WillowTheWhisp

If 19-21 year olds bother him how would he feel about a missionary couple? I know before I joined the church I thought an 'elder' should be an 'older' and didn't understand what a teenager could teach me. That was because I didn't realise that it isn't the 'kid' doing the teaching, it's the Holy Ghost and he's a lot older than 19. I think when we are church members too we get a different perspective on age because we know we lived before we came to earth so in the ultimate scheme of things our children could be older than we are. So, what can you expect in a Relief Society meeting? Well, I can tell you what usually happens in ours. Someone will notice that you are new and come over and say "Hi". They'll probably ask where you are from and if you are a member. Then whoever is conducting the meeting if they have already spoken to you will welcome you by name, or if they have not spoken to you will welcome 'our visitor' and may even ask you your name then. Other people will then turn round and smile at you. Then we have a few announcements and are asked not to forget to read the notices on the board. (We usually all promptly forget to read the notices on the board because we have a great lesson and our heads are full of that!) We have an opening hymn and someone is asked to offer the opening prayer (this has usually been pre-assigned but not always) If you are new it is HIGHLY unlikely that you will be the one who is asked. We have a bit of a peptalk about Visiting Teaching and a little spot of 'music time' under the direction of our music person. Then we have a lesson which this coming Sunday will be taken by a member of the RS Presidency and not from the study manual 'Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith' (the priesthood have the same lesson manual). The two middle Sundays of the month it is from that book and on those days somebody will either share their book with the newcomer or somebody will go off and find them a spare copy. Members will be expected to have read and studied the lesson themselves at home for those Sundays. You will not be expected to know something you have not had the opportunity to study but if you do wish to participate with a personal viewpoint or a question that would be welcomed. Participation in discussion by class members is encouraged. Following the lesson there will be a closing hymn and a closing prayer (again usually pre-assigned.) As this next Sunday is the first Sunday of the month you may also find a few minutes at the end of the lesson period have been left free for anyone who wishes to bear their testimony in a more intimate setting than in the chapel..

I don't know if this is relevant to what you are saying/asking but consider the word 'argument' I has come to mean an angry exchange of opinions, often with one party not listening to the other but continually insisting that they are right and the other is wrong: You did it No I didn't Yes you did No I didn't Liar! In truth an argument should be a reasoned exchange of different points of view with each listening to the other and in the end possibly one persuading the other to see things they had not previously considered which may affect their viewpoint.

Didn't people class themselves as 'of the Lamanites' pertaining to their beliefs or lack thereof? We know from the Book of Mormon itself that there were more people on the American continent than just the decendants of Lehi and Ishmael. To me the wording is simply for the sake of clarity explaining that it doesn't necessarily refer to literal decendants of Laman. After all, what about Lemuel? Was he a Lamanite?

I had never heard of the term 'restorationist' until I came across it on another forum. If I'm asked to identify my religion for official purposes it depends on how big the space is on the form provided. If it's a tiny little gap like ........... then I am more likely to put LDS than Mormon. My reasoning for that is that Mormon was a prophet and I am not he. I am however a Latter-day Saint (abbreviateable to LDS) or if the space is big enough I will write out in full 'member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints'. In casual conversation I will tell people that I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but if they then look blank I will elaborate by saying 'people often call us Mormons' and then explain why I don't. I remember in the last year or so President Hinckley saying we might as well get used to the idea that people are going to keep calling us Mormons, they've been doing it for so long they aren't going to stop now. If the person I am speaking to then says "Oh, I'm a Christian." I will add that so am I. :)

All flesh is evil? Is that Biblical? I know the Catholic church talks about 'original sin' and that we are all born in sin due to the fall of Adam and Eve. There seems to be some sort of implication that sexual intercourse in order to produce offspring is an evil act of sin but how can that be when it was God who commanded them to go forth and multiply and replenish the earth? I know Paul said all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God but I don't recall even him going so far as saying all people are evil. We all sin to some degree or other yes, because we are far from perfect but most of us know when we have done wrong because we get that pang of conscience. How could that be if we were evil? Surely if we were evil we would have no conscience. Jesus did not condemn the sinner. He condemned the sin. A person can be forgiven for that sin if they repent. If we were evil then how could we be forgiven? Where would be the purpose of repentance? Would we even feel a desire to repent if we were evil?

HoosierGuy, I feel so chuffed that you arranged and met up with the missionaries. I suppose for those of us who are members of the Church we don't always realise what a big step this must be for people and how much courage it can take sometimes to just take that first step. :)

A widow would not be considered someone able to care for the deceased's mother. A woman was not a breadwinner in that Jewish society. It was quite acceptable for a widow to be cared for by the relatives of her deceased husband, even to marry the brother or other kinsman of her deceased husband. Yes Yes Wasn't it also somewhat strange for a young Jewish man to remain single? (That's an understatement by the way.)

Can you give me a quote in context? We believe in the Jesus of the Bible. Sometimes I wonder if other people do when they seem to believe in some 3 headed god-figure which I don't recognise in the Bible.

I feel a personal sadness. He was a lovely man and I will miss his presence here in life. I've had the privilege of meeting him on more than one occasion. The first time was at the Susquecentennial celebrations here in what was then the Preston Stake. My late husband and I were taking lots of photographs in Avenham Park, where the first Baptisms in this country took place, for a sister in our Ward who was terminally ill and unable to be there. President Hinckley, then a councellor on the First Presidency came to chat with us about the photographs and asked where we were from. When we told him "Accrington" he replied "Eeeh bah gum lass. Ah remember Accrington. Ah were thur on mi mission!" in a broad Lancashire accent. He then rounded up Sister Hinckley and suggested we all go down to the river bank and we could take photos of the two of them down there. He went striding off at a march with Sister Hinckley trotting on behind telling him to slow down because she only had little legs! We got some lovely photos and then walking back he stopped to talk to some youngsters and encouraged them to plan to serve a mission, saying it was the best years of his life. Another lovely memory was when he came to dedicate the Preston England Temple near Chorley. It had been arranged that he would cement in the corner stone. We all trouped outside the building to the corner where this uncemented stone lay in place and someone passed him the cement and a trowel. He began to put cement around the stone, and drop even more on the ground. He was laughing at what a mess he was making of it and said that he suspected that as soon as he left a 'real builder' would come along and take out all his mess and do it again properly. Then he passed the trowel and cement around other leaders and said "stick some muck in that hole!" and if he was expected to work he didn't see why they shouldn't! Of course I'm happy for him that he is now reunited with his beloved Marjorie again. He so obviously missed her these last few years but we will miss him so much too.

Traela, I think you've missed my point, or perhaps I didn't explain it very well. It isn't me who doesn't understand how the new Enrichment program is supposed to work - it is those RS presidencies who are organising things for the sake of organising things rather than organising things which are needed such as in your example the bread baking. They organise a whole array of things and then are dismayed when no-one attends some of them. Elder Oaks talked in October Conference about not spreading ourselves too thin, not doing 'good things' just because they are good things but realising that sometimes it's better not to do some good things so we don't miss out on the best things. What point is there is scheduling a quilting bee if no-one in the Ward feels the need or desire to quilt?

There is nothing to stop you attending church if you still smoke though. You will be asked to give it up before being baptised and there will be help offered to you to achieve that. The main thing is not to get discouraged. I've known people who have given up and then later slipped back into their old ways again and stopped coming to church. It's easier to give up if you are amongst people who want to help and encourage you. I wish you all the best to get through the struggle.

Getting feedback and encouragement from Stake. Our Stake leaders are brill.

I think he was warning against flirting online where the anonymity may make it seem harmless. I know someone whose (ex)wife spent a great deal of time flirting online which then led to more and she eventually left her husband and went off with the man she'd formed an online relationship with. Another woman I know was flattered by the attention she received in PMs from another man on a message forum. She became insanely jealous when he spent time chatting to others. Although he was married he chatted up everyone online on that forum. The end result was misery all round with several broken marriages and others shaken to their roots. Those examples are a world away from innocent friendship and chatting and debating topics such as we are doing here.

In that case you are disagreeing with the Bible because it is the Bible which tells us that. You can't just pick and choose which bits of the Bible you want to believe.

Grammatically it is Books of Mormon and as President Hinckley used that term himself I'm sticking with it.

I was putting the final touches to my Relief Society lesson last night (based on the talk by Elder Oaks which in my mind is inextricably linked with Sister Beck's talk) when I had one of those 'lightbulb' moments. Sister Beck said "mothers who know choose motherhood" and I recall somebody saying that didn't make sense because if they were mothers they had already chosen motherhood i.e they had chosen to be mothers. But motherhood isn't about being a mother and just producing as many children as physically possible. She wasn't saying to those women who for whatever reason are not mothers that they have failed because they are seen as not having chosen to be mothers. She wasn't even saying to those who have one child or two children that they have failed because they are not having more children. What she was saying was to mothers, to those who already have children, be it one or one dozen - that the most important part of their lives should be the relationship with that child or children. Mothers who know, know that the relationship with their offspring (alongside their relationship with their eternal partner) is the only eternal thing that matters.

A 13 year old girl, friend of my daughter, has a t-shirt with the slogan. "If you think this looks good on me" in large print then underneath in smaller lettering, "think how much better it would look on your bedroom floor." Oh yes it covers all the necessary body parts but what kind of a message is that sending out? Who designs a thing like that? But more to the point what mother buys a thing like that for a 13 year old?

It's not as if killing Laban was the first option though. He had been given previous opportunities of handing over the plates but he stubbornly refused even when he was offered wealth in exchange he stole that and still kept hold of the plates. Oh dear I hate to have to disillusion you but although the Book of Mormon is shorter than the Bible it isn't 'instead of' it's 'in addition to' so in order to look fully into Mormonism you need to read both - and the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.

Yes I know that, but I was pointing out that this forum is the only one which I visit which has such a small default font in the text box and I don't want to be fiddling about with font sizes as I am usually doing several different things at once when I'm on the PC.

That is the part I'll never be able to get my head round. It is what I struggled with before I'd ever heard of the LDS church - then when I heard the LDS teaching on the subject it was light the cartoon light switch going on - Bingo! Yes of course! Yes I believe they are 3 gods (note the small 'g'). It's unfortunate that the word God is used to describe Heavenly Father. He is the One. He is the father of us all, including being the father of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Ghost. They are both our brothers. They have however progressed further than we have along the path to perfection and divinity. Both are gods. That does not mean it is not necessary to have a physical body to continue progression. Jesus has passed through mortality, just as we all do, and has attained that body for himself. The Holy Ghost has not yet done so. I personally believe he has chosen not to do so in order to be able to help us in ways that only a spirit being can. I believe he will be the last to be born on earth. I also believe that Jesus married and is eternally sealed to that wife. As far as I am aware this isn't officially taught church doctrine but I find it unimaginable that he would deprive himself of something essential. I think that answers some of your questions too AnthonyB.

It can be done if you play around a bit with the html. It's a bit messy but if you feel you really need to do it for the sake of clarity then the easiest way I have found to do it is to click the quote button in the second post which will bring that up surrounded by the quote tags. Highlight and copy all of that. Then go back into the thread and go to the original post which that poster quoted and click on 'quote' in that, which will then bring that up in your reply box. Now paste the quoted thing which you've copied after this first quote. At this stage you will have one quote followed by another. Now highlight and cut the opening tag of the second quote and paste it before the opening tag of the first post. This will then give you the quote within the quote. It sounds a lot more complicated than it actually is.

Do you mean how do you embed one quote within another quote?

We are going to go round and round in circles on this one because people who are firm in their Trintarian beliefs will not be persuaded that there are three distinct persons and those of us who are sure they are seperate beings will never be convinced they can be three in one and one in three.

Aww bless her she looks absolutely terrified of them.

We'll be doing stuff. Maybe even stuff we've never thought of yet. I suppose the person to ask the questions of will be the One who'll be in charge here at that time so maybe we'll find the answers then.