zil

Bad trip?

Not only do we all agree with @pam, the Church handbook agrees with Pam. Your family comes first, no matter what your calling. Do whatever you're guided to do by the Spirit and let the Lord worry about the rest.

I gave up on spy novels the minute I discovered fantasy. (Spy stories is where I started, but now I know that was because I didn't know anything about fantasy and spy stories were as close as I knew.)

Erm, it was the early 1990s, and staring down at a video screen is far worse, in my opinion, than keeping your eyes up. Sensors weren't needed; there was nothing anywhere near us to hit.

Plus Daniel Craig! Who could complain.

Fluke of time and place, dude, nothing more. But it really was fun. We took a car paid for by your tax dollars (literally) - it was a Chevy, I forget the model, some boxy 4-door sedan (but the plate number was D 004 423, if you're wondering) - and had great fun. If you hit the brakes when the instructor had told you not to hit the brakes, he punched you in the leg (fortunately, I followed instructions). We cooled the car off in between practice sessions by driving in circles, in reverse, using only mirrors - you don't look over your shoulders when going in reverse, you use your mirrors. Classroom instruction was interesting too. The only disappointing bit was that he couldn't teach us anything which was considered use of lethal force (found this out when I asked about a maneuver I'd read about in a spy novel) - not even to comment on it further. The instructor claimed he could jump one of our school buses sideways, but didn't recommend any of us use the bus try that or anything else we were taught. Just imagine a school bus doing a J turn - that would be totally cool.

You'd be surprised (apparently) just how much control you have over whether or not other drivers can harm you. Go take an anti-terrorist driving class (no idea where you find such a thing - I got mine for free while working as a driver for a company contracted to the US Department of State at the US Embassy in Moscow, Russia). Most people won't like this claim, but in the vast majority of cases, you can control whether or not you get hit by an idiot. It requires far more education than most people get, and far more attention and awareness than most people are willing to give while driving. And anyway, it's a lot of fun - you get to throw a car around in ways you didn't know you could throw a car around. (Make sure it's not your car - wear and tear during the class / practice is hard.)

Especially during earthquakes.

How are you with wining? (Just checkin'.)

I have no idea, but I don't think going behind his back is a good way to earn trust. But @Jane_Doe and @MormonGator probably know better than I. Honestly, I have no experience here, except, I suppose, from his point of view - I have no children, nor experience with anyone else's. I just know that when I withdraw, delay or stop good things (like starting college or attending church), feel emotionally exhausted and just want to hide in isolation 24x7, it means I feel crappy about who and what I am or like I have nowhere to belong, and don't feel like I can trust the people from whom I am withdrawing enough to tell them the truth of what's bothering me. You have to find a way to help him feel like he belongs, regardless of anything he did, anything anyone else did, what he thinks or says - he needs to belong, to feel safe. And yeah, depending on the source of all this, he may need a professional to help him through it - whether that pro is a therapist of some sort or a priesthood leader probably depends on details we don't know.

1) When one goes from having 100% of their time used up in good work to having all their time free, it creates a void. The available opportunities can seem unworthy (by comparison), leading one to doing nothing, which creates unhappiness while at the same time being addictive. He needs good things to do - or even "not bad" things, so he doesn't get in the habit of emptiness and idleness. 2) If something bad did happen, he needs to feel safe before he'll be able to reveal it to you (or someone) and work through it. You need to figure out how to help him feel safe, like he's loved and accepted no matter what. IMO, going from mission to never attending church is indicative of a problem. Withdrawing from family is indicative of a problem (unless said family are already dysfunctional or he feels it's not safe to open up to them). This casts doubt on his reasons for extending his mission - was it to stay for a wrong reason? Was it to avoid coming home to a situation that makes him uncomfortable? Or....? I'd say some honest and loving conversations are in order where you or his father or someone else he trusts mostly just listens.

From what little fanfic I've read, it stinks - as in, the writing stinks. Sometimes someone has a good story idea, but the execution is awful.

So next Christmas / birthday, you won't be getting her one of these? https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00RX1CCS2/

I wasn't meant for a laugh. Casting pearls before swine is indeed foolish or worse, but in this case, the pearls may be fake, and the bishop is not swine, so casting these pearls before the bishop to receive guidance from one with keys seems wise.

PS: The bishop is not swine. (Just saying.)

Crap. The two of you are to be one. The encrypted file and private trips to the bathroom with his cell phone (ahem) are not the two of you being one. Do what @anatess2 said!

Pure would love the light, not hide in the dark (encrypted files), not forbid disclosure to the Bishop. IMO, it is this "keeping secret" business that is the red flag - I cannot find a way to believe innocence so long as encryption and "no one else must ever know" are in play.

Would you feel better if I said "not good for you" rather than "bad for you". IMO, it's the same thing. Look at the list of ingredients - by the time you add all that grease and salt (and sugar in some flavors) and carbs, I'm pretty sure it's just bad for you. Your body's ability to deal with the bad without an instant coronary doesn't change that the one chip was bad. And anyway.... etc.

Actually, I pointed out the demonstrable fact that you called those who use the phrase self-righteous liars. Then I pointed out that you don't know what's in another person's head1, and therefore cannot accurately make that claim. 1Unless you're claiming God revealed to you what's in everyone else's head, or claiming to have telepathy and to have read everyone else's mind. If you don't like the phrase, grand, say you don't like the phrase. But you didn't stop there, you went on to accuse those who use it of being self-righteous liars: Yes, your first sentence is about the incidence of using the phrase, not the people, but the rest is accusing the people who use it.

Nonsense. I know beyond any doubt whatsoever that potato chips are bad for my health. I still eat them. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Potato chips are one example in a bazillion where people fall short of acting in harmony with what they know.) You don't avoid it because you know; you avoid it because it hurts. If I got third degree burns every time I ate a potato chip, I wouldn't have finished the first one. And you know what's in their heads and hearts, so it's your right to judge, huh? You have no idea what's in another person's head or heart, what they know or don't know, how they know it, or how hard or easy it is for them to act in harmony with what they know. Try a bit of charity and let them choose their own words and stop accusing them of lying (which is basically what your post did). Some may be liars, some may be using the word differently from how you would use it, but for all you know, some of them are telling the truth.

Pretty sure I don't own leather-soled shoes. No passport either. Sigh. Thwarted by technicalities. Stonehenge! Aren't you paying attention? :SMH:

Yes. This is my perception as well. (And it matches what Nibley explained. Not that Nibley is a reason to believe it - the scriptures are the reason - but he does a good job of explaining why he thinks this is the way, and I've never been able to find a way to refute his conclusions.)

The part of that links to verses 2 & 3 quotes Elder Orson F. Whitney ... Conference Report, Apr. 1931, pp. 65–66, who appears to disagree with you. Personally, I'll take the scripture over Elder Whitney. (Hugh Nibley also thought that tithing would continue to be required under the Law of Consecration, and that living both was really the only way to properly live the law of tithing - he said something to the effect that giving a 10th of your excess really wasn't much of a sacrifice. Pretty sure this was all in Approaching Zion, which the Maxwell Institute no longer offer online.)

If I didn't do it right, it's because your instructions were lacking. "A mention of the plates of Ether" - well, I mentioned them. "A", you said, not "Two mentions" or some other number of mentions. Not some specific phraseology, just "a mention". So, if I didn't do it right, what exactly aren't you telling me?

Whoa! Dude, this is totally cool. I've always wanted to be able to do this. Excuse me a moment while I put on my shoes and a jacket..... OK, ready. Ahem. Here we go. Wait, will I need a passport? Meh, I'll just bring a bunch of cash. Hang on, back in a sec....... OK, now ready. <clears throat again> Wish me luck. "The plates of Ether." . . . . . Dude! Nothing happened. No boom. I'm still on the couch. This sucks. If we were on facebook, I'd unfriend you!