• Announcements

    • Nemesis

      Contact Us Broken   09/27/2016

      Users, It has come to our attention that the contact us feature on the site is broken.  Please do not use this feature to contact board admins.  Please go through normal channels.  If you are ignored there then assume your request was denied. Also if you try to email us that email address is pretty much ignored.  Also don't contact us to complain, ask for favors, donations, or any other thing that you may think would annoy us.  Nemesis

stemelbow

Contributor
  • Content count

    7,869
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

stemelbow last won the day on January 9

stemelbow had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,920 Excellent

2 Followers

About stemelbow

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,378 profile views
  1. No thanks. I'm happy to read welfare of ones soul alludes to that which reasonably can be said to be the welfare of ones soul. I can't figure out what your hang up is here, nor does your stated objection make a lick of sense to me. So... time to bow out
  2. I'm getting a chuckle at the idea. Sitting at the stand in court, cinepro tesitifies, "he like Star Wars for crying aloud. I couldn't stand the thought that my fine employee liked that crap so I canned him. " "You realize this is a suit brought against you for wrongful termination right? I mean he didn't show up late or give you sloppy work? You didn't need to cut costs or free up a position?" "nope. Best employee I could imagine. It's just that he likes Star Wars and said so within earshot of my office." Id be curious how that'd go.
  3. They didn't. I've already rejected your effort to wrest from scriptures a unique application of what is meant by welfare of our souls. The passages you site do not suggest in any way, that difficult issues of faith do not pertain to the concept of the welfare of one's soul. your explanation did not convince at all.
  4. I really do wonder the results if Mormon missionaries went out to serve people rather than preach to people. The news would get out. People might look to them for help. The local church would likely get involved. People would trust the Church more, people would find more interest in what is driving this stuff. I could see it as a really great thing. The problem might be, though, service that is not needed. I remember a couple of areas on my mission in which we did service. It wasn't needed at all. We went to a elementary school and played at recess with the kids because the teachers didn't want to stand outside, then we did art or music projects with them. I mean it was kind of fun, but it wasn't really necessarily. Probably better if parents stepped in a helped more, and teachers just stepped up to do it.
  5. I'm not sure what your hang up here is. Welfare of one's souls would include anything associated with one's soul in general. Everything you listed, as the context demands of the BoM, as you suggested, would include anything a person feels or thinks and sees as important to his/her salvation, as I see it. to your last question: Not really.
  6. It's easier when you don't take things personally. A year or so ago I was out with a missionary on splits. We ran into a young gentleman, newly married, who had done everything but left the Church officially. He was adamant the Church was wrong, in contrast to the Church is true mantra. I had an enjoyable discussion with him, as he was fairly well informed. I think we left feeling pretty well appreciative of each other as we acknowledged the basis of his concerns noting how we simply had different conclusions here or there along the way, which gave us our differing perspectives. On the other hand, during the same time he and I were getting along, he and the missionary were not. The missionary challenged his every idea, as if his ideas were not valid or thoughtful. The missionary denied things in his ignorance. The young guy understood where the missionary was coming because he too had served a mission, but there was no progress in the conversation. Luckily a week or two before that we had stake conference and we had a visiting 70 come and speak. The visiting 70 said in his speech that we should readily acknowledge the messiness of our history and the difficulty of our doctrine, when members and others express their concerns. Denying, and getting defensive did not help. The larger point from which this was drawn, as I recall, was that it's hard to accept the truthfulness claims of the Church. That there was likely some in the crowd that day who weren't all that willing to just say the Church is true. It was one of the finer talks I've heard in a long time. But I reminded the missionary of that talk when we left our new friend. He was still seething a bit about how it transpired. I feared what would happen to this young missionary when he came to the realization that much of what our new friend had said about his problems with the Church had validity. I'd just say, doubts and faith are two sides of the same coin. To build faith we sometimes have to explore our ideas, let our imagination in and accept that we have plenty to learn. No. Not answers. It's not helpful or thoughtful to treat any response as an answer or some sort of resolution to issues, question, or concerns. To explore our ideas we have to accept that in many cases, there are no answers. That's the nature of our humanity. There are only ideas, possibilities and all that. That simply doesn't work as a solution. Discussing issues with the bishop, or Home Teachers only works if they are open and informed to discuss it. They simply won't be open and informed if they treat Church like a place wherein the wrong narrative dominates and the assumption of we ought to fear freedom of expression for the sake of keeping a composed and shallow meeting in place. It's far more contentious to shut down those who have differing views then to allow them to express themselves as we all try to work our way through the welfare of our souls.
  7. I'm sure they catch some things and I probably did too. It was about when I was 11, as I recall, when a stake leader came to our ward and in really dramatic and dogmatic fashion complained about science and how bad it was. Mocked evolution and all that. I remember thinking something like, "uh...this guy sounds upset but doesn't seem to know what the heck he's talking about". Later that day my dad approached me and said, "I saw you during bro. So and So's talk. You looked pretty concerned. You ok?" He then went on to tell me how "the Church is filled with those who have various ideas. That it's likely the Church is going on less light and knowledge on these topics and often speaks presumptuously just as the Church does. It's important to hear people and understand where they are coming from though." Anyway, I like my dad's approach. Not sure I care for this we're afraid of ideas being shared approach.
  8. Whatever the case we're talking about a religion and beliefs here. And seeing as more info has come out, it seems she is not all that well suited to be teaching there in the first place. So the issue feels more moot to me now. The at the story was reported by the opening link though, I admit, I'd feel concern.
  9. My OP asks a couple of questions...nothing more.
  10. well good.
  11. me neither. just curious what kind of thing you were thinking.
  12. well, what the heck? if that's her, then what's she trying to pull here? The news report made it that she has no intention of leaving the Church. Ah well. she probably wanted out of teaching there.
  13. She is? hmm...
  14. SUre if she taught that in class. Not so sure if she posted it on facebook.