askandanswer

I think this is what fiction food tastes like
(Old Testament | Isaiah 29:8)
8  It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth, and, behold, he eateth; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty: or as when a thirsty man dreameth, and, behold, he drinketh; but he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint, and his soul hath appetite:

This is just a reminder that the current edition of the Doctrine and Covenants no longer contains the Lectures on Faith, which were included, and probably considered to be scripture, up until the 1921 edition. De-canonized might not be the right term given that the Lectures on Faith (Doctrine and Covenants | Preface Testimony of 12:6)
"were not given or presented as revelations to the whole Church." but its certainly the case that what was once accepted as LDS scripture by the LDS church is no longer accepted by the LDS church as scripture. I'm too lazy and tired right now to think through what the implications might be for this discussion but I just thought it was worth pointing out. 

WIth respect Mirkwood, this is a really dumb goal. Why would anyone ever be nice to Gator? New year's resolutions should be realistic

I suggested one earlier that I'm not sure fits into those 5:  God chooses to destroy a civilization to prevent future generations from suffering and evil. Part of that may be the justice aspect, but another part is mercy. For some, it really is better not to be born. 
BTW, the 5 reasons you offer are sound--and could even make for a 5-part sermon some day. 

Modern science and simple observation tells you that surgery drinks, fact food, etc are bad for you.  That is good, and should be listened to.  God commanded us to take care of our bodies.  He doesn't need compel us in every little detail therein.  

I notice a sort of synergy between these two goals. 

I think the some of the stories in the Old Testament are allegory. Others are just all gory

I notice a sort of synergy between these two goals. 

We part ways here. Those acts of violence (usually judgment) ordered by God happened. If I do not understand why, or if I struggle with the justice of certain events in scripture, those ultimately become "back-burner" questions. Sometimes I stumble upon answers--even years later. Other times I may not get my answer. God's proven himself far too often for me to feel competent to condemn his determinations.  LDS methods of interpretation may allow for more flexibility (saying certain stories are parables, or allegory, for example). I don't have that luxury. So, when I don't get the why, I trust until I do...sometimes for many many years.

I think we view killing and death differently from how God views it. From our point of view, death appears to be the end of life, and that is considered to be a tragedy and therefore wrong and bad. From God’s point of view, perhaps death is considered simply a transition point, from one phase of existence to another, nothing more than a necessary stepping stone on the path of eternal progression, moving from a inglorious mortal state to a glorious immortal state. If that is what death is, and that is what we preach and believe, then perhaps we have an incorrect, unhelpful view of the awfulness of death. Perhaps from our point of view, death is a bad and awful thing, but perhaps from God’s greater vantage point, it is not. I also have faith that God loves all of His children and always acts on their best behalf, so if He orders the death of a nation, then it ways that I can’t be sure of, but can speculate about, the deaths of those of that nation is in their best interest.

I notice a sort of synergy between these two goals. 

And then there's Jesus Christ (the "I" in the verses below) taking credit for destroying entire cities (men, women, children, animals, insects, and perfectly good property) (see also 3 Nephi 8) (bold, red emphasis mine):
...and, upon reading the method of destruction of these places, imagine yourself a poor little 6 year old and what it would have been like for you.  While I respect Dr. Who's1 right to "deny this reality", I don't think it's a wise course for the rest of us.
IMO, in abstract, this is no different from those who pick and choose which commandments they'll obey, because some are distasteful - either way, it's picking and choosing what to believe, and thereby limiting one's own progression.
1 The one played by Tom Baker.  Sorry, not geeky enough to provide an episode reference.

I think instead of making a set of New Year's resolutions, it might be better to make a set of one month resolutions every month some of which might be the same as the previous month, and some of which might be new, for the new month.

I recommend reading the Doctrine and Covenants in conjunction with the History of the Church. The historical background that precedes every section usually contains a reference to a more detailed historical context in the History of the Church. For example, Section 10 contains a reference to History of the Church volume 1, pages 20 - 23. I find that when I read the two together, the Doctrine and Covenants usually makes a lot more sense.  

How could any of these four guys have been President? They all seem to have rocks in their head. Perhaps this sculpture is a literal fulfillment of Isaiah 50:7
For the Lord GOD will help me; therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed.
or maybe
Ezekiel 3:9 As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
 

Gator hunting

Gator hunting

Gator hunting

Hi @DesertLily and welcome to the forums!  And more importantly welcome to Christ's Church!!!
Yes or no is fine.
Your testimony is your own.  If you are a person of pithy powerful words, then let that be.  Speak as your heart and the Spirit dictate, and don't feel like you have to be anything else.

I recommend reading the Doctrine and Covenants in conjunction with the History of the Church. The historical background that precedes every section usually contains a reference to a more detailed historical context in the History of the Church. For example, Section 10 contains a reference to History of the Church volume 1, pages 20 - 23. I find that when I read the two together, the Doctrine and Covenants usually makes a lot more sense.  

Sons of Perdition refuse to act on Knowledge of Christ
Telestial refuse to exercise Faith in Christ (but do act on knowledge)
Terrestrial act on faith in Christ but allow the world to overwhelm
Celestial act on faith and endure to the end.
 

@Rob Osborn, you seem like a good guy. I mean that sincerely. But you also seem like the kind of guy who gets an idea early on, then develops it over the years, and clings to it to the point where you read your idea into everything -- scriptures, temple endowment and other ordinances, General Conference talks -- to the point that when a prophet or other leader preaches something in direct conflict with the belief, you dismiss the words of that prophet or leader as "just opinion."
This is dangerous, Rob. You do not want to do this. I have witness, up close and very personal, at least two (probably three or four) other people do just this. They get a brilliant idea, as they consider it, and they nurture it along. Soon they lose objectivity and become unwilling to bear any criticism toward their pet theory. They no longer approach the matter impartially or "scientifically". They become deeply invested on a personal level in their idea.
And in every case, it leads them away from the light, not toward it.
This happened throughout Church history. It is happening today -- look no further than Denver Snuffer, John Dehlin, and Kate Kelly, to name but three obvious recent examples. This is a club in which you don't want membership.
I understand that your "kingdoms of glory" theory is beguiling to you. I also acknowledge that such ideas are not inherently evil so long as (1) you remain willing at all times to immediately abandon your pet theory when the Spirit OR the Church's teachings direct otherwise, and (2) you keep an open mind on the subject, never taking your theory too seriously. I think you are in violation of both caveats, and thus on dangerous ground.
I say this with honest concern. What we discuss here on this forum are trivial things of little importance. But your soul is not a trivial thing of little importance. And the attitude with which you are approaching this issue eventually leads to very bad ends, places you absolutely do not want to be.

We had an American in our ward once. Loud fellow, but friendly enough. Once we got him to leave his guns at home and take his cowboy hat off in the chapel, he did fine.

On the subject of subject of wards not always being what we want...
 
We recently moved... as part of this process we had to find a new place to live and my wife and I spent alot of time prayerfully pondering where we should live that would be best for our family.  One of the things we were wanting was a strong Young Men's program (we have 3 sons).  In our last ward our sons were the program (more or less) and we wanted more.
In time our prayers and pondering was answered and we knew exactly where the Lord wanted us and he opened the doors to make it happen.  Everything fell in to place except the Young Man's program, it was only a little bit bigger.  Given how (sometimes miraculously) all the other things fell into place I spent some time why this particular part did not.
Then while talking and getting to know the bishop, young men and other ward leaders, a phrase kept repeating itself.. "We have been praying for more young men to help strengthen our program."   Then it clicked... Sometimes you get your prayers answered... sometimes you are an answer to prayer.
 
Or to put it in more generic form... Sometimes the ward gives you what you need... sometimes you are what the ward needs.

From a colonial perspective

Educated – Great

Female – Most welcome

Non-member Buddhist husband – Step right in

British – GET OUT OF HERE!!! No way. Never!  ##&@!&@!&@* off! No POMS allowed

(just teasing)

We even have a few Americans in our ward, that's how open and accepting we are.