Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I will cheer the loudest when husbands and wives can share their new name with each other. We have removed so many gender-dividing things in the temple already, what’s the hold up for that one?
Elder James E. Talmage of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles explained: “To hell there is an exit as well as an entrance. Hell is no place to which a vindictive judge sends prisoners to suffer and to be punished principally for his glory; but it is a place prepared for the teaching, the disciplining of those who failed to learn here upon the earth what they should have learned. True, we read of everlasting punishment, unending suffering, eternal damnation. That is a direful expression; but in his mercy the Lord has made plain what those words mean. ‘Eternal punishment,’ he says, is God’s punishment, for he is eternal; and that condition or state or possibility will ever exist for the sinner who deserves and really needs such condemnation; but this does not mean that the individual sufferer or sinner is to be eternally and everlastingly made to endure and suffer. No man will be kept in hell longer than is necessary to bring him to a fitness for something better. When he reaches that stage the prison doors will open and there will be rejoicing among the hosts who welcome him into a better state. The Lord has not abated in the least what he has said in earlier dispensations concerning the operation of his law and his gospel, but he has made clear unto us his goodness and mercy through it all, for it is his glory and his work to bring about the immortality and eternal life of man” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1930, 97.) President Joseph Fielding Smith gave this insight: “The same punishment always follows the same offense, according to the laws of God who is eternal and endless, hence it is called endless punishment, and eternal punishment, because it is the punishment which God has fixed according to unchangeable law. A man may partake of endless torment, and when he has paid the penalty for his transgression, he is released, but the punishment remains and awaits the next culprit, and so on forever” (Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 2:228).
“I cannot subscribe to the modern doctrine that God does not punish, because I cannot throw away all of the scriptures there are in order to reach that conclusion[, but] I have a feeling that when the Lord comes to give us our reward … and our punishment … that he will give that punishment which is the very least that our transgression will justify. I believe that he will bring into his justice all of the infinite love and blessing and mercy and kindness and understanding which he has. …
“And on the other hand, I believe that when it comes to making the rewards for our good conduct, he will give us the maximum that it is possible to give, having in mind the offense which we have committed” (“As Ye Sow … ,” Brigham Young University Speeches of the Year [May 3, 1955], 6–7).
We covered this when I taught seminary. Well, we covered the phrase “endless punishment.”
The seminary manual suggests that Endless is another name for the Savior.
In that sense, we could say that “endless punishment” is “the Savior’s punishment.”
What that looks like is not entirely clear, but we have quotes from church leaders that suggest that the Savior will not punish for a second longer than is necessary.
He will also push for the most reward that we can get.
I’ll try to find the quotes and come back to share them.
I don’t know if this helps you at all, but I thought I would mention what the manual says.
Not that my vote matters, but if I did have a vote and if it did matter, I would vote to either eliminate the new name or change it so that both spouses know each other’s new name. That would be a unifying factor in a marriage instead of a dividing one. It’s unlikely that they’ll reverse the priesthood role of women, but I do wonder why the emphasis on women studying it for the last several months. Anything less than an “all-in” for holding priesthood offices would be a major let down for many.
That said, my traditionalist viewpoints hope that at least that part doesn’t change.
Maybe they’ll reverse polygamy and it’s ugly history and denounce it moving forward.
I could cheer that one on.
Maybe they’ll tell us that the this COVID pandemic is a major test and that the second coming is just around the corner.
We’ll be taking calls from those who have seen rainbows this year.
Actually, wait – we were told just recently that the pandemic IS a test.
Hmmm
Maybe we will hear that in-home learning will continue indefinitely.
Maybe we will hear that the church is launching an academic curriculum that can be used by families in place of government schooling.
Maybe we will hear that we have the sealed portion of the plates in possession and that they are about to be translated!
Maybe Moroni himself will address us.
Or – maybe it will be business as usual and we will take from it what we need or want and will leave the rest for later.
Agree with the other comments – I would question the validity of those stories. Disgruntled people often exaggerate or contrive stories for effect. :problem: 1 – if those stories were true, we would have heard of many, many lawsuits against the church for the alleged preventable deaths.
2 – my husband is a firefighter and is 100% positive that situations like you described would never happen. Period.
3 – my mom was a temple worker and her stories agree with Curt (likely a different temple) that during emergencies, the veil comes down (if that room is where the emergency is) and emergency workers are quickly shown into the temple.
It’s fun to buy in to hype, but be careful that you consider the source before you also become excited.
I don’t have much to add except that our ward experienced this similar situation years ago. Husband diagnosed with rare cancer in February.
Ward prayers, fasting, blessings that promised healing, etc.
Two trips out of state to 1 of only 2 worldwide specialists for this type of cancer.
Chemo, radiation, etc.
He passed away in November.
This hit our ward family hard.
I remember hearing the bishopric request that our ward fast and pray. I could see the outcome even then and worried that we were putting too much stock in prayer this way. It was awkward for many of us to go through the motions with the intent that we somehow change heaven’s mind, but knowing our prayers really wouldn’t do much good in that regard.
I think that in those situations, it is always more appropriate to pray for acceptance and peace … instead of asking for a miracle.
But, that’s just me.
Quote:IMO exclusively relying on legalistic interpretation of existing scripture to move forward prevents us from receiving revelation and writing scripture we need for our day. Are we looking for greater light and knowledge or are we assuming that god has already revealed everything and the answer is to parse existing scripture… falling into the same trap that JS’s restoration attempted to free us from?
Oh, wow. I had not considered that.
This is why I love discussions. Thank you for your insight.
:thumbup: The YW theme change is good, but leaves me a little concerned (I tend to overthink the “what-if” too much). Heavenly Parents….I like it.
BUT, since our scriptures also teaches polygamy (I in the camp of it not being doctrine), does that open the door for later discussion of Heavenly Father having bunches of wives…and maybe we all have a different mother?
So, I like it, but worry at the same time.
Asking youth to turn to adult leaders for counsel is dangerous. Period.
We are talking about youth leaders who, for the most part, are good people.
But they are struggling themselves with how to “life” in general. They won’t make the best counselors, and those who are overzealous will do more damage than good.
In one of my old wards, our YMP was grooming the young men. Like, seriously grooming them (fit the definition to a T). If HE suddenly had permission to counsel his YM, that would be like granting permission for him to be alone with them more and more.
And by the way, how can a YWP or a YMP counsel youth without another adult present?
Maybe that needs to be stated clearly up front?
One of my YW leaders offered to cover for me if I ever wanted to be alone with my boyfriend. She offered to hire me to “babysit” while I took my boyfriend up to the spare bedroom. I never took her up on the offer, but what the heck? She also routinely took the YW out of church during third hour to get snacks at the gas station down the street.
It’s leaders like the ones I just outlined that will cause major damage to our youth.
As for what the bishops have to do…I don’t see it as much different than what they are already doing now.
The bishop is already the PQ president.
The youth will still plan activities.
The current YMP can still be called back in as an “advisor,” so I don’t see this change as being more work for the bishop.
My husband is a bishop and he’s not stressed about it.
I like that we are going back to scripture to clarify some things. Good changes, though I admit that it’ll feel weird to ME that a girl/woman/young woman will be sitting where our menfolk used to sit. I’m a traditionalist at heart.
Now…to change the rule for keeping the male new name a secret……here’s to hoping!
:thumbup: Our SM is: OS
OP
Sacrament Hymn
Sacrament
Speaker 1
Speaker 2
CS
CP
Sometimes the sacrament doesn’t take long (small ward). Our speakers overplan b/c sometimes they need to talk and talk and talk.
I miss the days of an intermediate hymn.
I don’t know that I have much to add to the good, better, best discussion, but I wanted to share a few stories (don’t know what good they will do): 1. We had a cub scout leader years ago who refused to provide her SSN for the BSA background check. The bishop said that she was a member in good standing and held a TR, so he wasn’t concerned about the BSA approval. It was odd.
2.An older gentleman in our ward was accused years and years ago of inappropriate actions against a young woman. The authorities were never called (despite the fact that the YW’s father was a police officer) and the family moved out of the ward. That YW is now a grown woman and is attending a different church with her children. When my husband became bishop, he checked this accused man’s membership record and sure enough, there IS a red flag by the man’s name. It’s there when ministering assignments are made and my husband has to manually approve those assignments. This man is not to be assigned to a family with children (nor will he ever hold a primary or YM or youth SS calling). While there isn’t a background check, there are red flags when something has been brought to the ward leadership’s attention. This man was never brought in for church discipline. It was left at “accusation-level” only, but there is still a red flag placed there. It’s better than nothing.
3. Another family in another of our wards had an issue with a young adult male primary teacher. He crossed the line with their young daughter. The family fought for punishment on the ward level, but didn’t pursue it on a legal scale. It was kept very quiet and even now (decades later), neither party talks about it. However, shortly after this family moved, the young man found a teenage girl to date…and we saw a similar story with her. Her family moved as well and there was a major ward division (who did we believe? The young man or the girl?). Had ANYONE talked openly about his actions with the primary girl, this teenage girl may not have fallen victim to the same young man.
4. My husband is also a mandatory reporter for his job (and as a bishop) and I know for a fact that we have a mom of several young children who routinely looses her cool with them and is borderline emotionally abusive to a few of them (I’ve seen it). She is a good friend of mine, so I don’t tell my husband b/c then he has to make the call, right? If he makes the call, we lose her and the family to bitterness and inactivity. The fallout from a CPS call would be devastating. Am I protecting her or am I protecting him?
5. Two-deep leadership is becoming almost essential in ANY situation with the youth. I am a seminary teacher. I was waiting in the hall by the door to the church one morning, watching for one particular student to arrive (we have 3 other teachers in the building who teach close to the outside door). I greeted kids as they came in, but I was alone in the hall with them as I did so. Apparently, I offended one of the youth with my greeting and as this youth passed the story around class, it morphed into something far worse and parents of other youth were getting concerned. I finally received a phone call from one mom blasting me for my actions. It was ugly, but because I had no other adult with me, my defense was useless.
We really are raising kids in a cultural society where they are trained to look for offense. I’m sure we’ve all been in situations like that. It’s only getting worse.
6. If background checks were mandatory,
-how often would they be run?
-how many people would refuse to do them (for whatever reason) and, therefore, decrease the number of badly needed primary teachers?
-what would happen if someone agreed to the check, it came back dirty and the person was either released or never given a calling?
Ward members would be curious and would we be creating a state of suspicion and gossip?
