Jane_Doe

My thoughts exactly! I mean, I am a spiritual person and I love church, but I going to go to church in my ward, and not one I had to buy a plane ticket to attend.

Nope.

I don’t think that anyone will deny that some truths can be found by methods other than divine revelation. As a professional research scientist, I certainly do! However, things like science/philosophy are very messy, and (as Claire said) subject to error. As a general trend, I’ve noticed a lot of Catholics heavily use things like science and philosophy to explain their position (I’ve also seen other churches do this as well). Coming from the LDS perspective this is strange, because you’re trying to use flawed tools to explain an perfect Gospel. Hence a lot of Mormons can be suspicious of explanations based on (for example) a pagan Greek philosopher. LDS tend to be more “just ask God” in their methodology for finding theological truth.

Honestly, yes. Every Catholic I know would say that their faith is based in Christ. For someone else to come and say "No, your faith is not based in Christ!" is rude. I'm not saying that such statements are wrong or right, but it is rude. That's because the only person who can tell you what "John" thinks is John himself. To do otherwise is no different than having someone come up to you and say "Oh, you're a Mormon, then you believe XYZ..." without ever letting you speak. Have you had an experience like that Vort? Again, the only person to that can say what "John" believes is John himself. Hence why I asked a Catholic what she (as a Catholic) thinks.

If she wants to do activities with you (which is a good idea), there are plenty of options which don't involve church or comedy clubs. A good movie? Sports activity? A day away from it all? What do the two of you like to do?

Vort, let's be polite. I know you're intending to defend the LDS viewpoint, but that doesn't mean we need to bash the Catholic. Truth is never dependent on putting the other guy down. I was curious as to the Catholic perspective on things, hence the "Ask a Catholic" thread (I'm a huge proponent of inter-faith dialogue and respect).

You nailed it. She's acting like a teenager: trying to figure out who she is, flipping 180's constantly, pushing the boundaries, and not really wanting the consequences. Reality will have to eventually hit her, but I don't know when that'll happen. I really wish I had more to offer than prayers and sympathies. Mureen might be right about getting some individual counseling. If your wife doesn't want to invite you in, or make things work, it's going to be a hard road.

Claire, I've noticed you're really fond of quoting Aristotelian philosophy. Why is that? I'm a fan of philosophy, but it seems strange answer religious questions by quoting a non-religious person.

I have had God speak through me through Netflix. Inspiration comes in all sorts of forms.

Welcome welcome!

Ask mom what she/baby need. I just had my little one's party and I told everyone we wanted diapers. We already had more clothes and toys than we know what do with. And gift cards aren't a bad idea either (helps with unforeseen baby expenses).

Congrats! Babies really do turn your world upside down. Be prepared for some unexpected turns! 1) I'm sure you've been warned about post-pardum depression. This is a real thing, and your wife will need rest after the baby is born. As my friend who's a labor and delivery nurse says: "the body spends 9 months building up all the hormonal changes. And then undoes it in two weeks: it's a wild ride". 2) Schedules and routines are your friend! Having a bed/naptime routine will be especially helpful for letting baby know it's time to sleep and making sleep training so much easier. 3) As you've probably noticed: you can find parenting advice to any tune you want. But the most important tune to listen to is the Holy Ghost.

How is this really different than any other gene therapy procedure?

I get your point, which is one reason why I've tried so hard to put on other people's shoes.

I was the OP on this way back, and have asked many trinitarians to try to explain their view to me. Ultimately I've decided that this is an issue I'm only going to 'get' after taking off my "Jane thinking shoes" and putting on someone else's. While in my "Jane thinking shoes", explainations like this one-- Are confusing because light/heat/gravity are the darn same thing, perceived with different instruments. Hence this statement is not trinitarian but modulistic, similar to saying my "Mommy" persona is a different person than my "work phD candidate" persona.... I gotta ditch the "Jane thinking shoes" to understand how a trinitarian thinks... something I've had mediocre success with...(Anatass helps a lot).

Text oaf the above link (official church source): TOPIC Capital PunishmentThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question of whether and in what circumstances the state should impose capital punishment as a matter to be decided solely by the prescribed processes of civil law. We neither promote nor oppose capital punishment.

"You can't rush a flower to bloom". My husband didn't ask me out until I had been accepted to graduate school. Throughtout middle and high school I thought he was immature (cause he was). He thought I was stuck-up (cause I was). It took time for both of us to grow up and become the person capable of loving each other in an adult way. And when he did ask me out, having that ten years of friendship to build off of was a great foundation.

Middle school. He had the biggest crush on my friend!

What I refer to a rumor is when people say something like "Mormons hate blacks, you think they're all wretched sinners because of this scripture..." Such is a false statement because: 1) "Black" refers to someone of African linage. The people mentioned scripture were Native American, and had nothing to do with Africans. So it is inaccurate to say the verse has anything to do with black people. 2) The people referred to in the scripture were specific: that family, living 2600 years ago. But once that particular bunch of people died, the "curse" has no reference to their decedents status with God-- Mormon scripture is very clear that blame for another's sins cannot be inherited. So unless you want to time-travel to accent America, it is quite silly to say "dark skin is a sign of disfavor from God". 3) Mormon scriptures are full of dark-skinned people being men of God (just not that one family 2600 years ago). 4) Mormons have always welcomed people of all linages into our congregations. Blacks hold many leadership positions. Heck, in my last congregation my best friend was a black man! So no... I don't consider myself or Mormon beliefs to be racist at all. Easyaspie, how would you consider any of the above the be raciest?

~600 BC, there was one group of people whose skinned was darkened as a symbol of their lifestyle going dark (i.e. evil). It's the similar to nun putting on a hobbit for the first time to indicate the change she wants in her life (except she's committing her life to God). This has does not that their decedents were evil (see my previous post). It has nothing to do with people of African descent. Skin color (black, white, or purple) has nothing to do with how righteous a person is. Cain has nothing to do with a person's race.

This is a common mis-informed rumor. The rumor stems from a Book of Mormon story, when a family splits because some of the sons want to follow the Lord and some wanted follow Satan. The scriptures say how the “bad guys” became dark. In this case, yes this refered to skin color, but more importantly it refers to symbolic darkness- i.e., turning to “the dark side” (to use a pop reference). That’s how things stood at that time for that particular group of people (~600 BC). Does this mean that everyone with dark skin is a follow of Satan? Heck no! Let’s pull another example from the Book of Mormon: a person with dark skin called by God to proclaim the birth of Christ. When this dark skinned prophet went to proclaim this news to the descendants of the “good white guys” they banned them from the city and would have killed him if not for divine intervention. A color of one’s skin has nothing to do with a person’s righteousness. Check out this clip of a black Mormon Bishop:

There are few things that an LDS member is *required* to take literally to still be considered "believing". Example: Christ literally rose from the dead, as will we. Belief that Jonah literally sit in a whale tummy for three days: totally not required. Getting outside of the "required" realm, there are some things that most LDS folks consider literal and some things most consider figurative. God telling Abraham to sacrifice Issac would fall in the first category. Personally I've never heard some one suggest it was just figurative and trying to figure out how that would even work... Oh well, not a primary concern. I'll respond more later (got to run)

Officailly, the church never endorses a candidate or political party. Churches are not allowed to be used for political events, or even voting spots. However, members are encouraged to be involved in the community, including politics. Every November local congregations are read a letter saying effectively "we endorse no candidates, but encourage you to vote". Still talking about official church policy: the church never endorse a person or party, but will occasionally comment on a policy, particulary moral ones. For example, just Tuesday there was a big new conference with the church officially saying "People marrying those of the same sex is wrong, but all people do deserve the right to a place to live." (please no one turn this into a gay-marriage thread!). Unofficiailly, a lot of individuals Mormons do lean Republican because they feel that party best represents their view (see Crypto's data). But there are still plenty of Democrats.

I find it's more of a spectrum of belief than being 100% literally or 100% figurative. A couple of examples from my personal belief: Naoh -- It did flood the whole area (Noah's "world"). Bible describes it raining 40 days. I do not believe that means at day 40 11:59 pm it magically stopped raining to have a sunny day 41. Rather, I believe "40" refers to the metaphorical Hebrew number-olgy "40" (length of time for a severe test). I fear that going 100% literal makes you miss the symbolic bueaty. And 100% figurative makes you go "oh that's a nice pretend story".

Are talking real life friends, or Facebook? There's a big difference.