askandanswer

Members
  • Posts

    3552
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Just_A_Guy in I feel called to the LDS Church...but I still don't know if it's true   
    If memory serves, it took 145 years for D&C 137 to make it into the canon.  When you're in a church that purports to be led by modern revelation, "never say never" is a fairly safe maxim to live by. 
     
     
     
    a)  If God could set one set of requirements for the salvation of Jews in 1000 BC and another for the salvation of non-Jews in AD 35, why can't He have one set of requirements for the salvation of blacks in 1848 and another set for the salvation of blacks in 1979? 
    b )  Let us assume that holding the priesthood and temple rites are, objectively speaking, required for the exaltation ALL people, regardless of when or where they lived.
     
    The LDS Church currently has a policy that it will not do proxy temple ordinances (including, for males, proxy priesthood ordinations) for Jewish victims of the Holocaust (unless a particular victim has a living descendant who authorizes the work).  Theologically, that policy makes it literally impossible for certain Jews to return to their Heavenly Father, or to be with their families forever.
     
    Now, the leadership of the Mormon Church--and the bulk of its members--have accepted the policy because i) it facilitates the Church's work in other arenas, and ii) I think most of us have the gut sense that the restriction is temporary and that, sooner or later, the work will be done.
     
    If it's OK to do that with dead Jews (who, per Mormon theology, are still conscious and presumably are very frustrated indeed at the delay in the work for their salvation), why is it unacceptable to do that with any other race if the net result is in the Church's best interest?
     
     
    I don't have the time to get into the scriptural details on such a discussion; but I would note in passing that my children's relationship with me in our nuclear family is not remotely threatened or diminished by the existence of my children's grandfather.  As far as my kids are concerned, I'm still "daddy"; and to them, that's all that matters. 
  2. Like
    askandanswer reacted to pam in My walk to work this morning   
    I walk to work every day.  From my bedroom to my kitchen table where I set up my laptop.
  3. Like
    askandanswer reacted to PolarVortex in My walk to work this morning   
    It's a great place for kites.  Even better is Ocean Beach, though.  The wind there is so strong that I think you could let out a few miles of cord.  I think I have a picture of it somewhere... let me see... yes, here it is:
     

  4. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from Maureen in Matt 10: 34-35 and Matt 5:9   
    Thank you Maureen
  5. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from PolarVortex in I feel called to the LDS Church...but I still don't know if it's true   
    Dorian, perhaps the more important question for you to reflect on is when will you let your decisions and feeling about the LDS church be guided by faith rather than empirical research and reasoning? It may be that at the moment, your balance between these two points may be a little skewed in favour of reasoning and on the question of whether the LDS church is Gods' true church, you may need to reset the balance a little more towards faith. Its always possible to find questions and stumbling blocks and unexpected oddities that can suddenly grow from molehills to mountains and become stumbling blocks that get in the way of our search for eternal truth, but the exercise of faith can quickly shrink them back down to molehills, or make them disappear altogether. 
  6. Like
    askandanswer reacted to SpiritDragon in I feel called to the LDS Church...but I still don't know if it's true   
    Hi Dorian,
     
    let me just focus on #2 this morning.
     
    In the OT the priesthood was even more restricted than it was in 1954. Anyone outside the lineage of Levi with few possible exceptions was not eligible for the priesthood. The children of Israel were also forbidden to marry foreigners. It may seem ugly and narrow minded, but it was God's decree, and before I would accuse God of being too exclusive, I'd be more inclined to accept my own lack of understanding while accepting He has a purpose.
  7. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Vort in Are women's TR questions different?   
    She actually had to live at a gym? The poor woman.
  8. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from Ratbag in Doctrines verses personal covenants   
    "True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior.

    The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior. Preoccupation with unworthy behavior can lead to unworthy behavior. That is why we stress so forcefully the study of the doctrines of the gospel."

    Boyd K Packer, October 1986 General Conference
  9. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from lagarthaaz in How many wards meet in your building?   
    There was a time when two wards and a branch met in our chapel but the branch was dissolved years ago so now its just two wards and some people still say the chapel is too small. Its been probably close to three years now that every sacrament meeting, when the person conducting gets up to announce the intermediate hymn and the final speaker, that they will remind the congregation to clean up after themselves in the chapel, to replace the hymn books, stack the chairs and clean the boards. The counsellor in the bishopric who first started doing this was released about two years ago but other members of the bishopric followed his lead and continued to make the same announcement each week. This same counsellor could sometimes be seen vacuuming the chapel early on Sunday mornings if he didn't think it was clean enough. I suspect that these things would continue to happen each week even if members were not reminded of it but I guess there is no harm in repeating the message. I don't believe the other ward makes a similar announcement in their meetings. Its also my observation, and not just me, that when its the other ward's turn to clean the chapel, they don't do it as well as our ward does but nobody seems to get really bothered by it. 
  10. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from Jane_Doe in How many wards meet in your building?   
    There was a time when two wards and a branch met in our chapel but the branch was dissolved years ago so now its just two wards and some people still say the chapel is too small. Its been probably close to three years now that every sacrament meeting, when the person conducting gets up to announce the intermediate hymn and the final speaker, that they will remind the congregation to clean up after themselves in the chapel, to replace the hymn books, stack the chairs and clean the boards. The counsellor in the bishopric who first started doing this was released about two years ago but other members of the bishopric followed his lead and continued to make the same announcement each week. This same counsellor could sometimes be seen vacuuming the chapel early on Sunday mornings if he didn't think it was clean enough. I suspect that these things would continue to happen each week even if members were not reminded of it but I guess there is no harm in repeating the message. I don't believe the other ward makes a similar announcement in their meetings. Its also my observation, and not just me, that when its the other ward's turn to clean the chapel, they don't do it as well as our ward does but nobody seems to get really bothered by it. 
  11. Like
    askandanswer reacted to classylady in Can you handle the heat?   
    Sushi or wasabi?  No way!
     
    Something sweet.  I'm thinking I'll have a Lindor milk chocolate truffle.
  12. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Blackmarch in how can we tell good from evil   
    I lke this rule of thumb from from galatians 5:
    22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
     23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
  13. Like
  14. Like
    askandanswer reacted to The Folk Prophet in What are your views on Catholics   
    Depends on the Catholic.
  15. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Vort in death penalty   
    Like this:

  16. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from PolarVortex in Are The LDS Dating Sites Ever Fruitful?   
    Oh no... the polar bear in my profile picture is not wearing a shirt.  Or pants.
     
     
     
    I take it the ginger bread person is appropriately dressed?
  17. Like
    askandanswer reacted to PolarVortex in Are The LDS Dating Sites Ever Fruitful?   
    So can the profile "headlines," which often make me laugh out loud, e.g., "Foodie seeks bad cook for weight loss purposes."
  18. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Vort in how can we tell good from evil   
    This sounds like the beginning of a joke. Let's make one up:
     
    An atheist is meeing with LDS, Baptist, and Buddhist missionaries. He gets up to make himself a hot dog and asks the missionaries if they'd like one, too.
     
    The Baptist missionary says, "The hot dog is like the Trinity. It's made of beef, pork, and turkey, but it's all one hot dog."
     
    The LDS missionary says, "The hot dog is like our mortal lives. It's made of flesh. We dress it up with fancy condiments, but the real goodness is inside. And if we look at it in cross-section, we see it's one eternal round." (His companion says, "No thanks, I'm fasting.")
     
    The Buddhist missionary says, "Yes, thank you. Make me one with everything."
  19. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Crypto in Thoughts on the nature of discrimination   
    I have no idea.
    The best that I think I can come up with is that discrimination on the basis of superficial things, unchangeable, or situations from which you were born into. e.g. skin color should not be discriminated against.
    However there are exceptions to a general rule, such as being born poor and and not being able to afford things.
    Generally discrimination shouldn't cause harm to another human being. Though prison, fines, and even the death penalty could potentially be seen as causing harm. (there is a reason we discriminate against many legally defined criminal acts)
     
    Discrimination should largely be based on how an individual acts (say stealing). It's perfectly acceptable for people to avoid jerks/people they don't get along with. There is still the problem with this though, e.g. mental disorders, is it really alright to discriminate against them (probably not, though if for example you aren't capable of being say a chemist you shouldn't be one)
     
    I find most arguments pro-discrimination (e.g. required education before entering college) generally have some merit. Don't discriminate against {insert here}, also generally have some merit.
    The way discrimination is applied in modern society seem completely arbitrary to me.
     
  20. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from jerome1232 in Confused and concerned and definitely saddened.   
    I was hoping to keep it as a surprise until the stake and wood are fully prepared :)
  21. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from notquiteperfect in Confused and concerned and definitely saddened.   
    Last night while looking around for some material that I thought might inform my planned input to one of the current discussions on this site Google directed me to another LDS themed discussion forum. I read a few of the posts and was shocked to read how critical the posters were of other posters. After enjoying the friendly, good natured discussion on this site, it really was quite a surprise for me to see how unpleasant the posters were to each other on this other site. This experience renewed my appreciation for the thoughtful, well informed, friendly tone of discussion that prevails on this site. It made me feel grateful for people like Anatess, Vort, Pale Rider, Prison Chaplin, Mordurbund, Seminarysnoozer, Just a guy, the folk prophet, eowen, polarvortex, Jimmigerman, estradling and many many others. New as she is, I also enjoy and appreciate Claire’s well thought out and well written comments. And of course, I’m grateful to Pam for all that she does in moderating and maintaining this site, and the organisation she works for. 
  22. Like
    askandanswer reacted to The Folk Prophet in Thoughts on the nature of discrimination   
    Of course you are right askandanswer and SpiritDragon, but the point is somewhat of a non-starter when it comes to the gay-rights issue. That is because the homosexual non-discrimination discussion clearly carries the idea of biased/unfair discrimination as an implicit adjective. And bias is always, at it's core, mistaken.
     
    Those who argue against non-discrimination either have to confess bias, or they must claim that homosexuality is harmful to society and there is valid reason to discriminate. That's a pretty tough argument to make in today's culture.
  23. Like
    askandanswer reacted to Claire in Thoughts on the nature of discrimination   
    The reason I focus in on the "God given" part is because the origin of the institution is relevant. If it really is something man just made up, even if he originally made it up to be between only a man and a woman, men would still have the authority to change that definition. If it has its origin in some power external to man, then it is what it is and we can't change it. Even if we try to argue that the institution is rooted in nature vice God, and logically there's good reason to say that it is, it could reasonably be argued that we are not necessarily bound by those origins in establishing our civil institutions. 
     
    I agree that invoking God doesn't carry a lot of weight, but I also think that that is something of a double standard that I don't think we should capitulate to. Truth is truth, whether or not everybody agrees with it, so we should be willing to invoke the truth (at least as we understand it) in the political arena. Others are of course free to disagree, and debating why we disagree is probably more profitable that trying to side-step the issue altogether.
  24. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from mordorbund in Joseph Smith, multiple wives   
    Claire, this comes from the official church website
     
    https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints?lang=eng
  25. Like
    askandanswer got a reaction from Vort in Thoughts on the nature of discrimination   
    If I hadn't been so tired when I wrote this post, it probably would have been more concise. Its longer than it should be but I think it still makes the point I want it to.
     
     
    In 2013, the last time our federal parliament gave some serious thought to same sex marriage, the church asked us to communicate our thoughts and feelings on the topic to our local Member of Parliament. I did so, and one of the lines I used in my letter was similar to the line Vort took in the news conference posting – that if we allowed same sex marriage because not to do so was unfair, unequal and discriminatory against gay couples who wanted to get married – then there was no longer any logical argument for banning daddies who wanted to marry their daughters or women who wanted to marry their dogs. A few weeks later, Senator Cory Bernardi, a government Senator and ferocious right wing hard core Christian, started making public statements along exactly the same lines. He was very strongly condemned from all sides, even his own, and after a week or two he stopped making such statement. Last year, the government wanted to remove a few words from Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act which would have had the effect of reducing the number of grounds on which a person could be sued for discrimination. These two events have led me to think a bit about discrimination and exactly what it is, or might be.
     
    It seems to me that the essence of discrimination is when a group that possesses a particular characteristic or attribute, is treated differently by other groups because they possess that particular characteristic or attribute. In the recent case, the attribute in question was being gay and the difference treatment was differential access to housing and jobs. If that sort of behaviour is indeed discrimination, which of the following is, and is not, discriminatory:
    Limited access to housing because of gender preference
    Limited access to housing because of a person's height
    Limited access to housing because of ethnic origins
    Limited access to housing because of inability to pay the rent
    Limited access to housing because of the poor condition of the house
    Limited access to jobs because of colour
    Limited access to jobs because of inadequate training or not having the correct qualifications
    Limited access to heaven because of sin
    Limited access to disabled parking spaces because of not having a disability
    Marriage only between a man and a woman
    Marriage between same sex couples
    Marriage between people and animals
    Limited access to baptism and temples because of sin
     
    Does God discriminate against those who are not worthy to enter the celestial kingdom by not allowing them entry? I certainly hope He does, otherwise there is no point in striving to meet the entry requirements. Is there a temple recommend question that discourages us from associating with certain groups or people who propagate certain beliefs? Is not the whole temple recommend interview process a means of discriminating between those who can and those who cannot enter the temple? I think that all of us, every week, need to be making decisions that involve a degree of discriminatory practice – eg, do I praise my son (different treatment) for a job well done (a characteristic)? Do I avoid my neighbour (different treatment) because he swears and is drunk (a characteristic) all the time? Do I refuse to employ the American gardener (different treatment) because he charges more than double what the Mexican gardener charges ( a characteristic) Do I make a different decision about someone or something or should my decision be influenced by (a difference) an attribute that that person has that is good or bad (a characteristic). If we answer yes to that question, we are practicing a form of discrimination. I hope we are making these kinds of decisions every day.
     
    My point is that discrimination is a necessary, unavoidable, important, and everyday, although usually unrecognised part of life. There is good discrimination and bad discrimination. The line between the two is often blurred and quite mobile. To simply reject something on the grounds that it is discriminatory may be failing to recognise the true nature of discrimination. The trouble seems to arise when people can’t agree on what is acceptable basis for discrimination.