person0

I would actually love this from a logistical view. However, while this would be appealing if the Church were just a club for people of a high moral standard, it can not happen in a church that wants to truly help people come unto Christ. Additionally, it could potentially have the effect of causing prophecy to go unfulfilled as the parable of the wise and foolish virgins is not representative of the world, but is representative only of the Church and its membership. Furthermore, it would likely lead to the annoying uprising of another (false) branch of the Church.

I'm pretty sure that God once said something to the effect of 'Don't eat that'. Then when the people ate it He said something like, 'Well, now you're going to die, and by the way you can't be in my presence anymore'. I suppose I could be getting my history wrong though.

I've got no issue with what you're saying there, except in this case what I said wasn't actually mean. There are many people (even members of the church) who would self identify as 20 something millennial females with liberal tendencies. I did not use the word snowflake at all, although I suppose some people do take the term millennial as a negative even though it is a generational term. The reason I wrote 'no offense' is mostly because of the accidental incorrect gender identification. It has to do with the fact that I originally thought that he was a she, and that's pretty much it. It also surprised me to see a male priesthood holder who felt it was worthwhile to argue in favor of R rated movies, bikinis, and who cared so much about peoples righteous indignation about caffeine. I would have been equally surprised just if he said he was a faithful active priesthood holder.

I agree, and I like what you said here. I honestly (no offense intended), based only on the OP, thought that Sweety D was a 20 something, millennial, female, with liberal tendencies. When I saw the post about being a bishop I was like:

Not all truth is doctrine. I believe the Pythagorean theorem is a true mathematical principle, and yet I read nothing of it in the scriptures. Your post makes it sound as if something has to be doctrine in order to be truth, or the correct way to live. That, to me, is hogwash. I am 100% confident that as we grow closer to the Lord we will abstain from these types of things regardless of their status as doctrine, or requirements, because they are true principles. There is so much filth even in rated PG-13 movies these days, there are so many abuses of caffeine, and even a one piece bathing suit would be considered immodest if the person were not swimming. Context applies, spirit of the law applies, etc. I drink caffeine from time to time, but I also can and have gone without it. You said you don't drink it for health reasons, that lone statement disproves your entire argument. If something is bad for your health than a perfect being (which is what we are commanded to become) would not drink it. How many people do you know who drink caffeine even though it is bad for that person's individual health. Regardless of culture, perfection is developed by degrees. The problem is not these cultural ideas but is more about judgement of others as you hinted: Incorrect doctrine has nothing to do with shameful judgments. Chances are more likely that the principles are true, regardless of doctrinal status. However, we can pass shameful judgement when something is true, or when it is false. This is why you see vegan and vegetarian activists who shame meat eaters and 'command that people should abstain from meats'. People ought to be kind to one another, especially when sharing their opinions. That is all there is to it. No one should look at someone funny when they are drinking caffeine, no one should be mean to the girl who wore a two piece bathing suit, and no one should be mean to the person who watched the R rated movie. However, people absolutely have the right to voice their opinion, and if they wish to do so, should find ways to do it in as polite and kind a manner as possible. ". . . whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." If the prophet said something, we are supposed to listen. If a young man is instructed to not watch a rated R movie, at what age does it all of a sudden become okay? He is taught correct principles when he is young so that he will follow it all the days of his life.

I agree with @zil. Personally, I do not see hanging out with co-workers or classmates as a requirement. Regardless, in your shoes I personally would probably not bother to pursue a PhD. I find most modern academia to be fruitless in terms of true quality education and positive economic production (even undergrad these days!). The cost/benefit just doesn't fully add up for me. However, If I were to make the decision to move forward with the PhD, I would just do the same thing I do in job interviews, act like I'm going to be the best candidate ever for the position and then be myself after they already gave me the job. This could translate to telling truth's like, "yeah, I love hanging out with friends and colleagues!", and yet keeping some of the truth in your head only, ". . . as long as they are having good clean fun and no alcohol is involved, and I am actually interested in what they will be doing".

I really appreciate this line of thinking, and I think this is how we should think about things most of the time. It is the same context in which we say that such and such president of the USA accomplished x/y/z thing, or such and such person built x/y/z building; those things were not accomplished alone, but it is still that person, the decision maker, or 'man in charge' who receives the acclaim for the accomplishment. I also think that understanding the technical truth is valuable. To my understanding the technical truth is that there are some things God is unable to do, not because he lacks the power to do it, but because the power to do it doesn't exist. I outlined this concept in one of my first posts in the forum about God's omnipotence. My response above applies here as well. Yes, it is consistent with our doctrine to believe that God is omnipotent and that yet there are things He is technically unable to do, or unable to accomplish all on His own. I believe this concept would fully address the conundrum you presented.

Yes you can delete your credit card information from your account. That said, I personally have never uploaded my information credit card info for the same purpose. Instead I enrolled in the google opinion rewards program. This pays me a few cents every once in a while for a survey that just takes about a minute, sometimes less. I have built up about $30 over the past year and a half and when I can't resist purchasing an app I use the money from that and have never put in a credit card. Another alternative would be to purchase an app store gift card so you can limit yourself by only allowing purchases until it runs out. Either way, there are a few different ways to protect you from yourself in this regard.

Yeah, yeah. But way too big and clunky for my tastes. My preferred would be a titanium ring with an RFID chip inside. Something I can just leave on and not take off so that I get the convenience as if it were implanted, but without actually having it implanted. Something like this perhaps:

I read a similar article today about the same company and had considered posting it too. I am not sure how I feel about it though. Many people's freaked out comments on the articles relate to the book of Revelation and the mark of the beast, however, I don't really have any concerns about it as it pertains to that idea. Would it be considered defiling one's body/temple in the same way we are counseled against tattoos and multiple piercings? Doubtful. I also imagine in the future you could have them encrypted with whatever information you want to always have. Aside from the unusual aspect of it, I imagine it would be extremely convenient. Imagine never needing your car keys, house keys, or wallet because a little chip will hold the information for you and encrypted so that sensitive data required a password. I can see why a ton of people will be getting in line for one of these. I am not sure what I will do yet once it gets to that level, I assume if there is anything wrong with it we may get advice from church leadership. Edit: Was just speaking with my co-worker who had a cool idea. A semi-perfect alternative where I would be 100% on board is if they could give the option to have a ring or wrist band that you simply put on your finger that holds the chip inside. I would actually like one of those!

Very clever. I just found this less comical real life version :

As far back as I can remember, I have always sincerely appreciated Elder McConkie's abrasive style of speaking. When I hear him speak I sometimes wish that more of the brethren spoke that way today. Despite his occasional inaccuracies, I think the perceived overconfidence with which he speaks was potentially a contributing factor to his being called of the Lord. Some people probably need(ed) it, and while I can't speak for all, I feel that we are benefited from it as we listen to and read his words even today. It is clear from his speeches and written word that he is not ashamed of the gospel of Christ!

@zil

Welcome!

Reminds me of this story related by Boyd K. Packer about a time when a missionary made sexual advances toward his companion: I agree with the counsel in this section as it pertains protecting ones self from the unwanted sexual advances of another. Especially when those unwanted interactions occur repeatedly. If Captain Moroni and other righteous military leaders of old were able to lead men in battle and kill thousands in a righteous capacity in order to preserve their freedoms, family's, land, religion, etc, I see no difference in protecting ones temple by an appropriate level of physical force.

The sin has already been committed at this point, you did not participate in the commission of the sin, and you did not choose to break the Sabbath in that way. If you are invited to do so, it is okay if you eat the food. Consider Paul's words in regard to a similar conundrum about eating meat sacrificed to false idols. ------------------------------------ I would not participate in any form of decision regarding the purchase of the pizza, except perhaps to recommend that we prepare food from the pantry, or eat leftovers instead. By participating in the decision I would be actively supporting the decision to purchase the pizza, and therefore would be breaking the Sabbath myself. It would be similar to when Paul consented to the death of Stephen, even though he did not participate directly in the stoning: ------------------------------------ No. Others have not made the baptismal covenant to keep the Sabbath day holy, however, you having the knowledge and the covenant are breaking the law by having them participate. This one is simple to understand when you read the written declaration of the commandment to keep the Sabbath day holy: ------------------------------------ It is a sin. It is one of the ten commandments. God saw it as so important that he listed it among the top ten things for the covenant people of Israel not to do, among the other 9 are adultery and theft. None of the answers would be different as both the Corinthians passage as well as the commandment in Exodus could apply regardless of if the person was LDS or not. ------------------------------------ It depends. In saying 'allow' you indicate having a reasonable ability to prevent it; if you do not prevent it, you are in the wrong. If you have the means to prevent or discourage the sins of another, and never do so because you are receiving a benefit from their sin, then you are also guilty to an extent. The Jews who called out to crucify Christ and set Barabbas free gave their input, and even called that the blood of Christ be upon them and their children. Pilate washed his hands, symbolic, yet ineffectual. All participants in the decision were guilty: On the other hand, if you yourself are not doing the allowing, nor are participating in the decision, and yet are benefiting from the sin of another person, this is not your fault, nor is it on your conscience. Two examples: I once ordered an item that took a couple of weeks to arrive. The item was delivered on Sunday. I did not choose to have it delivered that day, and could not have prevented it in that case. I benefited by having the item sooner than expected, but I am not held responsible for the action. In another case, my grandfather was once a tobacco farmer; he grew tobacco which would eventually be used in cigarettes. This was his livelihood, the distributors who purchased his tobacco could have chosen to sell the tobacco to processors who would use it in more appropriate ways; my grandfather did not have any say in their decision. My grandfather's patriarchal blessing promised him that his tobacco crops would come in every year so long as he remained faithful in the Church. So once again, it depends.

If everyone in your family is healthy most of the time, and no one needs anything other than generic prescriptions on a consistent basis, then I would personally recommend getting a high deductible health plan, even catastrophic if needed, and then setting up a private HSA account with Vanguard or another low fee institution that provides quality investment options. Find out exactly what you paid out of pocket in medical bills last year, or in the first 6 months of this year (x2) by contacting your current insurance company and getting the total patient responsibility dollar amount. Plan over the course of one year to contribute into your HSA the combined total of the difference in premium cost, if any, as well as the cost you paid for all medical expenses last year (or in the most recent 'bad' year). Completely fictitious example math: Work insurance costs $500/month Private catastrophic plan costs $475/month Annual plan cost difference: $300 2016 (bad year) health expense total: $1846.12 Combined total of cost difference: $2146.12 Resulting HSA contribution (per month): $178.85 As much as I know the ACA has increased insurance costs and would like to see its repeal, it is the law right now and you should still check to see if ACA coverage, catastrophic or otherwise, is eligible to you with a subsidy in your state. Losing coverage is a qualified life event allowing you 60 days to enroll in a new plan as if it were a normal open enrollment period. Your or your children might also qualify for medicaid or other state or local coverage depending on various factors. By using the above formula and contributing as if it were a bad year you are helping yourself to prepare against that possibility while not actually paying more than what you paid in those bad years. Eventually you may have new options open up and can consider those, however, you might have multiple good years and save thousands! For most sicknesses and doctors visits, avoid the emergency room, or even an urgent care center whenever possible. Verify if 'telehealth' is legal in your state and if so, download a telehealth app such as Amwell or MDlive. 'Visiits' via these apps can be paid for with your HSA dollars (but do not count toward your medical plan deductible). The average cost is around $50 at the most for a consultation and these doctors (in most states) can prescribe antibiotics and other medications for strep, UTI, ear/eye infection, cold, flu, etc, etc. These services are generally available 24/7. For any visits you do not believe can be handled over the phone based on the symptoms, first use an in-network primary care doctor every time possible and only use the urgent care centers and emergency rooms when there is no other option. Disclaimer: My recommendations assume what I laid out in the first paragraph based on what I interpreted from your post. I am happy to analyze any additional specific details you wish to provide. Credentials for advice: I have worked in the insurance industry for the past 4 years. I am a licensed health and life insurance agent in all 50 states. I work for a fortune 500 corporation and am the supervisor of a two person team (myself included) tasked with working one on one with every eligible employee across the country and/or their family in regards to health needs and insurance coverage. Specifically I work with them to analyze their specific medical costs and health needs to help them determine the best coverage options available and recommend the options that will provide the most appropriate coverage (both through my employer or otherwise, where applicable). I also have a high deductible health plan and am coming from personal experience. By using this method and being blessed with multiple good health years my family now has over $10,000 in our HSA. Personally 75% of my HSA is invested in a mutual fund and has built an additional $1000 on top of my own contributions (this part is not something I recommend to everyone, and I only recommend considering it once you have enough in your HSA to cover the out of pocket maximum for one person for one year). I am sure some of this advice may be information of which you were already aware, however, it could be useful to others. While many people here and elsewhere will have excellent life experience in regards to the insurance industry, where applicable, I am always happy to contribute advice based on my personal and professional experience. I hope this information is helpful in some way! Edit: Sorry to hear that ACA prices are ridiculous in your area. It's a terrible law that has not been effective in the touted objective. Sadly, although rare, it is sometimes worth considering the risk of going without medical insurance, as it appears you may have also been considering.

Dear @Sledge, I regret to inform you that the previous information you have received pertaining to the age requirement for no longer being subjected to the law of chastity was incorrect. The correct age at which you may fornicate freely is 53 years 7 months and 11 days if you are single, and 58 years 3 months and 6 days if you are widowed or divorced. As a result, your act of fornication will in fact be considered abominable before the Lord. Shame on Him for making such an unfair rule! Not to worry, just come down and hang out with me after you finish living, the heat is not as bad as they say. Sincerely, Screwtape p.p. person0

I suppose then that this unsuspecting man is a victim of rape culture? Or does it not count because they are Asian?

Just go in for a small, completely appropriate kiss on the lips (just a cute peck - no overzealous passion). Just make sure to do it really fast so she can't stop you. Then that way even if she doesn't like you, at least you got something good out of it before it went awkward! Oh, and do it like as soon as she gets there as part of the initial greeting, that way, you have a 5% chance of successfully pretending it was just how you greet people, and having her think it was unusual but forget about it by the time she leaves. If you can pull it off, you win either way! Anecdote: My middle eastern family actually does greet family and close friends with a kiss on each cheek, so in the right context this could actually work reasonably well!

From the version of the story you tell, it is clear that this Ted guy was probably a total jerk. But really, if you think about it, would your friend want anything to do with a girl like that? I sure wouldn't. He probably lucked out getting rid of that garbage sooner than later!

You generally would stop trying if she's engaged (or has rejected you already - multiple times), however, anyone is free game until they are married! After that you get away and leave them alone!

I was going to comment, but this is pretty much the best way I could have worded it myself.