JojoBag

Why the hostility? I am sorry that this offends some people, but I am not simply expressing my opinion nor my interpretation. I have quoted a very small sampling of what is taught by the apostles and prophets. Joseph Smith taught that knowledge is power and knowledge is salvation, including a knowledge of evil spirits which pertains to our salvation. That isn't my opinion, just a fact. Instead of getting angry, do some research and find out for yourself what is tradition and what is truth. If you'd like, I can give you a few web sites to download free all 26 volumes of the Journal of Discourses, all 7 volumes of the History of the Church, along with a couple dozen other books and articles written by the apostles and prophets, including current church leaders.

Women don't have to buy immodest fashions. I think that in anticipation to this problem, the Lord gave us a commandment regarding our clothing. 40 And again, thou shalt not be proud in thy heart; let all thy garments be plain, and their beauty the beauty of the work of thine own hands; (Doctrine and Covenants 42:40)

I concede your point to a point. I do have my soap box issues because I simply don't understand why the LDS ignore or cherry pick certain aspects of the Gospel. However, my original question was why some subjects are taboo, but I got a typical, traditional LDS response. As for the round about way, I have found that the typical answer (although not in this case) is prefaced by, "Well, that's your revelation." In other words, what they are saying is, "That's your opinion and it doesn't apply to me." Unless you can show that something comes from a general authority, it isn't true or is just your own opinion. Unfortunately, even then, I have found that with this subject, in addition to many other subjects, the LDS ignore what is actually taught because it conflicts with their conceived LDS traditions or what they were taught growing up or their own interpretation, etc.. even when that tradition or belief is in conflict with the gospel. I believe Palerider was right on with his/her reply.

How is it not relevant? Are you or have you been a single mother with little children? What do you do if you don't have home teachers or they are the typical majority and you don't know who they are, let alone see them? What do you do if your bishop is not living up to his calling and ignores you? Do you continue to let your child suffer? This has happened to me and my wife numerous times. My wife was a single mother for many years and was essentially abandoned by the priesthood brethren. How would it be irrelevant to her to know she could have laid her hands on her child's head and pronounce a blessing of healing or to cast out an evil spirit that was afflicting her child? As for not knowing better, do you have any idea what was taught on this subject by Joseph Smith? Go to History of the Church, Vol. 4, starting at page 602. The Prophet was addressing the Relief Society and gave instructions regarding the fallacy that women should not give blessings. As recorded by Eliza Snow: Ask yourself if you are being influenced by LDS tradition.

. If you've had such discussions, did you ever feel the Spirit during that time? Lingering on the subject will drive the Holy Ghost away. It's enough to know that we need to live worthy of the protection and presence of the Holy Ghost, and that when we feel other influences around us, we flee or pray for help. Sorry for taking so long to get back, but I had some research to do. I'm not surprised by your answer to my first taboo, which I'll answer first. It is the single most common traditional answer I have encountered from LDS. This typical LDS answer is a misinterpretation of what has actually been taught regarding evil spirits. You should have included the entire quote since it is very pertinent to this discussion. Here is the complete quote. 　 It does not say that we should avoid talking about evil spirits. It is talking specifically about the counterfeits that Satan uses to deceive those who lack discernment. This particular quote is based on the Jan 2007 First Presidency Message written by Elder James E. Faust, The Forces That Will Save Us," is based on a couple of general conference talks and speeches at BYU. 　 Once again, you notice Elder Faust said nothing about not discussing evil spirits. He specifically said "Satan and his mysteries" then went on to state what those mysteries are. Elder Faust then goes on to quote a very interesting statement from Brigham Young. Everything we know about Satan and evil spirits come from the Prophet Joseph Smith. He taught all the early Saints and church leaders. The Prophet was very concerned about the terrible influence of evil spirits. He wrote sermons about the subject, especially false spirits. One particular sermon, "Try the Spirits," was an editorial in the Times and Seasons and was included in the History of the Church. What The Prophet taught is completely different than your answer. Elder Orson Pratt also quoted the Prophet. I had a woman tell me that what you talk about you bring about. This traditionally misinterpreted answer is simply a myth that has been repeated so many times by the uninformed that is has become "doctrine" in the church. The problem is that tradition is quite often stronger than the truth. A problem that Joseph Smith lamented about. Your assertion that one cannot feel the Holy Spirit when discussing the capabilities of evil spirits doesn't make any sense when compared with the teachings and actions of the early Church leaders. Joseph Smith spent a considerable amount of time talking about them, as did Brigham Young and a couple dozen other apostles and prophets. I cannot imagine them losing the Holy Spirit unless they went out of their way to commit sin. Elder George Q. Cannon had some things to say on this subject. 　 I've taken the time to research all this, but I fear that with your traditional answer, you will also do what is traditional among the overwhelming majority of LDS I've talked to about this subject: ignore what was taught and continue on in your tradition. However, evil spirits surround us every minute of ever day. They never sleep, they never take a break, they never rest. They are continually watching each of us, looking for and taking notes of things we do wrong and using them in the future against us. They influence, afflict, make us sick, cause us pain and anguish and torment us as much as they are given power to do so. No amount of ignoring them, hoping they will go away and leave you alone will influence them to do so. They will laugh at you and continue on with their job. I do not mean this to be confrontational, even though I'm a bit blunt and I apologize ahead of time if this offends you, but it IS the truth.

Something I've been wondering about for some time is: why are some subjects "taboo" among church members? These are subjects not taboo among church leaders, but just among the members. Specifically, three that I can think of: evil spirits, women giving blessings and last days conspiracies. First, evil spirits. I've seen this discussed a few times on this forum, but never in church. Many early church leaders talked quite a bit about the subject. The Prophet Joseph fought them his whole life and taught extensively about them, and how to fight them. Brigham Young gave several sermons in general conference about them and there were editorials printed in the Deseret News about how not to become possessed. We are surrounded by them every day and afflict us, but it is taboo to discuss them. I can't figure out why. Second, the subject of women giving blessings. In History of the Church, Vol. 4, starting with page 602, Joseph Smith taught that women can give blessings by the laying on of hands. Heber C. Kimball also taught this same thing. However, we don't hear a single thing about this. Why? Third, conspiracies of the last days. I've tried talking to members about "conspiracy theories" and I get one of two reactions: a blank look or a smirk. Even when I try to explain about Moroni's warning of a worldwide secret combination in Ether 8, I still get the smirk or blank look. The funny thing is that we are studying the teachings of President Benson, the church's leading conspiracy theorist. Any ideas?

I just moved back to the U.S. from Australia and it is a rampant problem there. The ward I'm in here isn't too bad, but one person dressing immodestly is bad enough. What is just as bad and not talked about much are the men and boys who condone it by not saying something to their wives, daughters, sisters, girlfriends, etc. This past week, I was reading Isaiah 3 and started doing some cross referencing. What I read made me realize that verses 16 through 24 are being fulfilled today. The first cross reference (a) refers to modesty or in this case, a lack of modesty. Reference (b) is self-explanatory, but includes vanity, deceit, foolishness, vain, hypocrisy and pride. © refers to "walking in darkness," meaning they ignore the commandments of god. They walk after the ways of the world and have other gods before them. (d) refers to lust, sensuality and worldliness. (e) refers to "walking with short, rapid steps in an affected manner." In other words, swinging their hips and strutting their stuff. The last verses do not bode well for the daughters of Zion. The cross references for these verses are interesting. I won't go into all of them, but there are a couple things to point out. In verse 23, "the glasses" refer to clothing that is revealing, transparent or see-through. In verse 24, "burning instead of beauty" is a very serious consequence for ignoring God. "Burning" refers to a mark of slavery. Coupled with "baldness," this can be referenced to what happened in places like Nazi Germany and the concentration camps. The prisoners' heads were shaved and a mark of their slavery was given them. Make of it what you will, but the daughters of Zion are playing with fire.

In my advancing years, I have learned that no matter what we or other people do that affects our lives or the lives of others does not matter when it comes to our agency. No matter what we do that affects others or what someone else does that affects us, we choose how we will act and react to what happened. A personal example from my life. I was forcibly raped and molested as a little child starting about age 4. The molestation continued for about 5 or 6 years. Also during that time, when I was just 6 y/o, my neighbor introduced me to pornography. Because of the violent abuse, I became the most extreme of untrusting introverts and never made friends. The people who were supposed to protect me were my abusers. I was a very sad and depressed little boy and that depression continued until I turned 54. I also became a porn addict and stayed that way for several decades. I blamed my problems on my childhood until I finally overcame both the depression and addiction. What I finally realized was that I'd always had the power to overcome and go beyond the abuse and addiction. I realized that nothing forced me to continue in my depression and extreme introversion, and addiction. I used them as excuses for not changing; they were my golden calf that I worshipped. I realized that my eternal fate rested entirely in my hands by my own actions and that nothing anyone did in my past or present mattered. It doesn't matter what anyone else did or will do, but only what I do that matters. I am clean and free of my addiction and depression. My outlook now is that as long as I continue to make the Savior first in my life, I will have a chance to return to my Heavenly Father, no matter what anyone else does.

I've spent the last 2 1/2 years researching a couple gospel topics and what I've found has surprised me. When I talked to other members about their feelings on a couple of subjects, I was further surprised (although I shouldn't have been) as to their answers. What I have concluded is that as Joseph Smith said, too many members believe in tradition and not the truth. They have become very secularized and have modified the ways and wisdom of the world to fit their view of the "truth." Let's take modesty for example. Modesty covers physical appearance (not just dress), speech and thought. Over the past two decades, in every single ward I've ever been in there are women who think that dressing modestly is not showing too much cleavage or the skirt not coming too high up the leg. Too many others simply ignore any standards of modesty. My son emailed me yesterday and told me about an ignorant "good" LDS girl wearing a bikini to a YSA lake activity. His bishop took off his shirt and asked the girl to put it on. Then, there are the men who think this is normal and don't say anything to their wives and daughters about how they dress, AND the men who ogle these women. These men are just as wrong as the women. Then the men who wear shorts that are above the knee or wear tank tops. All of it is wrong. Then there are those who have more than one ear piercing, tattoos, wild hair colors, expensive, flashy clothes, etc. How about modesty in speech and demeanor? There are members who think nothing of swearing and using foul, vulgar and profane language. They tell or listen to dirty jokes, jokes that are irreverent, vulgar and crude, etc. The loud, obnoxious, attention seeking people have a problem with demeanor. Next is modesty in thought. Everything you do starts in your mind and what you put into your mind determines your thoughts. So, the guy who ogles the inappropriately dressed women or looks at the swimsuit magazines, who think they are simply "admiring the beauty of women," but are actually lusting. And the TV shows, movies, video games, etc., that have inappropriately dressed characters; the books and magazines that are nothing more than written porn - all of this eliminates the ability for modesty in thought. If you fill your mind with secular, worldly material, you will think secular, worldly thoughts and become a worldly, secular person. Conversely, if you fill your mind with spiritual, Christ-like thoughts, you will become a spiritual, Christ-like person. As Sister Elaine S. Dalton said, "Virtue encompasses modesty—in thought, language, dress, and demeanor. And modesty is the foundation stone of chastity. ...Virtue is a requirement for exaltation." There are so many more areas where LDS are very worldly, but this will do for now.

Actually, homosexuality does interfere with procreation. It is impossible for homosexuals to create life between each other. One of the major purposes of marriage (not the only) is to procreate. Adam and Eve were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth. We are given that same commandment in the temple when we get our endowments. There are untold billions of spirits waiting to come down and obtain a body and those bodies cannot be produced in a homosexual relationship. Here is what Pres. Kimball had to say about it. As for sexual sin, all the modern prophets have condemned homosexuality as a sexual sin, just as they have condemned all other forms of unnatural sex (per os or per anus) no matter if you are married or not and normal sexual contact between unmarried men and women.

We've passed the point described by the prophet Mosiah. I'm trying to find a quote by Brigham Young, but I misplaced it. Basically, it said that when the Quorum of the Twelve is called to Washington to account for Church policies, it will shortly after that that the Savior will begin appearing to the Saints in Zion. We are very close.

My wife and I have been reading a book by Duane Crowther, “Inspired Prophetic Warnings,” and chapter 6 made a strong impression on me. I’m going to quote few passages from the book. This is long, but worth it. Nephi talks about “a great and marvelous work” that is to take place in the latter days just prior to the Second Coming. According to Crowther, from the context of the prophecy by Nephi, the marvelous work is not the latter-day restoration of the Church, but another divisive event. He says that there will be a “specific situation that will cause the oppression against the saints and bring God's wrath upon the nation.” So, what is this “divisive event” Crowther is talking about? What event would divide an entire nation, along with the Latter-day Saints? I believe it happened in June with the legalizing of same-sex marriage. According to Alma, sexual sin is “most abominable above all sins save it be the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost.” (Alma 39:5) I cannot think of a single event more calculated to divide and shatter this nation and make God so angry as to want to destroy it. The Five Cities of the Plains are a prime example. I’ve read many comments from LDS posters who support homosexual marriage, my own daughter included. This issue has firmly put people in either the camp of the Lord or Satan. I fear for those who support it.

Did you hear the one about the doper who got LSD mixed up with LDS? He went on a mission instead of a trip.

Currently, he is covered under the First Amendment. No state can enact laws that conflict with the Constitution. That said, it will only be a matter of time before the Supremes will rule that any church that does not recognize homosexual marriage is violating the Constitution.

Talk about a complicated question! My wife and I talk about this and there really isn't a set answer. I guess it depends on the extent of the intervention and what people would consider "intervention." God will intervene to further his work. He will use people and events, both manmade and natural, to further his work. He inspired Joseph Smith on how to protect the golden plates. All the various revelations could be seen as interventions. As for Him personally intervening in the affairs of individual people, I think it really depends on faith and how well developed their ability to discern is. One of the gifts of discernment is that of discerning danger. Is that intervention? I believe it is. I was a cop for 13 years and I saw the hand of God intervening to save my life on more than one occasion. On one occasion, I had a hand to hand fight with a man who didn’t want to go to jail. I was inspired during the fight to keep him away from his desk. Every time he started dragging me toward the desk, I got this overwhelming feeling to keep him away. Eventually, I was able to get him in handcuffs and then walked over to the desk to see what was on it. I found a large, open lock blade knife in plain sight. I also know of people who later told me they felt a feeling not to do something, but ignored it and were in bad accidents. I have also read that people put themselves in circumstances where the Holy Spirit will not go. This happened to my daughter when she was drinking and was sexually assaulted. So, I guess it depends on your listening to the Still Small Voice.

The most important revelation I have received in my life was not in the temple. Nor did Joseph Smith receive his most important revelation in a temple. Being a bishop is a very difficult job, one that I am so glad I will never have. The problem with all too many bishops is that they think that discernment comes automatically with the job. In this, they couldn't be more wrong. Discernment comes through prayer, scripture study, etc., however, one thing that all too many members don't realize is that discernment goes hand in hand with gaining knowledge and wisdom. Discernment isn't automatic.

I have not read all the replies but based just on this quote, I think you are missing one important line: "are obedient to his direction." Wealth is actually a test of obedience. Let me quote a few scriptures. Wealth is a sign of obedience, but also a major test that, in my not-so-humble opinion, a large majority of LDS fail. Why do I say that? Because of a few factors: 1. Living beyond their means. 2. Extravagant houses. 3. Materially oriented. 4. Status conscious. #1. This one is easy. Too much debt from credit cards. If you can't pay cash for it, you don't need it. #2. If you live in a home that is way more than adequate for your needs, if it is fancy just to be fancy, or is in the right socially correct neighborhood, or simply unnecessary for your needs, you've got a problem. (BTW, when I say "you," I am not singling you out; I am referring collectively to those who fit this description.) Are you like one particular LDS politician I know of who has four big houses so he can travel around and live in style? #3. If you've bought the Mercedes or Audi when a Nissan or Toyota would have sufficed. Lots of toys like boats, snowmobiles, jet skis, the lifted 4X4, etc. Then there is the 84" TV, all the latest gadgets and electronics, etc. #4. Are you keeping up with the Jones? In my ward is the son of an area Seventy. He wants a purple Lamborghini. Not a new one, just one a year or so old. Nothing that would cost more than $300,000. When he told me that I thought he was kidding at first, but then my jaw hit the ground when I realized he was serious. I asked him why. I said that there were so many things he could do like help someone in need. He brushed that off as if it were of no importance. He doesn't have his food storage, but he does have a Lamborghini. I believe that if you have wealth and you do not do as the Savior told the young rich man, "Sell all you have, give it to the poor and come follow me," you will eliminate any chance of gaining the Celestial Kingdom. I don't mean live in poverty, but if you live beyond what you need for your own personal needs (including retirement - rainy day - food storage, etc.), you fall under condemnation. This is part of being obedient and many members fail in this. You can always tell which wards in a stake are affluent. Take one look at the parking lot. You will see the most expensive, status conscious cars: Mercedes, Lincoln, Cadillac, Audi, Lexus, etc. In a stake conference, you will see the fine twined linen and costly apparel. Personally, I prefer going to a ward in which the members are of a lower social class. They are more humble and teachable.

Here is an editorial from the Deseret News:

Let me write a few quotes I've found on this subject.

I forgot to say that I never committed adultery. My ex did and was disfellowshipped for it.

I'm new here and I have a question. If a person is divorced, can they make exaltation? I ask because of a couple things I've read and because of certain policies in the Church. Joseph Smith made the following statement: "If a man commit adultery, he cannot receive the celestial kingdom of God. Even if he is saved in any kingdom, it cannot be the celestial kingdom." (History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 81) The other reason is because of the Church's policy that no person who has been divorced can hold a leadership calling, nor can he be ordained as a High Priest after being divorced. Now, don't get me wrong; I DON'T want to be a bishop or anything of the sort. Only someone who is brain dead would want that calling. It just doesn't make sense especially when we are told that if we repent, the Lord will remember our sins no more. Any answers?