STILL FLAWED!!

[dellme]

3 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Yup, thats my reason. Im not sure what the reasons are for the other 82% of "HomeTeacher dodging familys" in my stake are. But then again they wont tell you and we will continue to ask God for inspiration when we can simply go straight to the source. God did give us brains did he not?

So why are you blaming the program, when you are part of the problem?  Why do you want to change the program instead of changing yourself?

Edited May 22, 2018 by dellme

[priesthoodpower]

.
 

Edited August 10, 2020 by priesthoodpower

[Behemoth]

21 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

(disclaimer: title is kind of a click bait)

I clicked.  Thanks for saying, I’d been making conspiracy theories about the intention of the posters. 

21 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

Christ was not assigned to minister to people. He casually went about his travels and anyone he met along the way he shared the message. 

Christ was the Son of God, And all your heart, might, mind and strength isnt “casually” engaged.

“casualness brings casualties”

1 hour ago, priesthoodpower said:

As it currently stands, I havent done my HT in about two years. That is 0% in two years.

This is what I’m curious about...

Look, we’ve tried the law of consecration once already. It didn’t work out for us. we weren’t ready for the greater law. Once we Recieve this law well, maybe we’ll make progress to that greater law. If our hearts remain hardened to our duty, we’ll filter our selves out, because the law of consecration is MORE responsibility,  not less. 

Accountability is wonderful.

this is a test to see if we will step it up. We need to step it up.

Edited May 22, 2018 by Behemoth

[dellme]

1 minute ago, priesthoodpower said:

For years our leaders have been telling us to do HT. Over the years the numbers slowly decreased and got worse. Do we blame the people or the program? I think the fact that the brethren in SLC changed the program answers that question.

 

You are clearly deflecting to avoid the root of the problem.

You complain about "fake friends" and low HT numbers, you complain " Christ was not assigned to minister to people. He casually went about his travels and anyone he met along the way he shared the message. " Yet you yourself will not allow yourself to be ministered to.

Do you see the problem?  The only people who can effectively minister to you are a few close friends whom you trust.  No one in your ward can minister to you b/c you won't allow them to minister to you. You are projecting your own failure to allow yourself to be ministered to upon others and you are therefore extremely critical of the program.

Your "solution" is totally unworkable-it would fail horribly-it would cause cliques to develop within the Church.

And quite frankly, with your attitude you will never be an effective ministering angel.  If you don't know how to be ministered to (which involves letting someone into your life), then you will never be able to minister to others . . .b/c quite frankly giving someone a ride home from school one day-big deal-that's just called being kind.

[Behemoth]

11 hours ago, dellme said:

You are clearly deflecting to avoid the root of the problem.

You complain about "fake friends" and low HT numbers, you complain " Christ was not assigned to minister to people. He casually went about his travels and anyone he met along the way he shared the message. " Yet you yourself will not allow yourself to be ministered to.

Do you see the problem?  The only people who can effectively minister to you are a few close friends whom you trust.  No one in your ward can minister to you b/c you won't allow them to minister to you. You are projecting your own failure to allow yourself to be ministered to upon others and you are therefore extremely critical of the program.

Your "solution" is totally unworkable-it would fail horribly-it would cause cliques to develop within the Church.

And quite frankly, with your attitude you will never be an effective ministering angel.  If you don't know how to be ministered to (which involves letting someone into your life), then you will never be able to minister to others . . .b/c quite frankly giving someone a ride home from school one day-big deal-that's just called being kind.

I agree, your presentational method seems not easily palatable. (Remember rebuke, AND show love.)

I think, he’s alright, I would say he should keep in mind, that everyone else in life is faking-it-till-their-making-it as well and in reality running on low self esteem themselves. We’re all (very) insecure as well, even when we pretend we’re not.. He can easily be the leader by showing confidence in their friendship, and the goodness of others. (That’s a thing too. — you “fake” the goodness of others until THEY make it)

oh! they were’nt feeling secure enough to say hi? Walk up with confidence and give a fist pump and say what’s UP BROTHER! AND then, when a brother pretends like they’re too good (an epidemic feeling) for being friendly, you do the same thing to him, - a little low profile ignore ’tude (but only to them, (when they’re in the act of being lame) then later try confident friendliness again) so they can eventually learn what behavior, doesn’t win. YOU CAN DO IT!...  btw I think you’ll be surprised how warmly people will react since their only waiting for someone to show kindness.

“fake-it-till-you-make-it” is a worldly phrase for faith. We desperately need more “fake-it-till-you-make-it” faith, in our circles, relationships and friendships. Fake the love, until you make the love.

 

Edited May 22, 2018 by Behemoth

[priesthoodpower]

.
 

Edited August 10, 2020 by priesthoodpower

[BJ64]

22 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

(disclaimer: title is kind of a click bait)

No matter what way you slice and dice it, it is still an ASSIGNMENT! ..now its an ASSIGNMENT with out a check box.

The whole problem with home teaching was that members felt that they were being assigned friends, aka fake friends. This new ministering concept is a step in the right direction but it still needs fine tuning.

If you understand my personality I come from a sheltered upbringing, I only had two or three "real" friends in high school and when they were not around I was a loner, I dont socialize very well. I love all my fellow EQ brethren but other then one or two of them, I really dont care what the others did over the weekend because other then being LDS I have nothing in common with them.

The "tweak" in Ministering should be one in where us as individual members report back an interaction we had with ANY of the ward members (male/female/young/old) during the month. And it shouldnt be limited to our ward only, include the stake and maybe even any LDS member. We are a worldwide church connected through the internet, why cant we be an influence and example to all.

Examples:

1. Every once in a while as I drive around town I will see one of the youth boys in my ward sitting at the bus stop. I stop and offer a ride. I have also done the same with my friends son who is in another ward. That is true ministering.

2. Im at the soccer field watching my kids game, after the game as we walk toward the parking lot we see another family from the ward and their kid playing in a game. We stop and cheer for their kid a few minutes and go on our way.

3. I played college basketball and I love the sport dearly. I hear about a father in the ward who is training his 14yr old son to be a basketball player. I offer to come and practice and help train with them. A family that I only used to say hi to at church I now become very close to them. Organic genuine Friendship.

4. I have one friend in my ward that we been going to the gym together for the past year. One of the other EQ members over heard us talking about the gym and wanted to join us. We now have a group of three that go to the gym together. That is true ministering

5. My relationship with my ward clerk is basically Hi/Bye at church. One day on facebook I see that he replied to a post in one of our local news stories. I replied to him supporting his stance. True genuine interaction and beginning of better friendships.

Christ was not assigned to minister to people. He casually went about his travels and anyone he met along the way he shared the message. That is true, genuine, Ministering.

I think everything you are doing is true ministering. Now just add a couple of assigned families as well. 

I think the higher law would be to minister to everyone in need without being assigned but I don’t think most people are ready for the higher law. 

[pam]

5 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

 

EQpres: Brother (Smith), we have a duty to minister to our brothers and sisters and their familys. Can you think of anyone in the quorum that you would like to get to know better and can develop a solid relationship with?

Brother Smith: Yeah, Brother Jensen and his family just moved into the ward, his kids are about the same age as mine and I would love to get them acquainted.

.

The problem with doing it this way, the "trouble family," yes all wards have one...or that needy person that others would rather avoid would never get chosen.  

[wenglund]

5 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

. I think im the only one brave enough to bring the real issue of "assigned friendship" aka "fake friends" to light. 

No offense intended, but I don't think it is all that brave to speak about alleged "fake friends" while posting under a fake name.

Yet, if I may, I believe you have confused "neighbor" with "friends." The second and great commandment says nothing about friends.  And, most any home owner may tell you that you typically don't get to chose your neighbors. They tend to be "assigned" (by market forces, etc.). What you do get to chose is whether to be a good neighbor or not.

Furthermore, choosing to be a good neighbor doesn't make one "fake," Rather it makes one civil, if not obedient to both of the two great commandments.

But, maybe I am just as flawed in my thinking as the ministering program of the Church. If so, we are blessed to have someone of your elevated understanding to correct us.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-.

[seashmore]

Ministering assignments aim to connect the hands that hang down with the hands that may be able to lift them up.  Have you ever played the human knot game, where everyone makes a knot with their hands and the group attempts to get everyone into a circle?  That's ministering.  That exercise works best if there's a leader giving directions.  "Suzy, you slide under Sally's arm.  Now, Billy, can you step over Steve's arm?"  That's the EQP and RSP making ministering assignments.  If everyone went about trying to untangle themselves by only conversing with those in their immediate vicinity, it would be a lot less effective.  (I realize that's oversimplified.)

Sometimes you're the one who needs help, and sometimes you're the one who gives it.  Why would you deny someone the blessing of serving you to the best of their ability?  For me, I've convinced myself that everyone is too busy to visit with me.  Doesn't matter how many times I've said, "Literally, all I do is come home from work and crochet.  If you need some quiet, come on over: I've got plenty to spare!"  It wasn't until I was called into YW after three years here that I was able to convince people that I wanted to go to their kids' musicals, concerts, games, etc.  The best way for someone to serve me is to allow me to help them.

I'm just going to leave this right here.  Ask yourself if you've ever been a poor, wayfaring man of grief, hungry, thirsty, caught in one of life's storms, beaten, scorned.  Then think about it from the narrator's perspective.

 

Lyrics

1. A poor, wayfaring Man of grief
   Hath often crossed me on my way,
   Who sued so humbly for relief
   That I could never answer nay.
   I had not pow'r to ask his name,
   Whereto he went, or whence he came;
   Yet there was something in his eye
   That won my love; I knew not why.
2. Once, when my scanty meal was spread,
   He entered; not a word he spake,
   Just perishing for want of bread.
   I gave him all; he blessed it, brake,
   And ate, but gave me part again.
   Mine was an angel's portion then,
   For while I fed with eager haste,
   The crust was manna to my taste.
3. I spied him where a fountain burst
   Clear from the rock; his strength was gone.
   The heedless water mocked his thirst;
   He heard it, saw it hurrying on.
   I ran and raised the suff'rer up;
   Thrice from the stream he drained my cup,
   Dipped and returned it running o'er;
   I drank and never thirsted more.
4. 'Twas night; the floods were out; it blew
   A winter hurricane aloof.
   I heard his voice abroad and flew
   To bid him welcome to my roof.
   I warmed and clothed and cheered my guest
   And laid him on my couch to rest,
   Then made the earth my bed and seemed
   In Eden's garden while I dreamed.
5. Stript, wounded, beaten nigh to death,
   I found him by the highway side.
   I roused his pulse, brought back his breath,
   Revived his spirit, and supplied
   Wine, oil, refreshment--he was healed.
   I had myself a wound concealed,
   But from that hour forgot the smart,
   And peace bound up my broken heart.
6. In pris'n I saw him next, condemned
   To meet a traitor's doom at morn.
   The tide of lying tongues I stemmed,
   And honored him 'mid shame and scorn.
   My friendship's utmost zeal to try,
   He asked if I for him would die.
   The flesh was weak; my blood ran chill,
   But my free spirit cried, "I will!"
7.  Then in a moment to my view
   The stranger started from disguise.
   The tokens in his hands I knew;
   The Savior stood before mine eyes.
   He spake, and my poor name he named,
   "Of me thou hast not been ashamed.
   These deeds shall thy memorial be;
   Fear not, thou didst them unto me."
8. Text: James Montgomery, 1771-1854
   Music: George Coles, 1792-1858, alt.
   Hymn sung prior to the martyrdom of the Prophet Joseph Smith. See History of the Church, 6:614-15.

 

Edited May 22, 2018 by seashmore

[priesthoodpower]

.

Edited August 10, 2020 by priesthoodpower

[wenglund]

46 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Except at church we call each other Brother and Sister because we strive to be a Ward FAMILY and not simply Neighbors.  Neighbors are exactly that, the person that lives next to you, so your argument is irrelevant. Sorry!

Hmmm...all the homes in my NEIGHBORhood (capitalized to assist your brilliance) , with few exceptions, are members of my Ward. Call them friends. Call them brothers and sisters. Call flawed and fake. Call them whatever you want. It will make you no less spectacular in how you completely missed my point ("argument"), let alone the meaning of the second great commandment.

But, compared to you, what do I or other members, or even leaders of the Church know? After all, we always get to chose our brothers and sisters. No assigning going on there.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited May 22, 2018 by wenglund

[priesthoodpower]

.
 

Edited August 10, 2020 by priesthoodpower

[anatess2]

11 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

Chastise me all you want but the proof is in the numbers. The past three wards Ive been in the HT numbers were below 18%. I think im the only one brave enough to bring the real issue of "assigned friendship" aka "fake friends" to light. 

The ole saying If it aint broke dont fix it. HT/VT was obviously broke and it needed fixing. Changing the name and method is a start but this idea of being ASSIGNED is still a problem.

Here is how I think the ministering should be executed:

EQpres: Brother (Smith), we have a duty to minister to our brothers and sisters and their familys. Can you think of anyone in the quorum that you would like to get to know better and can develop a solid relationship with?

Brother Smith: Yeah, Brother Jensen and his family just moved into the ward, his kids are about the same age as mine and I would love to get them acquainted.

...in the old and now still current way of assigning, the EQ pres would assign Brother Jensen to some one he feels fit, say Brother Mack, and according to the numbers of 18% success rate, the Jensen family would mostlikely not be ministered too.

I'm not chastising you.  I'm telling you why you think Ministering - a God-inspired program -  is flawed.  There are too many people, including you, who operate according to their mortal limitations rather then their spiritual potential.  When God gave the commandment to love your neighbor, He didn't mean - just Brother Jensen but not Brother Mack.  The problem is not the program.  The problem is the people.  You don't fix the problem by changing the program, rather you work to trigger a change in people through the program.

Edited May 22, 2018 by anatess2

[mirkwood]

3 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

 

Lets admit it, this new program is a watered down version compared to the old HT way where we had to have a formal lesson, prayer and sharing of the spirit. Now, we simply just need to make contact, no prayer, no lesson, but maybe (if possible) sharing the spirit. This is a step in the right direction and plausible especially with the internet and how our social culture is changing.

 

 

You are wrong.  This is the way it should have been done in the first place.  Flawed people just did not understand it, so now we have been given direction on how to do it right.  It has never been about the message/lesson, it has been about the relationships you create with your families.

[dellme]

8 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

Dont single me out, Im part of the 82%

 

Dont knock it till you try it, and its not a solution, its a tweek/suggestion.
 

Again more deflection.  You refuse to take responsibility in your own actions that is causing others to have lower rates, yet you then claim don't blame me b/c I'm part of the 82% and then you complain about 0% rates.  Classic, classic hypocrisy.

Edited May 22, 2018 by dellme

[dellme]

21 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

You are wrong.  This is the way it should have been done in the first place.  Flawed people just did not understand it, so now we have been given direction on how to do it right.  It has never been about the message/lesson, it has been about the relationships you create with your families.

I disagree, I personally do not see the program as a "higher way", I think it is definitely God-inspired, but I think it is more of a lesser way packaged as a higher way.  I don't think we've "progressed" to this level, I think we've "devolved" to this level.  Clearly the way HT/VT was run was not working in the modern times with modern thinking so the program was changed-to fit modern needs.

There is no way you can tell me that we are called to live a "higher law" when 40% of the membership believes SSM should be legal, or when we have Bishops advocating for SSM within the Church-you just can't tell me that we are so much more Christlike than people 50 years ago. It just doesn't compute.

It has always actually been a combination of the message and the relationships.  Without the message it just becomes a social club (I might as well as join The Shriners or any other number of social clubs).  We do a real big, big disservice when we turn the Church into a social club.  We should demonstrate the message through our actions and word, but if all the Gospel boils downs to is to just be kind then we have missed what it is all about.  You can't have one without the other, if all you are doing is being friendly and counting that as ministering then you have missed the point.

I'll give a brief example, too often (not frequently but more than I'd like) I've had missionaries over to my house and at the end they just leave-no spiritual message.  Oh we've definitely bonded but without the spiritual message all I'm doing is just having someone over for dinner . . .big deal.

Personally, I think (call my cynical) I think one of the reasons for the change was to remove differences between HT/VT so now women feel more "equal". There has been a lot of agitation on that front. Except personally, if we are going to do that-I'd rather just have my wife be assigned as my ministering companion and then we can dispense with all the logistical complications of trying to get your companion to go with you . . . but that's me.

Another example, thanks to "equality" now men only get 1 priesthood session a year and so do women, so we are now both "equal", except we both get less . . .great. I don't think that's progress.

Having said all that,  I do believe the new program to be inspired and to be what the Church needs, I just don't think that it's because we are such a much better people than we were 15-20 years ago.

Edited May 22, 2018 by dellme

[anatess2]

11 minutes ago, dellme said:

I disagree, I personally do not see the program as a "higher way", I think it is definitely God-inspired, but I think it is more of a lesser way packaged as a higher way.  I don't think we've "progressed" to this level, I think we've "devolved" to this level.  Clearly the way HT/VT was run was not working in the modern times with modern thinking so the program was changed-to fit modern needs.

There is no way you can tell me that we are called to live a "higher law" when 40% of the membership believes SSM should be legal, or when we have Bishops advocating for SSM within the Church-you just can't tell me that we are so much more Christlike than people 50 years ago. It just doesn't compute.

It has always actually been a combination of the message and the relationships.  Without the message it just becomes a social club (I might as well as join The Shriners or any other number of social clubs).  We do a real big, big disservice when we turn the Church into a social club.  We should demonstrate the message through our actions and word, but if all the Gospel boils downs to is to just be kind then we have missed what it is all about.  You can't have one without the other, if all you are doing is being friendly and counting that as ministering then you have missed the point.

I'll give a brief example, too often (not frequently but more than I'd like) I've had missionaries over to my house and at the end they just leave-no spiritual message.  Oh we've definitely bonded but without the spiritual message all I'm doing is just having someone over for dinner . . .big deal.

Personally, I think (call my cynical) I think one of the reasons for the change was to remove differences between HT/VT so now women feel more "equal". There has been a lot of agitation on that front. Except personally, if we are going to do that-I'd rather just have my wife be assigned as my ministering companion and then we can dispense with all the logistical complications of trying to get your companion to go with you . . . but that's me.

Another example, thanks to "equality" now men only get 1 priesthood session a year and so do women, so we are now both "equal", except we both get less . . .great. I don't think that's progress.

Having said all that,  I do believe the new program to be inspired and to be what the Church needs, I just don't think that it's because we are such a much better people than we were 15-20 years ago.

I agree with @mirkwood.  I believe this is a higher calling.  The pattern has always been that the more rigid the program, the lesser the calling.  Like when we are told Do This, Don't Do That (e.g. Law of Moses), it is a lesser law than the ones where we are left to our own agency to govern ourselves - which this Ministering program does as compared to the HT/VT program.

I don't claim that we are "better people than we were 15-20 years ago".  Rather, we are a better Church than we were 15-20 years ago and we, as a Church, is ready for it now.

[dellme]

4 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

I am part of the 82% of familys in my stake that dont like HTers coming over to my house, nor me going over to others homes (for one of many reasons).
You are part of the 18% (or what ever it is in your stake) that fulfill the HT calling and see no problems with the program. Have you ever come to think that younger familys in various parts of the world cant afford a 1700 sq foot house..have a family of 5 living in a 900 sq ft 2bd/1bath apt that is so intimate that having visitors over has become a foreign idea. You probably have a 2000 sq ft home with two large family rooms perfect for hosting and entertaining guests.

Look up my screen name on this forum and you will learn that my wife was having emotional affairs with men at the gym, my father-in-law is a pedophile, my father is a womanizer, brother is a criminal, sister a drug addict, I was addicted to porn and masterbated for 20 years. Yeah lets have all my neighbors and ward members know the finer details of my life.

Your problem is pride.  So what you have 5 people living in 900 sqft 2b/1bath? And, what exactly is your point?  You think people will look down on you for that?  That is pride talking.

Yes you've had it rough, but your pride is a bigger issue. If you actually opened yourself up to being ministered and stop letting pride get in the way, you'd find that the vast, vast majority of people have had some really, really rough time-they don't live perfect lives-they've probably looked at porn or had temptations with women or any number of issues. And that's quite honestly the beauty of it, seeing people who have overcome through the Gospel the struggles and problems they've faced.  You don't have to tell everyone the entirety of your life-but if you aren't willing to at least trust your HT, then you can't ever really be ministered to. 

Do you honestly think that your HTer would spread everything all over the ward? If you do, then the Church has a much, much bigger problem.

The point being is that no one can minister to you b/c you aren't willing to be ministered to and if you aren't willing to be ministered to you can't minister. It's really pretty simple. So the Church changed the program (and for good reason) so those people who really want to minister to you won't feel so dang guilty b/c you won't allow them to minister.  You can tell them, hey just send me a text message and that will work for me and they can say, great.

The point being you can't force help on people who don't want help.

As society has changed with social media-people are more prideful, they only want to present the "perfect" picture to the world and no one can actually see they are drowning-well no one can help you from drowning if you don't call out for help or refuse the rope.

[dellme]

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

I agree with @mirkwood.  I believe this is a higher calling.  The pattern has always been that the more rigid the program, the lesser the calling.  Like when we are told Do This, Don't Do That (e.g. Law of Moses), it is a lesser law than the ones where we are left to our own agency to govern ourselves - which this Ministering program does as compared to the HT/VT program.

I don't claim that we are "better people than we were 15-20 years ago".  Rather, we are a better Church than we were 15-20 years ago and we, as a Church, is ready for it now.

? What is the difference between a better people and a better Church?

I don't think "ready" for it is the right term;  I think it is necessary, but it is lower.  There is some serious cognitive dissonance going on here.

You make the example of the law of Moses; but actually Christ brought an even MORE strict Gospel, not less strict.  Don't commit adultery.  Pretty clear and rigid.  Don't look at another woman-even more rigid.  You have things backwards-the higher the law the MORE strict the rules.  Baptism vs. Temple- MORE strict rules.

It is totally illogical to make the claim that the Church is ready for a higher law when the Church wasn't even fulfilling the "lower" law. It's totally contrary to logic and to what the pattern of the scriptures tell us.  If you can't fulfill the lower law, giving you the higher law just damns you even further.

Seriously, we are "better" as a Church, what Church are you referring to? The one where a lady gets up in SS and berates the 1st Counselor in the SP b/c the Church isn't for homosexual marriages and she says the Church isn't Christlike?  The Church were members get up in sacrament meeting to proclaim they were born that way? The Church were members openly celebrate sin?

Hmm, you and I must have different definition of what better is.

I think it is inspired for the times we live in, different times require different approaches, but to claim it is b/c we are "better" IMO smacks of extreme hubris and pride.

 

[anatess2]

5 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

I am part of the 82% of familys in my stake that dont like HTers coming over to my house, nor me going over to others homes (for one of many reasons).
You are part of the 18% (or what ever it is in your stake) that fulfill the HT calling and see no problems with the program. Have you ever come to think that younger familys in various parts of the world cant afford a 1700 sq foot house..have a family of 5 living in a 900 sq ft 2bd/1bath apt that is so intimate that having visitors over has become a foreign idea. You probably have a 2000 sq ft home with two large family rooms perfect for hosting and entertaining guests.

This is so disappointing that I'm ashamed that an LDS person thinks like this.

Here you go... this is my chapel.  See that broom and dustpan sitting in the middle?  That's how we clean the place - broom, dustpan, and rags.   Do you see the ceiling fans?  That's a "wow!  luxury!" factor.  Not many people here can afford ceiling fans.  It's the middle of summer and it's 90 degrees inside this chapel on a good day empty - add about 80 warm bodies during sacrament meeting and that ceiling fan is like manna from heaven.  Of course, A/C here is like unicorns.

This is the back of the podium.  See those plastic chairs?  Yes, that's what we all sit on, including the branch presidency.  

This is the view out the chapel's side door.  That fence is only about 10 feet away from the door.    Those are the neighbors in those houses flush against the other side of the fence.  They may look like slums but we have members that live in houses half the size of those.  All windows and doors are always open even during sacrament meeting and so we have chatty neighbors, crowing roosters, barking dogs competing with sacrament prayer.  Our members visit those houses a lot and they invite them to their houses too  - the best way to improve our sacrament meeting is to have every single one of those people in those houses come to Church every Sunday.

Our members are so good at Ministering here that there were 6 of us cleaning the chapel instead of only 2 of us assigned to clean because 2 "ministerers" assigned to the sister who was assigned to clean the building came to help and 2 other "ministerers" of one of the "ministerers" also came to help.  Then at 4PM, another "ministerer" who passed by to check on one of her sisters who was cleaning found out we were not done yet (lots of talking while cleaning)... all of a sudden sweet bread and coca-cola appeared for all of us.  All of these sisters except me are new converts of less than 3 years.

Now, tell me again how your 900 sqft house is a barrier to Ministering.

Edited May 22, 2018 by anatess2

[zil]

10 hours ago, dellme said:

That is a lot easier said than done. I guess for those people who decide to post their entire lives on Facebook/Twitter/etc and broadcast that they just went to the bathroom that's cool and it's a piece of cake, but sorry that's not how my family rolls. I'm not going to be looking at my ministering families Facebook/Twitter feeds and stalking them and anyone expecting to do the same will be sorely disappointed.

If that's what "ministering" looks like, then you can count me out-I have very, very little use for social media and it's evils. 

Sigh.  Why is it that lately I feel like I have to write 12 pages of footnotes tacked onto every post?  It was an example.  What you personally are supposed to do will depend upon:

1) You

2) Your companion

3) The families to whom you minister

4) The guidance you receive from the Spirit

You mix all that up together and come up with "the best you can manage" and run with it.  Sigh.

[Lost Boy]

26 minutes ago, dellme said:

? What is the difference between a better people and a better Church?

I don't think "ready" for it is the right term;  I think it is necessary, but it is lower.  There is some serious cognitive dissonance going on here.

You make the example of the law of Moses; but actually Christ brought an even MORE strict Gospel, not less strict.  Don't commit adultery.  Pretty clear and rigid.  Don't look at another woman-even more rigid.  You have things backwards-the higher the law the MORE strict the rules.  Baptism vs. Temple- MORE strict rules.

It is totally illogical to make the claim that the Church is ready for a higher law when the Church wasn't even fulfilling the "lower" law. It's totally contrary to logic and to what the pattern of the scriptures tell us.  If you can't fulfill the lower law, giving you the higher law just damns you even further.

Seriously, we are "better" as a Church, what Church are you referring to? The one where a lady gets up in SS and berates the 1st Counselor in the SP b/c the Church isn't for homosexual marriages and she says the Church isn't Christlike?  The Church were members get up in sacrament meeting to proclaim they were born that way? The Church were members openly celebrate sin?

Hmm, you and I must have different definition of what better is.

I think it is inspired for the times we live in, different times require different approaches, but to claim it is b/c we are "better" IMO smacks of extreme hubris and pride.

 

So because a lady gets up and berates the 1st counselor, that is an issue with the church?  I don't think so.  That is a problem with her.

As for homosexuals being born that way...  I am pretty sure they are.  And if it were Christ, maybe he could fix that for them.  I don't know of much success through priesthood blessing of fixing the issue.  And if you can't fix it, then you need to accept the situation.  And the situation is that we are to love our neighbors, straight, gay, confused, whatever.

We all have our challenges in life.  Gay people tend to have some difficult ones.  I honestly don't think anyone chooses to be gay.  Just like no one chooses to be retarded...  It is just the way it is.   And then we have members that want to dump on them because they are this way.  Lets shun them..  Make them feel worse than they already do.    Wrong.  They deserve the Saviors love just as much as you do.  As such we should love them just as much as everyone else.

I am sure 20 years ago the church was not even nearly as accepting and loving towards this group.  50 years ago it was pretty racist against black people.  I am certainly not condoning homosexual relationships, but we are to love everyone, but not necessarily what they do.

So I think the church has evolved in a good way in those regards.

As for ministering, I see that as a much more flexible program.  I always felt pressured into giving a lesson, a prayer, etc with HT when I knew that is not what the family needed at the time.  Some families need more spiritual ministering and some need more temporal.  You go by the spirit.  After all...  all things temporal are still spiritual as well.  You don't give a family a TV when they really need a blanket.  It is nice that you are thinking of them, but thinking of them and being in tune with what they really need is better.

 

[anatess2]

45 minutes ago, dellme said:

? What is the difference between a better people and a better Church?

I don't think "ready" for it is the right term;  I think it is necessary, but it is lower.  There is some serious cognitive dissonance going on here.

You make the example of the law of Moses; but actually Christ brought an even MORE strict Gospel, not less strict.  Don't commit adultery.  Pretty clear and rigid.  Don't look at another woman-even more rigid.  You have things backwards-the higher the law the MORE strict the rules.  Baptism vs. Temple- MORE strict rules.

It is totally illogical to make the claim that the Church is ready for a higher law when the Church wasn't even fulfilling the "lower" law. It's totally contrary to logic and to what the pattern of the scriptures tell us.  If you can't fulfill the lower law, giving you the higher law just damns you even further.

Seriously, we are "better" as a Church, what Church are you referring to? The one where a lady gets up in SS and berates the 1st Counselor in the SP b/c the Church isn't for homosexual marriages and she says the Church isn't Christlike?  The Church were members get up in sacrament meeting to proclaim they were born that way? The Church were members openly celebrate sin?

Hmm, you and I must have different definition of what better is.

I think it is inspired for the times we live in, different times require different approaches, but to claim it is b/c we are "better" IMO smacks of extreme hubris and pride.

 

Maybe your neck of the woods can't fulfill laws.  I don't see this.  In my neck of the woods Church membership is expanding so fast that we are the only country outside of Utah that is about to get 2 Temples within 20 miles of each other.  We don't have ladies that get up in SS and berates her Stake Presidency over homosexual marriage.  Divorce is illegal here, let alone SS marriages...

You misunderstood my usage of "rigid laws".  Less rigidity doesn't mean less strict.  They don't correlate.

The Church means - the Church as a whole, not each individual within the Church.  When the Church teaches homosexual marriage is a great thing, then the Church has "devolved".  The Church is BETTER. 

[mirkwood]

It's not an issue of a higher law, it is an issue of explaining the concepts behind the HT/VT program.  Now it is clear what is expected...and it isn't a checkmark in a box.  HT/VT and now Ministering, if engaged in properly will lead us to become a Zion people.