Anddenex

That is a Zion mentality, which isn't socialism at all. Thus I am still confused where people talk about socialism in the BoM.

Linguistic gymnastics? Do you mean like saying "So it doesn't matter what Jesus said...in the Bible...that's not what I am talking about." Then, the very next sentence you begin quoting the Bible as a reference, while telling someone who quoted the Bible they didn't understand your point. John 6: 43 - 60, is a symbolic verse. The symbolism is easily shown in verses 47 - 50, 58. The Lord begins addressing eternal life, and that he is the bread of life. He then explains the manna they ate, but are dead. He then says, if they eat of his bread they shall not die. Are they still living who partook of the flesh and blood of Christ? Is it assumed that none of the children of Israel who ate manna have received eternal life? If not, is Christ a liar? No, because he was speaking symbolically. Also, please remember, quoting early Church members to an LDS, depending on the source, often times proves further witness of an Apostasy.

I am confused where the Book of Mormon talks about anything socialistic?

I agree with the sentiment here Anatess. However, do people only vote because they might offend, or do they vote because they fear the retribution of others? Sometimes, people clearly avoid specific issues because they don't want the retribution of those who claim "tolerance".

I was having humor with your last statement Harry Reid is a wimp.

Was this in reference to Harry Reid???? Please flame responsibly.

Is NurseB, still reading these?

I dido Georgia's and Skippy's comments.

This is provided on the site Bytor shared: Thus Jospeh did teach that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri, and it is accepted by the Church. EDIT: Found this on lds.org

Welcome back! This is definitely a decision which will benefit you and your children. This is going to be tough with regard to your daughter being baptized. The Bishop must, as you know consider her worthy, not only worthy, but understanding of the covenant she is about to make. In the handbook, the Bishop or Bishopric counselor must feel there is clear evidence she knows the covenant and will make every effort to keep it. Thus, the length of time that you have been active will weigh heavily on most Bishopric interviews. Thus, be prepared, he may say no, she is not ready. If you have legal custody, than you do not need permission from your spouse, but it would be nice to inform him. If your daughter has formally accepted her stepfather's last name, the child may also be baptized and confirmed in the name by which she will be known, in other words the last name of her stepfather, but on record and the certificate her legal name will be used Awesome, keep pressing on. The Church is very understanding of situations like yours. It is not the Church's fault you made a decision to be inactive for so many years. The Lord welcomes us back with open arms, however we must abide by his precepts if we want to find happiness in this life, even if they don't appear very supporting of our situations. Remember, baptism isn't a right of passage, it is a literal covenant with blessings if we keep, and warnings if we don't. Children must understand this. The Bishop and Bishopric definitely want to see your daughter baptized also. They are under strict covenant before God to make sure those who are baptized are worthy and understand the covenant, especially children. I hope the best for you and safe travels. EDIT: Side note, as pertaining to baptism outside of your Stake, this is possible if your current Bishop esteems your daughter worthy. Then the Bishop of the ward they will potentially be baptized must contact your Bishop and verify approval. A person is not allowed to be baptized in another ward without the Bishops of both wards being in contact. There are many good reasons for this.

My last comment is a paraphrase from Handbook 1.

Wow, when I first heard about the states petitioning Texas only had 2,000 signatures.

Correct. However, I assume it would depend also on the meaning of "legal custody". Does a stepparent need to adopt a child to have "legal custody"? If so, then yes, the stepparent would need to adopt the child before they could proceed with a sealing. Thus, it would vary from couple to couple. For example, if a stepparent has legal custody, but the child is not with them the majority of the time, then they are not able to be sealed. I know of a couple who currently switches off with their children every other week. In this situation if she were to remarry, her children could not be sealed to her new spouse. If the condition above is met, then they also would need written consent as you have suggested. Both conditions must be met in order for the stepparent to be sealed to the children. Also, if any of your children are over 12 years old, male, then they must hold the Aaronic Priesthood to be sealed. EDIT: I am not familiar with all legal terms, however for those who are in law, does "Joint Custody" also define that one spouse has legal custody?

If I am understanding the instructions correctly also, your Bishop is right. Their step dad will have to adopt them, and their real dad would need to sign over rights. If you have been looking this whole time, then you will need to take the steps the Lord requires, which have been given by your Bishop.

No. As L_M shared, soul mates are a fictional term that people have made up which believe the illusion that if you find a soul mate your marriage will be perfect, without fights, frustrations, etc... I am sorry to hear about your troubles. I wish you the best in your effort to find happiness.

Ha, yes, secede, was the word that didn't enter into my mind. I knew I was using the wrong term.

Anyone else reading up on the individual states which are requesting to secede from the United States? Is this likely to occur? I understand they need 25K signatures from the populace.

As they say also, fast and testimony meetings are the best and worst times to bring an investigator because you never know when someone will "go off the reservation..."

All are legit titles and doctrinal for the Atonement depending on the context of the talk. The "Infinite Atonement" is actually scriptural. "Repeating Atonement", again context, if a person is speaking about how we are continually repenting, that we don't just repent once, then yes the "Repeating Atonement" is correct. The same for "Continuous Atonement." You can find more titles as everyone suggested at lds.org. EDIT: Be cautious though when adding different titles to the Atonement.

Yes. You need to see your Bishop. The law of chastity has been broken referring to "petting", which needs to be discussed with your Bishop. It matters not if clothes are on if he fondles your chest. The real question, did you allow it to continue or did you immediately stop him? If you immediately stopped him, then the sin is his, and he needs to see the Bishop, and you have nothing to repent of.

These are great questions Bini. Honestly, I believe FN and FHE are interchangeable. FHE is a family night. Yet, FHE connotates a religious tone, thus a lesson before an activity is usually the emphasis. FHE is a time parents have the opportunity to teach their children the gospel, how a parent decides to teach a lesson, is solely up to the parents. There is no requirements regarding a lesson needs to be from the scriptures, or Ensigns. If parents are only going out for ice-cream or a movie then technically this is where FN and FHE are not interchangeable. The Church has a Family Home Evening Resource Book, and the Primary Nursery Manual is also an excellent source for lessons. Here is a great article from President Gordon B. Hinckley regarding Family Home Evening.

Nice to meet you.

I don't follow coaches very well, so I wouldn't even have a guess.

I was at that game, floor seats, it was disappointing.

Ha... just downloaded...now my wife won't know what to do with me. Today she is going to hear a whip crack all day long. I will tell her to personally thank you.