RMGuy

Vort, I would guess that most sacrament meetings are held more because we are supposed to have a meeting and then the bishopric finds speakers to fill the time rather than the bishopric feels inspired to address a specific issue and then organizes a meeting to meet that need. If the latter were the case then perhaps sacrement meeting would go for 2-3 hours some weeks or only have the sacrement and no instruction another....based on the needs of the unit. Perhaps it is important here to distinguish that I'm not saying that there isn't valuable, worthwhile, or spiritually uplifting information conveyed during those meetings. I like you have had the experience many times where perhaps I wasn't excited to attend a meeting, but went anyway and found it of great benefit. I am saying that many times we have meetings because we are supposed to, it is tradition, or the expectation than out of a sincere desire to worship. I wish that wasn't the case. With that being said, I'm off to my stake meetings :-) Wish you all a great evening. -RM

I like the statement that we told that the saints "And the church did meet together oft, to fast and to pray, and to speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls. And they did meet together oft to partake of bread and wine, in remembrance of the Lord Jesus." I think we need to remember that this is to uplifting and Spiritually nourishing. We also need to remember that the family is the basic unit of the church. I have in the past skipped local, stake, or regional meetings because it was important for our fundamental unit to meet instead. Recently, due to work and church callings I had not seen my family all week. I skipped Stake Priesthood meeting in order to stay home with them. What was the stake meeting on? Being a good husband and father. Can you imagine having not spent time with your family in a week and then listening to that? So instead of listening to how to do it better, I did it. Sometimes we have meetings in the church because there is important information to convey, and sometimes we have meetings in the church because the handbook says we are supposed to have a meeting. I find the first type very beneficial, I find the second at best a waste of time and a bore, and in somecases detrimental. Your experience may differ. -RM

I think much depends on the integrity of the questioner. What do they seek to find? There are few today who believe in the power, might, and majesty of Zeus, or Appolos....so what changed. Truth? Perception? Believe? Knowledge? Understanding? Today there are many that claim they belong to the true church, some of them are LDS and some are Catholic. Others are Seventh Day Adventis, Jehovah's Witnesses, Muslims, or Baptists, the one thing that we can be sure of is that if any of them are correct about belonging to the one true church, then the rest of them do not. Your question seems to me a question of from what and whence does absolute truth come, how do we know, and are we willing to test it....if it means we might be wrong. For me we test, by trying to prove something false, not by trying to prove it correct. In science we call that the null hypothesis. The Book for Mormon recognizes the same, "...I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true..." For me, something that is true should not have any fear of being exposed to light...beat on it...test it, try it, and let's see what the result is. If it holds up, its valid....if it doesn't then we have learned as well. -RM

Does the dog need to be sealed too, or does it get a free ride? Sorry, couldn't resist. -RM

I am going to share a couple of thoughts that might make me unpopular with some of my fellow forum members. Having once been one of those missionaries, I think you need to remember that they are 19 or 20 year old young men. They have been set apart as representatives of the Lord, but that did not remove whatever immaturiy they may have, nor did it magically endow them with wisdom and experience beyond their years. When you couple this with a need to return and report on their efforts and a link (whether real or imagined) between baptism and success, one can sometimes see how missionaries can be percieved as pressuring....even when it is not a good time. In personal experience I have seen missionaries drop investigators who they did not believe to be "progressing." If we assume good intentions on the part of the missionaries (and I would), it can also mean that they believe that this step would be a good and powerful first step for the rest of your life. As such, it pains them to see you not recieving the blessing that are in store for you. I think it is important to know that the Gospel is not one sized fits all. Some individuals join the Church after a week and are stalwart members the remainder of their lives. Others join hastily, never really had a good understanding of the church or a testimony of the gospel and fall away as quickly as they joined. We recently had a new convert in our ward that investigated for decades. In your situation, perhaps call the missionaries up. Schedule a meeting, and share with them exactly what you have shared here with us? Again, each situation is different. Your Heavenly Father knows that. Best of luck, and hope your mother is doing better soon. -RM

It is interesting to me that we as members of the church have a difficult time understanding why people would be critical of the Book of Mormon if they have never actually read it, but only listened to what others have said about it. Yet we seem to have no qualms about making judgements about something tha we have neither read or watched outselves. I'm sure there's a word for that somewhere...... -RM

Which is interesting since during the time when the KJV was translated thou was considered very informal and you was considered much more formal. Almost a reverse of what we have today....in other words if an English Citizen were to read a current translate as opposed to the KJV, he or she would likely find the modern translation to more formal/reverential than the historical one. For us, it seems just the opposite is true. Interesting that we see thee, thine, thou, and thy as formal, when they actually were the exact opposite. -RM

You can always come back. There are a few things that you should probably realized. 1. Your new ward will love to see you and have you. Feel free to invite your fiance along. I am sure that they would love to meet him too. 2. Your new bishop will understand. 3. There is no need to be rebaptized. You have just been away, not out of the church. 4. You can always attend. However, some of what has transpired the church views as sin, and will need to be repented of. That can take time, it might involve church discipline, and will probably require you to be able/willing to move out or get married, 5. Number 4 does not stop you from attending and fellowshipping with the saints. 6. ((hugs)) and welcome back :-) -RM

For what it is worth this might help: I was told by my mission trainer (and it is some of the best advice that I have ever recieved) that there are 3 types of people: 1. The jokers. For these people nothing really matters. It is all about the laugh, they care only about themselves, and only about having fun. They went on a mission to see the world, or because their girlfriend was going to dump them if they didn't, or because Mom and Dad would buy them a truck when it was over. 2. The Pharasiees. These individuals are concerned with being seen to do the right thing. Picking out a tie in the morning is a matter of fasting and prayer. They are so concerned with being hyper obedient that many times they miss the reason that the commandment existed in the first place. 3/ Then there are the boys or the girls. When this group of people work, they work hard. When they play, they play hard. But whether they are working or whether they are playing they are having fun, because the Gospel is meant to be fun, and if it isn't then perhaps we need to reevaluate what we are doing. He concluded by explaining that we all have the ability to move between there groups freely. What will you choose to be. For what it is worth. -RM

That is a great deal so long as you don't have to eat them. Big Mac's are a great way to grease just about anything, and they never really spoil. -RM

We follow order of operations to be obediant. Of course there are blessings (getting the right answer being one of them), some of us have a testimony of the order of operations, but if you don't and you continue to be obedient to the rule eventually you too can have a testimony that it works and that it is good and proper. Sorry couldn't resist. :-) -RM

I didn't read the entire thread, so perhaps someone else has already suggested it. Perhaps you want to bake a nice plate of brownies.....with exlax. -RM

Spartan, That was a great post. I think that the way you just responded is how I expect the Savior would have us respond. Do we try to understand, do we try to empathise, really empathise, or not. Do we take responsibility for our actions when what we have said, or done, or thought caused pain or hurt? Or are we more concerned with being right than with what is right? Thank you for being an example. -RM

Terrible news :-( May the families and friends find peace and joy in their memories together. -RM

I think to we as members need to understand that a prophets role is guide and direct. By design his role is to speak to the world (not just the church) about the reality of the Gospel generally, and to testify of Christ specifically. We have heard that sometimes an individual can speak as a prophet and sometimes as a man. Personally I think that can even be expanded upon: 1. An individual called to be President of the Church and a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator does not give up their ability to speak as an individual, nor do they give up their own opinions, biases, or prejudices. They are still human beings, men, who can make mistakes. There is no difference between this and the opinion of your home teacher, or the guy in the next cubicle at work (as it relates to the commandment or salvation) it is simply and by definition the opinion of man. 2. Opinion - even as a Prophet there have been times when an individual has given an opinion. In fact, we know from the minutes of meetings of the 12 that there is often significant debate regarding principles and doctrine even among this August group of Prophets. Clearly they are inspired and are seeking the will of the Lord. They are inspired, but they are voicing opinion. In my view the weakest of the inspired counsels. 3. Advice - sometimes even when speaking under the mantle of Prophet, what they give us is advice. Good advice no doubt, but advice none the less. This can be construed as general guidance to the world as a whole, and you will generally find benefit in following it. However, it might not be helpful for every member or non-member of the church. 4. Policy - the has been tested enough and the Brethren are comfortable enough with this direction to commit it to writing. It becomes a base line guide for the church as a whole, but is still not necessarily unchanging and eternal truth. We can all think of instances in which policy has changed. While we should be living the policies of the church, in my opinion, it is important to distinguish these from the next level but one of these levels. 5. Principles - This is what guides policy. And it is here that I think we really begin to touch the Divine. Principles are underlying doctrines that guide policy, advice, and opinion. For me personally President Hinckley's thoughts on more than one pair of earrings would fall in the category of either opinion or advice. It clearly isn't policy. But it IS predicated on the principle that the body is sacred and should be treated with respect. In this instance opinion or advice is clearly guided by principle. 6. Commandments - it is rare to hear a prophet of the Lord stand up to declare "Thus saith the Lord" or anything like it. However, it is clearly their responsibility and right to do so. And when they so declare, in my opinion, we have elevated to a different level. Of course, the most common example is that of the 10 commandments brought down from the Mountain, yet there are many others. These commandments guide everything else except.... 7. Eternal truth (gospel) - How does anything trump commandment? We need look no farther than Abraham with Isaac, or Nephi and Laban. Both of whom either did, or were willing to break the prohibition regarding thou shalt not kill. We have all heard the statement, when the Lord commands, do it. That probably falls into the realms of eternal truth! Yet this is where it can get difficult. There is not flag that gets waived to show us when a Prophet is speaking his mind or the will of the Lord, and if we don't know which is which it can be difficult. It can lead us to pray about a concept and get spiritual confirmation that the advice, or opinion is indeed true and binding and we can think that this then applies to the whole church, by way of commandment, when in reality it applies to us as an individual. It can lead to us perverting good counsel that was meant to edify and uplift us and lead us to judge or criticize or look askance at someone else who received a different answer. Those are just my $.02 -RM

Interesting topic Judo and a great post. You covered a lot of ground there. I liked what you said about different types of evidences as well as different types of people. I tend to fall more to the side of logic than to feelings. Allow me to pose a question, if I may. It is generally accepted in a court that eye witness accounts are some of the weakest forms of evidence, that while important they are not truely empirical as they cannot be tested and proved. If we accept that two or three (or more) witnesses of whatever type is in evidence better supports truth claims, then while we can claim those in the church do they not also support other church's equally? For example: 1. number of people testifying - we are greatly outnumbered by many other religions 2. Martyrdom - many others in different religions have sealed their testimony with their blood 3. Physical evidence - we are better here than many, and worse than some. 4. Fruits of the spirit - again we do fairly well here. THe church members have done an excellent job of demonstrating values and actions that are Christ centered. We have some that have not done so well, but many more that have. At the same time so have many other religions as well. I see what you are getting at with reference to Doctrine and Covenants, yet at the same time, I think that many in other religions would say that they KNOW (heart and mind) that their church is right/true/ good/chosen fill in the term of your choice, and I know some who have done as asked yet not recieved a witness. This is a great topic and I am interested in others thoughts. -RM Great topic. I'm interested in seeing others thoughts.

The opposite of love is not hate....it is indifference. -RM

This question was posed to me recently and I am interested as to what everyone here thinks. I know how I answered it... So assuming you had to choose between maintaining Faith in something that brought you Joy or learning the truth regarding that thing, which would you choose. Let's make this something none threatening.....Santa Claus. If you could rewinde the clock and have never found out the truth about Santa Claus becuase your faith in the guy in the red suit made you happy, would you choose to still believe in Santa or would you rather know the truth? Note that it is also the case to have Faith in something, and the truth can also support your faith rather than tear it down. For example, I can have Faith that the principles of the Gospel bring happiness.....the truth is that they do. Alma 32 talks about this a bit. You have faith in something then the evidence and knowledge come. The question is, if you didn't know whether the truth would validate or shatter your faith, which would you pick...faith or truth? -RM

Good catch Mom! You have gotten good advice above. I'll reiterate a few, and add a couple of items. 1. Address it. 2. Don't overreact to it. (A lot of kids, including LDS kids and girls not just boys look at this kind of stuff. That doesn't make it right or ok, but it also is 'normal'). 3. Remember that anything YOU do isn't as important as what HE does. What I mean is that you can put filters on the computer, you can limit his computer time, you can pick him up from school, drop him off, prohibit him from certain friends. All of those might be good ideas or bad ideas, but unless he decides he doesn't want to look at this stuff then all that will happen is you won't know about it, because he will still find a source. This has to come from him. You can help him, but you can't force him. 4. How you act will in large measure determine how he reacts. You know him better than anyone here. Use that knowledge wisely. Tailor what you do, to what he needs. Some kids need dropped on like a ton of bricks. Others just need a caring ear that says, I know you did this, do you want to talk about it? The wise parent knows which is called for when. Best of luck -RM

One of my favorite Christmas songs. -RM

I'll give you a slightly different take for what it is worth. It is inappropriate IF you believe it is inappropriate. The real question here isn't if there is some cosmic and eternal right or wrong regarding this issue, but rather what it does to your relationship together. Can you support her and trust her in this, or does it make you uncomfortable, insecure, nervous, or anxious. If this is the case then the two of you need to talk about it. If she feels it is more important to maintain this past friendship even in the face of your concerns then that should tell you how she values each relationship. On the otherhand, you need to understand that if this makes you nervous or insecure, she is going to feel that you don't trust her judgement. Either way, this isn't about what people on this board think, or even what your friends, family, or anyone else thinks, it is about what you as a couple believe. Good luck. -RM

I'll echo what everyone else has said. You are not to old, if it is something that you want and feel you should do, and feel able to do. Missions can be vrey make or break. I have seen missions be wonderful things in the lives of some missionaries, and I have seen others struggle after having been on a mission. Know that it can be a very good thing, but also know it is OK if you don't go. -RM

Interesting, My understanding was that most of the tin in the ancient near east resulted from deposits in Cornwall (Which would support the Land West or the Sunset Land attributions as well) or from Brittany. I'd never heard this view before. -RM

There are many scriptures that I would have a great deal of difficulty taking literally. -RM

Awesome! This helped! Got it, and thanks! -RM