Elgama

Yes I am worthy - thanks to a Bishop who wouldn't give me a Temple Recommend until I could say that 1 years ago. I know I am not perfect but I am worthy to enter the Temple with my head held - that makes me worthy to enter God's presence with my head held high. I am a daughter of my Heavenly Father and that makes me special and amazing. Poor woman is deluded but ya know lol Maybe as a Latter Day Saint woman she was oppressed, I have recently met my first LDS priesthood holder who does actively go about trying to oppress women - came as a shock after 17 years, he is the first one I have not felt truly respected women and Motherhood. One out of hundreds ain't bad.

for me all sins are equally awful to commit, ultimately the Saviour paid the price for all my sins not just the bad ones, if we start to rank them then we can justify them to ourselves, after all its only a little sin. The only difference is how difficult it is to repent. When we are baptised and receive the Holy Ghost we are supposed to lose the desire to do evil, and all should feel abhorant, that doesn't mean we don't sin, but we shouldn't desire it or justify it. I think ranking sin is wrong, its the sins I commit that are bad... and really denying the Holy Ghost, murder and breaking the law of chastity is much easier to avoid than swearing. when I hit my toe For atheist - murder and breaking the law of chastity are crimes that affect mortality, denying the Holy Ghost has deeper eternal consequenc*es that cannot be removed by taking away the veil

ok he can only give a blessing if he holds the Melchizedek Priesthood, its a little odd he doesn't but sure its right he has the Aaronic if thats what he says. Not sure what else to advise except be there for him sounds like he is working through his grief

just found the second page sorry my computer is struggling tonight, the burning of the Books maybe a major problem or it could be his way of grieving, I know my Gran burned my Grandad's journals (he had kept them everyday for over 60 years), and it can be away of just acting out the way you feel. But is clearly angry at God, ask him how he feels about using his priesthood, and if he would give you and the childrne a blessing, when my husband was depressed, angry etc I found reminding him of his priesthood was important. He may not be willing to do it, if not you can ask the Home Teachers for a blessing of comfort and direction (you don't have to be LDS to receive one), it will help you

Judo-Ninja is right we don't know your husband if a kick up the backside is what will help him do it, my husband cycled into a very deep nasty depression after a really bad time, and only thing that started him climbing out was me getting tough with him. But it depends on the person. How would you feel about asking him for a blessing to cope? I am assuming he is a Melcheizdek Priesthood holder, sounds like you and your children could do with them. And he could use one too. Are you religious at all you don't need to go to church, you can still bring the spirit into your home, you can have FHE on a Monday, just do something you enjoy together board games, popcorn and a movie, I don't know if you pray at all but the children could help you do family prayer, scripture reading. Maybe consider music you listen too etc You can just read the Bible with him. What you have been through is awful, the trauma of going to war is difficult on many families, I grew up aroound WW veterans and now live near two major airbases, it can have a devestating effect even on people you think can cope. My Father in Law loved the air force, but many years on still had nightmares relating to Korea and Vietnam. I hope you can find you way through this, but I think let him know whilst you expect your family to work through things, your willing to accept right now he is finding things difficult and lower what you expect of him. Do you have Home Teachers?

well personally have no bother discussing sex lol my Mum raised too kids to be open about sex and discuss our bodies etc Whilst constant discussion does you know good - I do think being able to discuss sex without embarassment is good both for a relationship with a husband and also good for other people too. Sometimes ideas can help to make things a bit more spicy and fun in a marriage. Don't think i waited to get engaged as such with my husband knew we were serious discussed it before then

OK just the way I feel. I want people to be comfortable in my home - I right now don't have it hung up but because haven't sorted the house out like that before that I had it in the hallway or kitchen that way anyone who I felt it would be inappropriate for could be taken into the living room, most people I take into the kitchen

I don't mark mine very often - tends to be because I am using the scripture. With my old set I did mark themm, by colouring it in and writing my impressions by it, but I am with the GA once I start marking I struggle knowing where to stop lol I love it all....... What I now mark is anything relevant to a current life decision or a calling I hold

he wasn't always fallen, and it may explain why in all the legends she seems so lost. They are often heart breaking. The Welsh Legend involves 2 men fighting over her, she was made of flowers, then turned into an owl. The Owl Service by Alan Garner is an interesting read

She's a Laurel - how friendly is your Relief Society President? can she attend Relief Society once a month and maybe the Relief Society social events/other meetings? How many YM do you have? when we had a small number of both in our branch (1 or 2 of each), permission was granted from the Stake and they had 3 joint social meetings a month and 1 seperate. Unless she is a good singer would ask her how she feels about singing the hymn? if not you can read it. Make sure you say the YW Theme with her. How many YW are on the records? realistically you won't need to spend the full time on the lesson, with a smaller number of children or only 1 it doesn't take as long, you can spend time putting together a newsletter, or cards for inactive YW There are things you can do in a branch that wouldn't be allowed or tried in a larger ward.

I have no scholarly pretenses, however I have a reasonable amount of learning and ability, it comes not from linguistics but from study of how History works, how historical documents are formed and how societies over time do things (which is where the archaeology comes in) + If you merely restrict yourself to linguistics and the texts we have present, you cannot come up with a reasonable hypothesis, we do not know how original the most ancient of documents we have are, and I am fairly sure the originator of the oral traditions is not around to ask - Moses however might be^_^ - the corrupted pasages cannot be posted as I have said several posts ago they no longer exist, however the correct passages exactly as they were written by the original authors, or spoken by the originator of the oral tradition cannot be produced to prove what they did say either. Therefore other areas of academic study are useful, to come up with the hypothesis. + Most of history is an hypothesis - mine is garnered from the stories in the Bible itself do I really need to list every time the Hebrew Nation became corrupted? The Book of Micah was written probably around 720 BCE - that is a lot of unaccounted for years when the writings were in hands of corrupt/hypocritical people.... the Pharisees we know had at very least corrupted interpretation. One thinks of Animal Farm by George Orwell - All animals are equal becomes All Animals are equal but some are more equal than others.. not a huge difference but the difference is crucial to the understanding. Do you seriously have enough faith in these scholars to say it is likely the Oral Tradition was in no way altered during the 1000s of years it was being passed down? remember the longest time frame passed in the Bible is contained in Genesis which was an oral tradition before someone edited it, if it is entirely correct then that would have only occured if it had some inspiration from God and revelation. Oral traditions in our societies that are only a 100 years old are generally very different to the actual event, written events are usually told with bias. Or do you have no understanding of how bias works in an historical document? + Nope - an American Vernacular term for the word No originated in the late 1800s/early 1900s was adopted as slang in the United Kingdom around the 1950s. As you can see I meant NO my view is based on the history of the people responsible for the writings we are now commenting on. If someone devotes their study entirely to the linguistics and ignores the history, archaeology and anthropology of the people it came from, they cannot profess scholarly understanding of a written piece - very basic historical training should teach anyone that

that would be because Roman Catholics have their own translations -I think its called the Rhiems Douai but willing to be corrected that is the version my Mum has that has her Great Grandmother's sacred heart in it.

or the current poor education systems so the reader struggles. Maybe these modern scholars aren't that much better than their predessors

That was the 1611 version, the 1870 version (which is the version most people has), used a different Greek Text and other sources, hence the 30,000 alterations to the NT, funny how modern critical scholars are happy to trash the very best scholars of less than 150 years ago, Wonder what the modern critical scholars of 2150 will make of the best scholars of 2010, the current scholarly opinion is based on which ever side the most big hitters are on, as they start to die off new ideas come through - I am willing to bet 100% of modern scholars are not agreed on the matter you will find differences of opinion

lol I guess you are just so secure in who you are you can afford to be in touch with your feminine side.

The way I read many of the legends is that she seems to be spirit rather than physical in form except when she inhabits the form of something else

How can they uncover something when they do not have the original texts? its entirely appropriate to assume with any historical document that information and bits are missing, we have to work with what is present, we cannot work with what it not. But as a history student I was taught, how to do history, my first year of the degree is very rare that rather than individual periods the technique took priority, it would be a very foolish Historian that assumes what we have of the Bible now is exactly the same as when the documents were first written. As we go further back in the Bible chances are more has been lost. The Mormon in me knows whole books are missing, the Historian in me says that is highly likely. Unlike with Modern Christianity where the great unwashed for the most part could not read the Bible, and make their own assumptions, there was less need to change it. The Jewish/Hebrew peoples could all generally read, had to for the Bah Mitzvah, the need to change it to control the people would also have been greater Nope it relies on the Bible stories themselves and other stories available from history/archaeology. How many times in the Bible did the Hebrew Nation/People of Israel etc fall from Grace, how many times were they taken into or walked into captivity. At times the Hebrew nation had a wife for Jehovah, worshipped a cow, we know Solomon and David slipped. very basic historical study - you have to accept the Chinese Whisper idea, how many documents down the line do we have if its not the original document? With each document there will have been changes, several documents down the line the changes can be quite radical. Language and its usage changes over time, so understanding of words change. Even historical study and interpretation changes over time, there is a bias in the scholars, only the Scientific Historians of the early 1900s even tried to remove their own bias. I'm interested to hear how you know this? we know what we have, we do not know what came before, even the Neanderthals have shown they had some writing/artistic ability, my presumption is that someone (Moses is sometimes attributed with it) wrote down the oral traditions, oral history changes and alters even faster than the written word Just like all the scholars you can quote - I am filling in the gaps with what seems to me to be the most logical presumptions with the evidence available

right so we cannot determine what the original text said - however the Bible stories themselves tell you what times the Bible was almost certainly changed and altered. Neither side can prove the changes we do not have the evidence, even in the case of the OT the Dead Sea Scrolls prove nothing. It is however a reasonable assumption that since Adam the Bible has changed drastically.

i believe its a good translation and as correct as any other the 1611 translation took many years by 54 of the top scholars from English universities at the time. The first of 15 rules drawn up to guide the process ' as little altered as the truth of the original will permit' in 1600s even the witch/poisoner debate is understandable as witches were used as herbalists during that time. Although that was probably a nod to the king who was funding this and had the power to kill you. Although given they didn't really skimp on the homosexuality references indicate they were not that heavily influenced by King James I & VI. The current version we have was redone in 1870, again by around 50 scholars from several different Christian traditions Baptist, Methodists, Presbyterians etc even Unitarian (in England at the time would be someone who did not concur with the trinity) most were admittedly Anglican but they would be as it was the predominant religion. On top of that American Scholars were invited to participate. 30, 000 changes were made to the New Testament, work was done carefully, there is no suggestion the scholars, were below par or did a bad job. Also scholars in 1870 were in some ways more reliable to today as most came from wealthy backgrounds and were self funded, less room for corruption from those providing the finance. KJV is knocked but it does have an exceptional pedigree over 100 of the top scholars in my country and some from the US worked on it. Its language was seen as archaic and difficult even in the 1800s but that does not make it a poor translation

this assumes they have the original text to work with and not just the oldest available text

there are Lilith type legends all around the world there are similarities to a legend in Mexico, and one in Wales about Blodeuwedd. My own theory with no basis in anything but is it unreasonable to assume Satan/Lucifer has a number 1 lady>?

guessing from the thread the JST isn't what you are after lol? We don't know anything for sure its as much a matter of faith as any other part of being a Latter Day Saint. HOWEVER there are things we do know which would make a probable scenario - the Bible is a very old collection of writings, we do not even know for sure who wrote them down first, if Moses was the first then he took down an oral tradition, and we all know how Chinese whispers works by the time he takes down the story it won't be the original story - so probably errors there. The Bible itself tells us the Hebrew people went through long periods of corruption, where they were taken into captivity, we know from history that the traditions of the Hebrew people went through some interesting times with their beliefs, its not unreasonable to assume the scriptures were tweaked for human convenience during these times, with Pharisees in the New Testament wouldn't be surprised if they didn't either. The Bible has been through many translations into many languages - people talk about the original Hebrew but do we even know what that is? they were influenced for long periods by the Egyptians and the Babylonians etc If I was to start typing this into medieval English or Anglo Saxon a mere 1000 years old I doubt many people would understand it - understandings have changed some words mean something totally different. How many people complain about how difficult the KJV or Shakespeare are to understand. Without a complete understanding of context and how the society it was written we cannot expect to understand what is written. It is very reasonable to assume that lack of understanding of the time it was written, myriad of translations, changes in language, and just the usual way history works that there are mistakes, even the Book of Mormon is the most correct, rather than the most perfect book and admits to mistakes in language etc. Thats what President Monson is for.... gives us our understanding in our time

I am not a scientist but at university level have studied Archaeology, Astronomy, Geology, Particle Physics, Chemistry and some Biology - due to an illness I have forgotten much of it but still have my impressions I formed from that time. I love DNA, where did you get your picture from? I've been wanting a painting for my wall. For me Faith and Science frequently inform each other, the more I study science the more I realise we have very few definitive answers, and I appreciate the iron rod and the definitive answers faith can give me. I appreciate being able to ask Heavenly Father - How did you do that? and receiving answers that say actually thats almost right but not quite I think its fine for there to be contradiction both with science and religion and within our religion and peoples understanding itself. We are mortal, the universe is not, its like trying to watch Avatar without the 3D specs... I know when I did the physics side of my degree courses, the professors first thing was to tell those that had studied it at school to be prepared for it to contradict, when I did my history degree I know many 'facts' even dates I had been taught at high school were wrong or theories - we were taught at high school what our stage in learning was able to understand, and its fine for that understanding to change later. Its not the facts or anything have changed but what we are able to comprehend has

For us it has depended on the Relief Society President some have us wear skirts to everything, some have more casual clothes.

Also sex does sometimes just go in peaks and troughs there have been times when more than once a night every night would be great and other times when once a month is a struggle. Same goes for my husband