Need A Little Help

[Jenda]

Originally posted by hwood247@Mar 20 2005, 08:56 AM

I feel I must reply to this post and say what my very first thought swere. First I'll tell you that as a mormon mother of a gay son I am struggling with many issues myself ( and at the moment I'm not asking for any advice as I'm muddled enough!!) but reading your post CGuy made me feel incredibly sad not just for you but for your wife also. The simplest answer I can give you is this, stop reading for a minute, stop battling everything out in you heart and head, sit and think very quietly about what you love, what feels RIGHT and then get down on your knees and with humility ask for the answer, how many times are we told that all we need to do is ask? So, put it to the test...ask. Simple as that, no-one here can give you the answers, your wife can't help you, anti mormons WON'T help you and you're not helping yourself by searching for answers on the internet and in books, ask the Lord, if it's true, He'll tell you.

Have I taken my own advice and prayed for the answers I am looking for? Nope, not sure I am strong enough to act on any answers I might get. Sometimes, it might be that we are actually just tired of the hard work it takes to be LDS how simple life would seem if we KNEW it wasn't true and could just go through this life without the work. Your life, however won't be simple because you have a wife who does know what is true for her....so yes, if you truly want out then you will have to face a whole pile of trouble and heartache but what else are we told? To thine own self be true, find the answer from the only source who knows for sure and find the peace of mind you are seeking.

Very good post, hwood.

[Guest JRodan]

There were a series of things that happend over the last couple of days that these members should be aware of.

First of all, yes, Justin is Bat. I put him on as a moderator to help out when I wasn't online. Why, you say put it as Justin? If any of you remember the uproar at ldstalk when Heather made him moderator you would understand. The point is that this is MY board made for the MEMBERS who post here.

Seems as though there were a couple other members that were upset and decided to hack in to this board and the board at ldstalk. There have been additional security features set up here by my ISP to ensure this won't happen again. I have contacted the owner of ldstalk to add those features there as well.

I know that some of you got private messages not to post, that the moderators were reading your messages, etc. That simply is not true. The ones that are reading THEIR messages and THEIR messages only is MY ISP provider that I PAY for this site.

I can only hope that all of you know that breaking into and/or entering a forum under another members password without their permission is just like breaking into a home. It is a felony. It is very serious. It is a federal offense.

I put up this board so that we would have a place to go to post, discuss and have some fun.

Now to address the Justin/Bat/Snow issue.

First off, the war between Bat and Snow started on ldstalk. There were a lot of posts deleted there and when Snow came to this board "justin" started deleting. He told me, after the fact, what he had done. None of it was right nor called for. Bat knows this. Snow knows this. That issue has been dealt with and taken care of.

The issue at hand now is the fact that a member obtained a password and decided to sabatoge out of pure spite.

Think what you all want. Comment and be sure to ask any questions. They WILL be answered honestly. I really am sorry that some of you feel betrayed.

ALso, I have added SGary as admin - not to edit/delete, but to check the functions of the board and to add new features. He doesn't care one way or another how or what you post.

Marsha

Oh my, Mr Sulu.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by JRodan@Apr 6 2005, 06:36 AM

There were a series of things that happend over the last couple of days that these members should be aware of.

First of all, yes, Justin is Bat. I put him on as a moderator to help out when I wasn't online. Why, you say put it as Justin? If any of you remember the uproar at ldstalk when Heather made him moderator you would understand. The point is that this is MY board made for the MEMBERS who post here.

Seems as though there were a couple other members that were upset and decided to hack in to this board and the board at ldstalk. There have been additional security features set up here by my ISP to ensure this won't happen again. I have contacted the owner of ldstalk to add those features there as well.

I know that some of you got private messages not to post, that the moderators were reading your messages, etc. That simply is not true. The ones that are reading THEIR messages and THEIR messages only is MY ISP provider that I PAY for this site.

I can only hope that all of you know that breaking into and/or entering a forum under another members password without their permission is just like breaking into a home. It is a felony. It is very serious. It is a federal offense.

I put up this board so that we would have a place to go to post, discuss and have some fun.

Now to address the Justin/Bat/Snow issue.

First off, the war between Bat and Snow started on ldstalk. There were a lot of posts deleted there and when Snow came to this board "justin" started deleting. He told me, after the fact, what he had done. None of it was right nor called for. Bat knows this. Snow knows this. That issue has been dealt with and taken care of.

The issue at hand now is the fact that a member obtained a password and decided to sabatoge out of pure spite.

Think what you all want. Comment and be sure to ask any questions. They WILL be answered honestly. I really am sorry that some of you feel betrayed.

ALso, I have added SGary as admin - not to edit/delete, but to check the functions of the board and to add new features. He doesn't care one way or another how or what you post.

Marsha

Oh my, Mr Sulu.

A lot of issues ~ someone needs time out~

[Dale]

Hi,

Chicago guy I am not sure I can link to a new Message discussing Book of Abraham issues. The message board was started by a critic of the Book of Abraham. But myself & Paul Osbourne have been presenting our reasons why we believe in the Book of abraham. Paul Osbourne has a good Book of Abraham website. FAIR's links to Kerry Shirts website is also good. My e-mail is [email protected] I also hang out on the http://www.fairlds.org message board under the name of Dale. The Foundation For Apologetic Information & Research is actively involved in answering published criticisms of the LDS faith. LDS scholars like Dan Peterson have been hanging out once in awhile. I believe in the Book of Mormon inspite of criticisms I have seen. The more criticisms I read the more I become excited about my beliefs. I discovered many answers to the issues that used to cause me painful doubts & questions.

Right now I am reading a book entitled Mormon Claim's Answered by Marvin Cowan. When I encountered the book in my teens it devestated my beliefs. I thought he had all the questions but I had no good answers. Now after several years pondering the issues the book looks very weak to me. The book's typical of the objections I find in my other christian books that criticize Mormonism. A lot of research has been done by FAIR answering the critics. There are answers if you know where to look.

Sincerely,

Dale

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Dale@Apr 11 2005, 08:50 PM

Hi,

Chicago guy I am not sure I can link to a new Message discussing Book of Abraham issues. The message board was started by a critic  of the Book of Abraham. But myself & Paul Osbourne have been presenting our reasons why we believe in the Book of abraham. Paul Osbourne has a good Book of Abraham website. FAIR's links to Kerry Shirts website is also good. My e-mail is [email protected] I also hang out on the http://www.fairlds.org message board under the name of Dale. The Foundation For Apologetic Information & Research is actively involved in answering published criticisms of the LDS faith. LDS scholars like Dan Peterson have been hanging out once in awhile. I believe in the Book of Mormon inspite of criticisms I have seen. The more criticisms I read the more I become excited about my beliefs. I discovered many answers to the issues that used to cause me painful doubts & questions.

Right now I am reading a book entitled Mormon Claim's Answered by Marvin Cowan. When I encountered the book in my teens it devestated my beliefs. I thought he had all the questions but I had no good answers. Now after several years pondering the issues the book looks very weak to me. The book's typical of the objections I find in my other christian books that criticize Mormonism. A lot of research has been done by FAIR answering the critics. There are answers if you know where to look.

Sincerely,

Dale

Dale,

You sound like a very wise man! Too many run away when they get the tuff questions ~ and they turn in to hard core anti's ~

They don't realized how uneducated they actually sound. I have been studying these issues indepth for decades and the answers don't come easy because the anti's have twisted and turned a lot of the stuff they put out, to accomadate their own depravity in spirituality.

Misery loves company and I have yet to find a truly happy anti!

They spend most of their time trying to destroy other's testimonies. What kind of life is that?

There was just an incident on the news yesterday about a women who left the church and she was spending all of her time trying to dig up crap on the church. She had found that several Jewish holocaust survivors had had their temple work done after the church set up a policy for it not to be done due to complaints from the Jewish community.

Well several Jewish people came over to climb down the necks of the church leadership because of this woman....

Guess what though? This woman's work was for not, because the Lord turned it around and the Jewish people have even a better opinion of our church than they did before ~ One on the demons side cannot thwart the work of the Lord....

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 12 2005, 10:34 AM

...and they turn in to hard core anti's ~

They don't realized how uneducated they actually sound. I have been studying these issues indepth for decades and the answers don't come easy because the anti's have twisted and turned a lot of the stuff they put out, to accomadate their own depravity in spirituality.

I consider my husband an anti-mormon and so does he but I must say he is quite an intelligent man and very educated. Depravity in spirituality? I don't think so; I would say it is his right to practice his free agency - which the LDS church preaches about.

Misery loves company and I have yet to find a truly happy anti!

In my husband's case he is married to a very light-hearted wonderful woman and is truly happy. How could he not be: he has two lovely kids, two of the sweetest cats you could ever meet (if any two cats could convert curvette into being a cat lover they could, really! ) And in addition to all this, we also get to spend time with our crazy 19 year old neice who keeps us thinking and laughing.

They spend most of their time trying to destroy other's testimonies. What kind of life is that?

Actually, my husband's obsession is with paintball but occasionally he likes to stir the pot - just ask said niece.

Guess what though? This woman's work was for not, because the Lord turned it around and the Jewish people have even a better opinion of our church than they did before ~ One on the demons side cannot thwart the work of the Lord....

From a recent article "a member of the church's high-ranking Presidency of the Seventy" says that:

<span style='color:blue'>"We've always been able to talk candidly," Christofferson said. "The trust that's been there has been there since the beginning."

Elcott said the two faiths share a history of persecution for their beliefs. "That was incredibly important to our conversations. We understand each other in a fundamental way."

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2651844

I think it behooves the LDS church to respect the Jewish community's view on these proxy baptisms in regards to their own members. It appears that the LDS church agrees. Why preach "free agency" if you're not willing to practice it? (just so you know Amillia, this is a rhetorical question)

M.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Maureen+Apr 12 2005, 12:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ Apr 12 2005, 12:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 12 2005, 10:34 AM

...and they turn in to hard core anti's ~

They don't realized how uneducated they actually sound. I have been studying these issues indepth for decades and the answers don't come easy because the anti's have twisted and turned a lot of the stuff they put out, to accomadate their own depravity in spirituality.

I consider my husband an anti-mormon and so does he but I must say he is quite an intelligent man and very educated. Depravity in spirituality? I don't think so; I would say it is his right to practice his free agency - which the LDS church preaches about.

Misery loves company and I have yet to find a truly happy anti!

In my husband's case he is married to a very light-hearted wonderful woman and is truly happy. How could he not be: he has two lovely kids, two of the sweetest cats you could ever meet (if any two cats could convert curvette into being a cat lover they could, really! ) And in addition to all this, we also get to spend time with our crazy 19 year old neice who keeps us thinking and laughing.

They spend most of their time trying to destroy other's testimonies. What kind of life is that?

Actually, my husband's obsession is with paintball but occasionally he likes to stir the pot - just ask said niece.

Guess what though? This woman's work was for not, because the Lord turned it around and the Jewish people have even a better opinion of our church than they did before ~ One on the demons side cannot thwart the work of the Lord....

From a recent article "a member of the church's high-ranking Presidency of the Seventy" says that:

<span style='color:blue'>"We've always been able to talk candidly," Christofferson said. "The trust that's been there has been there since the beginning."

Elcott said the two faiths share a history of persecution for their beliefs. "That was incredibly important to our conversations. We understand each other in a fundamental way."

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2651844

I think it behooves the LDS church to respect the Jewish community's view on these proxy baptisms in regards to their own members. It appears that the LDS church agrees. Why preach "free agency" if you're not willing to practice it? (just so you know Amillia, this is a rhetorical question)

M.

To answer all of the things you have brought up ~

You husband is your husband and you (the very light-hearted wonderful woman) ~ so of course you are prejudice.

Yes they always have, but they were really rankled when this woman told them our church had crossed them.

The fact is, the church always has respected the Jewish faith, and they didn't think they were causing any problems for the Jews in baptising their dead, as they figure if they didn't believe in Baptism for the dead, it was of non-consequence.

But apparently they do believe it has some signigicance ~ or they wouldn't say anything. :)

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Amillia@Apr 12 2005, 12:33 PM

...Yes they always have, but they were really rankled when this woman told them our church had crossed them....

Amillia - do you have a name for this so-called woman that rankled the Jewish community and any documentation of this rankling?

But apparently they do believe it has some signigicance ~ or they wouldn't say anything. :)

This is pure speculation on your part; to assume the Jewish community view these proxy baptisms as significant. For all you know, they could view these activities as just plain rude.

M.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

Maureen,

Why preach "free agency" if you're not willing to practice it?

What does that mean in this context? Are you saying that free agency requires Mormons to allow a particular class of Jews to tell them what they may or may not do with the names of another group of Jews, who are dead? Whenever something is forbidden, it seems to me that the sphere of free agency is being restricted, not expanded.

I suspect that of whatever Jewish names have been submitted for temple proxy work since the Church's 1995 agreement to restrict temple work for deceased Jews were submitted by accident. How many gray-haired Draper retirees have enough experience with Jewish names to recognize them on sight? Not every Jew is named Goldstein or Levin; that guy Michel who's involved in the latest fuss doesn't have a particularly "Jewish-sounding" name himself. He seems to have a pretty substantial chip on his shoulder.

[Maureen]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Apr 12 2005, 01:42 PM

Maureen,

Why preach "free agency" if you're not willing to practice it?

What does that mean in this context? Are you saying that free agency requires Mormons to allow a particular class of Jews to tell them what they may or may not do with the names of another group of Jews, who are dead? Whenever something is forbidden, it seems to me that the sphere of free agency is being restricted, not expanded.

The context I am speaking of in regards to "free agency" is allowing everyone the freedom to view anything (doctrine or practice) in the way they choose to view it. For example:

The LDS church views proxy baptism as a blessing, while the Jewish community view LDS proxy baptism for Jewish members as an insult to their belief system. The Jewish community may not understand completely how the proxy baptism works in terms of doctrine (baptism must be accepted by deceased) - but whether they understand or not is beside the point. If they (Jewish community) find offense with the practice towards their own people then the LDS church should appreciate their right to be offended and do whatever they can to repair the damage - which it appears they have done (again).

M.

[Guest TheProudDuck]

OK. You see, though, I don't believe people have a right not to be offended. (I think that's what you meant to say, not "right to be offended.") Some Jews are offended by proxy baptisms. Some Jews are probably offended by the existence of Christianity in general.

Neither do I necessarily think that dead Jews are the "own people" of living Jews. There is a limit to one person's right to make demands on another person's behalf. In law, that authority only comes about through the creation of an agency relationship. And at least in the vast majority of cases involving people objecting to the Church's proxy work for the dead, the deceased parties never named the current critics as their agents.

Here, we have a case in which we need to balance one group's interest in practicing its religion, according to its conscience, and another group's interest in not being offended. I think the Church has put forth a good-faith effort to accommodate the other side. Unfortunately, the other side doesn't seem to be operating in the same spirit of compromise, but instead is characterizing what is almost certain to be innocent mistakes as something sinister. If that's the way they're going to play, they can sod off.

[Jason]

Neither do I necessarily think that dead Jews are the "own people" of living Jews. There is a limit to one person's right to make demands on another person's behalf. In law, that authority only comes about through the creation of an agency relationship. And at least in the vast majority of cases involving people objecting to the Church's proxy work for the dead, the deceased parties never named the current critics as their agents.

If we're talking about holocaust victims, you can make an argument.

But what about Jews who lived long before Mormonism existed? How could they say: "Don't proxy baptise me into your little cult" when it didn't exist in the first place?

Secondly, do you really believe that Mormons will honor agreements made today with those of a hundred years from now or more? Let's say that in a hundred years from now, a large segment of Jews convert to Mormonism. Let's add to this that they want to proxy baptise those who today are staunchly against Mormon proxy baptisms. Will the Mormons of future generations honor the right of those of us today who specifically state that we want no such ordinances performed for us?

Im personally offended by Proxy baptism, and In my resignation letter to the LDS Church, I specifically stated that they were not allowed to perform proxy baptism or any other LDS temple work for me as long as Mormonism exists. Will they honor that request?

[pushka]

I agree with Maureen and Ex Mormon Jason...

How would the LDS people like it if another religion came along and baptised their dead relatives...or themselves...into their religion by proxy because the religion believed it was the 'one true' church of Christ? Presumably when these Jewish, or non-jewish people died they had not accepted the LDS religion, therefore they had no desire to be baptised into it? If you feel that the Jewish people think there must be 'something to' this baptism by proxy by objecting to it, how would you feel if the tables were turned and you were being baptised by proxy into another religion after your death?

[Maureen]

Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Apr 12 2005, 02:55 PM

OK.  You see, though, I don't believe people have a right not to be offended.  (I think that's what you meant to say, not "right to be offended.")......

No, I meant that people in general have the right to take offense at things that offend them - even if the one offending didn't mean to offend.

Neither do I necessarily think that dead Jews are the "own people" of living Jews.  There is a limit to one person's right to make demands on another person's behalf.

I agree.

Here, we have a case in which we need to balance one group's interest in practicing its religion, according to its conscience, and another group's interest in not being offended.  I think the Church has put forth a good-faith effort to accommodate the other side.  Unfortunately, the other side doesn't seem to be operating in the same spirit of compromise, but instead is characterizing what is almost certain to be innocent mistakes as something sinister....

I agree in part, although I don't really sense the Jewish community sees this problem as sinister, Radkey said:

<span style='color:blue'>"The bottom line is the [1995] agreement has not been kept," she said. "I'm skeptical of the problem being handled [with a new committee] because I've seen so much data. I hope the decision is not just a political one."

Some may see the problem with a suspicious eye, but sinister makes it sound like the Jewish community is accusing the LDS of deliberately being evil - I don't get that impression.

M.

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

I didn't read the whole thread so I apologize if this was already said.

My guess is most Jews do not care, and probably don't even know about this issue...and probably know next to nothing about the LDS, just like the rest of the world knows next to nothing about the LDS.

Of the small minority of Jews who are aware of the issue, there are probably a small minority of Jews who are getting angry about baptisms for the dead. The rest of this minority probably find it funny, and think the LDS are just a harmless wacky insignificant religion.

[john doe]

Originally posted by pushka@Apr 12 2005, 03:29 PM

I agree with Maureen and Ex Mormon Jason...

How would the LDS people like it if another religion came along and baptised their dead relatives...or themselves...into their religion by proxy because the religion believed it was the 'one true' church of Christ? Presumably when these Jewish, or non-jewish people died they had not accepted the LDS religion, therefore they had no desire to be baptised into it? If you feel that the Jewish people think there must be 'something to' this baptism by proxy by objecting to it, how would you feel if the tables were turned and you were being baptised by proxy into another religion after your death?

I personally would have no problem if, after my death, some other religion, in their earnest beliefs and interests in wanting to help me gain eternal salvation in the afterlife, baptized, sealed, and endowed me with blessings from God by proxy. In fact, you can save this post and use it as my consent after I die to perform those things for me if you wish. You can send my name to any church you can find that performs these kinds of services for the dead. I don't even care if it's a Christian church or not.

The thing that everyone seems to forget here is that even if a person has those things performed for them, they are completely free to accept or reject those ordinances done on their behalf. The LDS church, by performing proxy ordinces for the dead, has no power to force any dead soul to live by its teachings or be tied in any way to the ordinances performed for them just by performing proxy work for them.

I view these things as a gift, one that they don't have to accept if they don't want it. If the LDS church turns out to be wrong, then the ordinances performed in the names of the dead are meaningless, they essentially didn't happen and hold no weight in the afterlife. If, however, the LDS church does have the authority from God to perform these things, then it should be considered a great gift to humanity, and they should be lauded for their efforts to help those who lived before.

[Setheus]

Originally posted by ChicagoGuy@Mar 2 2005, 06:59 PM

you said I was pushed into the church. hmmmm what do you call being one of the only non members in a small Utah town going to Jr. college. having at least 5 people a day approach you about the church -- having missionaries thrown at me once a week by roomates and dormates , etc, etc.

I am not saying I didn't make up my own mind to REALLY become a member later but I was pushed into being baptised at least.

Buddy, I am in the military. Navy to be exact. I go to some wild places. I love Thailand. Guess what? I am pushed to have a "cold one" or buy a piece of A__ or chase some tail every single day. Some times by the very men who are on my team and that I put my life in their hands everytime we deploy. Don't feed us this peer pressure bull. Peer pressure only works on the willing. If you want to leave the church, then go! But don't blame it on others. YOU chose to join and YOU will choose to leave. Its just that simple.

My one question to you... What commandment are you unable to obey? People go inactive or just leave because they are unable to keep the law of chastity, WofW, etc....which is it for you? What is the root of "I don't know if the church is true." bull you are trying to lay down?

[Guest ago]

I was wondering if you have the time to take a survey made with the purpose of compare the intensity of a person's faith and possibly compare it to the language used.

www.psy.utexas.edu/religion

Thank you.

[Jason]

My one question to you... What commandment are you unable to obey? People go inactive or just leave because they are unable to keep the law of chastity, WofW, etc....which is it for you? 

Only a shallow, narrow-minded person would assume such a thing.

[Amillia]

Originally posted by Maureen+Apr 12 2005, 02:14 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maureen @ Apr 12 2005, 02:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Apr 12 2005, 12:33 PM

...Yes they always have, but they were really rankled when this woman told them our church had crossed them....

Amillia - do you have a name for this so-called woman that rankled the Jewish community and any documentation of this rankling?

But apparently they do believe it has some signigicance ~ or they wouldn't say anything. :)

This is pure speculation on your part; to assume the Jewish community view these proxy baptisms as significant. For all you know, they could view these activities as just plain rude.

M.

This woman was on the news at 5 yesterday. Names I don't ever remember ~ not even my kids ~ just ask them.

And I don't think it speculation at all. If I believed in Voodoo, I would resent someone making a little doll that looked like me and sticking pins in it ~

But I don't ~ and so if they do make the doll and stick pins in it ~ I say~ have at it !!!

[Amillia]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 12 2005, 11:08 PM

My one question to you... What commandment are you unable to obey? People go inactive or just leave because they are unable to keep the law of chastity, WofW, etc....which is it for you? 

Only a shallow, narrow-minded person would assume such a thing.

I don't find it narrow-minded at all and definitely not shallow. It is a fact ~

[Jason]

I don't find it narrow-minded at all and definitely not shallow. It is a fact ~

Based on what studies done by which universities or organizations do you base your assumption that leaving Mormonism is the result of one's inability to pay 10% of income, keep one's horse in the barn, or avoid intoxicating beverages?

[Setheus]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Apr 12 2005, 10:08 PM

My one question to you... What commandment are you unable to obey? People go inactive or just leave because they are unable to keep the law of chastity, WofW, etc....which is it for you? 

Only a shallow, narrow-minded person would assume such a thing.

Perhaps. But I'm willing to bet I'm correct in my assumption.

I've read all this winded debate and I am reminded of something I was taught in training. KISS Keep It Simple Stupid.

I bet that it's as simple as what I have stated. He has a problem keeping a commandment. I know why you left Ex. Because someone very close to you didn't keep the law of chastity. It boiles down to a very simple principle every time.

Lets not nuke this people. K.I.S.S.

[yaanufs]

Originally posted by Setheus@Apr 13 2005, 02:56 AM

It boiles down to a very simple principle every time.

Lets not nuke this people. K.I.S.S.

Could it be as simple as they didn't think the church was true anymore?

Or is that a simple fact that is too simple to consider?

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Setheus@Apr 12 2005, 08:48 PM

My one question to you... What commandment are you unable to obey? People go inactive or just leave because they are unable to keep the law of chastity, WofW, etc....which is it for you? What is the root of "I don't know if the church is true." bull you are trying to lay down?

Typical response by someone who is threatened by someone else's doubts. Here's where that simple thing called "free agency" comes into effect. CG has the right to choose what he believes and why. If for whatever reason, especially doubt in LDS doctrine and history, he chooses to change his mind and make a reasonable choice by not believing anymore - who are you to say he can't make that choice. Why would you Setheus be so threatened by someone else's loss of testimony?

M.