The Folk Prophet

Correction. Your understanding and quotes have all been from your understanding of LDS sources.

There's no question that the gospel will always push us. I think our general attitude needs to fall in line with not running faster than able, but we should also always be looking to lengthen our stride just that much more. It works much like any process of improvement. Take fitness -- if someone is out of shape and then they jump cold turkey into a full body-builder's workout and diet it will kill them...almost literally. But over the years I have moved further and further towards eating and working out in this manner and, except in choices where I have specifically determined not to, I practically live and eat that way all the time now and it really is not that burdensome. So it might be with these things. The church and all we need to do can be overwhelming. But if we take it line upon line and work to lengthen our stride day by day without running faster than able, we will constantly progress towards improvement. Add to this that the gospel has the added advantage of the Holy Spirit working alongside our righteous efforts to actually change our hearts and, eventually, we will become perfect (though not in this life, most likely :) ). So don't write off your abilities. You are capable of more than you think. Or, more accurately, with the Lord on your side, who is capable of all things, you are capable of more than you think.

You need to understand that the ones who are like this are also the vocal ones and it does not necessarily represent the membership at large in Utah. That being said, people are sinners all over. That is true even in the true church. I agree with you that it should not be going on. But there are lost souls in the active church just as much as there are lost souls in the inactive church and lost souls outside of the church.

You're twisting things. Control is irrelevant to authority. And nothing in the church is or ever has been independent of the priesthood. (D&C 107:5) Being authorized to act independently still fits very nicely into having been authorized. As to your Joseph Smith quote, you don't seem to understand the context or meaning of it. Do some research on John C. Bennett and what was happening relating to him around the time this quote was given and you will understand it's meaning better and why Joseph addressed the sisters in this manner.

Maybe this should go in the 'I Wonder' thread...but, I wonder how many good and faithful Mormons have accidentally broken the word of wisdom by patronizing Starbucks. I refer back to my first post: Generally speaking, just stay away. :)

Your opinions on this matter, per this and the other thread, have been duly noted.

Interesting. All of the items that showed mocha syrup as an ingredient did show caffeine content, including the hot cocoa.

My guide to Starbucks = just stay out entirely. What is there that isn't a breech of the word of wisdom is still a far cry from healthy. And I don't go to bars even though they may serve stuff other than alcohol. Yeah, I know. I'm a conservative nut.

What constitutes "wholesome" though?

A former bishop does not go inactive because someone was rude to them. There is something else going on for sure.

Huh?

No one said they knew what the bishop would say. Hence the words "probably" and "likely". It is a presumption, not knowledge. But a reasonably presumption can be drawn based on reasonability, and as much as there is a possibility of things beyond that (the full story isn't given, the bishop is not reasonably, the bishop is reasonable but the spirit prompts him, etc., etc.,) then it is entirely valid to assume a probable scenario.

First of all, let me state categorically that you are wrong about Jesus. He did, absolutely, obey organized religion. Just not all forms and organizations of that religion. Only that which was according to His Father's standard. Secondly - you're missing the point. The point is to obey God. The fact is that God's commandments come through His authorized servants and that means organized religion. So obeying God will align with His organized religion and will mostly look as if one is obeying religion, as you put it. But it is God we obey.

I cannot speak for anatess, but in my opinion the answer is yes and no. No, it does not define murder vs. killing. Yes, it does matter at another level, but the sin is it's own and does not relate to the killing itself. In other words, if you kill someone justifiably but do so with hatred in your heart, you need to repent of the hatred, but not of the killing, as it was justified. If you kill someone unjustly, it doesn't matter if you loved them right through to the end. It's still unjustified and you stand accountable. I don't think intent has anything to do with defining when a killing becomes murder*. I suppose it could if you were looking for an excuse to murder and then happened to have a justifiable moment to kill that person. I expect God would still hold that person accountable for murder...so in that regard I agree with anatess. Edit: * I should clarify that I mean in the eyes of God, or morally speaking. The law defines murder and justifiably killing on it's own terms.

Just tell him exactly what you told us. He will probably respond something along the lines of, "Good for you for repenting right away." And that will likely be the end of it.

Baloney. You know exactly what our answers are and have been. They are always the same. and they will be the same from every believing LDS person. You know from whence our faith stems and exactly why we believe God exists and the LDS church is true. You raise these questions again and again to be confrontational, and it is useless to respond to them. You have clearly shown yourself decidedly unwilling to "learn".

I always found Ba'al (Hadad) to be more related to Lucifer. Yam seems more similar to Christ, and Mot is (in my thinking) perhaps akin to Michael (Adam). With their father, El, akin to Elohim. I believe the similarities (the few there are) come from the truths passed down from Adam that were corrupted and twisted into these false gods.

If a general gives a command to a captain and the captain then passes it on, and so forth, until the private is given that order from the sergeant, is the private then to disobey the order because it did not come directly from the general? God is our general. We obey Him, and all commands He gives through all the means in which He gives them. But it is Him we obey.

You're disagreeing with something I did not say. I did not say one cannot have values without religion. I said that religion dictates values. I'm saying that one person's values as dictated by their religion are just as valid as one whose values are dictated by something else.

Nonsense. Religion dictates values. Values dictate morality. Morality dictates governance.

Separation of church and state means, and has always meant, that there is no state church and no church state. It means that the religious organization is not the government and the government does not dictate religion. It does not mean, nor has it ever meant, that religious people are banned from participating in government.

What's the difference between one who believes in no organized religion ruling over one who believes in organized religion vs. the other way around? Wherein is it fair or right for the one's influence to count and the others to not?

Limited recommend means that it is for baptisms for the dead.

Letter of the law response: I do not believe word of wisdom issues require confession to the bishop as a requirement for repentance, unlike serious law of chastity issues and the like. Spirit of the law response: Agree with JaG. Counsel with your bishop. There is no reason not to.

Yes.