Magen_Avot

Indeed. The JST Matthew 23:1 & 2 reads: (and this is not directed at anyone, um... except me sometimes) Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying, The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. All, therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, they will make you observe and do; for they are ministers of the law, and they make themselves your judges. But do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. You said it well, this is a gospel of love and longsuffering. We all deserve a break.

I've seen one of those "lets prove it shows" and they showed that very little alcohol is cooked out. I also sometimes wonder who is doing the justification, the one reasoning it's against the WoW or the one who doesn't believe it is. My wife drinks a very occasional NB, I can't stand that smell, near or otherwise. She always comes across very exact in other things. But how exact should anything be lived? Not doing it oneself? Letting everyone know it's not for themself? Letting everyone know it's not for anyone? Stopping everyone one see's and telling them it's bad, harmful or otherwise against the wishes of God? Or worse.....? Exactness is exactly great for exactly whoever thinks they need to do that and where in their life they need to do that. It still boils down to "their" idea of what "exactness" is or should be. What I'm getting at is no matter what we do well, we humans do pretty poorly in something else. It is a measure for an individual and their relationship with God. As an example: is paying 10% of every dime (including taxes or anything else), or is paying 90% the example of exactness? Just how far over the line should one have to go? I've often hear that noone should be commanded in all things. I say, "so don't do the commanding then". but sometimes these things are enough to

Oh!

I think the online world is more complicated than that, but I wouldn't dispute this in some interactions at all. I'm certainly no expert but human psychology in cyberspace by the little I've heard/read is interesting. I did read a little about inhibition/disinhibition in terms of online interactions and I can understand that each person responds differently and may be based on a lot of factors which include the "person" and the circumstances of the discussion. No doubt the sense of anonymity, invisibility, asynchronous communication combined with cyberspace and personalities is mind boggleing (to me at least). But I have at least learned a bit more about myself here (my second and now only online community). Your OP has certainly added to my own self reflection and I hope it will become part of my asynchronous thought process.

I took a look and was appalled. A. P. P. A. L. L. E. D. !!! I think the educational environment should focus on helping students keep their minds on their studies. How could anyone stoop that low? And I, for one, feel that peer pressure should be used to help control such outbursts. ahem,... I was talking about the note!

This is a good point. There have been 'stories' about such things but I don't know if they are true. The case you suggest is without any doubt IMO, not just wrong, but I believe could be prosecuted in court; however, considerations for an emancipated 16 year old might be doable, but that also may also require consideration of a judge and church authorities if the parents were against it,... idk.

Thank you,... I wish I could know the details cuz the article I read was very interesting. I'm not asking for the scoop, but it does seem like a lesson about ethics is afoot.

jmjlaw, I've been chewing on your thread since it was posted and almost replied directly several times. I feel its easy to get off path at times,... sometimes we all have that going IMO. It's important to recognize where we embrace doctrine and where we diverge from it or fill in the gaps as we see things. To this end, I think there have been some great answers and I don't think I could add much to them. What has plagued my thoughts since reading your post is this: your questions remind me of philosophies used by some who embrace or self identify as "disaffected" (at least according to my perception of it). Also, interestingly enough, the George Orwell book reference that was used is also connected to the use of this term, by some at least. Regardless of what I believe , I also don't believe in coddling the saints. They should know who and what is out there, hear other opinions and build strong testimonies. I recognize that I might be off base though,... but just a little , but I'm not being accusatory as much as stating an observation. You are welcome to your way of thinking, but to the extent that it has been revealed so far, I believe in the "Plan of Salvation" and am not in agreement with your view on it.

This is an interesting cunumdrum. What are the wishes of those who passed on? Some investigators are told not to join the church. Some will do it anyway and others not. Is it being honest in their dealings if they get baptised anyway? Vicarious baptisms against the wishes of the living (barring circumstances mentioned earlier) is not an issue of being honest in our dealings unless they ask you and you deny the truth. Is it ethical? Could be debated but only you can answer that one for yourself. In the end the person has their say don't they? I know the living makes it more complicated.

Do we know who ignored the rule for proxy baptisms? I havn't read where this is known. It may have been done accidently, or on purpose and the person may have been True Believing or... not.

Vort,... About your comment:

Oh thank goodness! I don't cook & my wife being Native American doesn't go there either!

Hi Iggy! Ya know what you are experienceing is just life and we all respond differently. Doling out opinions can be mixed with imperfect filters and judgements which I don't believe you deserve here because it just wouldn't help. I think it's great you've taken a step back to look at the situation and, you've even asked for input here. I do believe this is as good an opportunity there is to make a difference, and by what you said several people can be impacted for the better. There are pearls in the responses to your OP and I am rooting for you as you find ways to reach out to this woman. I would share ideas such as visiting her, inviting her over for dinner, giving her rides where ever she may need to go (as your schedule permits of course). Doing this or anything else for her will be most beneficial as you approach Heavenly Father and act with the love of Christ,... and I'm sure you know that. And... (since I am responding to 'what I would do') I'd apologize to the BP. I'd just bet it's not easy making the hard decisions, or the right ones when they're not popular. This would be a humbling experience for me, and what the hec! I've been there before. Good luck Iggy.

Tried to inject a humorous pic but it didn't work. Oh well.

Yep, and so it should be. Before the block system was in place the sacrement was specifically passed in jr. sunday school to all the younsters. Yes, they are mortal men making rules and regulations, but not only is it their business to do so, they have the Priesthood keys and the responsibility to do so. I don't say this to argue, there must simply be a system in place for the kingdom to be administered by. Not always easy to swallow I admit, but it this is what we have until the time we don't. We do all have our opinions and some seem more appreciated than others, I agree, but I do see this forum as a place where we all can have a say including you and I. I don't know what you mean by "being judged from the very beginning" though. Some comments can be harsh sounding, but other comments can just be misunderstood and it sometimes takes some contemplation to get a better idea about what was said. I think your comments are important because I get to consider another point of view. It doesn't matter if I or anyone else agree. I also understand your frustration cuz I felt the same way a couple of times, but for me taking a step back to collect my thoughts helped a lot. I for one would prefer you stay as I enjoy hearing other points of view,... (well, mostly ). Your voice may be just one of many, but not less valued by me at least.

Privacy in today's online world is an odd bird, but it doesn't really exhist. Kinda weird when you contemplate the religeous aspect of the site but even in our own home we can't break the law (rules if you will) and avoid the consequence. I got modded twice and was embarrassed and offended at the same time. I stepped on the line (ok,... maybe a little past the line) without realizing it due to emotions and hey, I learned something. I have received two email notifications from two different members I didn't know and when I went to my profile the messages didn't exhist. I looked up their profiles, which also didn't exhist. I've always wondered what that was about but after contemplating it, I probly don't want to know. I wouldn't want to moderate, but the hard decisions must be made sometimes and I don't see that I have the right or need to know the skinney. If I keep it to a dull roar, I'm ok... if not appreciated. :) The OP is much appreciated by me though.

Thanks for pointing to the handbook Dravin, I was getting ready to take a look when I read your response. I don't say anything now, but back in the day, I'd just explain to the non-member that the sacrement was to re-new ones baptismal covenant and let them make the decision. In the case of my children, my wife and I discussed their future baptimal dates and decided that at age 7 we'd sit down to discuss the importance of the sacrement, that we preferred they not take it until they were baptised but it was their choice. They all chose (at 7 yo) to wait until baptised and it seemed to make a difference to them. Some people seem to really get bent out of shape about it but it was our family decision to make and our kids plan to carry on the tradition. Either way, it's all about the internal process of turning to Christ, some days we do better and others,... not so well. Of course; we are (in our natural state) an enemy to God. Even if we feel we are righteously judging or being a "lion of the Lord" we can dramatically erode good feelings and subsequently the spirit of the whole ward. I love the direction the prophet has taken in the handbook of instruction. But it's not always easy to be accepting, loving and forgiving where our passions come into play,... at least I know this about myself. Good OP

Amen

Meee tooo!... like Vitimin "M" (that would be Motrin for the less informed) Oh,... and hang up the Superman Cape. Thats a biggie, but then so is my posture pedic.

Not hammer and chisel?

... and remember "The Matrix". Humans didn't do well on the grid in a perfect world, suffering was essential. It's doctrine man!

In fact, as spirit children we were a member of a family. God is our Father after all. Then and now.

they don't sparkle?

Getting "stuck" in this world is not taught in official doctrine even if it sounds thought provoking. There are some who believe all kinds of things and others who will share their personal experiences where they have come into contact with spirits of the dearly departed and have their own personal beliefs. Some may believe a spirit can get "stuck" perhaps, others may say that only a person who chooses to remain will linger (IMO a disobedient spirit even if otherwise easy to get along with). I tend to believe the latter based on my experiences, but even this is not taught in doctrine. I have never heard or read anthing official in conference talks that indicates getting stuck in this world is a doctrine. Nor do I believe this is possible if I understand what you are describing and if that's what the author is really saying. Generally, people write books, and they are in the business to make money by selling these books and they are under no obligation to maintain doctrinal standards, even if the book is supposed to be based on a true story. Perhaps at best, all the author can do is relate what they think has occured. I havn't read the book nor am I trying to diss the book, but you might think about putting it aside considering the concerns it is generating... or, ... not. Just a thought. After looking at it online, it sounds like a good read though.

In D&C 132 vs's 19 (20-26 is a good read too) 19: ...Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kindoms, pricipalities... Just some fodder for thought about number denoted resurrections. Vs 26 I've not heard or read in talks that I recall. Cheers!