erog84
-
Posts
56 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by erog84
-
-
14 minutes ago, Vort said:
My intent wasn't to tear you down, but to say that calling the cops every time someone says "boo" won't help the problem. Making the blanket statement that "the Church shouldn't try to determine the legality of things before reporting to the authorities" throws the door open very wide indeed. If you meant only the case where someone claims abuse or rape, then I probably agree that it should just be reported, unless it's so obviously false that it doesn't merit attention.
But I am not sure how that applies in the present case. For example, Brother Leavitt heard the sister's claim in 1984, when mandatory reporting laws didn't exist (I think). He obviously had serious reservations about the reliability of her report. In retrospect, with the present evidence that Bishop was a pervert, that looks pretty bad -- but at the time, it seemed reasonable to Leavitt, and if we had been there with him, we may well have agreed.
Hindsight is 20/20, but I would rather a paper trail showing I covered my bases than ignoring a situation if it comes back to bite me. There is never a perfect solution, and will always be "exceptions to the rule", but as I stated before, better safe than sorry.
-
4 minutes ago, Vort said:
You may be right. In at least some sense, you doubtless are. But you and FoolsMock seem to miss the point of my post, which was not directly in response to the OP. Rather, it was a sad, perhaps even bitter, comment on how the world, including too many Church members, receive correction and advice of our leaders -- long denying even the very existence of any problem, or disputing how bad it really is, or arguing over whether the Church is approaching it in the correct manner, only in the end to despair at how awful their situation is and how the Church and its old-fart members could not possibly understand the depths of their pain.
There is definitely plenty of people that fall into that.
-
2 minutes ago, Vort said:
How far are you willing to take this? Should the Church authorities call the cops if Sister Whoever shows up with a black eye? Should they contact CPS every time a child has a bruise?
It is naive in the extreme to say that the Church should never try to determine legality before calling the cops. No reasonable person would ever reflexively call the cops without first making some effort to determine whether there seemed to be a criminal or other legal problem.
Having read your posts for years now (long time lurker), I think you would appreciate a "common sense" approach. When someone is saying child abuse or rape, that is much different than a single bruise. And if you aren't sure, better safe than sorry.
-
3 hours ago, Vort said:
PROGRESS:
1980: "Nudity isn't that big a deal. It's natural. It's how God created us! People in the Church need to get over their sexual hang-ups. It's not like nudity leads to sex!"
1985: "Why all the worry about 'petting'? That's a 1950s term! Get with the times! A little kissing and affection isn't breaking the law of chastity! Sheez, people, lighten up!"
1990: "Porn? Seriously? 'Oh no, nekkid wimmen, now I must burn my eyes out of their sockets to repent!' Grow up.News flash, Nimrod: Boys have been sneaking peeks at naked women since people were put on earth. It's NOT a big deal. Your grandpa did it; your dad did it. Don't worry about it. It's normal kid stuff. Cosí fan tutti."
1995: "Quit with the 'oversexualizing' handwringing. So a boy has sex with his girlfriend. It's not the end of the world. Do you even know what the Old Testament penalty was for 'fornication'? Marriage! Not. A. Big. Deal."
2000: "You old farts are so sex-centered. Why is homosexuality a big deal? It's not like homo porn is going to 'convert' anyone to gayness. You need to get over your obsession with pornography."
2005: "The internet is awesome! How is porn a big deal? Guess what, Grandpa: You had porn, too! You think those Playboys were for the articles? The hypocrisy is stifling! Get a grip."
2010: "Come out of the Stone Age! Your sexual hang-ups are not my problem. Gay sex? Not my problem! Not a problem at all! Porn availability? Exercise some self-control! Get a filter! Sheesh, why do you always insist that everyone else adapt to your issues?"
2018: "YOU JUST DON'T KNOW HOW BAD IT IS! *sob* PORN EVERYWHERE! IT WASN'T LIKE THIS FOR YOU, BACK WHEN THINGS WERE PRISTINE! IT'S SOOOOO MUCH HARDER TODAY! YOU HAVE NO IDEA! DON'T JUDGE ME FOR MY PORN USAGE!"
Progress, indeed.
I don't think some general views by certain people over the past 40 years represent every young mans struggle today with pornography. Pornography is in much more abundance at such a younger age, that I personally feel like it is a lot more difficult issue for young men in 2018 than it was in 1980 on a whole (everyone is different).
-
47 minutes ago, Grunt said:
I'm assuming when NT said "still have the court documents" it was from the authorities.
Yea, maybe I miss-interpreted. I read it as the "church court" since I am so used to people calling it that.
-
21 minutes ago, estradling75 said:
Sent by whom... The accuser??... that is well within their legal right if they want to but sometimes they chose not to no one stopped them but themselves.. The Church? Do you really think the Church should drag both the accused and the accuser into legal system if the accuser is unwilling? Honesty how do you expect that to go if the legally adult accuser does not want to testify? We are not talking youth who are minors and seen and seen as legally incompetent. We are talking full grown legally recognized adult here making their own choices
On 4/6/2018 at 12:26 PM, NeuroTypical said:I would just like to make sure I'm on record here.
- A few years back, I had information regarding a Mormon in another state sexually abusing a child. I knew the child.
- I sent my information to that person's bishop and stake president, and asked them to tell me the results.
- The church held a disciplinary counsel and the person was excommunicated. The stake president called me back to tell me that result. He asked me to let him know if he could do anything else to help the child heal.
- I am a real person. This is not a rumor, or a thirdhand account of something. I still have all the court documents and emails and transcripts and stuff.
I'm only guessing here, but when horrible stuff like this happens, I'm guessing my experience is more of the norm than everything we're reading about with the Joseph Bishop incident.
This is what I quoted, and was replying to his personal situation. Perhaps there is miscommunication going on because your response is hard to match up to what I said based on his personal situation. Maybe you felt like I was responding to the original posting? Here is my reply regardless.
- Sent by himself. If he was able to send the knowledge of knowing child abuse was going on to a church authority, he should have been sending that to the legal authorities.
- I don't think the Church should be involved at determining the legality of those things other than turning over what information they are given to the authorities (legal ones). If you want to let the Bishop know what's going on, fine, but that should be secondary to letting CPS (or police, etc) know.
-
On 4/6/2018 at 12:26 PM, NeuroTypical said:
I would just like to make sure I'm on record here.
- A few years back, I had information regarding a Mormon in another state sexually abusing a child. I knew the child.
- I sent my information to that person's bishop and stake president, and asked them to tell me the results.
- The church held a disciplinary counsel and the person was excommunicated. The stake president called me back to tell me that result. He asked me to let him know if he could do anything else to help the child heal.
- I am a real person. This is not a rumor, or a thirdhand account of something. I still have all the court documents and emails and transcripts and stuff.
I'm only guessing here, but when horrible stuff like this happens, I'm guessing my experience is more of the norm than everything we're reading about with the Joseph Bishop incident.
And this is the problem in my view. That information should have been sent to the local legal authorities, not the local ecclesiastic authorities. We see the same issue across many organizations, who keep it all internal when it should be handled outside the organization. How many occurrences have happened just like this, where the local church authority covered it up? Hopefully very few, but I am not too optimistic about that.
-
Divorce proceedings can change by state, so just keep that in mind when hearing about what to do from someone other than your lawyer. From my understanding, in some states cheating on a spouse can effect the outcome, while other states it can't be used at all, so make sure you clarify that with your lawyer.
-
-
I watched Lakers and Warriors last night, and all I could think was " sure if you let me shoot that much I could hit 1-11 also", which is what Kobe's shooting was. I'm sure there is hope he gets better throughout the year, but much longer of this and he needs to save himself the embarrassment and retire, because last night was so mediocre. He didn't look like he belonged in the nba.
Warriors have faced a few good teams, but overall their schedule has been really weak, and all their players are healthy. Any great team needed some luck to elevate them higher, and that is waht the warriors are seeing right now. Will be interesting to see if they lose one of their top players to injury and have to play against a fully healthy cavs/spurs team and how they will deal with it.
-
I have been into MMA I would guess about 10 years now, watching almost every PPV and keeping up on alot of the fighters. But occasionally there will be a fight here or there that makes me step back and question it... for a day or two, then I am back into it. These type of fights would be ones where the ref isn't stopping it even though it is obvious the guy is out on his feet and is just taking a beating until he goes unconscious. Blood and cuts, broken limbs, none of that phases me but when someone can't fight back, the fight should be stopped asap. Sadly most of the refs are terrible.
-
-
I guess we shouldn't be suprised anymore at Coach's getting fired. Seems coachs are the first people on the hotseat and the stars are usually blameless. Being from AZ and a huge suns fan, it's shocking to people here that I am a big fan of the Spurs. The more I read about their organization the more respect I have, and it shows how successful they have been. More organizations need to try that model, and be PATIENT, and see where it takes them.
-
Holly is just beginning. She has now experienced un-clinching from Rhonda. She has the range to keep her at a distance and with superior kickboxing expertise and also now has more time to improve on her ground game. Jon Jones was the top of his class because of that fighting range. It wasn't until later that he gained expertise on the ground as well. Rhonda will have to learn not to rely too much on her judo and figure out a way to penetrate that striking. So, (if Rhonda humbles herself) Rhonda and Holly goes into the rematch on even ground. I predict Holly will be able to command the octagon again as it is easier to keep somebody at a distance that it is for somebody to penetrate a long reach... as is proven by Jones.
But, as is evident in UFC, anything can happen in the octagon.
Holly showed great movement, something I really haven't seen too much of her since she crossed over to mma. She finally is showing what many people expected of her, and that is great. But Ronda wasn't actively trying to take her down, the one instance she did was more opportunistic. IMO Jon Jones is not a great example to compare to Holly Holm. Jon jones uses his length really well to keep distance, Holly uses alot better foot work and Angles. Holly came from a boxing/kickboxing background, Jones comes from a wrestling background, huge difference when discussing Holly keeping it on the feet. Jones has improved ALOT on his BJJ, and we haven't seen too much of Hollies. Slipping out of ONE arm bar attempt though does not make me think she can continue to do it in a rematch if Ronda focuses on that.
I believe Holly is a legit top teir fighter in that division, and that the win wasn't a fluke by anymores. But we see this all the time, bad gameplans can make great fighters look amateur. Holly still has a good chance to win the next fight, but I would put my money on Ronda (if she mentally gets over the beating she took, which might not happen at all).
-
I saw the power rankings and lakers weren't even last place, so that is a plus! Kobe saying he hurts just walking to his car, that he is sore all over.... that is what old age and mileage will do to ya. I think they would be better off without him, but no way he is quitting this season without a serious injury.
-
Was great to see that happen, she has had it coming and finally someone could make it happen. Realistically I still think Ronda takes the rematch. I think she got caught up in her own hype thinking she had great standup and thought she could stand with holly. Always the chance she gets rocked coming in because she is terrible at closing the distance, but I think she would be the favorite on the 2nd fight.
-
Your understanding that the current members adherence to obedience has any resemblance to the Pharisees of old is wrong.
Ok
To properly qualify, members would need to make up a bunch of uninspired rules created by men, adhere to them strictly, while actually disobeying the rules and laws of God.
If you believe our current rules (as in the Handbook of instructions and other polices) are man made and not inspired of God, then you are also wrong. But if you believe that they are, as our inspired prophets and apostles have told us, from God and that God directs this church and it's practices, then adherence to those laws is nothing like the Pharisees, and requisite for our standing before God.
If the Pharisees are as you say, I have no problem with agreeing that our current adherence to the law is nothing like the Pharisees.
As to the Book of Mormon, for a greater understanding of the law, read and study 2 Nephi 25 - specifically vs. 23-28
Note, for example:
"yet we keep the law because of the commandments."
and
"And the words which I have spoken shall stand as a testimony against you; for they are sufficient to teach any man the right way; for the right way is to believe in Christ and deny him not; for by denying him ye also deny the prophets and the law."
Also see the next chapter, vs 1:
"And after Christ shall have risen from the dead he shall show himself unto you, my children, and my beloved brethren; and the words which he shall speak unto you shall be the law which ye shall do."
These are only a few small examples of the importance of the law (or obedience). It doesn't take much reading in the Book of Mormon and/or the D&C to see the importance of strict obedience.
I don't believe I ever claimed we shouldn't follow the law (if I did, please show me so I can correct this). My point once again, is that we focus so much on we have to do this, we have to do that, that we lose sight of the reasons why(besides strict obedience).
To claim that strict obedience and adherence to the law is Pharisaical is mistaken -- even in the context of missing the Spirit of the Law. This is not what the Pharisees were guilty of. Have your read Christ's condemnations of them? I am not sure if this was meant as rhetorical or if you truly think that I have never read the new testament or the BOM (I have both, many times).
for example:
Matt 23:3
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. (Note: no obedience).
vs 4
...but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. (note: no action (no obedience)).
vs 23
...and have omitted the weightier matters of the law (note: omitting part of the law is disobedience).
vs 28
Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. (Iniquity = sin = disobedience).
vs 34
Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: (note: does murder and torture sound like obedience to you?)
Mark 7:7-8
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men... (Note: the commandments of men are what the Pharisees taught).
and vs 9:
Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
etc...
I do not disagree with the idea that some, certainly, need to focus more on the spirit of the law. I also agree wholeheartedly with LeSellers that one cannot follow the spirit of the law by denying the letter of it. (Though I do have to ask -- how on earth could you possibly know the intents of "too many members" hearts and thereby know whether they are or are not within the spirit of the law? I faithfully do my home teaching every month and then someone like you comes along and determines that my heart is not right because I'm only following the letter of the law? How would you know? And if that's the case, then who, may I ask, is doing it right? Certainly not those who fail to do their home teaching faithfully every month.) None of us truly know the intentions/hearts of others, but we make judgement calls EVERY day, and we base our actions on these calls. In my experience, in my own judgement (which I am sure is faulty plenty of times), I believe that some members of the church start to believe that "all is well in zion" because they follow the strict letter of the law. In my own thoughts, I believe the letter of the law is important, but that we shouldn't lose sight of the spirit of the law (as you also seem to agree on). That is all I was trying to point out, not condemning others, not sayign we should ignore the letter of the law, or anything else.
As far as home teaching, I am not even sure how you made that jump. Once again, I don't believe I have ever claimed that you shouldn't follow the letter of the law. But let me give you an example. Home teacher A shows up, even after a hard day at work, tries to give an uplifting message hoping that in some way it will help that family out, and then leaves. Home Teacher B shows up, lets you know that the only reason he is there is to make sure to cross off that list that he did his home teaching, chit chats about random things for a few minutes then leaves. According to Teacher B, they both did the letter of the law, but I would say that teacher A, in my own judgement, also followed the spirit of the law. I have great respect for BOTH teachers, taking the time out to stop by four your families once a month is a commitment and so I don't look down upon teacher B at all. My point is that we as members of the church need to try to be more like teacher A, less like B.
Either way, the comparison to Pharisees is mistaken. The Pharisees were not obedient to the commandments of God. If the comparison was, instead, those members who were not obedient to Pharisees, then I'm with you. All this made up love your neighbor right out of the church stuff, for example by the likes of John Dehlin. Call that sort of thing Pharisaical and we're getting somewhere.
I will have to read more into the Pharisees, but you probably are correct in that regard. I have never read anything from John Dehlin, so I can't speak to your comparison there.
-
Hiding behind "the spirit of the law' often becomes an excuse for ignoring the law altogether.
Of the two extremes, I believe that obeying the spirit of the law is far better than avoiding it.
Jess me, doncha know.
Lehi
I don't disagree, but I never said otherwise. And I never brought up a discussion for both extremes, simply that we as members (myself included) sometimes get so caught up on the letter of the law, that we miss the spirit of it.
-
These are all good points.
I think Kobe is one of a kind though. Time waits for no man, but Kobe can get by (at least for a bit) on savviness and experience. Has he lost a step though? Yes. Big time.
Yea , I feel completely different on this. I think about 4-5 years ago Kobe matured and started to play more team basketball, but the more he has gotten injured the more he has gone back to being a selfish player. Some people will argue that he HAS to put up all those crazy shots because no one else on his team can, but I don't buy that. I hate dropping the Jordan comparison, but during his stint on the Wizards, jordan learned to play effeciently for what he was capable of, but Kobe still seems to be throwing up crazy shots when he doesn't have it in him.
-
I just saw today an article that said Kobe wants to play in the 2016 olympics. I'm kind of facepalming, but I understand historically they have had older people on there that play just a few minutes (larry bird comes to mind). As a competitor though, I would feel like, if I am not good enough to be there, then I shouldn't take someone elses spot, but then again I have never had the opportunity to be on an olympic team....
-
Comments like this mostly just tell me how little the one commenting actually knows about the Pharisees of old, what the importance of "the law" is, and the teachings in the Book of Mormon on the keeping of the law.
Well I am not Pharisee historian, so I won't claim I KNOW all those things you mention. I am simply going off my basic understanding. If you like I can rephrase my words. In regards to the OP, "All is well in zion", my thoughts on the matter are that we as members focus too much on the letter of the law, instead of the spirit of the law.
-
Everyone takes things different, and also reacts differently. What could be me trying to be nice, but blunt and getting to the point might come across as bullying to others. I would say they need to grow a thicker Skin, and they would say I need to not be such a jerk. In the end, I TRY (key word try) to come across as nice as I can with still getting across my points, and those people need to TRY(key word try) to interpret my words as non attacking, and perhaps then we can communicate with eachother regardless of our differences.
-
Re-read your answers after I did mine, I did TERRIBLE! Maybe for others they were fine, but I was shocked at how bad I did.
1. What is another name for America, authorized by the Book of Mormon? Land of promise
2. Is a “seer” and a “prophet” the same thing? Not necessarily. A prophet is automatically a Seer, but a seer is not automatically a prophet (or the other way around)
3. Who is Zelph? Righteous Lamanite Warrior who Joseph Smith pointed out where his burial place was.
4. Where did Adam first offer sacrifice after he was cast out of the Garden of Eden? On an altar...somewhere...
5. In the D&C Section 61, it states that “no flesh shall be safe upon the waters.” What was one part of the fulfillment of this prophecy? No clue
6. What is the name of God in the Adamic language? I don't speak/write in Adamic... so I'm guessing you mean translated into English... Elohim?
7. What are the names of Noah's three sons and what geographical areas did they settle in after the flood? Shem, Hamm yea that's all I have.
8. What is the meaning of the name, “Israel?” Son of God?
9. Which of the Twelve Tribes of Israel was Moses from? Aaron...maybe..
10. How many elders make up a quorum? 12
11. What are the three elements of baptism? Immersion, Holy Ghost...
12. What is the first principle of the gospel? Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
13. What are the three grand orders of the priesthood? No clue.
14. What are the three independent principles taught by Joseph Smith? No clue.
15. Satan can appear as an angel of light. Can he also appear in the sign of the dove? No, God promised he could never do that.
16. Must a person hold the Melchizedek Priesthood in order to cast out evil spirits? Technically ANYONE could cast it out by the Power of God... but specifically using the Priesthood to do so, I believe it does require the Higher Priesthood.
17. What is the meaning of Salvation? To be saved.
18. What is the greatest and most important duty of the Church? To bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.
19. What is the grand key that unlocks the glories and mysteries of the kingdom of heaven? Urim and Thummim?
-
When I think about members today, I mostly think about the Pharisees back in Christs time. It seems to me that now a days we focus sooooo much on the letter of the law, and forget why we have it. The law was made for Man, not the other way around. I, like everyone else is guilty of this, but it seems like we have bought into that we were made for the law. Just my 2 cents.
Joseph Bishop Redux: Lawsuit Filed
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
I completely agree. It's sad that we can now look back and see how much some of these church leaders (Throughout all religions) have failed us. Yes they are only human, just like anyone else, but I think many of us, myself included, expect more out of them.