The Folk Prophet
-
Posts
12439 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
197
Posts posted by The Folk Prophet
-
-
Pacific Rim.
I really really really really really love this movie.
The main reason: The boy and the girl end up to be really great FRIENDS instead of romantically involved. Refreshing to see such a wonderful friendship and not have to worry about the kids closing their eyes for some skinema moments.
Not to mention the giant monsters and robots fighting each other.
-
I've been deliberately slow to reply in this thread because the responses infuriate me. So let me be extremely blunt, church. You're talking about things you simply do not understand. You have had multiple people on here with deep, personal experiences with pornography addiction (and addiction in general) talk about how this isn't about sexual fulfillment, but about control and stress. You've largely dismissed those statements because you believe that it is about sexual fulfillment.
Here's a newsflash for you. If you want to know what it is that drives people to use pornography, talk to the people that are driven to use it. They generally have a far better understanding of what motivates them to turn to porn than someone who has been fortunate enough to escape its bitter clutches.
Wherein do you think that anyone unapologetic about the nature of a sin must never have experienced it?
You may claim your perception of other's experience and knowledge must be superior to mine. You're free to that opinion. Maybe it's even true. But when you tell me I can't understand something because I haven't experienced it, when in actuality I have experienced it, you quickly lose credibility.
So spare me.
-
Just watched it. I did not care for the music. I mean, it was fine...just wrong for the content. When the snare kicked in toward the end it was highly distracting. I think the music hurt it. Different music could have set a very different mood. I've noticed that the church has started using very different styles of music in their videos. In most cases I think it has been successful and worked. In this case...not so much.
-
Except that he isn't a mom of 7. He was just using that as an example. :)
Plus, 7 is nothing. I have a sister with 10.
-
1. How can you be so sure that Joseph Smith was a prophet, had the vision, and didn't just make up the Book of Mormon?
I would pose the same question back to you concerning your beliefs. How can you be so sure that Moses was a prophet, had a vision, and didn't just make up his stories in the bible? It's a matter of faith.
As you will learn in exploring The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we strongly believe in personal revelation. They reason I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet and that the Book of Mormon was not made up by him is because I took the matter to the Lord and asked.
2. What archaeological proof is there in the Americas that the Nephites and Lamanites existed, and had these great cultures that were destroyed? Also, what would you say to the critics who claim that there is no evidence of Jewish tribes coming to the Americas, and that several things mentioned in the BOM weren't around (steel, swords, horses, cattle, etc)?
Lack of evidence is not evidence. There are various apologetic explanations for things, as varied as the questions, but it comes down to the same matter as the previous question. There are archaeological evidences of the Book of Mormon and there are archaeological unknowns. Archaeology is not the reason that I believe the Book of Mormon to be true. Because I know the book is true through my faith, I can look for what archaeological evidences there are for support, and I can not stress too much about the things that have not been found yet.
3. What Bible verses lead you to believe that God would send another prophet after Jesus? Do these contradict other verses saying he is the last prophet?
Amos 3:7. If there are no prophets, God will do anything. So, no prophets = God doing nothing.
What verses in the bible say there will be no prophets after Jesus? I presume you refer to the parable in Matt 21?
4. What is your belief on the Trinity? Do you believe that each aspect of it is a separate being?
Short answer, we do not believe in the tradition of the trinity. We believe that when the bible speaks of God and Jesus being one that it means one in purpose.
5. I've heard rumors that Mormons believe God lives on another planet, and that humans can eventually become a God of their own planet..... Wouldn't that contradict the definition of a God? Or is this is widely held belief?
There is no teaching anywhere that speaks of God living on another planet.
We do believe in deification, but...well...read this. Becoming Like God.
6. What advice do you have for attending a Mormon service? I'll be going with a friend this Sunday.
Enjoy it. There's nothing too overwhelming about it. Just listen and learn and try to be sensitive to the Spirit.
-
Is it not honesty to say that my ideological opponent's ideology is wrong--even ungodly--while acknowledging that his manner and openness are good--even godly? Just as he may be seeking a way to persuade me, by recognizing my humanity and thoughtfulness, is he not opening himself up to possible persuasion as well?
I honestly don't know the answer to this. My feelings tend towards conflicting ideas. On one side, benefit of the doubt. On the other, skepticism.
I accept that this guy's manner and approach is significantly better than scathing accusations of racism. So I'm in line with your thinking in that regard. But I am also of the mind that it is indeed a tactic.
Maybe a better way to put it -- Kindness is not kindness if it's pretend. Then it is nothing more than a deception. A lie. So... maybe I'm sensing a lie. ???
Maybe I'm judging it too harshly.
Either way, I accept that our response should be to give him the benefit of the doubt when engaged in dialog with him and others like him. But I don't think that means it is inappropriate to state a skepticism in a separate forum with others.
-
He has very little to gain by expressing tolerance towards traditionalists. In fact, he'll like get some rather sever push back from the LBGT activists. Even if his motive is to play nice to win a few of us over, I'd suggest his tactic (if not his position) is blblical.
Possibly. Half truths are one of Satan's most powerful tools. And diplomacy is always beneficial. I see this as diplomacy. It gives a way in for those who, as he stated, refuse to even have the dialog because they are accused of racism. It opens up opportunities for some consideration of homosexuality and gay-marriage that might otherwise not be open.
Yes, I agree, the tactic could be considered biblical. How many organizations and leaders through the ages have picked and chosen from certain biblical principles to sway their followers to an evil end though?
Good and evil are not so black-and-white. Should we view every kind approach as good? If I am kindly swaying you to murder your brother, does it qualify as praiseworthy?
-
I didn't feel a dissertation on various forms of judgment was necessary given the context of the discussion so far. It seemed to me it was apparent that the judgment being referred to was that judgment concerned with condemnation and company. Of course we need to judge between good and evil, every decision made requires a measure of judgment.
I confess a bit of thread-jacking. But I think a clarification of what it means to not judge is always in order, as it seems to be somewhat universally misunderstood, if not by you, then by others perchance reading the thread.
As for the "ALL" about aspect of addiction I will have to respectfully disagree. It is about addiction. Satan loves addiction because it is practically a loss of agency. Over-eating, alcoholism, and pornography are addictions first and foremost. Yes over-eating involves food, alcoholism involves alcohol and pornography involves pornography, and yes they come from somewhere. Pornography almost assuredly becomes addictive because of the sexual aspect, but it is also entirely possible for individuals who are addicted to continue the activity even though it brings no perceivable enjoyment whatsoever, they may even lack libido completely but still turn to it, hating themselves for doing so and wondering why they persist when they don't even enjoy it.
Going back to the food addiction; Yes it always involves food, but it doesn't follow that it always involves hunger. The same goes for pornography, it always involves pornography, but it doesn't always follow that it is about sex.
I feel like there's a semantic debate coming on here, which is not going to be useful. When it comes down to it, once we worked out all the words and meanings, I'd guess we mostly agree.
However, I'd say the whole, no pleasure whatsoever but still turn to it, thing is more rare than common. And that goes for food or porn or what-have-you. Most over-eaters very much enjoy the food. Most porn consumption is based in enjoyment of the media as it relates to libido and sex. I don't think extreme cases should be used as the baseline for understanding. That being said, I have no statistical studies in hand to back my p.o.v. Of course if I did have them in hand, I would be skeptical of their validity when it comes to pornography. It's just too surrounded by Satan's lies and misdirection to trust much of what even any experts or statistics claim about it. The prevailing world-p.o.v., for example, is that a certain level of porn and MB can actually be healthy.
In any event we need to be loving and understanding of everyone's weaknesses. This is not to say that we accept the sin, it is always wrong to sin, but we love and accept the sinner and seek to help them find a way out. The only lasting deliverance coming from God.
Double thumbs up.
-
I assume you're talking about stress relief by way of breaking either the Word of Wisdom or Law of Chastity. There are other ways.
Hmm. Word of Wisdom. Didn't think of that. A medical marijuana suggestion? ???
Like I said, lack of detail makes it hard to advise.
-
We're talking libido though, right?
Strength of libido is no excuse to action. It's as simple as that. Beyond that, it's impossible to advise specifically because of the lack of detail.
I mean, what would you advise if I said I was on a medication that was making me feel homicidal? Go ahead? Kill a few people, it will make you feel better? Of course not.
The fact that your doc doesn't see certain actions as sinful does not make those actions acceptable to the Lord.
- Leah and applepansy
-
2
-
I see this article as simply another tactic. He strongly advocates for gay marriage and the acceptance of homosexuality, he simply defers to the fact that there are valid long-held reasons for the entrenchment against it that will take time to overcome, and notes that playing the race card is counterproductive to the war that is clearly already being won by gay marriage advocates.
-
What are you looking for? Advice that it's okay to sin because of medication you are on? I'm not seeing anyone advising you that way.
Moreover, your details are too vague to truly advise. What is the medication you are on? What is it's purpose? Why can't the medicine be changed or reduced. Details matter.
-
I guess it kind of depends on what's meant by "normal". We definitely want people to be able to relate, and not feel like we are so foreign that they cannot relate at all. But we also want them drawn to us because of our differences -- because they see greater spirituality, greater family strength, greater levels of service, etc.
In the strictest sense of the word, as the world becomes more and more corrupt, Mormons should be seen as more and more abnormal, but that abnormality should be a refuge to those who see through the lies of the "normal" corrupt world.
In today's world there is certainly still a level of cross-over between what is normal to the world and what is Mormon. The divide is growing though, day by day. Certainly Mormon's application of chastity is not normal. Certainly the Word of Wisdom is not normal. Even things like faithful weekly church attendance are less and less normal.
Maybe there needs to be a clarification of what is abnormal, but not odd, and that which is viewed as truly odd. One can be abnormally kind, for example, Not normal. But usually people don't look at excessive kindness as odd.
Mormons should be abnormal. But they should not be coming across as odd, strange, weird, etc..
-
Most in public look at the smoker like a modern day leper.
I wonder on this. I certainly don't have a broad enough experience to say for sure (though I do have a fairly broad experience as I travel for work a lot). I think this to be true if and when the person has cigarette in hand -- especially when standing between me and the entrance of the store I'm trying to access. I'll admit to some nasty glares. However, take that same person in the store and (assuming I didn't already cause an issue with the glare) I will interact with that person the same as anyone else, friendly-like and all.
Now, yes, when I look out my front window and the neighbor kid is smoking in front of his house -- the same neighbor kid who was blessing the Sacrament a week back -- yeah...a bit of frustration, annoyance and disapproval...for sure. But, the next time I see him, I'm friendly. So, yeah...not sure.
Sorry....thread jack. :)
-
While it is not our place to judge other's sins,
This is an oversimplification of what we are and are not to do. The scriptures teach a much richer concept of judgment than a platitude ("Judge not"). In point of fact, we are taught that we should judge, but righteously. Of course we have to understand that there is variety in the meaning of judgment, even scripturally, We are meant to judge in terms of assessment, choice, action, feelings, thoughts, etc. We are not meant to judge in terms of condemnation, hatred, bitterness, arrogance, etc.. Concerning the first, we cannot "not" judge. Not judging requires a judgment. Closing one's eyes in blindness under the generic "judge not" umbrella is not appropriate. We are meant to see, to understand, to choose, to do, to follow, to reprove, to call to repentance, to succor, etc., etc. These things all require judgment.
I can agree that pornography is not always about sex, it can be like a comfort food is to someone on the diet rollercoaster
Pornography is always about sex. I could accept your sentence if you had put the word "all" or something akin. (Pornography is not always all about sex.)
Comfort food is still about eating, even if it's not all about eating. Alcoholism is still about, well...alcohol. Pornography is still about sex, even if there are other factors at play. Stress, and the like, may be a trigger. But a trigger is not the core fuel. Moreover, non-loathing, pleasure and excitement are not the defining criteria of what makes something about sex. At it's core, pornography is the depiction of sexual things. There is no separation of sex from it.
-
The church's advertising campaign has taken some interesting twists and turns over the last few years. I was expecting an ipad to pop up after watching the Easter video. The music, editing etc reminded me of an apple commercial. Yet it's had a lot of hits on the internet over 5million.
The I'm a mormon campaign was an interesting one, rock climbers, professional sportsmen, people with interesting careers and families with one or two kids. I would have liked to have seen one with a mother unloading her 7 kids into the church car park, doing up Johnny's shoes, wiping Kelly's nose, hustling everyone along, looking a little frazzled and tired but still smiling. That's what I see most Sundays. I'm a mom of 7, I do my best, life isn't perfect, no it don't fly around in helicopters and yes, I'm a Mormon.
This ties into the discussion on Mormon's being normal or not. I understand the point of the I'm a Mormon campaign, and the objective is not to show what an average Mormon is like. The objective is to intrigue people about the church. Using interesting people to that end does make sense. Undoubtedly, those ads do not show what an average, everyday Mormon is. Most of us are not rock stars, basketball greats, CEOs, etc. But the world looks to these sorts of things as desirable, and hence the approach. The "I'm the most average person in the word...and I'm a Mormon" approach is interesting though. Might turn some away from it, might turn some towards it.
-
This particular question I don't find subjective. We know exactly why Satan is pushing against the family so hard.
It's not subjective. But it is not really a good question for testing the depth of someone's knowledge. It's pretty entry level. A great question for a new member. Per the OP, they have stated they are fairly well read and want to be tested in that. So we jumped directly to our best effort at difficult questions.
That being said, there are concepts within this question that are a bit more complicated that might work better to the original intent of the OP as I understand it: Why is the family the core unit of the gospel? Wherein can we only have fullness of joy through family? Etc.
-
So after having read the article on Deseret News I thought, "Yeah, OK. I get it." Kind of reminds me of the church's I'm a Mormon campaign.
After looking over the blog... Well, in principle I still get it. But the blog bugged me. I can't say for sure why. Maybe it was the cavalier and comical approach. I don't know for sure. Maybe it's just my mood. I don't begrudge them their approach though. It may well be a great way to get people interested in the church.
Ultimately I stand by my first comment. If the world isn't seeing peculiarity in a Mormon, the Mormon isn't doing something right. And I would not approach the gospel from a primary stand-point of being normal first because it's ultimately a setup dependent on deception. The Re-organized church (Community of Christ) fell into this trap, and little by little over the years have compromised and compromised to be more and more normal until they are hardly distinguishable from any run-of-the-mill Christian denomination. We should be distinguishable.
Now I know that's not ultimately the point of the blog. But the approach skirts the line of it close enough that it kind of bugs me...barely. I'm not really "bugged". That's too strong of a word. I just didn't latch onto it.
-
Oh! I forgot to mention... I wore a pantsuit for Easter Sunday. I went to two wards and there was not a single hullabaloo about it - not even a surreptitious glance down my leg...
I don't wear pants to church normally because I have lots of nice skirts to wear. This time, I wanted to wear Easter colors and all my Easter-colored skirts are too tight on me. Yes, I need to lose weight. But, in the meantime, I opted for Easter color pants instead of non-Easter color skirt... Nice pantsuit still...
I can get behind reasoning like this. The formal protest.... Well...that's another thread and don't want to hijack. :)
-
Yeah, the link doesn't go to a blog. But as to the question -- if the world sees and LDS person as entirely normal then it's probably an indication that there's something amiss with said LDS person, IMO.
-
I am not arguing that they are not in the presence of God, I agree with that. That isn't the point. Traveler is trying to say that everyone that comes to this world becomes spiritually corrupted just by the process of leaving the presence of God. I am saying that they are alive in Christ, they are kept from that corruption, they are protected from the effects of that separation. What power does the presence of God have that the presence of Christ cannot give?
There are many quotes from the brotheren that state that children are untainted from this experience. They do not experience a spiritual fall. If they do not become tainted by this experience and they remain pure, how is it that they suffer spiritually? Yes, they obtain corrupted physical bodies but the power of Satan has no influence on them. That is a fact.
I agree with you. But they still need the atonement because of spiritual and physical death. Spiritual corruption is something else entirely and impossible before accountability kicks in.
-
Good Afternoon The Folk Prophet. I hope you've been well!
As I stated in my post, there is a tendency, NOT universal, but a strong tendency in my experience in life for members of the church to essentially kick the sinner/addict when they are down. When it comes to porn, in particular, this tendency is the strongest.
Case in point, the fact that you do not believe, not even for a second, that porn addiction in many, if not most cases, is not a matter of sex but rather a means of coping with stress is an all too common attitude which does not leave a lot of room for compassion and sympathy when it comes to the porn addict. The porn addict is misunderstood and many implications are made about them when the reality is far more complex than just someone who is a perverted, selfish, sinner.
-Finrock
You have a black-and-white view (which is typical) of judgment. I can see porn addiction as selfish and perverted without seeing is as "just" selfish and perverted. Judging a sin to be a sin does not counter everything else. I pay my tithing. That's good. I also have too much debt. That's bad. I can judge that my debt is bad and my tithe paying as good. Most people can. I don't believe that people are quite as simplistic in their judgments as you are making them out to be. *shrug* I could be wrong, of course, but my experience is that most people, when you get to know them, understand quite well that nobody is perfect, and that the fact that a person is bad with money does not define them, or that a person who views porn has nothing else good about them.
The fact that I don't buy that guys are looking at porn because they're coping with stress rather than for prurient reasons does not mean I see them as nothing but pervs.
Yes, though, I do see your point. There is a level of "that guy's a ____________" (whatever sin you know of that guy) that worsens as the sin worsens. We are more likely to define a pedophile as nothing more than a pedophile than we are to define a non-tithe payer as nothing but a non-tithe payer. But this is not a church culture thing. This is a people thing. People outside the church do it to. They simple don't define all things as wrong that we do. But the things they do define as wrong...same problem. That guy's a thief. That guy's a pedophile. That guy's a tax evader. Etc. It's not a church culture problem, and it is not something that should be blamed on the church or on church culture. And the solution to it is certainly not to downplay the severity of something like pornography.
-
They do not "suffer" from spiritual death, they are alive in Christ. "Alive" is the opposite of death Moroni 8; " 12 But little achildren are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world; if not so, God is a partial God, and also a changeable God, and a brespecter to persons; for how many little children have died without baptism!"
You're arguing with word play. It's not meaningful. Little children are separated from God when they come to earth life. Therefore they suffer from spiritual death. It's the literal definition of spiritual death. It's factual. They also suffer from mortality and, eventually, physical death. You're scripture quote does not negate the literal meanings of spiritual and physical death. You would have to prove that little children are still in the presence of God to make your argument fly.
-
Whether it be porn or any other sin my view is that we, as members, ought to be less judgmental and more inclined to show sympathy and compassion towards those who are living in sin. Why? Because, believe it or not, every single one of us are living in sin and do we not all beg for mercy, compassion, and acceptance from Heavenly Father? And if we are not begging, do we not at least hope, wish, and wonder if Heavenly Father has mercy and compassion for us?
There is a tendency, not universal of course, but a strong tendency in my experience in life for members of the Church to essentially kick the sinner/addict when they are down because they believe they are more righteous than the filthy, perverted porn addict (alcoholic, etc.). I see people in my Ward who are struggling with addictions and I know that in most cases these individuals already feel like crap. They already think they are worthless. They already feel like they aren't worthy to be with members of the Church. So, they don't come to church. They don't participate. They are more inclined to stay away. In some cases their feelings are not justified but in many cases they are because members can and do judge them. What these people need are not overreactions and people preaching to them how horrible they are or how horrendous their actions are (they already know or feel that). What they need is to feel compassion. To know that they are loved and accepted, despite their sins. This is what I want the people I know in my ward who are struggling with addictions to know. I want them to know that its okay to have weaknesses and still come to church. That is what church is for. It is for the weak and the wicked. Come and be with us. We love you. We want you to be healed. Come get strength from joining with those who are struggling just like you are, albeit with maybe different sins and different trials, but we are still relying on the Atonement of Jesus Christ and are begging for mercy like you. I may have a testimony of the gospel and I know the atonement is real but I don't have everything figured out.
-Finrock
So, as a matter of interest, do you really think there is universal judgment by the church members, or do you think that perhaps it is more a perception of universal judgement by those feeling judged. I say this in that I have been on both sides of the coin, many times. I have felt judged, and I have been accused of judging. In most cases where I am accused of judging I am, actually, quite empathetic, having experienced sin and the begging for mercy (rather consistently, I might add).
It is my view that the church, at large, does much less judging than it is accused of, and that the perception of judgment is significantly higher than the reality. Accordingly there is a defensive response that is excessively nonproportional to the problem.
Mormon Porn Use Maybe Not As High as Previously Reported
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
How is my position lacking empathy? I have not diminished the difficulty of freeing oneself from pornography's clutches or whitewashed the power of it's grip. But my empathy or lack thereof doesn't have anything to do with the fact of how sinful it is or is not. A covenant is a covenant and breaking it is breaking it. Stating this to be so has nothing to do with empathy. Stating otherwise would be incorrect. When I viewed pornography (and, let's be clear, this was not a one time thing. I was very much in it's clutches for many years) I was breaking my covenants. The only path back was through sincere, difficult, painful repentance and the power of the Atonement. I understand that and I advocate it. This viewpoint is not a lack of empathy.
What about my opinion that porn use is ultimately about sex upsets you? It's more shameful for it to be about sex than it is to be just about a general lack of control? If we agree that it's not okay to view pornography, wherein is there such contempt towards whether it's about sex or not? Is that view harming people. How so?
Say I acquiesce entirely to your argument. Let's say it's driven by stress. Okay. So...now what? Someone addicted to porn now feels better about themselves? Repentance is easier? What's the great battle won there? You're response is as if you're standing up against the wicked lies of the enemy horde. It's a bit melodramatic really. The whole driven by sex or not thing is really quite irrelevant, and because I believe it to be so doesn't really mean much. So why does this infuriate you?