The Folk Prophet

What does natural have to do with a desire being a sin or not? An evil desire is evil, a righteous one is righteous. Whether or not it is natural or not is irrelevant. It just so happens that our natural desires seem to be, for the most part, evil. But the evilness of those desires is not caused by their being natural. They are evil because they are evil.

Then we are all doomed.

There's a distinct difference between a prophet having flaws and a prophet being a sex-crazed, alcoholic, racist who ignores the will of God in favor of his own perverse drunken biases. It's totally incongruent to me to imply that Joseph Smith was a secret pervert who forced women into adultery, but he was still a righteous prophet of God, and/or Brigham Young was an overt drunkard and racist who ignored God and did his own thing, but he was still a righteous prophet of God. I'm not buying it. There's a distinct difference between having a temper, speaking out of turn, having a bit too much frivolity, etc., and committing severe sin. Moreover, there is a distinct difference between speaking out of turn, holding biased opinions, etc., and sending the church down a path that is entirely against the intent that God had for it. By accepting this as a possibility, we lose all ability to trust in our leaders. And yet God has specifically told us in many instances that the prophet's voice is His voice, that the church will not be led astray, that He leads this church, and that we can trust in the church, it's organization, and it's leaders. Moreover, and more important, I don't consider it sticking my head in the sand to simply not presume that ownership of a distillery does not equate to alcoholic in any way, shape or form. (Edit: Wait...was that a triple negative? Hmm. Yep...three instances of "not". What a great writer I am sometimes.) You can call it sticking our heads in the sand, but I call it faith in God's words. And when an issue is big enough to wreak serious havoc with the system, faith, salvation, and the state of the kingdom of God on the earth, yes...I will err on the side of trusting God's word that we are being led by Him and not by the natural man's propensity to evil.

This is evidence that Brigham Young was an alcoholic? You have an interesting sense of logic. Which I've noticed usually goes something along the lines of the worst-case version that puts the church and its leaders in the most negative light, whiles still somehow barely clinging on to "the church is true". I have to wonder why your sense of logic constantly takes you there. I think this reply speaks volumes more about you than it does about Brigham Young's drinking habits though.

I would likely belong to the church of sex, drugs and rock-and/or-roll.

1) Did Joseph Smith do some things wrong? Yes, he was imperfect. 2) Did those wrong things include adultery and/or other sexual perversions, and yet he was allowed to retain his prophetic role and good standing with the Lord? No! Give me a break.

This entire premise is precisely opposite of what I have been taught and believe to be true. It's also a pretty sad way to look at things. Yes, God lets us choose our own paths. That is agency. but He is, without a doubt, involved in our everyday decision making processes if we only will let Him be. But what does disease, murder, famine and death have to do with that? Your logic here is escaping me. When I am diseased, I surely expect the Lord to comfort me. When I face famine, His guidance will help me through. When death or murder come into my life, by and through His grace I will be upheld, maintain my faith, and be give specific, direct counsel on how to act and respond. Oh yes, the Lord will be with me in every instance of pain and difficulty if I will turn to Him. He has promised this. And I believe it.

Yes. I believe that is how I also learned this mission of the church. Along with perfect the stinking saint saints and redeem the blankity dead.

Like Polygamy?

This is besides my point. My point is simple. God is in charge. His will runs the church, not imperfect mortal men's.

This is God's church and God runs it in spite of the fallibility of men. It doesn't matter how imperfect or perfect men are. It is entirely mistaken, in my opinion, to argue from as stand point that men are leading the church. They are not. God is. Regardless of fallibility, racism, ignorance, weaknesses, etc., etc., this is God's church and it will move forward in the manner that He intends it to. To imply that a serious mistake was made in the policies of the church that was entirely against God's will is a ridiculous idea to me. Is God in charge or not? Is He running things or not? Whatever the political or ethical motivations behind the ban, I have no doubt whatsoever that God intended things to be just as they were.

I'm going to have to go with yes. An honest person should very much care about those who are due getting their due and paying for what they get. Having an inner desire to cheat others even if one doesn't actually cheat others is still highly problematic.

I would go so far as the say that overall progress of the Kingdom is not requisite for it to be appropriate and perfectly acceptable. God's will and ways are His. We do not have to understand them. They do not need to make sense to us. He can do as He wills. Our place is to trust Him. Whether the choices seem to hurt or help per our perception--irrelevant. God's will is His. The bottom line is that when all is said and done, those who exercise agency to choose to accept God will be given all that He has. Those who did not will not. The rest is all pretty meaningless. Some had the priesthood, some didn't. Some had riches, some didn't. Some had polygamy, some didn't. Some had freedom, some didn't. Some had health, some didn't. And so it goes. All meaningless in the end. Did we choose Christ or didn't we?

That idea is contingent on what's considered "home" though. :)

No. Activity is a factual state and has no relationship to the spiritual, mental, or emotional state of a person. It's a simple matter of you're are active or you are not. You come or you don't. To be fair, we consider faithful and active as the same thing. And that may not always be the case. But activity is only usually an indication of faithful. It is not one and the same. But it is, regardless, a fact. You are active, or you are not. Being active is coming to church. It has nothing to do with testimony or the sharing of it. There are plenty of active people who don't have or bear witness of their testimonies. That's irrelevant to activity. I think maybe you (and perhaps others) are reading meaning into "activity" that is not there. Yes, we do tend to judge people's spiritual state based on activity. In many cases there may even be validity to this (not the judging part...that's a different discussion...but validity to the idea that activity and faithfulness likely do go hand in hand in most cases).

You're applying mortal sentimentality on to unknowable things of the eternities. How about instead we trust God and what He has chosen to reveal, how He has commanded us to pray and worship, and not impose our own, ridiculously limited human viewpoints on to sacred things? Just a suggestion. This has been specifically declared non-doctrinal on many, many occasions. To the point of excommunications.

One thing I've never understood on the Blacks and the Priesthood criticism: If one does not believe the church is true, then nothing was denied to anyone, because the Priesthood is a made-up bunch of nothing. If one does believe the church is true, then it doesn't matter, inspiration or mistake, tradition or truth, it just doesn't matter, because the church is true. So really, it comes down to: is the church true?

My main rule for gun safety in the home is, don't shoot is in the house. That'll be my standard policy. There may be exceptions to the rule. But, yeah. No shooting it in the house, I think.

But no one did this. The question was simply asked if you received a witness from the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon was true. It's a yes/no question. It has nothing to do with validity of choices and faith.

Also, see: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/receiving-a-testimony-of-light-and-truth?lang=eng

The blunt fact of the matter is that having explanations give concerning these issues will not suffice in resolving doubts. There is only one sure way to knowledge of truth, and that is through the enlightenment of the Holy Ghost. I'm not saying don't bother looking for apologetic reasoning behind these things. That's great. I'm saying it is insufficient. The only way you'll get past any of these issues is by turning to the Lord in prayer and fasting and humility, and carefully learning to listen to His guidance. Gaining truth and knowledge is a matter of being given light. It is impossible to see clearly without light. And light comes to us from God and from the Spirit, not just from study. Looking closer doesn't work if we're in the dark. We must have light to see. I recommend doing some scripture study on light and truth; Start with, for example: Alma 19:6, D&C 88:11-13, 1 Jn 1:5-7, D&C 84:45, John 8:12, Luke 11:34, 3 Nephi 13:22, John 12:35-36, 1 John 1:5, John 11:9-10, D&C 93:26, Particularly: D&C 93:28-40 "28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things. ... "31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light. "32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation. ... "36 The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. "37 Light and truth forsake that evil one. ... "39 And that wicked one cometh and taketh away light and truth, through disobedience, from the children of men, and because of the tradition of their fathers. Note how we receive light and truth. It's not just by study. It is by keeping the commandments. So, yeah...seek and learn and get explanations and all that. But your real objective is to get more light and truth, which comes through obedience to God's commandments (including prayer, scripture study, fasting, service, etc.) and having an eye single to His glory.

I have several fake guns. Replicas. I'd like some real ones. I'd like a 1911. I'd also like a Smith & Wesson 1917. And a couple of rifles. I'm only interested in target shooting and nostalgia. Home protection is an excuse...sort of.

Not sure how I'd take it as ranting when you're agreeing and supportive of my thoughts. :)

Problematic implies possibly. So...sure...we can agree. How about definitely possibly problematic? It's beyond the point though. No need to contend semantics. The point is, if one does not have a witness of the truthfulness of the gospel from the Holy Ghost...go get one!

Beyond other, obviously benefits of being involved in church things, setting an example for others is as important as anything. Go. It will set a good example.