Anddenex

Wonderful. Just don't hate me because I have a different opinion then you.

I am going to focus on this statement, "some people are born as pedophiles." Notice it does not say they are born with attractions, they are born as pedophiles. Thus I reiterate my last comment, are they really born this way, or is it when the assumed attraction comes (an enticement), which could logically be an enticement from the adversary, they have just dwelled on the attraction more than you or I? If attraction is the basis, or premise, then a man who loves animals, not his/her fault either? They are just born zoophilias?

Yes. Are they denying certain teachings, or is it they themselves have not read them? It is similar when an atheist asks a believer, who they themselves, have never read the old testament, and then are told something and they deny it, not because they are being deceitful, but because they themselves have never heard it before, or have not read it? I would be curious as to what you think is published by the LDS Church. The Adam-God Theory is not published by the Church, nor is the Blood-Atonement. If you are trying to say this is "meat" of the LDS faith, then you are looking for trouble, and not being a sincere friend, who wants to have an open discussion. This is a very interesting statement, because those in the New Testament who crucified their Lord, were the ones that were supposed to be the most studied, and yet when the "meat" of the whole gospel stood before them, they slapped him, spit upon him, and crucified him, calling him a blasphemer. What questions do you consider milk? What questions do you consider meat? Whenever I have entered into a conversation with a person claiming to be non-judgmental it is really easy to tell if they are sincere or not. If you are sincere, and non-judgmental, loving as you say, then no member will have any trouble with your conversations. It is the people that pretend to be such that frustrates a number of us, especially when they try to say we believe in things that we don't, or that certain principles taught by past prophets are doctrines of the church, when they are not. EDIT: If you want to have a perfect example of a non-LDS member who is open to conversation, friendly, and easily to speak with, though we disagree on doctrinal standpoints, then please get to know PrisonChaplain (PC), on this site.

I think the statement is coincides with another statement, I believe on page 2, which the author says something like, "People are just born that way." Yes, I didn't get any inclination from the article that the action wasn't condemned. As pertaining to your last question, Yes. This question reminds me of the article I read about a man who is in love with his two dogs. His premise, he can't help himself, he was born attracted to dogs. In connection to your question, I would ask, are they born this way, or is their attraction no different than yours or mine, except when the attraction first came upon them (an enticement), they dwelled upon the attraction more than you or I?

This type of statement from articles really disturbs me, They didn't choose it, really?? As long as we give excuses for controllable behaviors, then the behavior will never end. Whenever I hear a statement like this in defense of these decisions, I always think of a marriage who is dealing with an adulterous relationship. It is very natural for a man to commit adultery, however, to say they didn't choose it, and had no choice in the decision... yet it could be equally said, it isn't his fault, it is just in his nature to not be faithful.

Go have fun with your little one. Your child will have the same tendencies at 1.5 and 2 years old. Unfortunately, we live in a world that has a growing disdain for young children, and their random behaviors. Evidence, stores and other places that say "No Children Allowed." I can understand private affairs, but local stores?? (facepalm) They will only be so young for a short period of time, and as I am now with my 11 year old, 8 year old, at times I really miss those random screechings.

To be fair, I will openly admit, I am playing the devil's advocate with your statement, up to the first period. No, his point was not understood. The Catholic church, according to LDS doctrine is one of the groups which set their own doctrine, toward personal preferences, and it reflects solely an example of the apostasy. People creating their own doctrines is an individual apostasy which occurred throughout the Old Testament. If the original church is maintained, then people leaving the truth, bare no resemblance or reflection on its author. Now, the second statement. In comparison, let's admit StephenVH, it is not fair in the least. Let's see, how fast would the LDS church have splintered if only the prophets and apostles were allowed scriptures in their homes? How fast would the LDS have splintered if they, like the Catholic church, would kill, burn at the stake, anybody who held a different belief and openly taught it? Yes, it is much easier to keep a church from splintering if you have a self-divine authority to kill anybody who preaches against it. And thus the debate continues.

I would say there is nothing wrong or inconsiderate to bring a weapon to family function. It wouldn't bother me. By the way, most of my family are hunters, and we would target shoot. However, playing with children, other peoples children, when you have a loaded gun at your side, yes, I would say this is inconsiderate. He could have easily took the gun off his hip, put in his car and then rough housed with the children. I don't get why people think bringing a weapon into a public place is offensive or inconsiderate. I can definitely understand why bringing a gun into a home, private property, is offensive if the owner has asked a people not to.

Wow. Never gathered that. Very odd and deceptive.

I thought the individual who started this thread might be curious about this. This is a statement with regard to Mormonthink.com Mormon blogger says he faces church slap-down, possible excommunication – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

I have yet to understand this type of compassion for a spouse, not to say it is wrong, I am just saying I do not understand it. If my spouse was in a physical affair for two years, I would have left a long time ago. It would be obvious to me that my spouse did not care, and did not love me, if through my honest pleading they would not stop an adulterous relationship. I wonder if it would be better on the kids, that you were happy, and not being pulled down by your husbands actions? However, in saying this, you are the only one that can answer this question, and that is between you and the Lord. As pertaining to your last question, if my wife was having an affair with another men, and the wife of the man knew it. Yes, I would want to know myself so that I am not living in a delusion that my wife is faithful. If the woman is an active member, temple marriage, then your Bishop needs to know and needs to inform her Bishop that her actions have left her unworthy to enter the temple, and possibly partake of the sacrament. Although, this would be the call of her Bishop. But I would definitely want to know if this was my wife.

I understand others have offered some of their thoughts, and would like to share mine own. I already see death as described in Revelations 21, as complete as it can be, death will not take on a new meaning within God's eternal plan. I already feel, and understand, that the New Creation, we will be completely free and completely new. Our bodies will no longer be corrupt, they will be incorruptible. As stated in Moses 1: 39, of the Pearl of Great Price, we know that God's work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of all of his children. Thus we will be continuing the work and glory of our God, and inasmuch as we are in the service of our offspring or spiritual brothers, we are only in the service of our God. As such, although as others have said, speculative in nature, although we will experience what God is now experiencing with us, I am reminded of Nephi's words in the Book of Mormon, (2 Nephi 9: 10-11, there are other verses, however I have chosen to focus on these): It is interesting you choose to focus on the sorrow, yet I would venture to choose to look upon these words and others. The question, rhetorically I present, why would I sorrow when others will experience the same joy, paradise, an incorruptible body, and when death is no more for them either? Best Regards!

I don't remember this talk. Thank you, I will have need to read it.

That seems painful... kinda received the shivers.

Well, Anatess, it appears you and I have something in common. I think I threw eggs, a fork, a spoon, and a knife once at my older brother. Fortunately, my knife throwing days have been long gone. :)

First off, welcome to LDS.net Maynard. The verse of scripture you are probably referring to is Moroni 10: 3 - 5. Which specifically invites readers to read, think upon the mercies of God from Adam down to this present time, and then ask God if it is true. We are then informed, that when we pray about this God will reveal the truth by the power of the Holy Ghost. On my mission, and afterwards, when I was asked this question, especially when speaking with a Christian, I would respond something to this nature: If Christ revealed himself unto by the power of the Holy Ghost, would I also then need to get confirmation from the other Saviors mentioned in other cultures? The answer is simple, No. When dealing with men, it is wise to gather more than one witness. When dealing with a spiritual witness from God, seeing God does not lie, then I do not need to discover any other witness. EDIT: However, if a person has read the Koran and decides to pray about it, then that is fine also. If a person reads Hinduism and decides to seek a witness through prayer, that is fine also. The moment a witness is provided, it is pretty null to seek any other witness. The invitation to pray is honoring the agency, God given moral agency, to choose for themselves. This way when a person stands before God, they have only themselves to blame for their choices and decisions in this life. These are my thought Maynard.

It is best said they were open questions. To provide more insight to my questions. When I was younger I would have been easily diagnosed as ADHD. One of my teachers told my parents that I needed to be put on ritalin, to calm my energetic emotions and disturbances in class. My parents disagreed, thankfully, and they and the teacher decided a program for me. Each day I came home with a "smiley face", a "straight face", or a "frowny face." My reward, was going out to ice-cream with my dad if I successfully earned 10 "Smiley faces" in a row. Straight face, nothing. If I came home with a frowny face, well, the belt became acquainted with my back end. Although, I don't agree with the method my father used for frowny faces, however, I assure you I never came home with two frowny faces in a row. This statement is at the heart of my question #2 "2. What is the dividing point between a "Chronic Illness" verses a person who is choosing to act in accordance with their depression, despondency, or discouragement?" The reason for my self-fulfilling prophecy question is somewhat in connection with Vort's response and how many therapist diagnosed his condition incorrectly. I also, while studying, remember how often I would be reading specific chronic illnesses and realized, how easily I fit into about 2-3 of them. However, I wouldn't say I have any chronic illness, but I do have discouragement and despondency issues I face each day. Haha, that would only lead to trouble, and I mean trouble. I keep praying in my heart and everyday that my children overcome the weaknesses of their father.

I am sorry, that another person's iniquity has had such an impact on your mental and emotional well being. I am glad to hear that you have not given up, and keep on fighting. We only loose in this life when we officially give up. To be clear, while I was attending BYU, I was fully under the impression ALL illnesses were a matter of choice, and mental perspective. It wasn't until one missionary I was trying to help, while working as a teacher at the MTC, changed my perspective. I could seriously recognize that this young man was suffering from a chronic illness he could not control. Whether this stemmed from nurture or nature, I won't even begin to make a judgement call. This is where my questions stems, as pertaining to a "chronic illness" verses a depression one can change. I would agree that a person's mental capacity and strength is definitely between the Lord and the individual, however I would also add, a faithful steward who judges by the spirit is able to discern a person's well being also. I won't even begin to pretend I understand your feelings, because there is one attribute I can't stand within people is an empathetic pretender. I agree, healing takes time for individuals differently. What I am currently struggling with mentally, my wife is able to shrug it off and move forward. It bears no weight in her mind, but in my mind I feel like I have been hit with a two ton heavy thing. Best wishes LiterateParakeet.

I graduated from BYU in 2004. Thus, since my graduation, and during my schooling, none of these questions have been answered. What I have discovered is that it appears a diagnosis, often times is dependent upon the therapist. Thus stems my question, how is a chronic illness (out of the control of the person) determined verses a depression, or despondency which is fully in control of the individual. Let me provide two answers to this question and some background so you can also understand why these debates intrigue me. 1. Do I believe in chronic illness and that some people suffer from this? Yes. 2. Do I believe some may feel a chronic illness is out of their control, when it isn't? Yes. My mother suffered from Postpartum depression. I have always found her words to be insightful to me growing up when she explained this time in her life. "Andrew, every emotion, every feeling I felt was 100% real. However, it wasn't until I decided to be happy, that I the next day was happy. I haven't looked back since then." I have another family member who has taken the opposite point of view, and is still suffering from depression. I would say, this individual has taken a text book explanation for the depression. As mentioned at the end of my post, my PB provides me with a specific promise by which I would fall inline with my mother's words, verses this other family members.

These types of discussions have always intrigued me, and which is part of the reason why I majored in Marriage, Family, and Human Development, along with a minor in Psychology. I am intrigued by the varying responses by the public, LDS members, and researchers in general. I am currently reading the book provided by LM. I personally see nothing wrong in the Stake representatives statement, and find it to be factual. I would agree, God does not want us to be depressed. I am reminded of President Hinckley's statements regarding members of the church should be the happiest of all people. The questions I have yet to understand or discover are these, whenever these types of discussions are debated: 1. When does agency no longer play a role when connected to brain chemistry? 2. What is the dividing point between a "Chronic Illness" verses a person who is choosing to act in accordance with their depression, despondency, or discouragement? 3. How is it determined that this person suffers from a chronic illness, verses a person suffering from sin? 4. How much do self-fulfilling prophecies play a role in a person chronic illness? Note: I don't correlate "chronic illness" with sin. These questions stem from gospel doctrine and scientific research. Gospel doctrine for example: "And if ye have no hope ye must needs be in despair; and despair cometh because of iniquity." These types of discussion intrigue me also due to a specific promise within my Patriarchal Blessing.

It was a youtube video, however I think it was like 27 points.

I read this article, announcement, this morning. Very intriguing! Yet, we will see what they think they can come up with. This would be pretty cool if it was in our time. Kinda makes me wish I was my children's ages, with all the new developments within our time. :)

Tell them openly and honestly. If they like or dislike your choice, accept it, love them even the more, and continue to be faithful to your baptismal covenant. As we are told, "Who are we to fear, when God is our friend?"

Yes, I find this, personally, very odd. I am concerned for your sister if she has not found out why he came home early. Coming home early, though not always, and having to wait a year is usually the result of chastity issues either before the mission or during. If these issues didn't involve your sister, then you definitely have need to worry. My sister was dating an young man who was nothing of the type of man she would have been happy with. Albeit, he was a good man, but being a good man doesn't make a person compatible with another person. He would bad mouth my sister to his family, and my sister was under the delusion that things would disappear if they were married. You bet I stood in the way of this relationship, while allowing her free agency. If she made the choice to marry this man, then I would have accepted it and befriended him. As a sibling, as a brother, I have every right to share my thoughts and opinions boldly with her, and I did. I don't really care if other people thought this was right or wrong. I followed my spirit and my heart. No different than I did with a friend in high school. One of my dear friends in high school began to date a young boy who a week earlier had told me, "I haven't had sex in two weeks, I need to find me a girlfriend." He had his eyes on my friend. I definitely stood in the way of this relationship, and she wasn't very happy with me, but in the end, she thanked me and was grateful that I was bold in letting her know the truth. However, this thankfulness didn't happen until I was on a mission, a year later. Do what your heart tells you. Be bold, but not overbearing. Love her no matter what her choice. I understand how difficult this is, as I went through this with my sister.

Great thread Vort. Whenever I am reminded of this question, with my own despondency or discouragement I take comfort in the words of Lehi, Mormon to his son Moroni, and the life of our beloved prophet Joseph Smith. In the Book of Mormon we read, 1 Nephi 15: 27, What was Lehi's mind "swallowed up in" that he could not behold the filthiness of the water, or the wickedness of the world? I am then reminded of Mormon's epistle to his son Moroni when the Nephites were being destroyed by the Lamanites. As an army captain Moroni witnessed and caused the death of others, even his whole nation. I have been impressed by Mormon's plea to his son, in Moroni 9: 25, Despite the chaos within Moroni's life and experiences as a young man, his father quickly put life into perspective by saying, "may Christ life thee up..." and let this thought, this idea, this truth, "rest in your mind forever". I am then reminded of Nephi's desire and prayer to know what his father saw and witnessed in 1 Nephi 11. The angel appears to Nephi and asks him a slur of questions. I have always like the question by the angel to Nephi, "Knowest thou the condescension of God?" Nephi response is so insightful, Despite the wickedness something I believe which entertains the minds of all prophets and disciples of Christ, or "rests in [their] minds forever" is this: 1. They know God loveth his children 2. They recognize they do not know the meaning of all things With this, they place Faith, Hope, and Charity by which they can turn their focus to what matters. 1. Despite the wickedness of the world, God's merciful plan will succeed and prevail. 2. They can either whine, wimper, and loose hope, or be men of valor, and stand up and be determined to serve God as others have gone before them. Do what is right and let the consequence follow. 3. As Joseph Smith wrote, paraphrased, "Shall we not move forward in such a great cause?" These are my thoughts. Thanks for the reminder.