everyone who believes that GOD once commanded Israel to stone those who broke the sacred law of Sabbath-day observance. You openly mock the sacred LDS values of continuing revelation and the veracity of scripture.Will you put aside your cynicism and join me in a discussion of the goodness of GOD, and the veracity of Joseph Smith as a prophet of GOD? I am not trying to draw you into any kind of trap, but only wondering. You and I have had our problems in the past (in case you missed it, I am Maxel), but I truly desire to see you wholly believe the Book of Mormon's and Old Testament's truthfulness and accuracy. If you ever wish to have such a discussion, I will welcome it with an open heart and mind. However, I'd prefer not to get into on this thread, as it has gone off-topic enough. Again, I ask: will this thread be closed (unless there's reason to suppose that the OP will return)?

Can we close this, or get back to the original topic? I think Soldier's not coming back, and the current discussion is leading nowhere except to faith-destroying territory. Please, for the sake of the tender souls who might read this thread, finish this contentious argument.

So, I've decided to learn about firearms and learn how to hunt. I have had no life experience with either. Anyone have some suggestions on where to start? I'm looking to get a handgun for personal protection, a hunting rifle, and a bow and arrow. I'm open to advice from anyone with knowledge in any of these areas. Also, if anyone knows if a good online resource to study up on those things, I'd love to hear about it. Thanks in advance!

If the door-to-door sales industry would be more honest, I wonder if this law would even be considered. I worked for a few months last summer trying to sell security systems- no one (not my boss, trainer, or sales partners) cared if there was a "No Soliciting" sign at all. If they thought it was a good prospect, they'd bullrush on up (they also walked across people's lawns and got annoyed at me when I refused to). I don't think this would make a huge dent in the Church's proselyting efforts, though. As I understand it, door-to-door proselytizing is one of the least effective methods. The best is to have a member get someone interested and set a meeting up for their friends. We, as members of the Church, just need to get out there more!

Oh... I hadn't thought about that.Revised post: ...being a [sunbeam teacher] is more responsibility than I'd ever want... Being a [3rd assistant to the Hymn Book Straightener] sounds nice...

For some, they know that if they live worthily (as justaname suggested) that they will be called to certain leadership positions within the Church because their patriarchal blessing says so (MoE is the third person I've heard of who has such a promise in his patriarchal blessing). I think that, if someone is foreordained to be called into a stewardship position, when they live righteously they will actually desire said position- and they will desire it so that they can bless their fellow man and help move along the great designs of the LORD. I can see why you'd be hesitant to accept such a suggestion as I have laid our, justaname. When I was younger, and just starting to gain a testimony and walk in the ways of CHRIST, I aspired to be a General Authority. I aspired to be one because I thought it would show the world that GOD loved me and that I was "good enough" to be one (i.e., because of the pride of my heart)- there was still a lot of worldliness in my heart at that time. As I grew older, though, and kept trying to live righteously and humble myself, I realized that those aspirations were evil because of the motivation behind them. Now I realize that being a GA is more responsibility than I'd ever want, and aspire only to live worthily and fulfill the roles that I have been foreordained to (my patriarchal blessing gives some vague hints, but nothing specific). Being a Sunbeam teacher sounds nice...

I can't speak to pam's intent, but my understanding of the situation is that once someone's name is removed from the records, the Church doesn't send anyone to visit them.Having one's name removed is revoking the rights to the gift of the HOLY GHOST that were received during confirmation. It means that that person's name will be blotted out of the book of life. It is much harder to again become worthy to be baptized and receive the saving ordinances after having one's name removed than it is to struggle to overcome our trials of faith while staying within the Church, and having the blessings of the HOLY GHOST'S administrations and the priesthood to strengthen us. Is it easier to close and lock a door behind us, or to leave it open in preparation for our return? Having one's name removed essentially closes and locks the door behind us, and we can only get through by unlocking said door- that is, being baptized, confirmed, etc. It takes much less energy, time, and pain to simply leave the door open. I don't mean to be unduly harsh. mliff, I pray that the LORD will smile upon you and grant you the desires of your heart. Most of all, I hope to hear sometime in the future that you've re-entered the Church (or decided not to remove your name).

I read the statement (but I appreciate you copy/pasting it for me). What I meant to say- and I was too terse while saying it; my apologies- was that I think you have to carry a lot of preconceived opinions on the immigration issue and partisan politics to assume that the statement is any kind of admonishment that Utah legislators be "more fair" or "nicer" than the Arizona ones.

If you would be upfront and spared me the rudeness, I would be satisfied with whatever answer you chose to give. I'd be perfectly satisfied, actually. You seem to think I'm on a witch hunt for the creator. I'm not- I was after that one fact, namely: are you Lds Cross? Since you prefer dancing around the truth and insults to dealing in honesty, I'm content to let that matter go. Ultimately, it is not as important as another question that I had- a question you have answered by your actions.I see that Lds Cross no longer allows strangers to see his "Likes"- now no member who researches him will see that he has a preference for the movie "Latter Days" and is, consequently, not someone who is right before the LORD. I have rarely seen an honest inquiry met with such rudeness. I have apologized for the caustic nature of my first post- I had hoped that would be enough to ease the pain I initially caused. I am sorry that it has not. I agree, there are many things I fail to see. Yet I have never run across an honest man without an agenda who didn't take 10 seconds to explain something I did not understand when I asked. I never thought that. What I actually thought was that you (or someone you know) created the group and you went looking for ways to advertise it- and a thread concerning the cross was the perfect place to advertise on this forum. The topic of this thread was a lucky break for you.What caught my eye initially was the gratuitous link to the facebook group. After having seen your reaction to direct questioning, I am reassured that my initial assessment- that you are a wolf among sheep- is correct. I will not enjoy seeing you fail in your designs, Mike- but I wouldn't have it any other way.

Would you be so kind as to confirm/deny if you are indeed Lds Cross on Facebook? On further reflection, I don't blame you for only discussing topics you've already done research on (and consequently linking said research)- since you're building your academic reputation around such works, and it's easier to enter a discussion when you've already done research on the topic, it seems fine and natural. I apologize for the caustic tone of that accusation.My main problem regarding this thread is that there's only one real logical conclusion: that this facebook group is yours, partially because it only has one member, was created only hours before you linked it, and you link the facebook group then link the logo (ostensibly the only reason for linking the facebook group in the first place). The fact that you didn't mention if you created it or not, and then dodged the question when asked, sends up a red flag. If titling your blog "Cultural Mormon Cafeteria" and explaining that a cultural Mormon is "A long-time member... who has lost his/her faith" in a prominent box near the top of the page isn't 'proudly', I fail to see how not. You've chosen the most identifiable feature- the title- to actively portray your status of non-believer.Perhaps you have another explanation though, and I'm reading too much into it?

RedPheonix- I have respect for your intelligence, and the fact that you are willing to put so much effort into ascertaining the truth. I haven't had time to read this whole thread (I have to leave for work in ~15 minutes), so if I repeat something someone else has said I apologize. Regarding Galatians 1:8-9, I suggest another perspective on the scripture. We learn (at least) two things: -The idea that angels from heaven may come in the future isn't an absurdity- in fact, it may be expected. -We are to reject a "new gospel" ONLY if it disagrees with the established Gospel of the CHRIST. As a Baptist, I'm sure you're familiar with the idea that heavenly manifestations ended with Christ's apostles (or somewhere along the line between the first ecumenical Councils and the Reformation), whether you agree with this idea or not. It isn't the best example, but this scripture which proves a stumbling block to you hints that such manifestations not only should have continue, but were expected to. Which parts of the LDS faith do you find to be in contradiction to the Bible? And not just traditional extra-Biblical doctrine; the actual Biblical text? As for not knowing where Zarahemla or Moriantum are- I suggest, if you wish to study more on the topic, to give the apologists over at FARMS a chance. I wish I had the time to hunt down a piece that dealt specifically with the problems of locating Zarahemla, but alas I do not. Also, the folks at FAIR do a stand-up job. Most of all, I encourage you to go before the LORD in prayer and ask for yourself if the Book of Mormon is true. If you don't feel like you could do that, I encourage you to go before the LORD and ask, with real intent, intending to act on the answer, what the desires of your heart pertaining to the LDS Church are. God bless.

I guess the question is, then, whether these men called as leaders were A) honest about their immigration status, and B.) were doing what they could to fix said status. If the man called to be a leader was an illegal immigrant, and was doing everything he could to "fix" that (I have no idea how he would do so), I could see that not being an issue with the Lord. I think I've said before that I have almost zero understanding of the naturalization process- only that it seems to have gotten very complicated (especially for Latin American immigrants).

I'm curious to find out where you get this information- that some Bishops and Stake Presidents are illegal immigrants.I know that 'the Church' was in the habit of sending illegal immigrants on missions, but I was unaware of illegal immigrants being ordained to leadership positions.

For someone who so loudly proclaims that the Church and politics should be separated, you're surprisingly often the first one to make ties between the two- or at least to assume the Church is acting partisan or (politically) ideologically.

I heard it from a temple worker during (I think) a sacrament meeting- I forget who.I have a friend who is a temple worker; I'll try to find his email and double check. Or maybe someone else can verify / clarify: if I'm wrong I'd like to be set straight.

Mike: I find the fact that the facebook group you linked only has one member: Lds Cross, who has done nothing but self-promotion, interesting. Are you Lds Cross and the group's creator? EDIT: I just reviewed your history of posting on this board, and you have only ever self-promoted your own work. I can't help but feel this is another attempt to do so. I also find it interesting that the only personal information about Lds Cross is that they like the movie "Latter Days" (for those who don't know, it's a 'romance' about a missionary who begins a homosexual relationship with a party boy). You yourself proudly proclaim in your blog that you have lost your faith in the Church. Putting 2 and 2 together, I'm guessing this group isn't for the truly faithful Latter-day Saint- regardless of their affinity for the cross.

There was another member of the priesthood with rameumpton at the time- they were under very specific orders to see if the Spirit was being felt (i.e., "see if it was being done properly"). They were entitled to the reception of the Spirit if it was present.Because the law of witnesses was fulfilled (that is, having two or more persons present to experience the event), I'd wager that rameumpton's conclusion- that this sister did not have the right intent, or something else was deeply wrong- was correct. When a person speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost brings the message to the heart of the listeners (2 Nephi 33:1). However, when the Holy Ghost cannot endorse what is being said because the speaker has ill intentions (or something else is wrong with the speaker), the Holy Ghost cannot bring it unto the hearts of the listeners.