Anddenex

This is a comment you would have to weigh seriously, and not act on a whim. I have a friend who was sinning also, and desired to go on a mission. He, was not chaste, but lied to the Stake President that he was. He was just getting ready to send his papers in after being esteemed worthy by the S.P. The S.P. called him in for a meeting. In the meeting the S.P. read a letter he had received from another member of the church. The S.P. then asked if the statements in the letter were true? This friend, now knowing he was caught in a lie, decided it was better to be honest with the S.P. The S.P. and with my friends desire to be honest this time, were now able to progress forward on the path of repentance. My friend, although at first, was very frustrated was very grateful for that letter, because he helped him on the path of repentance verses the path of lying and deceiving. You easily could send an anonymous letter, or a letter with your name attached, asking the Bishop to keep your name withheld. This is a suggestion. I personally feel in these matters, Bishops and S.P.s need to know, especially if the individual is about to serve a mission or to enter into the Temple.

My experience with keeping the Sabbath Day Holy: First, upon returning home from my mission I sought to obey the Sabbath by reading scriptures, serving, studying, and I wouldn't use the Sabbath as a day for studying my secular school work (why did those who study on the Sabbath have better grades? ) I remained in my church cloths studying while hearing screams for the Jazz games, other sports teams, etc... by good wholesome young men, and young women. This didn't affect my rose colored glasses though. Second, the next three questions I have found I can answer "Yes" to: 1. Does anybody know a Bishop who watches sports on Sunday? 2. Does anybody know a Stake President who watches sports on Sunday? 3. Does anybody know a General Authority who watches sports on Sunday? These are my Shepherds. These are the individuals my Lord had called to lead me by precept and example, yet, knowingly the Lord called individuals to leadership who some would say are surely breaking the Sabbath Day and are not keeping it Holy. My rose colored glasses begin to take a different hue. Third, upon being married and having children for a long time we watched neighbors get together on the Sabbath while we stayed home, we were honoring the Sabbath, they weren't. Until a friend went out of his way to make sure we attended. I never felt a loss of the spirit when I attended neighborhood get togethers on the Sabbath and enjoying a few sport games. After the game, or activity, sometimes it turned into a really insightful and wholesome religious conversation. We don't have any cable at home, so not watching sports was easy, unless we were invited to a friends house. Conclusion, as other people have shared, the decision of honoring the Sabbath is between the Lord and the individual. If a person feels not watching sports is not honoring the Sabbath, great! If a person feels watching sports on the Sabbath with family or neighborhood friends is not dishonoring the Sabbath, great! In the end, I will stand before my Lord and receive my reward. My bet, there will be people in the highest degree of glory, within the highest tier, who watched sports up to the day they died.

OOH, OOH, it's the San Diego Chargers? I win!

Sorry LM, I didn't realize you asked me a specific question personally. I am not sure how I missed it seeing I read the post directly below yours. Yes, I have personally experienced this type of hatred and filth within the last 5 years. I speak with a few people on youtube, and watch videos elsewhere, seeking to keep up with what is said for my children. However I have never attended one of these meeting myself which your post makes mention of. I want to be able to protect them should they experience this. Within the past year I read a post from a Christian who said all Mormons should be killed, however I believe he used to the word "wiped-out". The poster used the common language from these types of individuals. Back home in California I know of one church that yearly has these types of meetings, especially if anybody in their congregation is beginning to speak with missionaries. I don't believe it is as mainstream as it used to be, unfortunately though, it hasn't disappeared.

When I used "pickle juice" I was thinking about Elder Holland's talk this past general conference with regards to envy. However, I used it in reference to someone not rejoicing in another brother's return.

I am connecting "pickle juice" to any time a person is unable to rejoice in another's accomplishment. My "pickle juice" comment was in connection with the OP's statement regarding the brother who is unwilling, at the moment, to find joy in a brother's return, not the prodigal son's brother. Thank you for the insight, I have never interpreted the prodigal son as feeling unappreciated. My mind always stopped at the older son not happy that a fatted calf was killed for a disobedient child, and the older brother was feeling jealous, not unappreciated. Thanks for the insight.

When I hear this I am reminded of the story of the prodigal son, and am thankful for the example of the Self Righteous brother who could not rejoice as his father rejoiced in the son which was lost, but is now found. I feel this is why we are told faith, hope, and charity lead all to do good things. It appears this brother has faith and hope, but as with a lot of people, including myself, charity is not as easy as faith and hope. It appears this brother is drinking 'pickle juice".

Because of personal experience and others experiences, with regard to honoring my covenants with leaders I now follow three guidelines: 1. Stewardship 2. Doctrine 3. Is it good? One must recognize there is a time and a place to automatically listen to a spiritual leader, i.e., Bishops, Stake Presidents, etc... and there is a time to actually seek confirmation through prayer. My father tells me of an experience when we lived in Alabama dealing with a Stake President and an Elder's Quorum President. The S.P. had a friend, a young man who was recently released from prison. The S.P. thinking that this young man needed a good example in his life, asked this EQP if he would allow this young man to live with him until he could get on his feet. The EQP sought confirmation, and received an answer form the Lord, "NO." The EQP told the S.P., the S.P. didn't like it, and as a result it came down to his temple covenant and the EQP was convinced to have the young man stay in his house. The result, the young man committed adultery with the EQP's wife, and she ran off with this young man leaving the EQP with their children. The EQP, should have listened to the revelation he received from the Lord, instead of listening to the good intentions of an S.P., under the bounds of covenant keeping.

It is apparent, my weakness in writing has confused the majority of those who have replied. I know the difference between the law of consecration, as covenanted, and the United Order. I wasn't confusing anything, I just needed to be more specific. However, I do agree with MoE, and Dravin, as pertaining to your answer referring to the Lord having us try and fail, then not try at all, although this wasn't the intent of the question. Another aspect of my weakness in writing (boy, I am glad I am not one that will ever be commanded to write scripture). The first questions intent had nothing to do with "try and fail", but was more in the lines of, with such a newly organized church, I find it interesting that within 2 years the Lord instructed Joseph Smith to establish the "United Order" (so as to be more clear this time). I have wondered why, so soon? Is it that the Lord saw the turmoil and persecution ahead and tried to give them an avenue by which all would be equally yoked? I hope this clarifies (I am sorry, my grammar, and ability to write isn't at good as Vorts, Applepansy, Just_a_Guy, MoE, and Dravins, and others). The second question is to bridge the first. If the pioneers were instructed within 2 years, why has 180 years passed and we haven't been instructed again. The only logical, haven't had any spiritual manifestation as of yet, is inline with Skalenfehl, I hope this clarifies the questions, and would love to hear any other thoughts.

When the church was first organized, not long after, the prophet Joseph Smith introduced the Saints to the law of consecration. If I am remembering correctly it was within 2 years of the establishment of the church. Since that time, nearly 180 years have passed and the Lord has not seen fit to establish it again, yet within a short period of time, when the church was organized the Lord saw fit to instruct Joseph Smith to establish this higher law. 1st - Why would the Lord instruct the newly organized church to live a higher law? 2nd - If the Saints were ready then, after nearly 180 years why hasn't the Lord instructed his servants to establish it again? 3rd - Does this speak toward the faith of the pioneers verses the faith of members today? I would love to hear anybody's thoughts regarding these questions. :)

Yes, unfortunately this type of experience still exists. It is amazing that people harbor such hatred.

The most important aspect in any relationship is if the Lord confirms it. All else takes a side step. President Kimball advised couples never to marry out of their culture, however even in advising this he said that he would never get in the way of a couple, even if their cultures were different, if it was confirmed by the Lord through the avenue of prayer. One of my best friends in middle school, his father 62, his mother 40. If a woman is attracted to younger men, and a younger man is attracted to older women, and the Lord confirms the marriage. Go for it. On my mission I met a couple, she was 35 and he was 22 when they go married if I remember correctly. Or, she may have been older. If I am remembering correctly I think the age is off, by a couple of years. I remember them being 14 or 15 years apart. They appeared to have a wonderful relationship. If my father had his way with me, I would have married a woman 10 years my older, or as he always told me, she needs to be 4 years, at least, older than you. Well, I didn't listen very well and married a young woman 4 years my younger.

Dravin makes an excellent point, how are you defining your relationship and how is she defining it? Are you steady, or are you both dating other people? If you are dating other people, then confronting her will be moot. One of the most important principles and doctrines within our faith is our "moral agency". I think it rather obvious, if she likes another guy, then yes, it will affect any type of relationship you may have. However, if you are dating other people, then this should be expected. My personal feeling, if you confront her, it will put her on the defensive and she will most likely see you as an antagonist. If you are not married, remember she has every right to like other guys. Even if you are engaged she still has a right to like other guys. I would not worry to much, relax, and recognize, if this relationship will continue it will continue. Go out, have fun, and hope for the best. I remember dating a young lady, I was thoroughly interested in, who also liked another guy. I look back and wish I would have just went out with her, had fun, and enjoy the relationship. The relationship would have still ended, however, it would not have ended so badly if I used a little more intelligence. I am glad it ended, because not long after, I met my wife.

1. Unfortunately, it appears anything good can be used for evil purposes, or have evil results. Without temptation, we as a people, would never discover truly who we are, and what actually motivates us. 2. Positives? My children. The intimacy shared between my companion and I, a union unlike any other union, which is a combination of conversation (mental) and physical joy. Well, my single brothers tell me part of the reason why they are so upset all the time, is because they don't receive any release of testosterone like their married counterparts, but I think this is and excuse According to most intimacy experts, they say, the most important organ during sexual intimacy is your brain. 3. Shamed? The only time a person should be shamed by sexual intimacy is if that intimacy occurs out of the bonds of marriage. If a person is ashamed by their intimate relationship with their companion, spouse, then they have some unlearning to do, and relearn there is nothing to be ashamed of. Unlearn it is dirty. This is Anddenex's two cents, well, I think there were 3 cents, with a couple of half-pennies to go along with it.

1. As with any relationship, be yourself and relax. 2. Dating an LDS man turns quickly into marriage depending on the person you are dating. Kristi and I dated 4 months, engaged 4 months, married after 8 months. Couldn't have chosen a better woman, and she could have chosen a better man, but now she is happily stuck with me. I have friends who dated for years. I know of people who were engaged after the first date, and are still happily married. Follow your own timeline, make a choice for yourself and stick with it. 3. Men have a tendency to want to be in charge, however, recognize the difference between a controlling man verses a man who takes the lead. Be yourself, if he can't handle who you are, don't give him anymore of your time. As you already know, the purpose of dating is to find a companion who you are compatible with. There is nothing wrong with a woman who is willing to take the lead at times. I find it more alluring that a woman has a mind than a woman who is submissive in everything and waits on me. That is boring, at least to me. 4. End it the way you feel. If your date moves in for a kiss, and he is not a person you want to kiss, well, make it very apparent you are NOT kissing him back. I always ended a first date with a handshake (And no it did not mean I wanted to "jump" on her), unless it was a really fun date, then it ended with a hug. Something I noticed when attending BYU, back home in California men bragged about how many girls they slept with. In Mormonville, as a result of obedience to the law of chastity, men brag about how many girls they kissed. I would advise, avoid being one of those numbers, bragging rights for narcissistic men.

Ear plugs???

Said to my younger brother, "You would be perfect...if you were taller."

Just in case anybody missed it, this statement, "Here I was asking a serious question, only to receive light hearted responses, for some reason I feel personally offended", was a joke.

@John Doe, NightSG, and Pam --- Here I was asking a serious question, only to receive light hearted responses, for some reason I feel personally offended. Thank you for the thoughts everyone.

What is it about human nature that people tend to take things way to personal?

binions? binisaya? binibining pilipinas? I know I am definitely close

Mumford and Sons Enya Cherry Ghost - "Thirst for Romance" Instrumentals Guster "Satelite" I am all over, except for country, and majority of rap.

The user name I thought was funny but too long: Ihatethatallthegoodnamesaretaken .... ha

No. I believe the constitution gives me that right, as long as the movie theater has no policy regarding guns. It does if the individual involved has honored the laws established in the town the person lives in.

It is implied with this statement anne: The U.S. was redeemed by the shedding of blood. Which weapon do you think shed the blood of Brits so that America could establish the constitution?