The Folk Prophet

Light has a spectrum, of which visible light is only a small portion. Radio waves are also a form of light, and we've figured out ways to piggyback information on a light wave which your stereo then interprets into sound.
 
I mention this to magnify and contrast TFP's opinion. If it is symbolic, you can take it farther than what Joseph (technologically) knew at the time of the revelation. Or it could turn out to be literal, that there are forms of light that carry packets of spirit information. I know of no sources that explore such (except a simple analogy (by Widtsoe maybe?) comparing seerstones and a "sea of glass" to radio technology).

A wild guess here, but I wonder if their argument was:  If you do not have God, and God is love, then you cannot have/express loved.  It's an academic, semantic, and, I suppose, theological argument.  What I would say to them, as a fellow Trinitarian, is: Don't be harsh-toned and mean-seeming when you are trying to tell someone you have love and they don't.

It's all word play. By their definition of "Christian", we aren't. So what? It amounts to name calling. (Which is, I'm sure, exactly how they feel about being called anti-Mormon...though....if the shoe fits......)
 
Anyhow...sticks and stones and all that.

Could it possibly be that Vort is a Metallica fan?

Sad but true. You have several problems. One: You need to go by "MormonGuitar", not "MormonGator". Also, don't be all holier than thou. It's sad but true that the memory remains if you're the unforgiven. I'll keep you in mind wherever I may roam, my friend of misery. Mama said not to give up the struggle within or believe that to live is to die; just turn the page

I'm not sure it's valid to call it a "privilege" to not get beat down for your skin color.
 
"Consider yourself privileged that I didn't just shoot you in the face!"
 
Hardly. Privilege should be above and beyond what ought to, by right, be "the norm". The norm should not be getting beat up for skin color. Nor should the norm be special treatment.
 
If I'm walking down the street minding my own business and doing nothing wrong, it is not a privilege to not be hassled by the cops. If, on the other hand, I'm walking down the street openly breaking the law somehow and the cops don't hassle me, then sure, that's privileged.
 
As others have said. It's reverse discrimination to refer to it as "privilege" unless it's actually above and beyond what ought to be the norm. I'm not saying white privilege doesn't exist -- but let's call privilege privilege, and not common human rights privilege.

I'm not sure it's valid to call it a "privilege" to not get beat down for your skin color.
 
"Consider yourself privileged that I didn't just shoot you in the face!"
 
Hardly. Privilege should be above and beyond what ought to, by right, be "the norm". The norm should not be getting beat up for skin color. Nor should the norm be special treatment.
 
If I'm walking down the street minding my own business and doing nothing wrong, it is not a privilege to not be hassled by the cops. If, on the other hand, I'm walking down the street openly breaking the law somehow and the cops don't hassle me, then sure, that's privileged.
 
As others have said. It's reverse discrimination to refer to it as "privilege" unless it's actually above and beyond what ought to be the norm. I'm not saying white privilege doesn't exist -- but let's call privilege privilege, and not common human rights privilege.

Faith can not be based on anything but truth. When its based on lies it will invariably be shaken eventually. Than all it will take is the truth to shake ones foundation when its preached unto them or it will cause one to anger after those who preach it.

Truth can be things uncomfortable. Things that don't make one "feel good". I remember a time when someone didn't want to share something with a new member because it was "uncomfortable" or didn't want to push them away. You don't increase faith when you do that you hinder it. You don't increase faith by "hiding" or "leaving out" correct things. As one said it must be tested.

I would argue that there are no knots. But...obviously it's perspective.
 
 
Not to get snarky either...but rejecting it in the 20th century is still highly problematic.
 
Practicing it...yeah...different matter.
 
I do think it highly interesting (and this isn't necessarily directed at you...just using your post as a springboard for a thought) that we struggle SO much with issues that are 100% absolutely cultural as if they have any bearing whatsoever on eternal truth. Polygamy being a prime example, of course. The wrongness of polygamy as a theory is entirely cultural. Entirely. And yet so many cannot look past their own obvious cultural bias in that and similar things.
 
Interesting.

Also agree. And those 90% of casual observers were raised "innocently" on Will & Grace, nicely prepping them for Glee, Brokeback Mountain and the like.
 
The insidious nature of entertainment's abilities to sway morality is difficult to overstate.
 
And all the traditionalists now wonder what went wrong. Why is the younger generation like this? Didn't we raise them right?
 
No! Your television raised them!
 
Casual observance indeed.

The other week my niece, out of nowhere asked, "How do you get out of an elephant?"
 
"How...?" We asked...a bit confused.
 
"You run around until you're all pooped out."

Also agree. And those 90% of casual observers were raised "innocently" on Will & Grace, nicely prepping them for Glee, Brokeback Mountain and the like.
 
The insidious nature of entertainment's abilities to sway morality is difficult to overstate.
 
And all the traditionalists now wonder what went wrong. Why is the younger generation like this? Didn't we raise them right?
 
No! Your television raised them!
 
Casual observance indeed.

Thanks, It's good to know my thoughts are a worthwhile contribution and not a senseless spilling of my guts. I completely agree that the idea of basing the core of one's faith outside of a spiritual witness is dangerous, especially to the latter-day-saint since it is a key difference over many other belief systems that we can actually get answers from God, or rather that a spiritual witness is ultimately the foundation by which faith is established and not great lawyer-ing of doctrinal points and well selected scriptures.

You did catch in the other thread that pretty much every other response was how awesome the temple is in spite of it being new (and therefore) odd.
 
The percentage of people who have a "dark" feeling in the temple is very, very, very, very small...and it is an indication (with all due respect to the poor guy who was struggling that way) of something wrong with that person, not with the temple.
 
You should not be freaked out about the temple. You watch a video that teaches the plan of salvation and make covenants...none of which are not already intrinsically part of the baptismal covenant. And there's some signs and tokens stuff that, frankly, I still don't entirely understand (and I'm a temple ordinance worker). So don't stress about getting it all or it being overly weird. It is not.
 
Listen. Learn. Enjoy. Return often. Listen. Learn. Enjoy. Be blessed.
 
Remember, the key to the temple is the covenants we make there. No different than the covenants we make outside the temple. Just more detailed. We covenant with the Lord to follow Him and He covenants with us to bless us with eternal life. That's really the crux of it.
 
Take it seriously, of course. There is little with more meaning than these covenants we make. But relax too. The temple is awesome!

A liberal complaining about solving cultural problems with political solutions....
 
Hmmm...

The other week my niece, out of nowhere asked, "How do you get out of an elephant?"
 
"How...?" We asked...a bit confused.
 
"You run around until you're all pooped out."

Agree with the profound effect comment. But overall public acceptance in sheer numbers is not necessarily the prime variable, imo, for judging profoundness of impact. Without the media's subtle teachings of normalcy, getting right at the core of Joe-sixpack's moral center, the legality/illegality would never have been an issue in the first place.

The other week my niece, out of nowhere asked, "How do you get out of an elephant?"
 
"How...?" We asked...a bit confused.
 
"You run around until you're all pooped out."

Agree with the profound effect comment. But overall public acceptance in sheer numbers is not necessarily the prime variable, imo, for judging profoundness of impact. Without the media's subtle teachings of normalcy, getting right at the core of Joe-sixpack's moral center, the legality/illegality would never have been an issue in the first place.

Usage of words like these does more to hurt the conservative position than...
 
... :D

Off topic...but I disagree.

Maybe the best answer is, rather than taking the bait and choosing culture over politics, we simply do both.  It's like the classic college professor who says:
 
A or B?
 
And the brilliant freshman who correctly answers, "Yes."
 

Great post!
 
What you are talking about is one's ability to spiritual discern.  This dilemma is spoken of many times in the scriptures.  I like Zechariah's words about it, chapter 11; " 17 Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened."  The "right eye" is symbolic of one's ability to discern spiritual things.  The "right arm" is symbolic of one's ability to carry out spiritual things.  Just like we have a right eye and a left eye and a right arm and left arm we are dual beings.  It is said more clearly from modern day prophets and apostles like David O Mckay and Elder Bednar that we are both physical and spirit beings.  Elder Holland made it clear that the "mind" can have ailments as in depression etc. that are physical in nature, the physical mind or in other words the brain.  Those being different from the thoughts that are generated by the "mind" of the spirit.
 
Our ability to differentiate the source of those thoughts, passions, feelings etc is called spiritual discernment or metaphorically represented by the "right" side of the body, on the right hand or the right eye, etc.  We want to find ourselves on the right side of Christ in the end.  That is the test of this life - do we pay attention to the right side or the left side or like Zechariah so poetically said when one's faith is "shaken" what happens is the right eye becomes darkened.  In other words, spiritual discernment is more difficult.
 
The whole focus then is to keep our "right eye" clear.  That is the purpose and effect of the gospel, to enhance our spiritual discernment.  Without it, the natural man takes over, the "left" side of the body, or the physical or carnal man takes over and then we don't see things spiritually as well.  
 
Maybe this is why I spend so much time talking about what is physical vs what is spiritual, to discern the two can be difficult but that is the test.  Elder Bednar; "The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41). The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ."
 
Like you stated, the conundrum exists because we are dual beings, everything has to be processed through the natural man brain.   Even if the spirit is the source of the message it still has to be processed through the brain.  So, the best way to help (but not totally do away with the conundrum) is to do everything we can to distinguish what is from "natural man" the physical brain vs what is from the spirit (the way the Holy Spirit communicates is directly to our spirit).  We "put off" the natural man to tune into the spirit or to improve our spiritual discernment.  You are describing THE test as Elder Bednar says - which inclination do we respond to - natural man vs spirit, right eye vs left eye.

I would argue that there are no knots. But...obviously it's perspective.
 
 
Not to get snarky either...but rejecting it in the 20th century is still highly problematic.
 
Practicing it...yeah...different matter.
 
I do think it highly interesting (and this isn't necessarily directed at you...just using your post as a springboard for a thought) that we struggle SO much with issues that are 100% absolutely cultural as if they have any bearing whatsoever on eternal truth. Polygamy being a prime example, of course. The wrongness of polygamy as a theory is entirely cultural. Entirely. And yet so many cannot look past their own obvious cultural bias in that and similar things.
 
Interesting.

I looked up dhimmitude
 
...was not disappointed