RMGuy

Alexis, with all due respect I think that while we may not proclaim in official written publications that others are wrong and we're right, that it appears to many that this is EXACTLY what we do. We understand it as trying to share with friends and neighbors the glorious truths of a restored gospel that contains a fulness of truth and builds on their existing believes. They see it as sending door-to-door salesmen around to proclaim that they are wrong and we have it right. We see it as a sincere question by a young boy prophet, who asks for an answer and recieves a personal visit from a loving Father who provides wonderful guidance and counsel They see it as a claim by a young boy that what they have been taught and hold dear is wrong. We see it as an invitation to come and commune with the saints, to participate in the ordinances of salvation, and enter into possible exhaltation. They see it as asking them to forsake what they hold dear because we claim that we are right and they are wrong and unless they do things our way they are lost. I'm not defending those that are seeking to destroy the church, but I think that ALOT of what many percieve as anti-mormon literature is not that at all. I find it a worrying when we as a group are always willing to claim the moral high ground (we didn't mean to offend, we only want to share, we allow others the priviledge of worship how and what they may) and can't understand when others view our actions as offensive. We clearly did not intend this as a personal attack on these other religions or groups. Yet, when these other groups write what they believe or attempt to share it with us, we see it as a personal attack and offensive. We can't have it both ways. For what it is worth, that's how I see it. -RM

We are highly accepting so long as they are just like us. -RM

“I am prepared to meet my maker. Whether my maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.” ― Winston Churchill I love Churchill quotes. -RM

Tell me you had a Mars bar though? Please tell me you didn't miss out on that? I had a companion that used to say that if they didn't have Mars bars in the CK then he wasn't going...lol! -RM

Where can we get some of that....oh wait, you meant it took AWAY hypersexuality.....never mind. Please bear with me, in a weird mood this afternoon, it should pass shortly. -RM

I always found Stairway to Heaven nice, but your results could differ. -RM

Seriously? She should not be treated the same because of a physical attribute? Should I be judged differently because I am sporting a goatee? -RM

with Ribena to drink and a Mars bar for afters......... I'm homesick now -RM

Served in England. Given the choice between there and here (the US) I would pick there everytime. Why? Better Humor Better Chocolate Better Scenery My rule, be proud of where you are and who you are. -RM

First I think you would need to define what you mean by anti-mormon literature, as what falls into that definition may have a direct bearing on the intentions and purposes of the author. For example, there are numerous works that are not written or published by the church or church members. I wouldn't consider them anti. Depending on your view point there are numerous works that present facts that may make the average member uncomfortable. I wouldn't consider them anti either. There are even works that publish for the world aspects of the gospel that members hold sacred. Again, not neccesarily anti in my opinion. When a work though begins to present untruths and does so deliberatly and intentionally for the purpose of destroying faith then I feel comfortbale labeling it as anti. In my opinion there is much that gets labeled as anti, simply because it was not written by a church member and contradicts some cherished belief. Just my $.02 -RM

It's the eye shadow and lipstick I want to see him in...lol! -RM

Well you COULD be Spartan, but I think it would be a cause for the revokation of your temple recommend. -RM

Not sure if this is what you are looking for by way of feedback or not, but I think too many times we seem to equate "progression" with callings. Since you mentioned priesthood progression I will use it as an analogy. Many times we can fall into the trap of thinking, we'll I've never been called to a bishopric or the high council, or into the leadership of a quorum. Similarly we might think that I've never been ordained a high priest so I haven't progressed as far as I would like. For me, progression is a much more personal experience. Am I a better person that I was yesterday? Am I open to truth and understanding? Am I doing things because I was told to, or because I understand and want to do them? In short, am I being refined into the type of person that I eventually want to be? For me, there is no purpose in "checking boxes" so that I can get a temple recommend and be sealed with my family for eternity, if I haven't spent time "checking the boxes" to build the relationship with my family so that they will actually want to be with me for eternity. For me the church is not about callings, positions, or even commandments and obedience. For me it is about eliminating from my own life the attributes and attitudes that I don't want to be there, and cultivating the behaviors and values that I want to develop. Those things can't be measured outwardly or even judged well by others. They are instead between me and God. I measure progession on a very personal yardstick, sometimes I grow by leaps and bounds, othertimes there seems to be little progess, sometimes I even regress. I don't let others determine what, where, or how I should be. Don't feel like your role has to be define that your only role can be or should be as a wife, or mother. Just because you are a woman doesn't mean you have or don't have a nurturing role. You were given agency, and you have amazing potential. Don't allow yourself to be confined into a narrowly defined box. Eternal progression is about bursting the borders of that box, and becoming someone extraordinary! -RM

So you have never had or foresee an instance in which a prophet may speak contrary to God's will? Never an instance in which a life might have been better off through following the Spirit? That seems like an pretty big stretch. -RM

Eowyn, I completely agree. Unfortunately, there are some who do not understand the principle that way....as I stated in my previous post they unerstand virtue as equivalent to virginity. As such, they see no way to be fully "restored" from sexual sin, and see rape as the same as willing participation. If individuals do not understand that distinction then this can be a dangerous message for youth. My $.02 -RM

No problem. :-) -RM

Spartan, Not sure about the purpose of your response. Mine was aimed more at Judo, since we can see that the ban wasn't something that was in place during the Kirtland period. Why that is the case isn't something that I have spent a lot of time with, but I think that many members of the church beleive that the ban was always in place since the time of Cain until 1978, which is clearly not the case. African-American's were ordained during the Kirtland and Nauvoo period and participated in temple ordinances during the late Nauvoo period as well. Your post reads like it is more of a response to StephenVH than to mine, since I never mentioned polygamy. So not sure exactly why you quoted my post? -RM

Just as a point of factual reference I think we should remember that there where African-Americans or "Blacks" who held the priesthood and served in leadership positions throughout the Kirtland period and into the Nauvoo time frame. Brigham Young did not codify the prohibition against priesthood ordination until after the exodus to the west. At the time of that ratification he was not sustained as President of the Church but was sustained as The President of the Quorum of the 12. -RM

So, the advice I'm looking for is where do I start? Transfer. No seriously. The Church gave up on the idea of "gathering to zion" a long time ago and emphasized the idea of building zion where you are. Except we don't apply the same standard to BYU. It reminds me of the military and getting your ticket punched. Now I'm not saying that BYU is a bad school or anything like unto it. But it is not the only good school, and it is not the only school that has potential LDS dating partners. There’s surely somewhere a lowly place in earth’s harvest fields so wide, where there are lovely sisters of the church that are looking for someone just like you. Perhaps that IS at BYU, but perhaps it is not. -RM

With the utmost respect, and even submitting that I believe that was indeed the intention of the quotation so cited....that is NOT what it says. It does not address whether virtue was willingly given up or forcibly taken, and there are many in the church that have tended to identify virtue as synonymous with virginity. Hence the case of my friend illustrated above. I mention this because I think your caveat is an important one, not because I am casting aspersions your way. -RM

For me the more important question is: Am I trying to love others unconditionally? -RM

Spartan, I liked your statement, "Don't just say "it's true" tell them exactly what it is that is true and real." I find it interesting that we seem to have a different definition of what a testimony is in the church. I had this discussion with the YM/YW the other evening. When we testify we have an obligation to tell the truth. So there is a big difference between saying I think, I believe, and I know. We need to be careful in what we say. For example, I KNOW the benefits of the WoW. I can demonstrate how living said principle has benefited my life. I KNOW that chastity is important, not only for you, but for your future spouse. I BELIEVE that we have a prophet on the earth who guides and directs us, and I act accordingly. I THINK that it is important for us to gain confirmation from the Spirit of the council he provides. -RM

lol. -rm

Mormonmusic, excellent post. This is a very touchy subject for me. Though it was many years ago....and I am not suggesting in anyway that this is right, I had a good friend of mine who as dateraped. Her parents had used this statement to explain in FHE and family discussions the importance of the LOC and maintaining virtue. Now I believe that we are all responsible for our own actions, but my friend decided to take her own life. Her note indicated that she felt it was the only way that she could repent of what had happened. It wasn't even her fault....it was rape. Yet in part because of the stance her parents took, and how they communicated it to her, she felt she had not choice. Now I know that isn't what the quote says, and I also would state that it was never even the intent. But it is what my friend got out of it, and why I made my initial post. As for me an my house I'll believe that the Lord meant for the atonement to be used, even for the most heinous of sins. That doesn't in any way excuse poor or immoral behavior. But I am with Mormonmusic here. We need to discerne what we read, hear and expeience and then act accordingly. Because of my previous experience this statement is just a bit to over the top. -RM

HiJolly. Excellent post. I have always had a problem with stating something like "The Church is true" Really? Like my car is true? I think a statement such as "The doctrine of the church is true" or that, "the leaders of the church teach true principles" "The testimonies of the prophets are true" or similar is more authentic and a better descriptor, generally, of what the individual actually means. -RM