Midwest LDS

Posted before I read my bad.

You're welcome! I've always admired the reverence and dedication Jews show to the Lord through their Sabbath Day observance. Thank you for sharing your beliefs on the subject.

I believe it was moved to Sunday to honor the Ressurrction of Jesus Christ. Christ was killed on the cross on Friday and rose from the tomb on Sunday, and I believe most early and modern Christians celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday for that reason. There are exceptions however, such as the Seventh Day Adventists, who still honor the Sabbath on Saturday.

I would say there are some similarities between our houses of worship and your synagogues, as well as some differences. Similarities: We also gather weekly on the Sabbath to study our scriptures. Generally, we have one hour where we hear sermons on various Gospel topics given by the members of the ward. We also have one hour of more in depth study, Sunday School together one week and Priesthood/Relief Society split by men and women the next. We also have special focus on certain scriptures and Gospel lessons during the holidays, Easter and Christmas being most important for us (and most other Christians of course). We also meet with our Bishop one on one if neccessary on Sunday, for individual counseling on various issues on an as need basis. I assume that is the same for Jews, although I don't know when you counsel with individuals in your congregation as a rabbi so I apologize if I am incorrect about that. I would say in many ways our faiths are similiar, as our churches can also be considered houses of prayer, study, and assembly. Differences: On Sunday, the most important part of our worship service is partaking of the Sacrament. By eating the bread and the water, we renew our special covenants that we made with our Father in Heaven and Jesus Christ during our baptism, and reflect upon and seek forgiveness for our sins. It is the most important part of our weekly worship, and is generally held near the beginning of our worship services.

You're right, a neferious conspiracy of the youth to bring him down I'm sure.

Not well, although to be fair he was executed by the old men, his own government, rather than the rising generation.

Maybe it's just me, but I really don't see any problem with missionaries talking with their families more often. Especially in such a family oriented church, it makes a ton of sense. There are so many other major issues we deal with in the world that a phone call once a week doesn't really scream the infantilizing of society to me.

Socrates 469-399 BC "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room."

Oh yeah, everyone is different. I talk to my parents weekly, and personally I wpuld have liked communicating more freely with my family, but I know other people have different relationships with their loved ones. I'm just glad missionaries have the option to call home more regularly, I know my mission would have been exponentially easier on me if I could have been in close contact with my support system at home. But that's just me☺.

I definitely approve of the change, and it will make it a lot easier on parents as well. I know it was hard on my mom to not be able to talk to my brother and me more tyan twice a year.

I'm really excited about this. Homesickness was the hardest part of my mission, and it would have been a lot easier for me if I could have called home regularly. What a great change! https://www.thechurchnews.com/global/2019-02-15/latter-day-saint-missionaries-can-now-call-text-home-weekly-first-presidency-announces-49001

Well a flashing 12:00 is right twice a day then😃

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

I just can't imagine. I bet every single person who answered the door would ask if the sisters were his wives. Sister training leaders are a real blessing.

In my mission, maybe 5 or 6 years before I got there, they briefly had District Leaders go on teamups with pairs of Sisters the same way they do when training Elders. Three guesses as to why the mission president ended that practice quickly😃. I can only imagine how much fun tracting must have been.

That makes sense to me. I guess you just have to ask yourself which would make you more sad, not saying goodbye in person, or hearing them sing badly.

In that case, I would say no. If they were still doing their own work, absolutely. But if you are just going to see them lip syncing and using back up tracks, I feel like it would just end up depressing you.

Agreed. While I certainly disagree with some posts here, I still have not found an LDS forum that even attempts to uphold the standards of the church like this one does. I'm not saying one does not exist, but I haven't found it. I also appreciate interacting with others who do think differently from me. I find it helps me develop my own thought processes and faith when I have an honest discussion with someone I disagree with.

Fair enough, that was actually what I meant. I don't think President Oaks has said anything in an official capacity worthy of censure. Quite frankly, I appreciate his straight shooting and to the point manner of speaking. I was refering to the weaknesses inherant in all men, not anything that I am aware that he has done.

I actually understand where you are coming from to a degree. I also feel like President Oaks message was being misinterpreted, and I appreciated what you had to say after the first paragraph. But the problem for me was the initial paragraph felt like far to much of an attack on President Oaks. I know the brethern are human. I know they make mistakes. But, they will not lead the church astray and, to me, it sounded as if you were saying that President Oaks does that on a regular basis and if it wasn't for better apostles like Elder Uchtdof, he would be screwing up the church. Now that you have clarified your thinking, I recognize that wasn't your intent, but that's how it sounded to me which is why I took exception to that part of the article. I feel like the brethern are attacked enough by the world, and that they should be loved and supported by us, not criticized, even when they make mistakes as human beings.

It really stinks to get lumped in with a bunch of criminals like that. I don't blame you for being frustrated. My very much amateurish view of things (I don't have any firsthand experience with our legal system like @mirkwood or @Just_A_Guy so I tend to take their points of view on this a little more seriously than mine) is that the more people are affected by your (generic) crime the harsher the sentence should be. First time drug offender with a joint? Get a fine. Dealing drugs to users? Much harsher sentance with serious jail time.

I agree! Worf was always one of my favorite characters, I love the stoic, honorable warrior types. Sulu was awesome too.

I agree to an extent. As I acknowledged at the beginning, she does defend President Oaks in this article, and his words were definitely taken out of context. I took exception to her initial criticism. To me that's unnessary because he is called of God to a very special calling. I don't like it when members critisize our leaders because it represents, to me, attempting to steady the ark. The General Authorities are called of God. If they say something wrong, and they do sometimes, God will provide a correction through their brethern. It's our job to love and sustain men like President Oaks, not say "I really don't like this guy or what he says most of the time, but in this one instance he wasn't wrong". To me that represents a lack of faith. A criticism like this from a non or former member? Sure, because they don't kniw who he is. But if we truly have a testimony as to who the brethren are, then if we struggle with something they say, we work it out in private and don't announce to the world that we don't like them most of the time.

I don't quite understand it when an author starts an article with how much he/she (generic) doesn't like certain leaders of the church (I've seen this more than once). While this author actually ends up defending President Oaks, she spends the first few paragraphs talking about why she doesn't like him. Maybe this is just me, but I don't find such criticism of our leaders helpful at all. Are they human? Absolutely, and they make mistakes regularly just like us. But I don't understand why we don't just trust that the Lord is leading his church, and stop trying to steady the ark. President Oaks is one of my favorite speakers, he always has been, but even if I didn't like him for whatever reason I wouldn't criticize him publicly. He is an Apostle of Jesus Christ, chosen by God as a prophet, seer, and revelator. If he is in error, let God deal with him and I can focus on working on my own relationship with Christ. I think all of us could be a little kinder and more forgiving of our leaders.

Sorry I was refering specifically to drug crime and agreeing with @NightSG about murderers who get off light. White collar criminals (depending on the crime) still deserve to have the book thrown at them. If you ever feel like being disgusted with the Bernie Madoff types, just watch an episode or two of American Greed. Watching all those poor people who lost life savings so some scammer can get a third boat is enough to convince me of that.