[Brown]

johnh wrote:

Talking with a friend and his wife and she believes that’s what happens. How can God emphasize and fully understand without having been there? It’s a 70 year trip to earth enough to be a just God? She says multiple lives here in various genders is required.

I have been pondering the same thing lately. I was going to post something similar, but you beat me to it.

[Brown]

We might just have a “Earth Behavioral Experiment 2.7b Simulation Programmer” or “Distant Galaxy DNA Cloning Expert”.

I’m not even convinced gender exists in the eternities.

[Brown]

Old-Timer wrote:

Just to clarify, a woman can be sealed to every husband she had in mortality, so it does go both ways, in practical terms.

.

Are you sure about that? Both my Mother and my Aunt had to wait for their “temple divorce” to go through before they could marry their second husbands in the temple. Men I know who remarry have not had to do this, nor is it recommended that they do.

[Brown]

SamBee wrote:

That’s getting into literalist territory, Brown. It’s the domain of both Richard Dawkins and six thousand year old creationists.

.

I don’t see it that way. It’s just that if they are merely stories, then is that a foundation for a religion I should believe in? I think there are many who claim to have gained great insight from the Harry Potter series or the Chronicles of Narnia. But that doesn’t make the authors prophetic or called of God, does it?

[Brown]

If they are just good parables that JS made up to help us, then should we worship Aesop as a prophet, too? Should we let him guilt us into attending meetings weekly and giving him money to continue his work spreading fables?

I guess if they are just stories, then we have a lot of regular old Joes writing good stories. Not really a foundation for a religion, is it?

[Brown]

Old-Timer wrote:

I love the theory of Home Teaching, even if the implementation gets messed up too often. I love the idea of helping each other, and I know WAY too many situations where a loving person outside the family was just what someone in the family needed to survive a rough stretch. Also, when done properly, it can be a godsend for single mothers with boys, especially. I like the concept of “it takes a village”, and I don’t want to try to raise my kids in isolation from other caring adults.

Helping each other is great. Assigning helpers and essentially forcing them to help, even when not needed, through rigorous stat keeping and peer pressure, is not that great.

[Brown]

Does the church really view masturbation as a sin? Honest question. Is there any direct doctrine to support it? Pornography there is no question, but I have never heard anything concrete regarding masturbation.

[Brown]

I wanted to like beer, but I never really liked it. I dated a girl that was a big beer drinker and she got me one occasionaly, but I merely tolerated it. I have no desire to drink beer. Wine tastes like rotten grape juice (which it essentially is). No thanks. Unfortunately the only alcohol I would still like to enjoy is the kind where there is no question that is is definitely a strong drink. But then I’m too cheap to buy $15+ small glasses of it anyway, so it’s not a huge temptation.

I mainly swill caffeinated cold beverages.

[Brown]

Sounds like an interesting read. Thanks for the review.

[Brown]

We probably all know people who got engaged or even married in a matter of weeks. Sometimes it works great, but usually it is not the best idea. Initial flurry of excitement over someone new can cloud the judgement. I think “marrying” a religion too quickly is the same way. It might work out, but it probably won’t.

[Brown]

Of course they are in a hurry. Jesus can’t return until we’ve knocked on every door, right? (pardon the sarcasm)

Numbers or goal-based church programs rub me the wrong way and especially missionary work. I never served but I heard from just about every missionary that ever served that there was pressure to speed people along, even if they don’t even really understand what they signed up for.

[Brown]

Gerald wrote:

One of the issues with teaching about these activities in this manner (alcohol use, smoking, pornography) is that the youth get the notion that they cannot be forgiven and so once they stumble a bit (take one sip of a beer) they say to themselves, “Well, I’m already damned I might as well go the whole way” and go on a drinking binge (for example). I think avoiding these activities IS the best tactic but we have to inject some reality into our conversations with youth. Many of them will take that drink, or that drag, or view that inappropriate image on the internet and then what? If repentance is not emphasized, they will assume that they are forever tainted regardless of what follows.

I actually have been there as a teenager. “Well I’m going to have to go to the Bishop, might as well do this a few more times before that happens!” I just don’t think religious consequences are a huge deterrent for many, other than a deterrent for getting caught.

[Brown]

SamBee wrote:

Get relativistic about murder, lying and stealing, and you head into Manson family territory. .

I think Nephi pushed those exact three aside on the night he visited Laban. Is he an honorary Manson or a noble Prophet doing God’s work?

[Brown]

I don’t think there would be many people passionate about church history that wouldn’t have a bias.

[Brown]

ihhi wrote:

hawkgrrrl wrote:

I questioned my deacons in class last year. What is more serious, and they all said getting drunk was worse than sex.

What about drunk sex? 😳

I think teaching consequences is far more valuable that just saying “God thinks you are naughty!”. A real, honest discussion about teenage pregnancy and STDs are a lot more scary than “Someday you will forget a scripture when you need it most!” Oh the horror! 🙄

[Author]

Posts