Anddenex

I'm not sure I agree with your thoughts on doctrine (or even anyone else's definition of the word), but I do like your post, what you say about covenants, and your idea of reading the scriptures from this perspective.  Thank you.

It is my impression that we spend too much time trying to understand doctrine.  I think that a focus on doctrine will result in confusion and doubt.  It is also my observation that when there are disputes (for example on this very forum) that the disputations are all concerning doctrine. 
I would suggest that there is something much more important to center on.  I believe we should be more aware and more concerned with our covenants.  Many think the Book of Mormon is to help us better understand doctrine – well good luck with that thought.   Rather I believe the scriptures are a record of people and their covenants.  Mostly their covenant (conventional obedience or conventional disobedience) with G-d.
May I give an example?  I do not care that much about the doctrine of tithing.  Sure, it is interesting to discuss all the doctrine of tithing.  I once considered writing a pamphlet titled “Tithing Strategies for the Wealthy”.  Knowing the doctrine of tithing is not the most important aspect of tithing.  I do not think transferring money to the church and thinking it is tithing is that important either.  But having a covenant of tithing and being obedient to that covenant is what is important.  Just paying tithing is not the covenant.  It may be a surprise to some but – attending tithing settlement is just as important as paying tithing.  A person that does not attend tithing settlement is not being obedient to their covenant.  They may argue all kinds of points of doctrine – but if they do not make a covenant and stand obedient to the covenant they make they will not know the truth of the doctrine nor will they have the blessings of tithing.
My friend @CommanderSouth  – may I suggest that you read the Book of Mormon.  Not for doctrine but as a witness of covenant and a type and shadow for yourself and your covenant with G-d.  If you make covenant with G-d (Moroni 10:1-5) that G-d will manifest his covenant to you and as you are obedient to that covenant – your testimony will grow.  Do not read scripture for doctrine but read it as a covenant with G-d.
One time during a High Priest lesson a teacher asked why those there attended.  He specifically asked a member of our Stake Presidency that answered that he came to be inspired.   The teacher then asked if he ever was not inspired that he would quit coming?  The instructor then asked a gentleman that had been excommunicated why he came.  He answered – He came because he made a promise to G-d that he would attend priesthood meetings.
My suggestion is to live by covenant and not by doctrine.  Not that doctrine is useless – that is not what I am saying.  What I am saying is that your understanding of doctrine will always be seen in part but that the fullness of the Gospel is only realized by covenant – and if you are not experiencing a fullness then it is you covenant that need updating.
 
The Traveler

@CommanderSouth,
When Joseph Smith was translating the Book of Mormon, and read within the book that there were walls around the city of Jerusalem, even he who saw God and Christ face to face immediately doubted and thought that he had possibly been deceived.  Only after Emma confirmed to him that Jerusalem was indeed surrounded by walls was he reconciled to the truth.  If a prophet who actually saw God and met with angels would doubt based on something so simple as the existence of walls, I can assume our occasional doubts are to be expected.
I have my doubts on occasion, but I also have a way to deal with them.  I am convinced that the Church is true, but if it's not true, then there is no God, and all religions are invented.  If the Book of Mormon as a whole were to be a fictitious invention, then so could Jesus as the Savior and everything else, just as easily.  Personally, I would rather believe that there is a God, and a Savior, and an afterlife.  When I doubt some historical fact, or this or that, I find myself realizing that it's not really worth it to focus on that thing, because if were to give in to my doubts, I would end up being an atheist, or at best agnostic, and I pretty much refuse to go there.  Also, when I consider that if Satan really exists he would want me to go there, that makes it even easier.  It's The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints or bust for me!
As others have mentioned, focus on things that do strengthen your testimony!  I remember when I received a spiritual confirmation of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.  I remember giving a blessing in which I was blessed to receive the Spirit to foretell to my friend that she would meet her husband that year; she did, and has been married to him for 5 years now, and going strong.  I remember giving a tour of the Church building to an investigator named Carlos and standing in front of the painting of the first vision and reciting it as we both looked on, and the power of the Spirit that filled our hearts and the room.  There is nothing that will ever be more convincing of the truthfulness of the gospel than moments like these.
There will always be things to doubt, but those things are merely incidental areas where we lack information.  The truth is revealed by the power of the Holy Ghost.  The only way you can effectively overcome your doubts in the long run is to receive witnesses of the Spirit of God.  However, even then, just as Joseph Smith experienced himself, from time to time you will still be faced with missing information and things that can be doubted.  In those times, you fall back on what you do know and what you have experienced.

Just to expand on this thought: Faith and doubt do not co-exist because faith is, ultimately, more about trust and commitment than it is about belief. (Belief is a component, of course -- but not the end all). So many people equate faith with simple belief. I am convinced, myself, that faith is possible without belief -- but that's an unlikely scenario.
Anyhow, what it really comes down to is choice. We choose to believe or not. We choose to have faith or not. Despite uncertainties (and, frankly, despite the doubts we have), we can choose to set those aside and move forward on what we have experienced -- those glimmers of desire, hope, and light -- to exercise our faith to both believe, follow and act. We have been promised that when we do this (exercise faith) that our hearts will be filled then with greater desire, hope, and light (or, as sometimes described, with fruits from the tree we are nourishing), which leads on and on until the perfect day.
We don't need perfect understanding, knowledge, belief, faith, or confidence to move forward. 

One thought:  There’s a difference between doubt and uncertainty.  We are told in scripture that faith and doubt cannot really coexist; whereas faith and uncertainty coexist quite a lot.  And I suspect that’s OK.  A big part of my job is getting in people’s faces and showing that they don’t really “know” what they thought they knew; and (for now!) I’ve made peace with the fact that for all my beliefs and conclusions I, too, “know” relatively little about pretty much any aspect of my life.  (Just yesterday I spent four hours researching a point of law I thought was pretty straightforward; and at the end of it I realized that a) the law on that point is pretty nebulous, and b) literally dozens of attorneys practicing in the same field as myself (and several judges) have been getting the point wrong for years.)  
There’s *always* going to be more information out there; some of which may necessitate some degree of paradigm shift—and openly acknowledging that will leave a lot of uncertainty in one’s life that may not completely resolve.  For me, this seems to be the case with religion as well.  When we talk about the truth claims of the LDS Church, I’m not sure I could honestly say I believe them any more deeply now than I did ten years ago (although, I hasten to add, I DO believe them).  But I am sure that, for all my flaws, I’m a better person now than I was ten years ago; and that transformation/refinement is largely due to my attempts to apply the Gospel’s precepts into my life.  That’s the core of my testimony at this point in my life—that while yes, the Gospel makes sense to me most of the time; the fundamental thing is that it works.

Thanks for sharing your struggles @CommanderSouth. I'm sorry you are having a difficult time accepting the Book of Mormon right now, but I'm glad you're putting in the effort to strengthen your testimony. I was lucky I suppose. I joined the church when I was 8, and I still remember the Lord telling me through the Holy Spirit that this is his church. I've had my share of struggles throughout this life, but I've always been able to fall back on that experience whenever any doubts have surfaced. It does get better☺. Here are two of the thoughts I had while thinking about your issues.
1. Don't quit the struggle! Many times answers to deeply held questions take time, effort, and sacrifice. Even though this is something you've struggled with since your baptism, the fact that you've stuck it out so far is pleasing to the Lord. I believe you can and will receive an answer to your concerns about the Book of Mormon, even though I can't tell you how long it will take. But hold on to what our Heavenly Father says in 2 Nephi 31:15 "And I heard a voice from the Father, saying: Yea, the words of my Beloved are true and faithful. He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved." Salvation is promised to you as long as you don't quit!
2. I can't erase your doubts or your fears, but know that I know the Book of Mormon is a true record of scripture. It has been revealed to me by the power of the Holy Ghost, and I know the events that are recorded in it and the teachings it gives are true. I've seen the good that comes from living by it's principles, and I know that you will find an answer to your earnest prayers. God be with you in your search for truth brother.

How does any of these "annoyances" create a "lesser sex"? Do these "annoyances" extend to the Godhead as well, as the Godhead is the Father (male), the Son (male), and the Holy Ghost (male)? Are you therefore "annoyed" with the Father because his "presidency" is all male, and according to your frame of reference thus treating women as a "lesser sex"?
A presidency, with specific roles and responsibilities, does not make any sex of lesser value should the presidency be all male or all female. Just as the Godhead does not lessen Heavenly Mother, nor make her a lesser/weaker sex (I am pretty sure she doesn't feel weak or of a lesser sex to her companion).
"Blessed are the ameek: for they shall inherit the bearth."

Like, for example...men holding doors?
Are you a Social Justice Warrior in training? Because you certainly take profound offense on behalf of others just like one. To answer your questions:
Women are not Sunday School presidents or counselors because the Handbook specifies, "Members of the ward Sunday School presidency are priesthood holders." Ergo, no women. Men do not serve on Primary presidencies because the Handbook specifies, "The bishop calls and sets apart a sister to serve as Primary president." Women serve on presidencies with other women, not with men. Gay men are called as teachers and to serve on auxiliaries. You are simply wrong on these points. It is possible that a bishop may decide not to call a homosexual man to teach children, because he wants other modeling. That is the bishop's decision to make. Gay men are men. (You might have missed that.) They do not serve on presidencies with women, including on Primary presidencies.

I think you would agree @Lehite that God is not sexist. So the real question you should be inquiring of God is whether the different roles of men and women in the Church have come by way of his direction. If so then you will know that the differences serve a purpose in his plan. But as with any question we ask God we must be willing to accept the answer wholeheartedly and without reservation.

Actual woman here.
I find it annoying when people try to tell me I have to be just like a man in order to be not be the "lesser sex". 

1.) I'm finding it annoying when women are still treated as the 'lesser sex' in today's world and in the church .
In the USA and in the LDS Church worldwide, they're not.
2.) Also on the same note, how come there aren't as many women Sunday school presidents or councillors etc,
Sunday School Peesidencies are the responsibility of the Priesthood in the same manner that Gospel teaching is the responsibility of Fathers in the family.
3.) likewise men on primary presidencies,
The rearing of children are the primary responsibility of women in the same manner that the rearing of children are the primary responsibility of Mothers in the family.
 4.) what about 'non practicing' Temple recommend holding gay men teaching, or being on a primary presidency or auxiliaries ? Or non practicing gay women in auxiliary presidencies ?  Mixed presidencies in non priesthood callings .
Male Presidencies - Elders Quorom, Young Men, Sunday School
Female Presidencies - Relief Society, Young Women, Primary
Gay men are males, Gay women are females in the Church.  They are not barred from callings.
 5.). Also why do sisters still have to 'vail their faces' in a certain part of an ordinance in the Temple I always feel it very discriminating towards women when that happens. 
If you're looking for discrimination, you will find it everywhere including places where it doesn't exist.. I suggest you go through the temple again paying close attention to the symbolisms and what they symbolize.  If you're not sure about a certain symbol, like the veil, you can ask any of the temple workers to explain it to you.

So your interpretation of the matter is that the command is to "try" and be one with another -- or a command to be "willing"?
Great question, let's review this question in light of Lehi's words to his sons, "arise from the dust, my sons, and be amen, and be determined in bone mind and in one heart, united in all things, that ye may not come down into captivity." This appears to be more than a "try" scenario, but definitely a "willing" scenario as the Lord requires from us our heart an a willing mind, "Behold, the Lord arequireth the bheart and a cwilling mind; and the willing and dobedient shall eeat the good of the land of Zion in these last days." (Source)
Was this command given to his sons knowing that Nephi could not control Laman and Lemuel? I would have to say yes, it was. Was this a command to continue as two sons were, and a command to two other sons to "repent" and change their ways to "become" unified and determined in one mind and heart? I would have to say yes, it was. For some this command is direct toward repentance. For others this command is simply to continue your course (I think @zil 's diagram of coming to Christ is most important here).
Unity is a "process of becoming" rather than a state (at least for us); whereas, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost it is a state (already achieved). The same concept of, "Zion is not achieved in one day. Zion is achieved over many days, many weeks, months, and years by constant (consistent) efforts by those who love God and his Christ."
You're going to have to walk me through this. If I have the attitude that getting up and going to help my neighbor move (or some other service) is important, and so I do it, but another in my ward feels like it's not important, they can't be bothered, etc., and so they don't do it, then the problem is with me?
Zil's diagram is a good start, and to clarify I understood the intended meaning, and was using a "literal" meaning for point. If we are placing ourselves as the "center" and not Christ, then yes, the problem is with "me" (general), and I am also interfering with being unified. We are not bringing people to be unified with "me", we are bringing people to be unified with "Christ" -- the fountain of all righteousness. A river flowing continually toward the fountain of all righteousness eventually becomes one with the fountain (Are we able to distinguish the water in the rivers from the water in the fountain? I would say, no.). We all though reach the fountain at different intervals of flowing water.
The command appears two fold to me again. For some it is to continue our course. For some it is to repent and change our course. At times, we may find ourselves in the "continue" and at times we may find ourselves in the "repent."
EDIT: I believe that command was probably more for Laman and Lemuel rather than Nephi and Sam; although, a good reminder for Nephi and Sam also.
 

So your interpretation of the matter is that the command is to "try" and be one with another -- or a command to be "willing"?
Great question, let's review this question in light of Lehi's words to his sons, "arise from the dust, my sons, and be amen, and be determined in bone mind and in one heart, united in all things, that ye may not come down into captivity." This appears to be more than a "try" scenario, but definitely a "willing" scenario as the Lord requires from us our heart an a willing mind, "Behold, the Lord arequireth the bheart and a cwilling mind; and the willing and dobedient shall eeat the good of the land of Zion in these last days." (Source)
Was this command given to his sons knowing that Nephi could not control Laman and Lemuel? I would have to say yes, it was. Was this a command to continue as two sons were, and a command to two other sons to "repent" and change their ways to "become" unified and determined in one mind and heart? I would have to say yes, it was. For some this command is direct toward repentance. For others this command is simply to continue your course (I think @zil 's diagram of coming to Christ is most important here).
Unity is a "process of becoming" rather than a state (at least for us); whereas, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost it is a state (already achieved). The same concept of, "Zion is not achieved in one day. Zion is achieved over many days, many weeks, months, and years by constant (consistent) efforts by those who love God and his Christ."
You're going to have to walk me through this. If I have the attitude that getting up and going to help my neighbor move (or some other service) is important, and so I do it, but another in my ward feels like it's not important, they can't be bothered, etc., and so they don't do it, then the problem is with me?
Zil's diagram is a good start, and to clarify I understood the intended meaning, and was using a "literal" meaning for point. If we are placing ourselves as the "center" and not Christ, then yes, the problem is with "me" (general), and I am also interfering with being unified. We are not bringing people to be unified with "me", we are bringing people to be unified with "Christ" -- the fountain of all righteousness. A river flowing continually toward the fountain of all righteousness eventually becomes one with the fountain (Are we able to distinguish the water in the rivers from the water in the fountain? I would say, no.). We all though reach the fountain at different intervals of flowing water.
The command appears two fold to me again. For some it is to continue our course. For some it is to repent and change our course. At times, we may find ourselves in the "continue" and at times we may find ourselves in the "repent."
EDIT: I believe that command was probably more for Laman and Lemuel rather than Nephi and Sam; although, a good reminder for Nephi and Sam also.
 

So your interpretation of the matter is that the command is to "try" and be one with another -- or a command to be "willing"?
Great question, let's review this question in light of Lehi's words to his sons, "arise from the dust, my sons, and be amen, and be determined in bone mind and in one heart, united in all things, that ye may not come down into captivity." This appears to be more than a "try" scenario, but definitely a "willing" scenario as the Lord requires from us our heart an a willing mind, "Behold, the Lord arequireth the bheart and a cwilling mind; and the willing and dobedient shall eeat the good of the land of Zion in these last days." (Source)
Was this command given to his sons knowing that Nephi could not control Laman and Lemuel? I would have to say yes, it was. Was this a command to continue as two sons were, and a command to two other sons to "repent" and change their ways to "become" unified and determined in one mind and heart? I would have to say yes, it was. For some this command is direct toward repentance. For others this command is simply to continue your course (I think @zil 's diagram of coming to Christ is most important here).
Unity is a "process of becoming" rather than a state (at least for us); whereas, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost it is a state (already achieved). The same concept of, "Zion is not achieved in one day. Zion is achieved over many days, many weeks, months, and years by constant (consistent) efforts by those who love God and his Christ."
You're going to have to walk me through this. If I have the attitude that getting up and going to help my neighbor move (or some other service) is important, and so I do it, but another in my ward feels like it's not important, they can't be bothered, etc., and so they don't do it, then the problem is with me?
Zil's diagram is a good start, and to clarify I understood the intended meaning, and was using a "literal" meaning for point. If we are placing ourselves as the "center" and not Christ, then yes, the problem is with "me" (general), and I am also interfering with being unified. We are not bringing people to be unified with "me", we are bringing people to be unified with "Christ" -- the fountain of all righteousness. A river flowing continually toward the fountain of all righteousness eventually becomes one with the fountain (Are we able to distinguish the water in the rivers from the water in the fountain? I would say, no.). We all though reach the fountain at different intervals of flowing water.
The command appears two fold to me again. For some it is to continue our course. For some it is to repent and change our course. At times, we may find ourselves in the "continue" and at times we may find ourselves in the "repent."
EDIT: I believe that command was probably more for Laman and Lemuel rather than Nephi and Sam; although, a good reminder for Nephi and Sam also.
 

No, he just assumes you're a back woman. Truthfully, I think we all assume that. You're in it for the lats.

The Lord invites us to be one in Him. By definition that is what the Church is, and we invite others to join us and become one in Christ. Ultimately this is expressed in opur being sealed into the family of Adam and doing what it requires to enter into the Church of the Firstborn.
I think it is key to sustain and follow our leaders in terms of how we relate to factions that might arise within the Church or our countries. The Book of Mormon gives us some superb standards in this regard as to the conditions under which such action would take place, and when we act, we act in unity upon that point. This is why authorized, presided councils are so essential -- functioning properly, they bring minds, hearts and hands together.

The original question is whether or not "unity" is a measuring stick of our Christianity. The answer to this question is "yes" unity is a measuring stick of our Christianity. To be unified is a commandment from God. What you are asking now is a separate question. Does our willingness/unwillingness to keep a commandment have any reflection on our commitment to the Lord -- our personal Christianity? Yes, it does.
Do you share the same concern regarding the commandment for couples, husband and wife, to "cleave" and to be "one" with each other? This commandment is based between two people, and cannot exist without the whole striving for the same end goal. Neither couple can control the other's choices, and their individual choices in a marriage is a reflection of their Christianity, especially if serious sin ends the relationship.
Wards are commanded to be "one" and our willingness in our wards to be "one" is a reflection of the "wards" Christian desires. If God was not "one" with Christ, and the Holy Ghost was not "one" with Christ and the Father, would this be a reflection on the Godhead, especially since they are the ones commanding "unity"? Yes, it would.
Although, I can see the intended meaning, I am using the literal meaning for point, "if someone is not of one heart and mind with me." This lies the problem -- "me." We are to be "one" with Christ and the Father, through the power of the Holy Ghost (spirit of prophecy and revelation). If what we believe to be "truth and right" is wrong, then we have need to change, repent, and thus be one with God. I believe the Church is seeking to show us a great example of "becoming" one with other faiths and churches; although they hold different beliefs that would indeed betray a trust with God if they accepted. Is this a reflection on the Church's Christianity and the desire to do as God has commanded -- Yes.
 

Because they do'n't know the immense power of the fountain pen!  And the bread knife for that matter.  

How can that possibly be?  They took away everyone's guns, and once you've done that, everyone suddenly turns all peaceful and passive-like.

London Bridge is going down.

They really are a nice group of people. This collective niceness is something that I have never seen in another group of people. Not a bad apple amongst them.