person0
-
Posts
2029 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Posts posted by person0
-
-
55 minutes ago, marge said:
I poured my heart and soul into this religion for two years, and wanted nothing more than for it to be true.
It is true. Neither your nor my wants have any bearing on it. It simply is. Don't get me wrong, I understand your perspective. What you perceive as arrogance is confidence in God and the witness of His Spirit. My relationship with my Heavenly Father and my Savior, Jesus Christ, and the manifestations of God's power in my life, both temporal and spiritual have led me to this knowledge time and time again. I know you can come to this knowledge, too.
I don't know the circumstances surrounding your efforts to seek an answer, so I can only judge based on God's promise that I know for myself to be true. If you are interested and willing to hear it, I will gladly share my experience with the fulfillment of that promise in the hopes that it may help you. Would you like me to share my witness and would you be willing to hear the Spirit witness to your Spirit that my experience and testimony is true?
-
26 minutes ago, MrShorty said:
. . . to assume that your testimony MUST transfer to others. . .
I haven't done that.
26 minutes ago, MrShorty said:. . . I'm not entirely certain I agree that my testimony means that ALL others are expected to receive the same testimony.
It is neither you nor I, but God's promise, as declared by Moroni, that establishes that everyone will receive a testimony of the Book of Mormon by the power of the Holy Ghost, if they properly adhere to the requirements of the promise as it pertains to their individual situation, assuming they 'do not cast it out by [their] unbelief'.
35 minutes ago, MrShorty said:In some ways, I think some of this "all or nothing" thinking is part of why many people leave the Church. They come to look at some of the difficult, contested issues, decide that the Church's position on that issue is not true and, because they believe it is all or nothing as we have been taught, their entire house of cards crashes. I don't fully understand how it all works, but I find myself shying away from some of this all or nothing absolutism that characterized my older faith.
I believe this is unrelated. The Book of Mormon being true has nothing to do with whether or not some other Church policy, teaching, or statement is true. If one disagree's, they are free to take it up with God and Moroni, who also promised, "God shall show unto you, that that which I have written is true."
It is not my intent to be hard. I desire that all understand that they will come to know the Book of Mormon is true by the power of the Holy Ghost when they follow the prescribed way to obtain a witness as it pertains to their circumstances. Otherwise, God would be a respecter of persons.
-
13 hours ago, marge said:
I would say I have studied the Book of Mormon in depth, I also did come follow me all last year (and most of this year on D&C) I've attended LDS church (when I can due to covid). I've lived the Word of Wisdom the entire time, I've prayed with a sincere heart to know if its true. After almost two years of sincere seeking (and I mean very sincere) I have to conclude that it's not true. It makes me really sad because I WANT it to be true.
I mean no disrespect, but I know the Book of Mormon is true by the power of the Holy Ghost. It cannot be true for some and not true for others. If you believe you have not received an answer, there is either something missing from your methodology, or from the way you seek, interpret, or accept answers from God. If you truly want to know it is true, and are willing to act upon a personal witness and confirmation, as a community, we would love to help you dissect and enhance your process of seeking and finding, so that you may not only receive, but also recognize the witness God has prepared for you.
-
16 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
My daughter is 17, wife and I can't even imagine what it would be like to have a kid who has killed twice before turning 18. It's sobering.
The mothers of the Army of Helaman volunteered their young sons. They killed lots of people. God even helped them do it! 😁
-
2 minutes ago, LDSGator said:
They probably offer mental health counseling to cops who have to use lethal force, so it’s obvious that even in the “best” cases it has an effect on you.
I don't disagree that it can sometimes happen, I just disagree that it is something we can assume.
-
1 hour ago, LDSGator said:
That has a big effect on you mentally unless you're a sociopath.
If by big effect you mean negative effect, not so sure I agree with that statement. There are plenty of people in the scriptures who disliked killing but did so every time they considered it necessary to protect themselves and their loved ones. The fact that there should be no joy in killing doesn't mean the effect must be negative. Nephi slew Laban, it had a big effect, but I think the biggest effect was that Nephi learned that violence (and even killing) is sometimes the answer, and the right course of action, to the point of being sanctioned and even encouraged by God. Captain Moroni -- one of the most righteous men to ever live, a man whom the prophet Mormon sought to emulate and after whom he named his son -- justly and with God's blessing and inspiration, put people to death just for refusing to be drafted for the cause of freedom on at least two separate occasions.
As for Kyle, I am hoping the effect this has on him is simply to encourage him to no longer participate in such things, unless it is his own property or the time comes when there is truly no other choice but to take up arms, as the prophecies indicate.1 hour ago, LDSGator said:. . . would you rather deal with civil lawsuits and needing round the clock protection for the rest of your life . . .
As for me personally, or course not. There are people who have to deal with that even without doing anything foolish, though. It is unfortunate, but depending on if they get tossed out (I think they likely will now that he's been acquitted), that could be a part of his life now, and he will have to learn to deal with it. On an interesting note, many ancient prophets voluntarily and knowingly subjected themselves to that for the sake of preaching the gospel. For Rittenhouse, he did something foolish, but the result of his foolish action has set a precedent that I believe this country desperately needed reasserted in our day and time.
Quote. . . being hated by, oh, 35% of the population will get to you. . .
He was going to be hated by them anyway. He certainly found out at a little younger age than most people though. 😄
-
8 hours ago, MrShorty said:
I thought of @prisonchaplain while listening to Rick Bennet's (Gospel Tangents podcast) interview with Dr. Chris Thomas who recently wrote a book about his experience reading the Book of Mormon as a Pentacostal. I thought prisonchaplain and some of you others may enjoy this. I notice prisonchaplain hasn't been on the forum in a while. All's well, I hope??
I struggle to understand how a Christian can study the Book of Mormon in depth and come away from it without reaching one of two conclusions:
1) It is the Word of God as is the Bible
2) It is not the Word of God, but if not, the Bible must not be either
I tend to automatically assume that one who reads the Book of Mormon and doesn't believe it to be true could not have fulfilled Moroni's promise, or they cast out the witness they received. It is a very direct promise: ". . .he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost." On a separate but related note: If I were to ever leave the Church, the only other option is atheism / agnosticism. It just seems too obvious to me that other religions are just as (if not more) flawed as detractors claim ours to be.
-
7 hours ago, LDSGator said:
Oh agree.
Now he has to ask himself every day if it was worth it. He’ll also probably have to file for bankruptcy in order to avoid his paycheck getting garnished for the rest of his life when the civil suit comes down. And it will. He also gets to look over his shoulder for the next twenty years and worry about lunatics seeking vengeance. So in reality, his life has not even started to become chaotic yet.All of this could have been avoided if he stayed home and played Playstation that night.
I think you are assuming the civil suits will be successful and also assuming he will not succeed in lawsuits against major media outlets who maliciously defamed him. If Nick Sandman was able to settle for millions, I'm sure we can assume Kyle will be able to do the same, if not more, given the more egregious level of defamation and the impact to livelihood of being falsely labeled a murderous white supremacist.
I am less concerned about his safety and financial stability and more concerned about what he will choose to do with his life and if he will strive to become a better man. He showed enormous restraint in deciding when to use and when not to use his weapon; given how young he still is I hope his acquittal doesn't go to his head and lead him to change for the worse.- LDSGator, Backroads, NeuroTypical and 4 others
-
7
-
25 minutes ago, LDSGator said:
maybe from a non-church institution
I agree that I would love to see more studies. Unless I misread, the article seemed to mention that a non-church entity at least reviewed the data and came to the same assessment. Obviously not another independent study, but very likely the next best thing.
-
You and I are begotten of God. Christ was the only begotten in the flesh. Christ is both the spiritual and physical offspring of God; everyone else is spiritual offspring only. (As far as has been revealed)
- Just_A_Guy and askandanswer
-
2
-
On 9/2/2021 at 2:34 PM, Just_A_Guy said:
My understanding, further, is that the law does not include exceptions for victims of rape or incest.
Although the Church allows for the possibility of personal revelation for certain scenarios. Given the terrible things Heavenly Father 'allows' to happen all over the world because of our individual agency, I can't personally imagine a situation where someone would get a confirming revelation to abort a child solely on the basis of rape or incest. Without that personal revelation, it would still be a gravely sinful act by the Church's standards noted in the handbook, although I can't imagine any discipline would take place.
-
On 9/2/2021 at 8:44 PM, Grunt said:
This year I've spent a considerable amount of time looking at Catholicism due to some questions I had.
I met with a Catholic Priest while on my mission and obtained a copy of the Catholic Bible, including the apocryphal books, and also a copy of the catechism. In reviewing the Catholic doctrines for understanding and comparison, I came across this little gem that really helped me understand the concept of original sin:
Quote". . . the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand."
[Link]😁
-
I have decided to continue to follow the First Presidency's request despite my opinions on the medical efficacy of so doing. It may well turn out that the only reason for the request is the practice of obedience. I will be obedient in this small thing, and hope it will strengthen me in the event I am asked to do more difficult things in the future.
-
10 minutes ago, dprh said:
Can you expound on that? What risks are increased by wearing a mask?
In the state of KY where I live, parents who wanted their children to wear a mask in school had to fill out this form. Then the Governor decided to issue a mandate requiring masking in schools. Check out the "I acknowledge" statements.
-
27 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
It's a similar thing with masks. Even a barely-noticable reduction in risk, when you are looking at an entire population, means lives are saved.
I don't actually believe there is any real-world reduction in risk at all. Not even a minimal amount. I was just being polite. However, even if we assume there is a minimal reduction in risk for COVID, that still doesn't account for the increase in risk for other ailments, including mental illness.
-
On 8/15/2021 at 2:36 PM, LDSGator said:
I hope some people who used to lecture others about following the prophet but now are refusing to do so when it’s something they don’t like end up with more empathy when they encounter other members struggling with this or that teaching. But I’m not optimistic.
Although I haven't yet decided if I will stop wearing the masks when unable to social distance, the struggle in and of itself has led to a great deal of empathy. That said, I've never been much bothered by people ignoring non-doctrinal items that are matters of policy. It concerns me when doctrine is disregarded in favor of the philosophies of men, which I see a great deal of in the Church these days.
-
Link | Context
The CDC itself acknowledges that only masks that are at least to the standards of N95 masks and which have also been fit tested with a confirmed seal check for each fitting are effective at providing protection. Even in a scenario that is fully compliant to those standards, it is still recommended that a physician change masks after each patient visit. How long do those last? Like 5 - 10 minutes at most in my experience.
The CDC also acknowledges that surgical masks cannot provide any reliable wearer protection. Even more, they provide protection only from large droplets, splashes or sprays. Medically, large droplets are considered those greater than or equal to 100 micrometers (1/10 of a milimeter), such as those produced from coughing, sneezing, and occasionally from very heavy breathing. And the use limitation is that they should be discarded after each patient encounter, which as noted before, is a very brief period of time, vastly shorter than the two hours we are in Church.
There are other recent CDC documents which list additional voids to protection that occur when touching and/or adjusting masks, for those who have facial hair (I do). Similarly CDC guidelines indicate that masks must be replaced after coughing or sneezing, and the like.
The reality is that, even if there is a use case where masks are effective, no one is wearing them and abiding the proper usage guidance enough to provide any real world benefit. The CDC even admits something along those lines in one of the recent studies I have read, to the extent of undermining their own statements within the same study. Behold:QuoteUniversal masking is recommended to slow the spread of COVID-19. Cloth masks and medical procedure masks substantially reduce exposure from infected wearers (source control) and reduce exposure of uninfected wearers (wearer exposure).
. . .
The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, these experiments were conducted with one type of medical procedure mask and one type of cloth mask among the many choices that are commercially available and were intended to provide data about their relative performance in a controlled setting. The findings of these simulations should neither be generalized to the effectiveness of all medical procedure masks or cloths masks nor interpreted as being representative of the effectiveness of these masks when worn in real-world settings. Second, these experiments did not include any other combinations of masks, such as cloth over cloth, medical procedure mask over medical procedure mask, or medical procedure mask over cloth. Third, these findings might not be generalizable to children because of their smaller size or to men with beards and other facial hair, which interfere with fit. Finally, although use of double masking or knotting and tucking are two of many options that can optimize fit and enhance mask performance for source control and for wearer protection, double masking might impede breathing or obstruct peripheral vision for some wearers, and knotting and tucking can change the shape of the mask such that it no longer covers fully both the nose and the mouth of persons with larger faces.At the minimum, I find it is completely reasonable to believe that generalized masking is a wasted effort, the effect of which is negligible at best. Hence, in reference to the topic at hand, it is likewise reasonable to conclude, all things considered, that the recent statement and encouragements from the First Presidency has other intentions which are not related to medical efficacy.
My thoughts. I appreciate your patience with the length. -
Okay. I have some thoughts on this. I am surprised others haven't already pointed them out. I will quote portions of the statement made by the First Presidency and then provide my personal commentary.
QuoteWe want to do all we can to limit the spread of these viruses.
If the leaders and members of the Church were to enact this statement to its literal fulfillment, we would return to remote only Church. In all sincerity, that would be more preferable to me than Church attendance with masks. I personally have extreme difficulty devoting any type of focus while wearing the mask, mostly because I struggle to avoid thinking about it and noticing how annoying it is. That said, I don't want to limit my children to remote participation which is less effective for them.
Serious question: If leaders and members are willing to disregard the above council by taking the risk of spreading the virus during in person services, why should other members feel any obligation to wear masks during those services? If we are to interpret the above statement differently, then why wouldn't we interpret the statement on masks differently.
QuoteWe know that protection from the diseases they cause can only be achieved by immunizing a very high percentage of the population.
Immunization occurs in two ways:
- When one acquires and defeats/overcomes an infection.
- When one is vaccinated against infection.
Notice they did not specify that the protection can only be achieved by vaccination.
QuoteTo limit exposure to these viruses, we urge the use of face masks in public meetings whenever social distancing is not possible.
What if social distancing is possible, but people just aren't doing it? I have done my best to be obedient to this request by social distancing with my family, and putting on my mask when I am in situations where it is not possible, however, I have been dealing with an internal struggle as to whether or not I will continue doing this, as it is truly destroying my Sabbath experience and I am experiencing a great deal of anxiety over it.
QuoteTo provide personal protection from such severe infections, we urge individuals to be vaccinated.
Notice the reason they urge vaccination is not to limit viral spread, but instead to provide personal protection from severe infection. Given my age group and health, it is not necessary to be vaccinated to achieve this result. That said, I have told my grandmother and others that the vaccines are unlikely to cause harm and are likely to be beneficial and if I were elderly, I would seriously consider getting vaccinated.
QuoteWe can win this war if everyone will follow the wise and thoughtful recommendations of medical experts and government leaders.
This statement is very ambiguous, and it makes sense to me why. This statement makes it clear that each individual may consider the recommendations of the medical experts and government leaders they trust. There are obviously many doctors and government leaders who recommend vaccination, including former President Trump. There are also medical experts who recommend it only for adults, and others who recommend it only for the elderly and those with co-morbidities. And there are a few who don't recommend it at all.
The only doctor who lives in my ward is a cancer surgeon and has chosen not to get the vaccine and also expressed that even upon reviewing available studies, and the data, that masking is ineffective. I met with my ENT earlier this week and he is sick and tired of the masks and believes they are unnecessary (he did not specify ineffective, only unnecessary), especially at this point, but he did choose to get vaccinated. Both of these individuals are at least 55 or older.
Should I choose not to wear a mask and not to be vaccinated, I would still be fully adhering to this portion of the recent announcement because I have reviewed the available data for myself and also discussed with medical experts to advise my opinion, and am following the thoughtful recommendations of the medical experts I trust. -
37 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:
You may have missed the Queer sister thread from about 3 months ago... many of us expressed our concerns then
Yeah, I saw that thread.
-
On 8/1/2021 at 4:51 PM, NeuroTypical said:
so, has this thread given you enough material to post back?
I was never intending to respond to the person who shared it publicly on Facebook. That said, this thread has somewhat disappointed me in the responses. It seems no one else is concerned about the fact that this type of material is infiltrating the Church. It doesn't seem to be locally or minimally confined.
My Ward is very woke, including our Bishop and his wife, EQP and his wife, etc. One of our young women recently started asking our children to use male pronouns and started going by only the traditionally male portion of her name. I am genuinely concerned about the way these things are impacting the membership and the fact that there has yet to be any clear direction from higher ups. Thankfully, a high counselor has brought this up to our Stake President today with the hope if obtaining further guidance.
I suppose I thought people here would share in my concern and grief. That said, perhaps I didn't give enough information in the original post.
-
25 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
I've been reading good sci-fi for four decades, and this is as good as any I suppose.
Any thoughts on the fact that members are reading and spreading this material, or the statement or quote from the image?
-
Is anyone familiar with this new book? A member in my area posted this and it has me worried about the material and beliefs that seem to be infiltrating the Church unchecked.
I believe we should love all our brothers and sisters, regardless of their background. That love leads us to share the truth and the Gospel of Christ. Christ will then enable them to overcome the world, through His infinite Atonement. This can lead us all to deny ourselves of all ungodliness, in the myriad forms it manifests throughout our mortal sojourn.
The quote shared in the attached image seems to directly subvert the eternal truths declared in the Family Proclamation. Am I misreading it, or misunderstanding something? Members of my ward have asked for copies of this book, and I can't imagine it will lead them toward Christ. Is anyone here familiar with it and/or what the author's intent and teaching is? My initial impression is that the title itself identifies it as a book that 'teaches a different gospel'.
[Image Removed]
-
-
6 minutes ago, Vort said:
Cautionary tale:
'You have been warned.
I see that assignment operator where a comparison operator ought to be! On that note, though, I looked up 'why not be a software developer?' and one of the top reasons was essentially, "If you can't handle staring at a screen for 8 hours to diagnose and accomplish what should have only been 10 minutes of work, don't be a developer!"
- NeuroTypical and Vort
-
1
-
1
A Pentacostal Reads the BoM
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
I think it would be inconsistent with the teachings of the Book of Mormon as a whole for God to wait until after someone's death to witness to them that the Book of Mormon is true and that it is His word, through His prophets and messengers, IF they are reading it and seeking that answer in this life.
Oh but it does. Either the Book of Mormon is what we claim it to be (a genuine and true historical and scriptural record of God's dealings with some of the ancient inhabitants of the Americas), or it isn't. There is no in between.
I am curious, do you claim that you received a specific witness that the Book of Mormon is not true, or simply that you never received a witness that it is?