sixpacktr

This last week in Sacrament meeting one of the Sisters in the branch gave an excellent talk on reverencing the name of God, and I was very glad to hear this given. We have a lot of converts in our branch (mainly ex Catholic, since Buffalo is heavily Catholic) and I have heard OMG dropped with regularity. I think for most converts it is a leftover from past practices, something that has become so engrained in the vernacular it is almost like saying 'what's for dinner?', etc.I agree with you. This sister brought up a point I have thought of many times: we don't understand the power that these names carry, and once we do, we'll hang our heads in shame if we defiled them thru casual or (worse yet) angry usage. We as Saints and Christians should regard the name of diety with reverence, and although we are swimming in the mud of disrespect, those things should never cross our lips except in the most loving tones and with great reverence.

Chik-Fil-A beats the absolute crap out of KFC. Alas, there are none in western NY Atlanta had one about every 3 miles it seemed, and they were all packed. Kind of like "Ted's" Hot Dogs here in Buffalo.

I for one believe that it is more prevalent today than ever, not just that we are more aware of it. There used to be a thing called shame in the world that kept people, for good or bad, from doing some things that were wrong. I seriously doubt that girls in HS dressed worse than streetwalkers like they do now. I also seriously doubt that kids were as sexualized as they are now. Parents used to be parents, for the most part, not their child's 'friend'. Yes, sin has always existed, but it is more prevalent today than before. 20 years ago 'NAMBLA' would have been ridden out on a rail; now they have a website so all of the ilk that are dripping with evil have a place to go to feel 'validated', that they are normal like everyone else, they just get their jollies from little kids instead of an actual grownup. Homosexuals have always existed, but since when was it popular to 'come out' in HS? And don't give this crap that 'since when is it popular'? because it has become the 'in thing'. My girls would come home and tell me about this boy or this girl that had 'come out of the closet' and was openly gay. Sorry, in my day, we'd have pounded him to within an inch of his life. Right? Probably not, but how many kids today do things because they want to experiment, not knowing any better? Let's go to the Bill Clinton excuse of what or what doesn't constitute sex. That used to be considered a really way out there practice, not done so much. Now young kids do it and don't consider it sex because there was no penetration. So don't tell me that it isn't worse. It definitely is.

Hey Lona,I agree with Rosie on this, however, there is a link on this page called 'Mormon Testimonies' that may be of interest to you. It is in the 'pinkish' block at the top of the page, btw 'Mormon Wiki' and 'LDS Forums'. There are some interesting things noted there.

Ok here goes so if you think I got it wrong go ahead and tell me so. I think that the 2nd coming is on its way. When I think of it remember the earth was cleansed with water and now the earth is warming. Isn't the 2nd cleanse be of fire. Maybe this is what they meant? Your thoughts. Ooops, sorry off topic. Don't Sin (or any one of the above sins very bad for you)! do you get it thats me trying to be funny hahaha. Blackcat, It was warmer 600 years ago than it is now, and the world wasn't consumed by fire, so don't be duped by the GW crowd acting like this is the end. Bruce McConkie talked of 'the nuclear holocaust that surely shall be', which would be much more likely to cleanse with fire than Algore's pipe dreams of fame...

Since Pushka pushed:1. You can put them in anytime. I put mine in a good 5 months before I was available. One sister serving in our branch right now put hers in about 2 months before she reported. 2. Again, that varies. See above. My call came about 3 months after I submitted, but I had said I wasn't available until at least 4.5 months later because I was in school. 3. Some take a couple of weeks, some a couple of months. 4. Once you receive your call, you can receive your endowments. It is highly recommended that you wait on taking out your endowments until you are in your mid-20s if you don't have marriage/mission plans. 5. Study more of the scriptures, gain a greater/stronger testimony, and be more humble. 6. Work even harder. It is only 2 years, and it affects the rest of your life. I still see myself as 19-21 and see/feel/sense things that happened on my mission like it was yesterday. I don't dwell on it, but it truly affects your life (and let's just leave it at my mission was over a long LONG time ago). 7. More church books to read. I love to read, and let's face it, as much as I love the scriptures, I can't read them hours on end. 8. Didn't take much I couldn't use, so nothing.

CK, Even better said. I love the scripture you quoted of Christ being our advocate. Satan, I believe, will be our chief accuser (that is his name). That is his job. And he will be 100% right. We don't deserve it. That is why the scripture you quoted is so, so comforting.

Rosie, I remember a talk in GC by I believe Elder McConkie, but I don't remember clearly. It was back in my days at BYU (so the mid 80s), and the talk was about doing our duty. He broke down the reasons people do things in the church (and maybe in any other pursuit) as follows: 1) Out of fear. You do it because you are afraid of punishment or retribution (won't make it to the CK, etc.) 2) Out of habit. You do it because it is what you do (go to church because my parents did) 3) Out of a sense of duty. My obligation, if I don't do it someone else will have to, etc. 4) Out of love. The best reason to do something, and one that shows we have become more Christlike. He stated that as long as at least you are doing things, it is better than not doing them, but that 3 was a good reason to do them, but 4 was the best (of course). He also stated that oft times things progress from 1 to 4 as we gain more of an understanding of our purposes for doing things. Anyway, I remember that talk from time to time. I remember it vividly, not when it was given, but I see myself in the BYU Laundry, where I was a janitor, with lots of time to think as I did things, and pondering the meaning of that talk. I hope that I have progressed more to levels 3 and 4 at least... Looking over the places you mentioned Six, they all seem to have their place. Could part of the issue be that I'm focusing too much on the area #4? Rosie, Ahh...the legendary guilt the church inflicts upon us (not said tongue in cheek, but rather as fact). I gotta run to a meeting, but I think that comes more from misunderstandings than from actual facts (if that makes sense). I used to feel guilty all the time, now only when I know I have displeased HF by acting in ways I know I oughtn't. Try reading Believing Christ by Steven Robinson (I think! Man my memory is getting worse and worse!). It made me see things a lot differently... Added after meeting: I reread your note, and noticed that you feel more 'overwhelmed' by the responsibilities or maybe the expectations of you as a member of the church, and I believe that to be very widespread. I think that is why we hear from our GAs so often that we should be an optimistic and happy people instead of spreading 'doom and gloom' everywhere, since we DO KNOW the truth and have inspired leaders over us that give us what it is our HF wants us to do, as well as being taught to gain revelation for our own selves and families. That being said, I do believe that people do get too 'caught up' in the details of what they are supposed to do (let's see: HT/VT, callings, geneaology, serving others, community service, read scriptures by yourself and with family, prayer by yourself and with family at least 2 times/day, keep the house up, be a 'Molly Mormon' (which I don't think is bad, but there is a lot there) or a 'Peter Priesthood', teach our children, keep up on our education, personal preparedness, missionary work, etc., etc., etc. Have I missed any?? OF COURSE I HAVE!) and don't sit back and realize the absolute grandeur of the gospel and of the atonement in particular. That is why I was so picky to a degree about reverence in Sacrament meeting. It is the one meeting we attend where the spirit should make us weep because it is so present, and yet we, as a people, miss out because of irreverence, etc. As I said, I used to think, quite seriously, that I was meant for about the telestial kingdom. Mind you, I served a mission and was a ZL, I have served as EQP, as YMP, and as a counselor in the Bishopric, taught SS, many, many responsibilities. My mission was about the good news of the gospel and the opportunity the Savior gave us to return and live with HF, but I didn't believe it for me. I wasn't good enough, no one like me could make it. I didn't understand the atonement for many many years and so I wrote myself off. Then I read Bro Robinson's book, as well as a book called Spiritual Survival in the Last Days by the Yorgansen brothers, and I realized that although I had taught the atonement, I truly hadn't believed it, at least not for me (and how can you teach something you yourself don't truly believe will affect you??). It changed my outlook. I was able to see, really for the first time, that HF did want me with him, and that if I did my best, that was all that was required of me. Nothing more, but then again, nothing less. How relieved I was to know that! I also saw a talk on BYU TV by a Brother that spoke of D&C 46:13 and 14, which talks of those that know that Jesus is the Christ, and those that believe on their words. This man had been a Bishop and SP and felt he was only a 'verse 14er', but then realized he could and should become a 'verse 13er'. I had the same feelings, but after hearing his talk, that became my goal for this year. I have fallen short of it this year, but won't this next. It is my goal to KNOW that Jesus is the Christ. I now believe, very strongly he is, but my goal is to KNOW. And once that comes, I believe that everything else will fall into place for me as well. Just remember Rosie, it is a journey, and we are sometimes left to our own devices by a loving HF in order to find our way and gain confidence as well as faith. If he showed us everything, did everything for us, then he would be embracing Lucifer's plan. Agency means that we are left to our own devices a lot of times, I believe, with a Father there that is mindful of us and willing to help when we really need it, but not necessarily at every pleading. Sorry for the ramble, but I wanted to get that out...

Rosie,I remember a talk in GC by I believe Elder McConkie, but I don't remember clearly. It was back in my days at BYU (so the mid 80s), and the talk was about doing our duty. He broke down the reasons people do things in the church (and maybe in any other pursuit) as follows: 1) Out of fear. You do it because you are afraid of punishment or retribution (won't make it to the CK, etc.) 2) Out of habit. You do it because it is what you do (go to church because my parents did) 3) Out of a sense of duty. My obligation, if I don't do it someone else will have to, etc. 4) Out of love. The best reason to do something, and one that shows we have become more Christlike. He stated that as long as at least you are doing things, it is better than not doing them, but that 3 was a good reason to do them, but 4 was the best (of course). He also stated that oft times things progress from 1 to 4 as we gain more of an understanding of our purposes for doing things. Anyway, I remember that talk from time to time. I remember it vividly, not when it was given, but I see myself in the BYU Laundry, where I was a janitor, with lots of time to think as I did things, and pondering the meaning of that talk. I hope that I have progressed more to levels 3 and 4 at least...

From God's perspective, it matters a lot. He would leave the flock of 99 to retrieve the 1 that when astray. "A few" is a big deal. Even if the rest continue, it is still a loss and people ought to care. Just my two cents on that Ben. Not trying to rob you of your post-just my opinion. Of course each of God's children are precious to him, but the point is (and I know you get this...) that so what if there are naysayers and those that snipe, or those that lie in wait to deceive and destroy...the church will move forward and is on the right path.

does that mean that forcing is ok...if it is for a good cause?? is it ok to force people to do what is right? Often times it IS to persuade someone to do right, but it's done in an unrighteous manner. If a persuasion is for the betterment of the other person and is not intended to glorify the persuader, then I'm not sure it's unrighteous. An example would be a husband forcing or persuading his wife or children to do something because he "holds the priesthood, and what he says goes." This is unrighteous dominion. What would you consider 'force'? Holding a knife to someone's throat and making them do something that is right? Taking away privileges for not doing something that someone should have done (like our children)? I'm reminded of a talk in GC several years ago, maybe in PH session, maybe not, by a brother from South America (Brazil, I believe, but I can't remember clearly). Anyway, he spoke of a young man that loved surfing and the beach more than church, and so didn't go to church. One Sunday morning, one of his leaders (either YM or Bishopric member) showed up at his house inviting him to come back to church. He made an excuse and didn't go. The next Sunday, this leader was on his car (the YM's car) waiting for him, and invited him to church again. The next Sunday (I've cut down the length of time, but you get the gist), the YM thought he'd bug out early and headed to the beach before the leader could come and get him. While he was surfing, he was surprised to find this leader wading into the surf (in his suit, no less!) and calling to him to come to church. This YM then gave in and went to church and became active from that. And if I remember right, he (the speaker) was the YM, and he praised the name of this leader that 'forced' him to come back thru his example of love... So I'll ask again: what do you consider force? I have yet to see someone forced to do something in the church. Not once, on any of the leadership councils that I have sat on, has someone been forced. Made to feel ashamed because they weren't doing their duty? Even that would be iffy, but we sometimes equate feeling guilty for not doing our duty with being 'forced'...

I agree 100%. I have stayed at many a Marriott, and thought that at least THEY'D have hot chocolate or herbal tea or something other than coffee! Hey Aphro,Surely you have been on boards long enough to know that when someone starts off with a negative comment they aren't looking to be converted. If they were, they'd have spoken with the missionaries first to get some answers, not go about it in a 'here is where I think you all are wrong' and then not coming back to say anything. If he were sincere, he'd have come back with something like 'no, really, I'm curious, etc' which has happened on this board before. When they come in and do a seagull manager bit (you know, come in, crap all over everything and then leave) it is 99.9% certain they were trolls getting their jollies by taunting us horn growin' Mormons...

But Pale:DO YOU HAVE AFAITHA, IN THE POWER OF ELECTRICITYA, TO LIGHTA, YOUR AHOUSEA?! BY THE APOWERA OF THOMASA EDISONA, LETTA THERE BE ALIGHTA!

Gibby,Congratulations! You have now officially taken the place of Satan in standing as the chief accuser of a whole group of people. Did you know, O most knowledgeable one, that Satan's name actually means "accuser of the brethren"? How does that feel, taking some of Satan's work away from him so that he can concentrate on other things? Putz...

Well, I'm convinced. Why did I not see these obvious problems ever before? Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you, Gib, for pointing out these things. You must be some kind of genius to point out such obvious contradictions that nobody has ever seen or shown to Mormons before. How was I ever so blinded by those evil Mormons with their human sacrifices and driving on the wrong side of the road? Don't forget the double secret ninja meetings and handshakes, as well as the horn pulling parties in the graveyard as we offer goat sacrifices to Joe Smith...

Everyone, Just subscribe to LDSGEMS so that you can have these delivered directly to your account. Why take up this space simply cutting and pasting what is already available?

Last night on BYU-TV there was a re-showing of a fireside given by the Pres of BYU-I and his wife on the Law of Chastity. We have watered down the severity of that sin, both the world (who thinks it 'quaint' or outright stupid) and the church (I'll do my 6 months of 'repenting' and that will be that). Fornication and/or adultery are bad. Period. No two ways about it. Right up there with shedding innocent blood and denying the HG. But we have made it a 'wink and a nudge' and all is alright...

Very well put. I would put it forth as my opinion that 99 times out of 100 the calling is issued to help the callee rather than those over which s/he has a stewardship. While it is true that as the mantle settles on that person they are able to help those over which they have responsibility, it is equally true, as Tiancum so eloquently put it, that the person with the calling changes and becomes more Christlike as they learn new skills and new dimensions of themselves. And that in turn gives them empathy and the ability to stand in the place of the Lord and help those that need it, whatever it may be.

fair enuf...

I did exactly that. I was given permission again as soon as I talked to the authorities. Then (and pardon me, I'm not being rude), what is the problem? You worked within the confines of the church gov't, and it all worked out. I see that as a positive. Am I missing something?

Hi Mo,You keep dealing with extreme fringes. If my Bishop told me to go rob a bank to pay my bills, then yes, I'd be a tad concerned and probably wouldn't follow him. If he got up on the pulpit and said that from now on those that drank coke could no longer have a TR, I'd speak with him privately and ask him to show me where the church said you can't do that. However, I wouldn't publicly embarrass him or talk behind his back that he was nuts, etc. The example was basically if we'd follow a leader down to hell. No, I wouldn't. But when the Bishop gives someone an assignment, or a calling, or anything else, then I believe we should obey. There seems to be this spirit of seeing how close to the edge we can get before we are being disobedient, or better yet, 'still righteous'. To me, the spiirt is going to tell you 999 times out of 1000 that the Bishop, or SP, or Prophet, is right and that we are to obey. That 1 time in 1000? If the spirit told me strongly don't do it, then I'd tell the Bishop what I had been told, and ask him to explain why he feels it is important for me to do whatever. And if his explanation makes sense, and I don't feel that it will jeopardize my standing with my HF, then I will do it. Again, I too can believe the wrong thing just as much as that man can. I guess I get back to the mantle that Bishop's receive when called. I honor that office, and recognize that man as my spiritual leader for the amount of time he has that calling. I don't get to 'pick and choose' what I'll believe or disbelieve. And all of the men I have served with while in Bishoprics, or as EQP, or as YMP, etc., were honorable, upright men that would NEVER tell anyone something that they didn't need to hear. They were humble men that did the absolute best that they could, and got enough harping from those in the ward that had the same spirit as prevails to some extent on this board, always a 'how dare you tell me something I don't want to hear' attitude. It seems that too often people want to make hypotheticals on 'when this or this happens, I'll tell him to go to hell because he is out of the way' instead of an attitude of 'I'll support my leaders as best I can, and not add to the burden they bear, and get confirmation that what they are telling me is correct'. Blind obedience was never in the cards in HF's plan. Praying about what we have been told or taught, gaining our own testimony of that, and then acting accordingly? Yes, that is exactly what we are commanded to do. Why this hang up on trying to determine if a leader is leading us in wrong paths?

The Bishop has the responsibility to lead the ward that he is over (or BP if a branch). He is the chief HP in the ward. He is the President of the AP in the ward. IOW, he is the leading PH authority in the ward. Under what circumstances would he tell you to not give blessings? Because he is mean? Because he is on a power trip and only he wants to give blessings in the ward? I don't know the circumstances surrounding his admonition, and don't want to. If my Bishop told me to stop giving blessings because of transgression or some other such thing that he felt was keeping me from being worthy to exercise my PH, and I knew him to be right, I'd follow his admonition. If I was falsely accused, I would take it up with the Chief HP in the Stake, the SP, and appeal to him. However, during that time, I would follow the admonition of my Bishop until such a time as I was exonerated or whatever. Sorry, it is hardwired into me. My spiritual leaders are called of God. When they speak, I have been taught to obey, and I do the best I can. If you want to flout the admonition, that is between you and HF. I, however, would prefer to remain obedient and work within the confines of the church government and work it out there. Guess that makes me one of those 'brainwashed kool aid drinkers' that can't think for themselves. So be it. I'll trust in my obedience and the admonition of the spirit than being offended because someone wounded my pride.

This is a great example. It makes sense to me why you wouldn't obey the Bishop. I wonder what sixpacktr would think? M. Bishop asks me to do it, I'd do it. I've served with a couple of Bishop's, and know that they have more information than I do as to the circumstances surrounding that family. Answer your question, Mo?

I became more Libertarian as a result of listening to the talkmaster Neal Boortz out of WSB-AM in Atlanta GA for 6 years. The more he talked, the more I realized I agreed with what the Libertarians said and promoted. That does not mean I agree with everything. I don't agree with the stand on drugs or abortion (in this Sgallan is correct). I think that governments have to take moral stands (and stop with the 'who decides what is moral?' argument, I've already heard it, and I'm simply stating what I believe). The founders of the country spoke of a moral basis of conduct, or else a democratic republic cannot stand, and I believe that as well. I don't believe that schools should promote a certain religion, and I don't think they do. I believe that a lot of whiney pants have taken it to the other extreme where now Christian beliefs are openly mocked and denigrated and those of other religions are promoted. My eye opener came when we lived in a little town in Iowa and they refused to allow the kids to sing Silent Night or Joy to the World at the Christmas concert (it promotes Christianity...) and yet had a day of singing praises to Martin Luther King Jr. I have nothing against the man, but the focus clearly was worship MLK Jr but not Christ. Anyway, the home is where kids should be taught, not the gov't schools, not anywhere else. And before some call me a hypocrite, I can't abide the Dems, who I see as openly hostile to the US, and I can't abide the Repubs, who I believe are just as liberal for the most part and spineless wussies besides. The Libertarians speak most to my beliefs, but not all.

Let me clarify what I meant. Once we have an opportunity to meet with our HF and KNOW, beyond all doubt, that we didn't live up to our potential and that we rejected the offering of the Savior to stand in our place, I believe that is what King Benjamin was speaking of when he talked of the 'worm that dieth not' and 'eternal flame' of shame. Our HF is all knowing, perfectly kind and loving, but WE would be so savaged by our short-sightedness and laziness while here in doing what we knew to be right (and I'm not speaking simply of church members, but all members of the human race. We are judged according to the light we had, remember), that we would feel so bad that we DISAPPOINTED our HF and that it would be too uncomfortable to live with him. He wants us there, but WE will be the ones that will shy away because we will know then we don't belong. It is kind of like (and this is a very loose analogy, granted, but it kind of works) when we have said something nasty about someone, that person finds out about it, and we run into that person somewhere. If you have any type of conscience, you feel about 1" high and wish you could get away as quickly as possible, especially if that person treats you kindly. To me, it would be the same type of discomfort, multiplied a google times... agree 100% with you. That doesn't happen often does it B) ? yaay!