Josiah

Very interesting thoughts Traveler.
 
If someone is handling a weapon irresponsibly, the last thing I'd be concerned with is their feelings about being reprimanded. Sure, that might come into play if they were doing so in a vacuum. But irresponsible weapon handling isn't about how people feel about it. It's about safety. And that is the primary concern. It makes a good deal of sense that the feelings of the weapon handler lose out to the primary concern. 
 
I mention this because I see it, in a lot of ways, the same when it comes to discussions of moral issues. I'm typically concerned less about the one I'm "debating" with as I am about the message being taught and the influence it might have on others. I'm worried about the safety of my children, friends, family, and the well being of the church first.
 
It's interesting. It comes down to that ravenous wolf vs. lost sheep idea. As I see it, if one is struggling with something they're a lost sheep. When they post that struggle/thought/etc. publicly in a way that might influence others they can become a ravenous wolf very quickly. And so it is with those defending the lost sheep/ravenous wolves. Personally, succor them. Publicly, don't defend wrong/sin/evil.

Our default position is to be empathetic, kind, gentle, understanding, encouraging, uplifting, loving, giving, etc. When we reprove it will be motivated by the aforementioned ideas and it will be because it is the right thing to do. It will not be to gratify our vanity or our pride. It is easy to justify abusive behavior in the name of religion or in the name of righteousness so I think it is wise to hold close to empathy and tenderness. Most of us, most of the time, want and desire and even need unconditional love. It is our job as sons and daugthers of God to be stern and firm in principle but to be kind, gentle, and loving in our conduct towards others. When we are living right we will know the time to be firm and sharp, showing always afterwards an increase in love towards those reproved.
 
-Finrock

A wonderful example of why Wikipedia is a poor substitute for actual thought or analysis. The meaning "change of heart" is, of course, exactly the meaning of the English word "repentance".

A few thoughts:
 
#1: You can cry repentance with boldness and sharpness, but you can also do it with gentleness and meekness. Both can be effective, both encourage people to turn to Christ and change, and therefore both qualify as crying repentance.
#2: Sometimes people need it given to them straight to snap them out of their sense of carnal security, and other times people have simply lost hope, and need comfort and peace rather than confrontation. The Savior used both methods, according to the individual needs of those He taught. There's no sense trying to discuss which is the "better" method of crying repentance.
#3: As Christ did, we are to rely on the Spirit to know what method to use at what time (see D&C 121:41-43).
#4: Love is a prerequisite to crying repentance in either form. Whether you choose to be direct or to give support and understanding, it won't work if charity isn't behind it.
 
Why the decline of declaring repentance (in the more direct way)? Perhaps the Lord feels that right now, we as a church need the softer method, and so He has directed our leaders accordingly. But they're still crying repentance. Alma needed both to recognize his failings and to find the hope to turn to the Savior as part of his repentance process. I wonder if we sometimes place too much emphasis on the former, and not enough on the latter.
 
Regarding homosexuality and the OP links - I'll admit I fail to see how someone necessarily must eliminate the temptation of homosexuality in order to repent. I'm not saying it's impossible to do this or that it shouldn't be a goal, but what does someone really need to do to repent? Stop sinful actions? Absolutely. Change thought patterns? Of course. Align the true desires of their hearts with God's will? Crucial. But end temptation? I thought that being tempted by something, in and of itself, isn't sin, and our temptations and weaknesses may not always change in this life. If that's the case, isn't it appropriate to focus primarily on ending the behavior, coming unto Christ, and changing the heart instead? Or am I mistaken here?

This thread reminds me of an experience I had while serving as a home teacher to an elderly widow.
 
Norma was a stalwart member of the Church for most of her life. Her deceased husband had served as a bishop and a councilor in a stake presidency, she had served in just about every calling a woman can serve in, and together they had raised a fine family with all of the sons serving honorable missions.
 
I had been her home teacher for probably seven or eight years, during which time she faithfully attended all of her meetings and was worthy of a temple recommend.
However, she began having some serious health issues, and for about nine months she bounced back and forth between her home and the hospital unable to attend church during that time.
Eventually the major issues were resolved and she was able to live at home again without any help. But even after her health improved she didn't return to church, although she continued to pay a full tithe and maintain her recommend.
Each Sunday the bishop authorized the Aaronic priesthood to bring her the Sacrament, and she would spend her time reading the scriptures and watching old conference addresses on BUYtv. As far as she was concerned she was still a faithful Latter-day Saint.
 
She had no family living in town, so as her home teacher I visited with her once a week or so, while my son and I did yard work and anything else she needed done. Several times a month I would invite her back to church, and each time she would say, "Oh I'd like to attend if it wasn't for my stomach, or my bowels, or my "this" or my "that".
I talked to her children many times when they would visit, and they would say to me, "Oh I wish we could figure out a way to get mom back to church!" "We know she has some health problems but we think she could attend."
Yada, yada, yada.
Then when the subject of church would come up while Norma was in the room they would pat her on the back and say, "we understand, mom"; "don’t worry about it, mom"; "you're doing the best you can, mom".
 
Then one day during one of my weekly visits, after inviting her to church and hearing the same litany of excuses, I said, "Norma, do you know what you are?"
She gave me a quizzical look and said, "No, what am I?"
I said, "You're inactive."
 
I could just as well have said "you’re a child molester" and I doubt the look on her face would have been any different.
She rose up in her chair, her face flushed with anger, and she declared "If I didn’t love you I'd toss you out of my house this instant!!"
 
I replied, "Norma, think about it a minute. You drive down to the store a couple of times a week to get your groceries; you drive down to the post office almost every day to get your mail; and you drive to the senior citizen center twice a week for a meal and to visit with everyone for several hours. Now you explain why you can't drive over to the church and at least sit through a Sacrament meeting?"
I said, "Norma, you’re inactive."
She looked at me in stunned silence for a few seconds and then replied, "I suppose you’re right. I’ll be to church this Sunday."
 
And she was.
And she rarely missed another meeting until about a year later when she fell, ended up in the hospital, and passed away a month or so after that.
 
I remember talking to one of her sons after she began attending church again, and he asked me how on earth I got her to go back.
I told him that I told her she was inactive.
He laughed and said, "I’m surprised she didn’t toss you out of the house!"
 
The point of this story is this: With some people, rather than a sympathetic pat on the back, what they really need is a benevolent kick in the butt.
 
"VERILY, thus saith the Lord unto you whom I love, and whom I love I also chasten that their sins may be forgiven..."
 
I'm not suggesting that the above story is illustrative of the following principle, but I firmly believe that when it comes to SERIOUS sins, it's entirely possible to "love" someone right into hell.

Our leaders find themselves in a situation designed to make it impossible for them to win. Their response is to use as much kindness and charity as possible in calling people to repentance. Clearly, some think that's not hard-line enough, while many others howl that it's much too hard-line.
 
Personally, I don't think there is one single "right" way of approaching the issue. I sustain my God-ordained leaders, not because they are perfect, but because they are ordained of God. Whether their approach to this or any other particular issue matches mine is utterly irrelevant.

Sounds like a wise choice to me. From an article written for our youth:
 

BS, to be clear and perhaps a little blunt, you have no authority to proclaim revelation. Your word that blacks are the "seed of Cain" is of no more moment than another's "revelation" that the teaching is false.
 
Our leaders have said that we don't know and that we should leave such things alone. We already have enough marginal members-in-name who want to proclaim all such teachings false and the prophets who taught them as fallen, or at least mistaken. We don't need those from the other extreme insisting the opposite, that the teachings were actually revealed truth.
 
Come on, folks. Are you Saints? Then fall into your ranks. Quit trying to prove how brilliant and free-thinking you are by your theories and assertions. Follow the prophets. I know it's hard and challenges your pridefulness, but that's all the more reason to do it.

For the record, I completely agree with you. I don't personally understand how any other view can be logically justified, and I believe 100% that the Book of Mormon is a literal record for these very reasons, as well as a witness from the Spirit. But I am also aware that there are a few members who openly feel that the Book of Mormon is the word of God, but that not everything in it literally happened, and that these members are still able to hold a temple recommend if worthy. That was his question, after all.  :)
 
But you're right, I should probably have been much more clear on why it is accepted and taught as literal, and how the implications of that are important - because they are.

For the record, I completely agree with you. I don't personally understand how any other view can be logically justified, and I believe 100% that the Book of Mormon is a literal record for these very reasons, as well as a witness from the Spirit. But I am also aware that there are a few members who openly feel that the Book of Mormon is the word of God, but that not everything in it literally happened, and that these members are still able to hold a temple recommend if worthy. That was his question, after all.  :)
 
But you're right, I should probably have been much more clear on why it is accepted and taught as literal, and how the implications of that are important - because they are.

Alrighty. So in response to your long OP, I have a fairly long reply. So prepare yourself. 
 
Question #1: There's a whole spectrum of reasons to come to church. As a whole, your motives seem really good considering what's been going on in your life. So no, nothing wrong at all! Is seeking camaraderie and edification the #1 absolute best reason to attend, as opposed to devotion to Christ? Maybe not, but it's a huge piece of the puzzle at minimum. Besides, I seriously doubt that I've truly found the #1 best reason myself. Just keep coming, and you'll keep finding better and better reasons to come.
 
Question #2: Already been addressed. Talk to the bishop. You may be advised to work toward not using even medical marijuana as an eventual goal. Then again, maybe you won't. In any case, I would very strongly consider whatever advice you are given. As you've seen, God can work miracles if you leave it in His hands and try to do His will.
 
Question #3: I believe the question we are asked is "Do you believe that the Book of Mormon is the word of God?" If you believe that and still feel like it's solely metaphorical, you'll probably be fine for now. You should be aware that it is widely considered to be and taught throughout the church as a literal record. But as far as I know, that's not an issue that will get in your way.
 
Now, regarding the Atonement: it absolutely applies to you. You know that. You have seen pretty irrefutable evidence of its power working in your life, giving you physical, mental, and spiritual strength beyond your natural capacity. You have also felt of God's love for you through that same Atonement. All of this was made possible by the Savior, who volunteered to suffer all that you personally have suffered, and much more. He did so because He loves you, and because He knew that without that sacrifice on His part, you would never recover physically or spiritually from your mistakes. He wanted to give you that opportunity, and to enable you to feel a measure of His love for you. You have seen many of the blessings that come from the Atonement on your path to recovery.
 
The thing is, there are blessings and then there are blessings. In many ways, the Atonement isn't an all-or-nothing deal. The Savior is constantly giving us everything we are able to receive. But there are some blessings we can't receive or use until we prepare ourselves and are ready for them (think 6-year-old with car keys  ). God, knowing the state we need to be in to receive His blessings, has given us commandments. These commandments are a guide to preparing ourselves to receive the blessings critical to our happiness and eternal progression. As an example, you've seen from your own experience that "the Word of Wisdom is no joke." It's for our own physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well being. Consider the following scripture in D&C 130:
 
 
So, what does all this have to do with you? There's been discussion so far about choices, consequences, the Atonement, being allowed to receive Christ's blessings, etc. Some of the advice given so far you have taken harshly. If I'm reading you correctly, part of that is because some of that advice seems to imply that you are still "forbidden" to receive the blessings of the Atonement, for whatever reason. The thing is, in a sense it's partially true, at least for the moment. There are blessings and then there are blessings. You have made some major changes, and been blessed greatly as a result. But there's more, my friend. There is much, much more your Savior wants to give you! That's good news!!! But some of what's left for you to receive requires more preparation than you've made so far. And that will take time, therefore some of the blessings of the Atonement will have to wait, as has been said. The same goes for everyone at some level.
 
That's why the potential issue of marijuana, for example. The question is, will it prevent you from being fully prepared to receive and utilize some of these crucial blessings made available to you by the Atonement? Tough question, since we don't exactly understand divine law too well yet. So the fact is, I don't know. Those on this forum don't know. You don't know. Your doctor doesn't know, and the politicians don't know. But God knows, and the role of the bishop is to find out from Him what needs to be done in cases like this.
 
The more we align our lives with the teachings of the Savior, the more strength and power and peace we allow Jesus Christ to introduce into our lives. And the best news of all is that, as you've seen, the things we can't change about ourselves, Christ can handle. But again, it requires us to be in the right state. We have to be trying. We have to exercise whatever faith we have, turn to Him, and follow the direction we are given. As the scripture above says, it requires obedience, especially when we don't understand it, don't like it, or don't see how it will work. 
 
To me, this is one reason it's so meaningful that Christ has suffered the very things we suffer. He understands perfectly our doubts, our shame, our guilt, our pain, our fear, and so on, because He chose to feel them. I don't understand exactly how the Atonement can have the effects it does, but this little piece of it makes sense to me, at least. There's great comfort and strength in knowing that He is right here in the trenches with me, and He doesn't ask me to do anything He won't do Himself.
 
Well, I hope some portion of my rambling has been of help to you. You're well on the right track, and there are even more great things ahead for you. I wish you the best of luck, and I'll do my best to clarify anything I said, answer more questions, or help however else I can. Keep at it!

"There are a hundred reasons to leave the church, and only one reason to stay."

What's your point?  That the Church has a moral responsibility to ensure that its standards don't prevent a person from acting on a particular desire, so long as it can be demonstrated that the desire is truly "inborn"?
 
I think Packer's sermon would squarely refute this--not because of the theme leftists have contrived for it (this nonsense about Packer supposedly saying homosexuality is not inborn), but because of its actual theme--that who we are does not dictate what we must do, and that we are fundamentally free to throw off our predispositions to do evil.  In a word--repentance.
 
 
As Josiah eloquently points out, a big part of "context" is reading the rest of the sermon.  So, let's do that:
 
 
It's interesting to me that folks who criticize Kimball never engage with his discussion of the statistics, or the actual problems that really do crop up when a couple is trying to blend disparate cultural traditions.   Critiques usually boil down to something along the lines of "well, I chose a different path, and the world didn't blow up, and Kimball's statements offend me.  So, the man must be pooh-poohed; and to Hades with the statistics and to Hades with the real-life problems and to Hades with the dozens, or hundreds, or thousands of LDS youth who may have actually dodged a bullet by following that advice."
 
I don't know whether Kimball's advice is still timely today given globalization, the internet, increased ethnic diversity in the US, et cetera.  I do agree that a surfeit of left-wing bigots have created an atmosphere such that even if Kimball's advice is still empirically true, there is still a devastating social cost to speaking that truth aloud.  So in that regard--Mission Accomplished, or something, I guess . . .
 
Whether applicable today or not, Kimball's statements were born of repeatedly trying to mediate marital disputes in his various ecclesiastical offices, over a period of decades--and Kimball, you may recall, reserved a special place in his ministry for Native Americans.  It's one thing to suggest that Kimball's advice was generally applicable then but not now.  But it takes a heck of a lot of chutzpah to suggest that this wizened, experienced counselor was in truth some kind of sheltered, doddering ninny who didn't have a clue what he was talking about even at the time he said it.

I think of never giving up ....and as President Hinckley always said .... Things will get better ....you'll see

Eowyn, your mom is hurting--badly. And as much as you are hurting, her pain is different since her relationship lost was different than your relationship lost.
 
When my dad lost my mom, I would say it took at least a year before he started getting out of the fog he was in. He functioned during that year, but there was little to no joy. He had moments of laughing or smiling (grandkids helped there), but it really wasn't until after the year anniversary of her death that I saw how he was doing better at the day to day living.
 
My mom and dad had just celebrated their 49th anniversary when she passed. I can only imagine how difficult it was for him to establish new routines, thought processes, meals, etc. 
 
Your mom's viewpoint of life or even eternity is a little skewed right now. Maybe her ETTE viewpoint has always been a little different, but right now, I'm guessing she is finding it hard to see joy or happiness without your dad in the picture. This church is such a family oriented church, that I'm guessing that just attending Sacrament meeting is very difficult for her. As I'm sure you know, when you are depressed, you can't see joy as an end result of anything.  
 
I only have my experience to rely on. What helped my dad was several things:  we, kids, were never afraid to talk about mom...we called him on her birthday, their anniversary, the anniversary of her death, etc. I still do that and we talk about her. When he was in the depths of his depression, he talked to his doctor who put him on Prozac to help. It took about a month of Prozac before dad said he was feeling a little better.  He developed his hobbies and began spending time with his friends and family--he kept busy with interesting/worthwhile things.  
 
I'm so sorry that your family has to go through this grief. It's been 8 years since my mom passed and I still think of her each day (if not each day, then several times a week). Again, I can't even imagine what it must be like for my dad who had her for 49 years. As her daughter (and involve your siblings with this), be sure someone is calling/talking to her daily, invite her out of the house on at least a weekly basis, ask her help for things she can do, encourage her to talk to a doctor if necessary, if you know her friends then ask them to help, don't be afraid to talk about your dad with her.

I was so impacted by the notion, that I've made it half of my personal mission statement.  Basically, my mortal probation here contains many alluring paths I could take that would lead me and others to destruction.  ETTE = I take zero of those paths.  And I don't get to rest from this plan until my heart beats its last.

I'm all for context. Otherwise we'd read D&C 132 today and conclude that we should go find a second wife.  
 
The point is not to use "context" or anything else as an excuse for disobedience. It's easy to say "well, in context, this advice on home teaching doesn't apply to my situation because I'm so shy" or whatever it is.
 
Speaking of context, while I can't seem to find a link to the full book your quote came from, I did find this little tidbit from the page before:
 
https://www.lds.org/manual/eternal-marriage-student-manual/mate-selection?lang=eng
 
“… “The difficulties and hazards of marriage are greatly increased where backgrounds are different” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 302)."
 
True enough, right? It also sheds some light on what he meant by the quote you provided. I'd be interested to read everything he wrote on the topic all together if you have that link. As you say, in full context it might be more clear what he's saying. But even without that, we can put some things together. Also from the same source linked above:
 
“I have warned the youth against the many hazards of interfaith marriage, and with all the power I possessed, I warned young people to avoid the sorrows and disillusionments which come from marrying out of the Church and the unhappy situations which almost invariably result when a believer marries an unbelieving spouse. I pointed out the demands of the Church upon its members in time, energy, and funds; the deepness of the spiritual ties which tighten after marriage and as the family comes; the antagonisms which naturally follow such mismating; the fact that these and many other reasons argue eloquently for marriage within the Church, where husband and wife have common backgrounds, common ideals and standards, common beliefs, hopes, and objectives, and, above all, where marriage may be eternalized through righteous entry into the holy temple. …
"… We recommend that people marry those who are of … somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question”  (President Spencer W. Kimball, “Marriage and Divorce,” 142–44).
 
To me, that last paragraph makes it a bit more clear where he stands. So yes, context is important. Your point is well taken.  :)

'End' doesn't only mean a final point or conclusion. It can also be defined as a goal or purpose. What is the 'end' or purpose of the gospel? It is immortality and eternal life - or exaltation in eternal families.
 
To me, "endure to the end" very literally means "continue on to exaltation". 

'End' doesn't only mean a final point or conclusion. It can also be defined as a goal or purpose. What is the 'end' or purpose of the gospel? It is immortality and eternal life - or exaltation in eternal families.
 
To me, "endure to the end" very literally means "continue on to exaltation". 

Easier said than done, but so true.

The Holy Ghost will be your best guide. The Lord knows your situation and your heart, and we don't. Pray about it! But honestly, I'm not too worried. Unless you are given specific promptings, the Lord's will for your relationships at this stage of your life is outlined in For the Strength of Youth and other teachings from the prophets and the scriptures - not the missionary handbook. Therefore, short of a prompting to the contrary, I wouldn't do anything drastic to your friendship. But I also wouldn't break the rules you've set.
 
Bottom line: If you're committed with all your heart to keep the commandments, counsel, and promptings you have been given for this time in your life, you're probably already giving 100% to the Lord. If you're giving 100% to the Lord by doing His will now, you'll be able to do it on your mission too. If you do need to change something about this, the Spirit will tell you if you ask. Meanwhile, date mostly other people. Enjoy your friendship. Learn what you want in an eternal companion. Have fun. 

Str8Shooter nailed it back in post #5.
 
 
Hmm, prophetic. How'd you know Str8? 
 
Seriously though, don't get too worked up over stuff people say, especially on the internet. There's basically always miscommunication somewhere rather than bad intent. And that all applies doubly when controversial/political stuff like medical marijuana is involved. Listen to the 10 or so others here who told you that the bishop can advise you on this issue based on your individual circumstances.
 
I've got some vague thoughts on the Atonement and some of your concerns running through my brain as well. It's getting really late though, so I'll come back tomorrow sometime and see if I can get a coherent post together then. For now, welcome!

Answer to question #1:  No.  It is not wrong to go for those reasons.  In fact, I don't know if there really is a reason not to go to church unless you are violent, contagious, or disruptive.  Always go to church.  My reasons for going to church have changed for the better over the years and part of the reason why they changed is because I kept going.
 
#2:  This is a tough one, my friend.  The laws of the land have no authority on the laws of God.  This gives the 12th Article of Faith conditions.  For example, abortion is legal here, but the Church is adamantly against it and will in no way ever support it except in extreme and very rare circumstances.  When it comes to medical marijuana and it's use, it is between you and your priesthood leaders.  Some say absolutely not.  Some say yes, but you cannot smoke it.  It just depends.  Even if you are told no, keep coming to church!
 
#3:  Yes.  You need to have a testimony that the Book of Mormon is the word of God.  Read it.  Read it every day.  You don't have to read it all it order, but read it.  Pray about it and you will get an answer.  Then comes the hard part.  Once you get an answer, you must have the courage to act.  You must be able to withstand mocking from your friends of family, the buffetings of Satan, and all sorts of other things.  Basically, you must be able to be willing to virtually stand with the Savior.  As you do this, the blessings will come during and especially after your trials.
 
I have one more piece of advice.  When you say, "I’m strongly considering going back to church.", Satan hates that.  He despises it.  The last thing he wants is someone to begin the road back to God.  If he hasn't already, he is going to start working on you a bit harder.  He is going to place more doubts in your road.  He is going to bring back old vices and temptations to try to get you to move off the road or quit.  Don't ever quit!  If you slide off the road, get up, dust yourself off and get back at it.  It's not easy, but it is so worth it every single bit.  Humbly pray for strength and put Satan in his place.
 
Also remember that people are human and make mistakes.  No church member is perfect, even if it seems like it on the outside.  If someone says something offensive (it will happen) let it go.  You will hear false (and weird) doctrine that is not true.  If you have questions, always ask someone, especially the Bishop.
 
I wish you the best.  I know this church is true.  It has changed the life of my family and myself.  I'm not just saying that as a cliche either.  We are so much happier now.  We feel complete and whole.
 
Stick with it.  It really is worth it.

'End' doesn't only mean a final point or conclusion. It can also be defined as a goal or purpose. What is the 'end' or purpose of the gospel? It is immortality and eternal life - or exaltation in eternal families.
 
To me, "endure to the end" very literally means "continue on to exaltation".