let’s roll

Members
  • Posts

    140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    let’s roll reacted to NeuroTypical in What book would you force people to read?   
    Well, 'force' is a bit strong for me.  But I'm on record several places saying something like "When they make me Emperor of the restored church, everyone will have to read these before they can get baptized". 
    Valley of Sorrow: A Layman's Guide to Understanding Mental Illness by Alexander B. Morrison of the Seventy
    “Judge Not” and Judging by Elder Dallin H. Oaks, August 1999 Ensign
     
    I figure if everyone just read those two things, the church would be at least 20% cooler. 
     
     
  2. Like
    let’s roll reacted to prisonchaplain in What book would you force people to read?   
    Everyone interested in interfaith dialogue must read: 
    How Wide the Divide? A Mormon & an Evangelical in Conversation by Craig Blomberg and Stephen E. Robinson   These professors are respectful and yet direct. The book is over 20 years old, but does a great job of engaging core doctrinal issues. Of course, neither author is an official spokesperson, yet both held substantial academic positions in the faith community they represent. A great example of convicted conversation!
  3. Like
    let’s roll reacted to wenglund in Children with gay parents   
    This makes perfect sense , and I agree with it in some respects and in certain contexts.
    However, while believing members of the Church hopefully aren't of the world, we do live in the world, which necessitates finding amicable ways to get along and thrive with those who have differing points of view.  I think what @Jane_Doe and @NeuroTypical are wisely suggesting is that having sensitivity towards  differing points of view is part of finding ways to get along and speak to others in the language of love they understand--particularly kids. 
    Said another way, if one wishes to persuade others to your point of view,  it is best to first connect with them, in part by understanding and acknowledging their current perspectives, and then respectfully reasoning with them towards a mutually beneficial end. 
    Granted, most, if not all on this board not only fully understand your perspective of love as it relates to homosexual families, they likely share it.
    As I understand things, the issue being raised isn't one of personal belief among board members, but ways to effectively approach those not on this board and who hold differing beliefs.
    I learned this lesson by being on the receiving end of people dogmatically telling me for years that my religion wasn't Christian and that I was going to hell. Under such conditions, productive interactions were near impossible.
    Just a thought.
    Thanks, -Wade Englund-
  4. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Midwest LDS in Children with gay parents   
    @Jane_Doe  you’ve demonstrated the love, patience, and compassion you invite us all to have in the post above in responding to those trying to deconstruct your invitation or claim that it’s something that it’s not.  I commend you for that.
    To your point, young children are neither familiar with, nor interested in, others’ determination to define families to their own liking regardless of how well-founded that definition is in a theology that young child also knows little or nothing about.  
    In that context your invitation is thoughtful and well-founded.  To declare to a young child that the loving support structure he or she lives in isn’t a family, labelling the child among all his/her peers as the only one without a family can’t be described as anything but unnecessarily cruel.
  5. Like
    let’s roll reacted to Traveler in Understanding vs. justifying   
    I believe this is the essence of the teaching of Jesus (first taught from the Old Testament) concerning those that have eyes and see not and ears and hear not.  But I look at this also - what purpose is there in reading scripture if one does not intend to learn anything?  If in reading scripture and listening to the brethren - what use it it when we come away having not learned anything or changed our minds concerning some principle?  Isaiah said that we learn line upon line upon line and precept upon precept upon precept.
    I also believe that we disrespect G-d if we study revelation with the intent not just to avoid learning something that we previously did not understand - but also without the intent to change our heart - especially how we view G-d, our fellow man and ourselves.  
    Thanks for the reminder @Vort
     
    The Traveler
  6. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Jane_Doe in Children with gay parents   
    @Jane_Doe  you’ve demonstrated the love, patience, and compassion you invite us all to have in the post above in responding to those trying to deconstruct your invitation or claim that it’s something that it’s not.  I commend you for that.
    To your point, young children are neither familiar with, nor interested in, others’ determination to define families to their own liking regardless of how well-founded that definition is in a theology that young child also knows little or nothing about.  
    In that context your invitation is thoughtful and well-founded.  To declare to a young child that the loving support structure he or she lives in isn’t a family, labelling the child among all his/her peers as the only one without a family can’t be described as anything but unnecessarily cruel.
  7. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Vort in Understanding vs. justifying   
    Btw, I support wholeheartedly your invitation regarding how best to read scripture and listen to prophets, I just think your analogy regarding lawyers is misplaced...except perhaps with respect to prosecutors whose duty to seek truth trumps their duty to advocate for convictions.
  8. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from SilentOne in Understanding vs. justifying   
    Lawyers are advocates.  As such they are required to make the best arguments for their clients.  In that context, the formula you describe is accurate to a degree.  
     Doctors are duty-bound to treat patients regardless of the patient’s moral standings. Is a doctor who provides medical treatment that saves the life of a murderer any less worthy of praise then the doctor that provides medical treatment that saves the life of a child?  Both deserve the best efforts of the doctor.
    In a similar manner all clients deserve the best efforts of a lawyer to use their knowledge of the law and skills in advocacy and negotiation to further the purposes of the client, as long as that purpose isn’t illegal.  There’s nothing backwards, wrong or dishonest about it.
    Yes I’m a lawyer and that’s what I was taught at JRCLS.
  9. Like
    let’s roll reacted to Jane_Doe in Children with gay parents   
    Love this comment.
    A child, especially a young one, isn't in the position to judge the righteousness of their parent's lives.  And a child can indeed bond with many different adults --- mom, dad, grandparents, aunts/uncles, stepparents, foster/adopted parents, etc.  My husband grew up with three parental figures-- his mom, his dad (they were divorced) and his dad's long term girlfriend.  As a kid he didn't understand that his mom & dad were divorced because of abuse, nor that his dad and the longterm/cohabitating girlfriend weren't married and had major issues.  He just understood who was going to be there to hold him when he was upset, who cheered him on, and who would listen when he needed to talk-- in other words who showed him love.  Was the situation ideal with God's Plan?  Not remotely!!  But his parents sins didn't mean he didn't/doesn't love them. 
  10. Thanks
    let’s roll reacted to mordorbund in The Wife Dilemma   
    Using Canterbury Tales to support a tongue-in-cheek affirmation of sex in heaven? You get a trophy.
  11. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Midwest LDS in A movie we all love   
    School of Rock
    A Knight’s Tale
  12. Like
    let’s roll reacted to Lost Boy in Questions about preisthood worthiness   
    Many members have challenges with their testimony.  There is no proof that God exists.  The evidence that God exists is very much up to one's interpretation. The only way to know of God's existence is through the power of the Holy Ghost.  There is no other way.  We are each going to have our testimony challenged.  Be kind and gentle to those that do, especially loved ones.  Being harsh with them only drives them away.  It certainly doesn't bring them closer.  
    If your husband wants to participate in the priesthood, tread carefully.  Be happy that has some importance to him.
    My wife has fallen away from the church and is in some goofy new age spirituality non-sense.  And although I really dislike that she is into it, I have made it a point to be respectful of it.  I hope one day she will feel the desire to come back.  but until that day, I have decided that being critical of her is of zero benefit.  
    All you can do is to love them back.  His actions are between him and the Lord.  So be easy on judging him.  
  13. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Fether in 2 hour church ? why so happy   
    No worries.  And I hope my reply didn’t come across as being caustic (it wasn’t meant as such) but rather my characterization of the goal of being a seeker with a hunger for Divine guidance and a heart willing to embrace and follow that guidance, even if it means leaving behind some things we have in the past enjoyed or valued.
  14. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Fether in 2 hour church ? why so happy   
    And I suppose my knee jerk reaction to those who choose to second guess prophetic guidance is that 13 hours apparently wasn’t enough.
  15. Like
    let’s roll reacted to Just_A_Guy in Last vote for forum name change   
    How about “Mormon-ish:  The Third Hour”?
  16. Like
    let’s roll reacted to MrShorty in Lies we tell our daughters: Have a career.   
    I don't think that I thought about definitions that closely (who knows, maybe I did not think at all). Since you pressed me on it, I would say it is more 2 than 1 -- more towards how this fosters stereotypical gender roles. I think I have made comments on this forum to the effect that I am not convinced that many/most/maybe all of the gender stereotypes we use to describe men and women are universally true. Perhaps I am thinking counter to the Family Proclamation, but I am also not sure about strict adherence to the described/prescribed gender roles given in the Family Proclamation.
  17. Like
    let’s roll reacted to zil in Saying no to a calling.   
    Welcome, @Zhen!
    I think because of the instructions we've received to always accept a calling, we sometimes don't realize that it's OK to counsel with the person extending the calling - to explain to them details about our life that they may not know (schedule, availability, other commitments, personal fears or doubts, etc.).  It might be that after counseling about the calling, either they decide to pray about it further, or you realize it's not as bad as you thought.
  18. Like
    let’s roll reacted to Chilean in How Much Is Too Much   
    There's no such thing as limits when you're having fun!! Ha J/K
    I'm here throughout the day during the weekdays, as my work get slow sometimes and I get bored and you guys entertain me (Thank you!) I don't get on the forums during the weekends as I'm busy.
  19. Haha
  20. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Midwest LDS in Was jesus married   
    I can’t really interpret the above as anything but trolling.  
  21. Like
    let’s roll reacted to Just_A_Guy in A Gospel that Crushes?   
    A couple of additional observations in addition to the excellent points already made: 
    I. 
    As I’m sure the OP will agree, there is only one gospel.  There is no “gospel of Spencer Kimball” in opposition to a “gospel of Gordon Hinckley” in opposition to a “gospel of Russell Nelson”, any more than there are gospels of Matthew, John, James, Peter, and Paul standing in opposition to each other.
    There are, however, presentations of the gospel according to various individuals; which presentations echo the way the Gospel of Jesus Christ resonates to the individual presenter’s unique personality.  You see this in the Bible, where Paul often (but not always) emphasizes grace whereas Peter and James make much of the need to live a Christian lifestyle. 
    Similarly, “The Miracle of Forgiveness” represents one presentation of the gospel according to Spencer W. Kimball.  And it may not even represent Kimball’s complete thoughts on the subject (there is anecdotal evidence that in later years, he acknowledged to close family members that some portions of the book were perhaps a bit more harsh than necessary). 
    With that being said, “The Miracle of Forgiveness” resonated deeply with a significant portion of the LDS membership during the era in which it was published.  It was, I think, in many ways a response to the "cheap grace" narrative that had underpinnings in antebellum America (many of the anti-Mormon Missouri terrorists had no problem raping Mormon women Saturday night and then walking into church on Sunday morning and proclaiming themselves "saved"); and that had become especially dominant in American Protestantism after World War 2.  The book's appeal now is somewhat less broad, perhaps in part due to  continually evolving cultural norms and attitudes--it's one thing to call people out for hypocrisy on a standard to which they at least offer lip service; another to persuade them to live by a standard they never accepted in the first place.  Maybe that’s part of the reason that the book is not currently in print.  Of course it's always possible that, just as specific Biblical passages or authors tend to come in and out of fashion within various Christian sects, we may yet find some decades in the future that Kimball’s writings once again seem very timely indeed. 
    To address the OP’s question about how to determine “truth”—ultimately truth is revealed to the individual through God Himself.  But the apostles (and, collectively, the church authorities) give us advice that, if followed, will navigate us to a point where we can actually pick up God’s revelations directly and with some measure of reliability.
    II. 
    What the OP misses—and perhaps, what Kimball may have not presented articulately (or at all—I haven’t read MoF in years)—is that even if we have not yet completely been liberated from the bonds of a character flaw or bad habit; we can still improve.  A person in the throes of addiction can go from relapsing every day, to relapsing every three days, to relapsing once a week; and so on. 
    If we don’t, as part of the repentance process, allow ourselves to take an honest look at the spiritual growth we have already gone through via the grace of Christ in spite of our weakness; and if we don’t remember our own divine potential and trust in God to help us change further—then yes, that repeated process of making and breaking resolves can be spiritually exhausting.  But looking at Kimball’s teachings in their totality (above and beyond what he wrote in MoF), I don’t believe that was how he approached the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 
    III
    I see little problem with your “(c)(1)” classification.  The anecdote the OP cites of the coffee-drinking woman illustrates a woman who is not trying.  The anecdote of the soldier Kimball cites, denotes a person who does not believe that fulfillment of the ultimate task is possible--in other words, it describes a person who denies the power of Christ to perfect him; whereas Mormons who struggle with sin do so as a result of Moroni's invitation to "come unto Christ, and be perfected in Him"; confident in an eventual victory through diligence working in conjunction with the grace of Christ. 
    Summary: 
    Mormonism's take on the Gospel of Jesus Christ strikes me as being different than much of modern orthodox Christianity; in that many orthodox Christians now content themselves with declaring people to be “saved” in their sins during this life; pushing both the need for and possibility of salvation from sin into the hereafter (if at all).  Mormonism, by contrast, steadfastly insists that a) there's no such thing as salvation in sin; b) people can and must be saved from their sins (if only by in part, and by degrees) in this life, and c) that this salvific process in practice represents a joint effort between the penitent and the Savior. 
    This is not a process that is supposed to crush us; but it will most certainly break us. It's that way by design--"broken heart and contrite spirit", and all that.  And, to quote a wise man--anyone who says differently is selling something.
  22. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Jane_Doe in A Gospel that Crushes?   
    No.
    I echo Zil’s good thoughts and add a few of my own.
    A hearty amen to your concluding statement that the atonement is a gift which, as we come to understand it, will transform our soul and cause us to want to follow the Savior.  I invite you to continue to search President Kimball’s writings.  I’m confident you’ll find he taught that principle as well.
    As to how to understand how faith and works intertwine, i invite you to ponder the Savior’s response to the man who asked what he needed to do to gain eternal life.  The initial response was confirmation by Jesus of the man’s recitation of commandments/works listed in the scriptures.  When the man asserted he had done all those works since his youth and asked “what lack I yet” Jesus gave him an invitation to do a work of faith which the man was unable, at that time, to do.  Was his ability a lack of faith or of works? I trust you’ll agree is was a lack of both.
    As to the feeling of being crushed, I guess if I were to feel that way, I’d feel like I was discounting the power of the Atonement.  I invite you to read The Infinite Atonement by Bro. Callister.  It’s revelatory and while you may find it different in tone from how you found Miracle of Forgiveness, I believe the books are harmonious.
    Finally there have been a few recent talks on how best to understand the invitation to be perfect.  One by Elder Holland and another by Pres. Eyeing.  I think you’ll find both empowering rather than crushing.
    Godspeed to you in what are clearly sincere efforts to follow the Savior.
     
     
  23. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Anddenex in Was jesus married   
    I can’t really interpret the above as anything but trolling.  
  24. Like
    let’s roll got a reaction from Vort in Was jesus married   
    I can’t really interpret the above as anything but trolling.  
  25. Like
    let’s roll reacted to zil in Was jesus married   
    I'm casting my vote for "troll".