puf_the_majic_dragon

THIS https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1971/04/the-lords-people-receive-revelation?lang=eng I think instead of searching around for other people's revelations on this or any subject, we should be searching for our own. Now that I've got that off my chest - yes, stuff like this is utterly fascinating I like the one from Heber C Hale on the Spirit World: http://emp.byui.edu/ANDERSONKC/halesp.pdf

I think we're getting wrapped around the axle over semantics and broken metaphors. Well, I like the skiing one, so let's use that. Skiing down a hill is not the same as walking up the hill. But it's still the same hill. Probably the exact same run. Don't confuse the path with which direction you're moving. The straight and narrow way to the Savior is also the straight and narrow way away from Him - depending on which direction you choose to walk. Nobody wakes up one morning going "Oh crap! Today I'm addicted to pornography!" It happens one step at a time: Yesterday I was looking at pictures, today I'm watching videos. Reverse the direction - tomorrow, exercise some self control and don't watch any videos. Nobody wakes up one morning going "Oh noes! I smoke a pack of cigarettes a day!" It happens one step at a time. Yesterday I smoked 4 cigarettes, today I smoked 6. Reverse the direction - tomorrow, exercise some self control and only smoke 4. I'm not saying that you have to go back up the same path. I'm saying that you can. A dozen different ski runs converge at the bottom of the hill, and you can get back to the top of the hill using any one of them - including the one that brought you down. And only my closest friends call me p-diddy

Hmmm I guess that could be what I'm saying. I wouldn't say it's easy, by any means. The path into addiction is generally downhill, but the path back out is pretty much always uphill. But an example might be a pack-a-day smoker. Nobody starts out smoking a pack a day; they start out smoking one with their friends or family and it escalates gradually as the addiction becomes stronger and the high from each "hit" becomes weaker. So the path to becoming a pack-a-day smoker is also the path to quitting smoking - instead of smoking one more today than they did yesterday, smoke one less. Perhaps it is an over-simplification, but I think that was my point. You've obviously put more thought into my statement than I did.

You're right. But the funny thing about a path is that you can move along it in two directions. For a person already addicted to pornography and struggling to form real relationships, they can take the same path back to the light that you followed into darkness. The difference is where you start and which direction you're going. I'm an intellectual and a skeptic and a scientist. So for me it comes naturally to question research that leads to such broad claims as made by this article and echoed by the comments on this thread. In case you've forgotten, the primary claim is that "Boys can't become men because of video games and porn." A secondary claim is that "becoming a man" involves "sex, sports and social interaction in the real world". (The lack of an Oxford comma in that quote is killing me >.<) Now let's never mind the moral implications of assuming that a boy must have sex to be a man. And the blatant sexism that all men must be interested in sports. These can wait, for now. These are not a "specific concentration on the heavy-user who demonstrates impaired concentration abilities". They are broad generalizations that are patently false. Now perhaps Zimbardo's research papers are more specific and more targeted to a specific over-use demographic, but the article does not read that way and none of the quotes from his book give any compelling reason to believe that's what Zimbardo is saying. In fact, quite the opposite, the quotes from his book and from other scientists indicate a very broad analysis. Example? "It seems likely that for a significant portion of the population of adolescent boys video gaming and online pornography can contribute to social isolation," said Weigle. And the best caveat the article gives is this:Weigle of AACAP also told CP that the connection was not absolute, as teenage boys could have a "limited exposure" to video games and pornography and still not suffer from social isolation. This gives the impression that all video games and all porn are psychologically destructive to all adolescent boys, and the only treatment is to "limit exposure" (as if video games were radioactive >.< riiiight). I'm a gamer. I know a LOT of other gamers. In fact, everyone I know is a gamer. Only one of my friends is "socially isolated". The guy is always playing video games - on his phone, on his computer. He might say 100 words in a day. Oh, and he's autistic - the video games and the social isolation are symptoms of his autism. Also, he holds a full time job (in tech support of all things! Great therapy for his autism, actually) and is happily married to my best friend. So I'm sorry if it bothers you that I'm not buying into this fad. It really bothers me that you and so many others are buying into it.

Forgive me for not reading the whole thread before posting. Read here: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/search?lang=eng&query=cut+short+in+righteousness&x=-1142&y=-362 And here: "It is the privilege of every Elder to speak of the things of God; and could we all come together with one heart and one mind in perfect faith the veil might as well be rent today as next week, or any other time. …" (Joseph Smith - Teachings, p9 - Quoted in: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1971/04/the-lords-people-receive-revelation?lang=eng ) No, Christ does not know the time of His own coming because it's yet to be determined. The way I understand these revelations is that the timing of the Lord's return is up to us. Righteousness will hasten it, wickedness will delay it.

Amos 9:7 The Ethiopians, the Philistines, and the Syrians had their own prophets and their own direct and immediate guidance from the very same God that lead the Israelites out of Egypt. So short answer - YES. And LDS prophets from Joseph Smith to Thomas Monson have said as much. God gives to each person - and to each people - the guidance and direction they need and are ready for at that time. He gave to Buddha the path to enlightenment through selflessness. He gave to Muhammed the path to peace through unity. He gave to Joseph Smith the path to exaltation through communion with God. What did He give to Baha'u'llah? The trouble is that while Latter-day Saints do have the most truth, we have this cultural bias to believe that we have the only truth, so many of the members ignore any truth that doesn't come from an LDS lesson manual (and even a lot which does). But even having the most truth, we still do not have all truth. As a Buddhist, I learned a great deal of truth that you would never hear in an LDS Sunday School. And just to echo what askandanswer said - the Pope can receive revelation for the Catholic church. Now what other religions lack, and what makes the LDS church unique in its revelation, is authentic priesthood authority. That is what opens the door to more revelation than has ever been given to man before, and that is why I confidently say that the LDS church has the most truth.

Many religions see Eden as some sort of idealistic paradise lost and to which they long to return. As Latter-day Saints, we understand it quite differently. Specifically, we know that we need opposition in order to progress (2 Nephi 2) and there was no opposition in Eden prior to the fall. So while it may seem like a paradise by comparison to our current fallen state, it would have been an unending prison of stagnation compared with the Glory which God prepared for us before the creation even began - but with the fall, and by necessity also the Atonement, we have the opportunity to grow and gain far more than Eden could ever have been. "For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;"

I can't speak for anyone else, but I for one have no issue with Dr Zimbardo's research per se - because I haven't seen any of it. I do take issue with the article you posted, which is a poorly written, biased piece of bantha fodder. Now, since this article is the only exposure I've had to Dr Zimbardo, my opinion of him and his research is about on par with my opinion of this article - but, as I said, I haven't actually seen any of his research, so I'm open minded. If you shared an actual research article from a respectable peer-reviewed journal, I could form a better opinion of the research. If you want a list of flaws in (the way) the research (is presented)..... 1. It assumes causation based on correlation. There's no indication that any attempt was made to rule out the poor social skills as a cause of the "excessive" interest in these media rather than an effect of it. 2. It assumes that "sex, sports, and social interaction" are the pinnacles of human achievement. 3. It assumes that a lack of interest in these things is novel. 4. It assumes that a lack of interest in these things is bad. 5. There is no indication at all of any effort to exercise proper controls and rule out important variables, such as mental illness and learning disability. 6. Any indication and research pointing to the potential benefits of these media is completely ignored. Frankly, the article fails. It has no citations to any of Zimbardo's research and reads more like pitch for his book than as a scholarly summary of modern research. It's an example of a biased writer catering to a biased audience, telling them what they want to hear. There is also a wealth of research that video games develop skills in many other areas - such as spatial reasoning, strategic critical thinking, analysis, perception, hand-eye coordination.... the list goes on - but I don't see any of that research on the website hosting this article. And yes, there is absolutely a generation gap in the interpretation of this kind of research, and especially in the reading of this article. You might consider that the exact same kinds of things were said about television - kids were spending way too much time glued to the tube in the 60s and not developing an interest in "sex, sports, or social interaction"; and these are the same kids who grew up and had kids of their own and are now commenting on this thread arguing that video games and porn are ruining the next generation. I imagine a similar kind of "town hall" was probably called in Europe 20,000 years ago over "that kid in the next village selling those clay Venus figurines". Finally, I couldn't care less what any churches say about violent video games and movies or porn. It is not the content alone, but also how it is used. First Blood is a violent and gory R-rated movie. That describes the content, but it's not the whole story. If that movie is used to mindlessly entertain people with action and blood, I'd agree that it's a bad movie. But the same movie can be used to teach people about the horrors of war, the insanity of PTSD, and the dangers of untreated mental illness - nevermind the history of the Vietnam war and the way its veterans were treated when they came home. When John Rambo breaks down at the end bawling like a baby over his friends he lost in that war.... It's a beautiful allegory of man's inhumanity to man and how spiritually destructive it is - and when used as such, to teach and instruct, it's one of the best movies ever made. Just because it's violent doesn't make it bad. Could the same apply to porn? There are people out there striving to do exactly that - to combat the mindless entertainment of pornography by using it to engage its viewers in education about relationships and human-to-human interaction.

THANK YOU!!!!! Everyone is so quick to judge, so quick to point out what is wrong with the world. This article is pure trash, and everyone here is so eager to agree with it. People so eager to condemn something they have little or no experience or even knowledge of, simply because some bloke with a title says so. The fact is that video games are no different from movies, television, books, theater, or any other story telling medium - except that video games are perhaps more effective because of their inherently interactive nature. And as with all entertainment, it is not the form that matters, it is the content and how that content is used. Especially how it is used. This applies to pornography, too. If you made pornography that was about love and romance instead of sex, you'd be describing every chick flick ever made - and don't get me started on how those have ruined women's expectations of relationships! Different content, but still used the wrong way. And while it's obvious that modern media is definitely changing how the upcoming generations think and and act, there's no real evidence that such a change is bad - it's just different. And different CAN be good.

Thanks, Pam :) It has been a while. I'm pretty sure before my mission. I've gotta update that in my profile, too.....

Since this started as a trip into Book of Mormon linguistics and etymology.... I think this is a resource that everyone on this thread should be aware of: The Book of Mormon Onomasticon. It is a wiki of sorts dedicated to professional linguistic analysis of the non-English terms used in the Book of Mormon, organized as a dictionary or index. Yes, the nerd in you should be brimming with excitement :)

The Traveler had a carriage he drove where 'ere he went. He traveled day and night-time too. He searched for time unspent. Drive on. Don't slow. It will improve, you know. He searched alone, all by himself. He searched in hopes he'd find that simple, peaceful love he knew. The life he'd left behind. Drive on. Don't slow. It can't be long, you know. He drove his horse to pull him on, until he found his heart. And then he found a woman fair with whom he'd loath to part. Drive on. Don't slow. She'll break your heart, you know. He slowed his horse, to gaze a while. He'd hoped he'd found the one, the woman for whom he'd searched so far, with whom his search was done. Drive on. Don't slow. The pain will hurt, you know. He stopped his search and stayed a while. 'Twas heaven in her arms. He lifted up his hopes and dreams succumbing to her charms. Stay close. Don't go. My love is strong, you know. She changed her mind and broke his heart. She thought it couldn't last. He cried for days and nights on end. He longed to have the past. Go on. Don't Stay. You must move on, you know. He stayed and cried, his soul was wrent. He loved her oh, so deep. He couldn't change his heart's desire this love he had to keep. Shut up. Don't speak. You'll hurt her more you know. And now he sits, alone again waiting by his horse. He sits in hopes and prayers to God that she will change her course. Get up. Don't sit. You make it worse, you know. The Traveler had a carriage that sat unused and worn. He used to travel day and night in search of love untorn. Drive on. Don't slow. It will improve, you know.

Thank you so much for missing the point - AGAIN. But a more approprate analogy you might have used would have been "plural marriage (aka the new and everlasting covenant - the label is arbitrary)". The New and Everlasting Covenant is the full covenant of the Gospel and includes all laws and ordinances starting with faith, repentance, baptism, and the Holy Ghost and continuing on through the Endoment (which includes the sealing ordinance). However, the same phrase is also regularly understood in the church to refer to the covenant and law of marriage, of which plural marriage is a part. The Law of Consecration is all-encompassing (which, in its fulness, we are NOT under covenant to live at this time), and the "United Order" is a part of that law. More specifically, the United Order is a set of circumstances, guidelines, and standards by which the Law of Consecration was carried out. Now, it'd be nice if somebody were to comment on what my real point was, and not poke at some tangental detail.

I think you're all missing the point. I'll take some responsibility there for making a statement that I knew would be ambiguous, misunderstood, and controversial. My argument is not that Mormons are essentially communists with a faith structure centered around common ownership and common responsibility. Though that is a valid argument. My argument is not that capitalism in all its various modes, methods, and forms, is completely and totally dependent upon selfishness and is the antithesis of what Zion represents. Though that too is a valid argument. My argument is that we, as holders of the truth, should spend less time discussing all the ways in which the world has done things wrong, and focus on all the ways the Lord has taught us to do things right. MarginOfError is right, the United Order (aka Law of Consecration - the label in this case is arbitrary) was administered on a local level. Allow me to take that one step further - Zion must be built (or poverty ended, if you like) on the most "local" level possible: in our homes and in our home/visiting teaching routes, and in our wards. As much as I would love (and I would love) to intelligently discuss the thoughts I mentioned above and how they can apply on a global scale, I think it would be a better use of our time to discuss ways that we can build Zion, as we've been commanded to do, and develop unity on these "local" levels, as we've been commanded to do. I think that discussion would be far more productive, and would be far more effective at ending poverty.

Amusing Ourselves to Death by Stuart McMillen - cartoon Recombinant Records

Ooooh you going to show us how to worShip? yeah that reference probably went over EVERYONE's head.... In my own experience, I've found it helpful to use a more... mortal? use of the term "worship". Maybe it's cause I'm such a hopeless romantic... You find the love-smitten poet who adores a woman and he says that he worships her - what is he saying? That she occupies his thoughts constantly. That his only desire is for what pleases, helps, or uplifts her. That he has lost himself in her. That he would do anything for her. Apply this to God. Does He occupy your thoughts constantly? Is your only desire for what pleases, helps, and uplifts Him and His work? Would you do anything for Him and have you lost yourself in Him? I don't think particular rituals or actions have anything to do with worship, it's ALL a matter of the heart. With an eye single to the glory of God.

Maybe slightly off topic, but the title is "ending poverty" so I think this applies. Doctrine and Covenants 104 16 "But it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low." Mormons were the first communists... While we're all crying havoc and running around scared of all these machinations we imagine behind the scenes of our government and social leaders "ending poverty, the liberal way" - we SHOULD be talking about ending poverty the Mormon way.

Dig out your PoGP and read Abraham 3. Once you've done that, Kolob == Christ. Now go back and read it again.

The really funny thing is - after what I've contributed to this thread... I only spend about an hour on facebook PER MONTH.

I love it!

Sure, and then Oberth has to come along and appoint an official organization to represent him and his vision, since every other organization has drifted somewhat from that original incarnation. Then again, I had always been taught that Goddard was the father of modern spaceflight. But I suppose that depends on who's teaching? So Vort... when did you change your pic? I saw that one next to your name and went nuts for a second thinking "I was sure Vort was a dude...."

Not sure. I got a cousin (in law) with acute schizophrenia who went on a mission. Lasted about 6 months, though, before he had to come home and get back on medication. I'd think severe down syndrome might be one thing - there's a guy in my ward with down syndrome. He holds the priesthood and I really admire how diligent he is in serving within that calling, but I don't think he'd be able to serve a full time mission. Autism may be another one, depending on its severity and doctor's recommendations. I think that's really what it boils down to - what do the doctors, and your bishop, say? :edit: Justin, the down syndrome kid, I'm sure would be allowed to serve a service mission if he had a desire to do so. I can't imagine that they wouldn't be able to find a place for him to serve in that capacity.

I had an idea for a book (or a movie) where people's everyday lives take place entirely on the internet. That's where you work, where you hang out with your friends, where you get married. If you want to have kids you just buy a kit and do it through the mail. Or, with some advances in genetics, you just go through a catalogue online with your "spouse" (in chat, of course) and pick the features you want in your kid (oh I like that nose, but he's gotta have that mouth and those eyes) and then the company (for a fee) splices the genes and makes your baby. They could even raise it for you over a webcam so all you have to do is pay for diapers and watch it's first laugh on instant replay. I'm thinking "GATTACA meets the World Wide Web" on steroids. The really sad thing is - I'm sure somebody's thought of these ideas as legitimate business ventures. But again, my EQ pres ENCOURAGES us to use facebook for home teaching when other options aren't available. One of my home teachees works for Lockheed and is always gone - from Virginia to Africa - so I don't have much else in ways to reach him.

Like a year or so ago I got into a big spat in the LDS.net chat room regarding employers looking up myspace and facebook pages. Apparently, looking you up on myspace or facebook is part of the interview process now. I threw a HUGE fit about how wrong that is - and it is wrong - but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And people have lost jobs or lost opportunities for having pictures of last weekend's shindig on their facebook. Facebook and myspace are just a couple of examples of ways that we are fooled into living a fake life. Heard it in a CES fireside a while back that internet relationships slowly drive us to undervalue the importance of our bodies and real world relationships - and that's Satan's doing 110%. ____ On the flip side, my YSA ward uses facebook for all sorts of announcements and activities planning and fellowshipping - even home teaching (when in person visits are not possible - like one of my guys who's out of town the whole month). There are a lot of good uses for these programs as well. Just keep your guard up :)

Apply and see what happens, like Misshalfway says. They might let you serve a full time mission. If they don't, you can serve a stake mission - which is pretty much identical to a full time mission in most respects, except you don't leave home. You can also serve a service mission, such as working at the Bishop's Storehouse or employment center in your area - which counts as a full time calling. In both cases you get a name tag and a lot of the blessings of a full time mission. There are also other options available, depending on your situation and where you live. Don't know if you ever saw God's Army (and I know, I know, a lot of that movie was doctrinally junk) but there was a character in there who was a full time missionary with brain cancer. While the movie is fictional, there are real life instances where people with disabilities and illnesses do get special dispensations to serve full time missions. So if you ask me, it's worth a shot. BTW - this seems as good a place to mention it as any - I just turned in my papers If I have any disability, it's that I turn 26 (which is the cut-off age) in less than a month.