broadway

Jason,here is a little playwrite I cooked up. Tell me what you think... Me: God doesn't change. Neither do you. You: ok ok ok...wait a minute! Are you saying that I have always looked like this? Are you suggesting that you do not believe in the LDS doctrine that I will one day have a glorifed body? Are you saying that I always have the same moods, beliefs, education and underwear? That doesn't seem like you have thought this through too much, dear. Me: First of all, Doesn't Catholic scripture say that God is the same today yesterday and forever? Hasn't God changed moods commandments, and such? Why,then, is it the mormon church that gets your anger over this? What about God doesn't change? You: Yes, Catholic scripture states that God is the same today yesterday and forever...but the Catholics do not preach that God was once a man. Me: So, we are talking about form, here when we talk about changing? You: Not entirely, but yes, for the most part... Me: The Mormon church preach this as well... You are familair with what an intelligence is, I assume." You: Yes. It is a confusing doctrine, but I do know it. Me: This is what doesn't change. What we really are...intelligences. God is made up of these, so are you. This never changes. Other things do. You: Oh, I see. You are so much wiser than I am. Why didn't you say so in the first place? Wow. Is it too late to become a memeber again? Me: You know better than that. You: Is it too late to marry you? Me: (pauses...) uhhh...what? You: (blushes) nevermind.

Holy Cow! $70!!!! uh....I will wait until it comes out on video.

I agree with you ammon. I am a primary teacher and we are running low on teachers (not the church's fault...everybody got pregnant at the same time) It is more difficult for a primary teacher to take on multiple classes and for the teachers to change each week in primary than it is for the RS pres to have to lead, conduct and teach...I am sure the ladies would understand. What I would do, though, is get the parents involved. When I had to 'call in sick' one sunday, I got one of the parents to teach the class. Yeas, that was temporary. Maybe you could talk to the Primary pres (unless you are the primary pres, in which case I would not adivse doing so in public) and see if she would support you in getting the parents more involved in the classes. Ask some parents to start teacing the class, even for just one hour, then another parent can come in and teach for the second hour. Kids need a steady teacher. If the teacher changes every week, the kids are not going to take the lesson seriously. And if the teacher is new each week, then the teacher has no chance of getting to know her students way of learning better. This is important.

*pushes start button*

As a member, I try hard not to go looking for controversial material. Jason has recommended that I get this CD in order to help me research some things. Though I am open to other perspectives and love strengthening my testimony by finding more truths about my churh, I do not go looking for things that are not 'of the church' so to speak. I see that is is by Deseret Books, so that seems to infer that it would not be anti material. Is this correct?

Many of the things you mentioned I am familiar with and am content with. Some of the things I have NO clue what you are talking about. I would like any links you may have that would go to support your claims. I accept your word as the truth so far as you understand it. For my own, though, I would like to form my own opinions on. You mentioned having a link for one of the things for certain. Go ahead and start me out on that. Also, if you would...start a thread on these things. Especially the ones you felt you could not remember or whatnot. I appreciate your respect in not saying things you shouldn't say outside of the temple. You are a very kind person, indeed, to have this respect even though you do not believe in it. Your respect is for other people, I am sure, rather than for this forum or for our church. Whatever the reason for your respect, it is appreciated. You do not have to explain it any further. You can just take the credit for it and leave it at that. Gosh....there were some toher things you said I wanted to comment on...what were they??? Ah yes, You made the comment that many changes were made for practical reasons. Yes. Many. I agree. This would account for many of your issues. I cannot see that thse particular issues were theones that changed your mind about my church. Which ones specifically did it? Also, a little back ground would be nice as well. Did you have a run-in with a leader about your differing beliefs that started you on your quest for truth that lead you outside of the church? Some other situation, perhaps?? I am 36 weeks and 4 days. In other words, I have a little over three weeks left. Your wife is twenty weeks? Wow! That is an exciting time of pregnancy. Things are now starting to change. The baby's gender can be seen. Baby can be measured . All kinds of fun stuff...and if memory serves me correctly, twenty weeks is the beginning of the fun for the daddy too since the blood flow is much stronger in certain places, and makes it easier for mommy to be ...frisky. Yes, 20 weeks is a fun time. 3 kids? Wow...this is my second. My son is 3. I will be having a girl this time. I am elated that things worked out that way. I always assumed that I would have a house full of boys the way my mom did and my husband's parents did. Good luck. She has a long road ahead of her, but it will end quicker than she thinks. (At least I am hoping, for my own sake!!!) broadway

no I haven't. This is interesting, then. How could these guys grow up in the chruch (for most of them did, wouldn't you say? Not all, but the majority.) and not know more about their own chruch than the six discussions? The ones that I have talk to know quite a bit about the gospel despite the fact that they aren't supposed to read anything but the scriptures and the Missionary Library stuff (you know what that is, right? Just making sure. I do not want to assume anything) I do not live near any LDS colleges, so I can't really refer anyone to a professor. Perhaps the original lady does and can. I know that the missionaries wouldn't say anything but church sanctioned things rather than opinions and theories. This is important. Once you get into theories, things can get sketchy and possibly even more argumentive. As this is a long list and I doubt that there would be anything about this on lds.org how about an overview? You could even start a new thread. I would like that very much so that I can see both sides to it. I would very much appreciate this. And thank you for doing even as much as you did. I can certainly see why, can't you? There weren't many members. If one's ansestors weren't LDS, how could he be sealed to them? I think it sounds like a pretty good make-do solution until there are more members. I am lost. But this is nothing new. At least when I am lost now-a-days, I can blame it on my pregnancy... Cute. That is fine. You are certainly entitled to your beliefs. I see. I misunderstood your motives, then. Sometimes you did use faces rather than give answers. This infers that the answer is so obvious that only an idiot would ask the question or make whatever comment. I took a little offense (offense is too strong a word though) at that. Faces are fine as long as they are accompanied by a comment. You show me where it is said that I am not allowed to answer a straight question with an honest answer. I am familiar with the idea of 'milk before the meat' but if a direct question os asked, and the Spirit prompts me, I feel that I can give a direct answer. As long as the conversation hasn't turned into a debate or arguement, I see no reason why the prophet would disagree with my answering questions. Am I that invisible? broadway

I am unsure what your reason was for pointing out that a reason to leave and reason for staying out are different subjects. Could you go into that further?The link I posted said more about his claims about the church than they did his character. Please, just peek at it to see what it is before you disregard it. You will see that it isn't a site to bash him so much as it is his claims...though I was only able to get through 1/8 of it. There is a lot there about his claims and their falsities. Why don't you take into account his personal conduct when deciding whether a person would have an alterior motive. He was excommunicated, so that may have left him imbittered about it. It would be one thing if the things he were saying we true. But they aren't. It goes along with his integrity. That is why I brought it up.

not sure if I'd believe either, but I do know that neither would I find boring!

Isn't the point of a TR interview to tell the bishop anything that might keep you from being worthy? Isn't it the bishop's duty to be the judge and not you?I am asking because I have not gone to the temple yet. I am taking the whole process very seriously. I really do want to know if there is anything in my life that would keep me from being worthy. To purposefull exclude a piece of information that I might think would not allow me to go to the temple seems to defeat the purpose of an interview, does it not? I am not saying this to down you or point out your twig in your eye...but only to understand the process better. broadway

Some "exaggerations" smell a lot like lies, like: -The Temple spires are designed to imale Christ on His return; -The Holy of Holies in the Salt Lake Temple is lined with human skulls; -Temple ordinances involve writing '666' on your forehead in blood; -There is an exact mockup of the Oval Office at Salt Lake in preparation for the day the "Mormons" take over the world; on and on, and 'exaggeration' is an awfully nice word for these tales. Take a look at the website link I posted in my above post. There are a few more 'exaggerations'.

Interesting. Thank you for starting this thread. This is definately something I will research and speak to my spouse about. My initial thoughts were this: It is not possible the authorities meant that no one should use contraceptives under no circumstances. In fact, in may of the quotes provided, there were such exceptions made. It is then left up to the members to decide for their families whether they fit into these exceptions. There were some other valid exceptions that I could think of that were not mentioned. But, again, I thank you for bringing this up.

Ex-Mormon Jason, You mischaracterized almost everything that I said. My point in saying that I received a 100 on an anti-mormon paper in a school ran by baptist church wasn't to point out that I am an expert in the subject. There were two reasons I posted that. The first was to point out the humor in it. (A 100 given by an infamously anti-mormon denomination to an anti-mormon paper) and also to point out that I was more than just skeptical of mormons when I investigated. In fact, the only reason I did investigate was to prove once and for all that mormonism was of the devil. My point in bringing up his immorality was to point out that Mr Decker may have an alertior motive for going ex-mormon. His integrity has always been in question. This is important because why should anyone take as truth what he has to say. I suggest you (and anyone else) take a look at this website. http://www.angelfire.com/mo3/pma/deckertext.html You are right in that his infidelity and his lying about the church are two seperate issues, but that does not take away the truth of either situation. Thie link above posts some pretty significant misconduct done by our Mr Ed. It is even more bold to be a brazen stubborn fool and admit it to no one, and not change. That was rather arbitrary. Any reason why you say this? This would be more difficult than getting a hold of a missionary. The purpose here was also for convience. Alright, then, I had already in the past invited you to give your reasons for becoming inactive or tranferring membership (or however you would like to put it...not trying to be sarcastic here). You didn't respond. No worries, I am sure you didn't notice my askingor you were just busy...so I will ask again. Added to that, I will ask you which beliefs you think that I am unfamiliar with. I am unsure of why this makes any difference. I will have two males sealed to me and a female sealed to me. Eventually, I will be sealed to another man and woman. I do not see how this is wierd or against doctrine or... Perhaps I am misundertanding your reply. Are you inferring that he had males sealed to him as husbands or something? " Are you implying that believing a bold thing makes one incorrect? Then I suppose Jesus was incorrect. He was pretty bold in expressing his belief that He is the son of God and the Savior of the world. I suppose any of the prophets were incorrect since they were pretty bold in exclaiming a direct communication with God. If you are going to get into a discussion with me, I would appreciate some maturity. I am not out here to convert the world. I am here to seek the truth. You will be hard pressed to find someone else who is as willing to hear someone else's perspective as I am. If you want to point out something, do so. Do not make faces and call names (not saying you did). All that is unecessary. I promise. I am not overly-worried about telling people the deeper doctrine of our chruch. I am here to tell the truth. It is up to the other person to decide how he or she takes it. I do not hide any part of my beliefs. Ask and I will give you an honest and complete-as-I-can-give answer. Again, be mature and speak your mind. I cannot respond to faces. I am noticing a pattern of evasivness. Listen, if you want to discuss something, I am more than willing to hear your side of it. As a convert to the church, I am most interested in hearing the point-of-view of someone like you, an ex-mormon. All you need to do is speak your mind. Enough with the silly faces instead of answers or opinions. Ok? Fair enough? I have been trying to get you to give me your side of it since I met you. broadway

Ed Decker is a former member of our church that had constantly been cheating on his wife. His life tells a lot about whether this man is trust-worthy or not. I actually read the book in high school and did a thesis paper based on it. My purpose was to prove that mormonism is a cult and a lie. I received a 100 on the paper. Also, let me tell you I went to a private high school ran by a baptist church. Since then I have realized some of the things are really absurd. The best way of dealing with friend of your is to ask her if she has any questions she would like to ask you or the missionaries. We will not lie to her about our beliefs. All she has to do is be honest with herself. Getting anti-propaganda isn't the best way to learn what the church actually teaches. Where would she tell you to go in order to get info on her church's beliefs? We do not ask anything different than that. You want to know about us? Come ask us. Our church has some rather bold and different beliefs, this is true. This does not make them incorrect. We should not be overly-worried about evading questions about becoming Gods, living with God in the pre-mortal existance, Satan being Christ's spiritual brother, Kolob, or anything else that gets streched WAY out of its original truth. Addressing these issues right away as they come up will be the best way to get the out of the way so that you can properly teach her the more important, more releveant things about the gospel to her...such as Faith Repentance and Baptism. Stressing to her that she will never have to worry about becoming a god if she can't grasp the first things first. Faith is essential to it all. Without it, there is no chance to become a god.

A really wise man, a friend of our family's who served as a bishop, said this...If you get to the weekend and don't drink any sodas at all, and begin getting headaches and other withdrawal signs, you are drinking too much. The WOW is about health. Being addicted to a drug (regardless of how 'small' the drug may be) isn't healthy. If you can go all weekend without sodas and do not get affected by it, then odds are, you aren't drinking so much that it is unhealthy for you. Pretty wise insight, isn't it? broadway

As for the church's standards: <a href=\'http://www.lds.org/youthresources/pdf/ForStrengYouth36550.pdf\' target=\'_blank\'>http://www.lds.org/youthresources/pdf/ForS...gYouth36550.pdf</a> Click on <span style=\'color:red\'>Sexual Purity. It gives specifc things that are not acceptable as an unmarried invidual. Passionate kissing is included in this list of unacceptable. The entire book is great for a youth to have as a compilation of standards of LDS Youth. I would ask a chuch leader for one if you do not already have one. FOR STRENGTH OF YOUTH broadway</span>

In regards to African American members: The church never barred them from membership, just the priesthod...and the church realized that it was wrong in doing so. The doctrine wasn't about what COLOR a person is. This is the mistake the church made. The doctrine was about leniage. Not all dark-skinned people came from that particular leniage. Heavenly Father revealed this to the church after the church leaders sought after His council about it due to the heavy political pressure being put upon the church. If anyone can find the church's statement on this issue, by all means post it. I have forgotten which leniage was banned from the priesthood. I also do not remember if the church now lets this leniage have the priesthood. I think it does, but don't quite remember. Does anyone else know? broadway

March 31, 2004 BY MICHAEL SNEED <mailto:[email protected]> SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST The State of Illinois is saying it's sorry for something that happened 160 years ago. And it's all because Ald. Ed Burke (14th) is a closet historian. Last week, a resolution was quietly passed by the Illinois Legislature seeking "the pardon and forgiveness" of the Mormon Church for persecution that led to the expulsion of 20,000 members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1844 from Nauvoo, and the 1844 vigilante murder of Mormon leader Joseph Smith. The resolution reportedly stunned Mormon Church President Gordon B. Hinckley, who was so touched by the apology he "had tears in his eyes," said a source. The official apology, which was introduced by state Reps. Dan Burke (D-Chicago) and Jack Franks (D-Woodstock), meant so much to the Mormon church a delegation from Illinois led by Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn has been invited to Salt lake City to meet with Hinckley. The delegation also includes Ald. Burke, his wife, Illinois Appellate Court Judge Anne Burke, Dan Burke (the alderman's brother) and Franks. The thread that sewed closure to the 160-year-old Mormon tragedy began when the Burkes vacationed in Utah last year with their friends, Elaine and Burt Gordon. They were introduced to Lt. Gov. Olene Walker and her husband, Myron, a great-grandson of a Nauvoo survivor who helped establish Salt Lake City, the Rome of the Mormon Church. We spent dinner getting a rundown on Nauvoo and the Mormon expulsion," said Judge Burke. "My husband, who is besotted with history - especially Chicago history- was fascinated by Nauvoo and the way the Latter-day Saints were treated," she added. As a result, Ald. Burke spoke with Rep. Burke, and a resolution was drafted in February. When the Burkes returned to the Gordon home in February and reported on the draft of the resolution, they had no idea the reaction would be so emotional. Walker, who had since been elected governor, immediately called Hinckley, who summoned the Burkes to his inner sanctum. “It was amazing to see how personally he took the state's gesture," Judge Burke added. "He was moved to tears. Three generations have come and gone since the Mormon expulsion, but to them it's like it happened yesterday. Most have relatives who fled Nauvoo and they heard the story all their lives. "When Nauvoo was settled it was the 10th-largest city in the United States," she said. "It was a thriving community that was forced out and left in the dead of night to ensure their safety. "We thought it was about time to apologize." And they will do so on April 7th - one day after the 174th anniversary of the church's founding. The Burkes are devout Catholics, with Judge Burke presiding over the National Review Board, which is examining allegations of sexual abuse by priests in the U.S.

I don't know. What is a halcyon? hal·cy·on (click to hear the word) (hls-n) n. A kingfisher, especially one of the genus Halcyon. A fabled bird, identified with the kingfisher, that was supposed to have had the power to calm the wind and the waves while it nested on the sea during the winter solstice. adj. Calm and peaceful; tranquil. Prosperous; golden: halcyon years. I didn't know either. broadway

John 11:35Jesus wept. I know this because I grew up in the south and my mother always used to say "Jesus wept!!" as an expression of aggrevation. This, in and of itself, used to aggervate my brother and I, so we decided to say "Yep! John 11:35" after each time she said "Jesus wept!!" We were stinkers! Why did God strike Anaias and Sapharis dead? In what passage in this found? broadway

God God My question. Where on the Earth would one have found the Molten sea? Where are these two verses found?broadway

That's right. He probably could have jumped over the Empire State Building, towed the Queen Mary with his teeth, and bowled a perfect game. But could he remember all of his anniversaries ??? LOL!!! broadway

Names can count, I guess. You guys came up with some great ones. stiffneckedness!! Great one! broadway

Anybody else find something longer?

You guys are good! As for the question about Solomon's wife...I thought I had the entire book of Song of Songs down pat, but obviously not. I will get back to you unless someone else does before me. broadway