rockpond Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Another general authority tells young single adults to please stay in the ship despite their questions about church history, blacks/women and the priesthood, polygamy, gay marriage, first vision accounts, etc. Similar to the Renlunds’ theme: just stick with the basics, you don’t need to know more. https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-01-22/what-to-do-with-your-questions-according-to-1-general-authority-whos-an-expert-on-anti-church-materials-48843.amp?__twitter_impression=true From the article: “Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include: Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? “In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on. “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said.” 1 Link to comment
stemelbow Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Quote There are some members of the Church who don’t know the answers to the primary questions, and they spend their time and attention slogging through the secondary questions. “They mistakenly try to learn the truth by process of elimination, by attempting to eliminate every doubt,” Elder Corbridge said. Boy does he have that wrong. Quote In contrast to that gloom and stupor of thought, the Spirit of light, intelligence, peace and truth attends the events and doctrine of the Restoration, especially the scriptures revealed through Joseph Smith. “Just read them and ask yourself and ask God if these are the words of deceit, delusion or truth.” A very black and white view. It seems rather shallow and unthoughtful to me. Link to comment
Popular Post Duncan Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 Do I trust God's love for me is more important than what Orson Pratt told someone in 1876, one is how I view myself and God and the other is interesting but not necessarily life altering. I was reading last night from a historian who said that so far they can't determine what led to this decision based on no records exist but this is what we can know. Will that change in the future, maybe, but for now, this is what we can know-based on the information available 8 Link to comment
Popular Post provoman Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 38 minutes ago, rockpond said: Another general authority tells young single adults to please stay in the ship despite their questions about church history, blacks/women and the priesthood, polygamy, gay marriage, first vision accounts, etc. Similar to the Renlunds’ theme: just stick with the basics, you don’t need to know more. https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-01-22/what-to-do-with-your-questions-according-to-1-general-authority-whos-an-expert-on-anti-church-materials-48843.amp?__twitter_impression=true From the article: “Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include: Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? “In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on. “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said.” Not sure they is an issue here. I think it is reasonable to seeks a spiritual witness to what he referred to as the primary questions. 6 Link to comment
Popular Post the narrator Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 Can we all take a moment to laugh about "anti-Church materials"? 6 Link to comment
Gray Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 16 minutes ago, the narrator said: Can we all take a moment to laugh about "anti-Church materials"? I guess that's the new anti-Mormon? Seems pretty non-specific though. Link to comment
CA Steve Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 16 minutes ago, the narrator said: Can we all take a moment to laugh about "anti-Church materials"? I would love to see the list of what he considered "anti-Church materials". And, the thought that one could just sit down and read though all of this material or even a significant portion of it, is just a bit difficult to believe. 2 Link to comment
Duncan Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, CA Steve said: I would love to see the list of what he considered "anti-Church materials". And, the thought that one could just sit down and read though all of this material or even a significant portion of it, is just a bit difficult to believe. i'd imagine he would have subjects but not every single piece of information. There was that graphic from mormon leaks a few years ago that had different subjects, Dehlin and Robert Norman made the list and people were like who is Robert Norman? but i'd imagine these were the groupings of information and he read or talked to people with those issues, but I don't speak for Elder Corbridge Link to comment
ksfisher Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, stemelbow said: Quote There are some members of the Church who don’t know the answers to the primary questions, and they spend their time and attention slogging through the secondary questions. “They mistakenly try to learn the truth by process of elimination, by attempting to eliminate every doubt,” Elder Corbridge said. Boy does he have that wrong. So Elder Corbridge is saying there are some members of the church who do this. When you say that he's wrong are you meaning that there are no members of the church who do this? 3 Link to comment
Popular Post bluebell Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, rockpond said: Another general authority tells young single adults to please stay in the ship despite their questions about church history, blacks/women and the priesthood, polygamy, gay marriage, first vision accounts, etc. Similar to the Renlunds’ theme: just stick with the basics, you don’t need to know more. https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-01-22/what-to-do-with-your-questions-according-to-1-general-authority-whos-an-expert-on-anti-church-materials-48843.amp?__twitter_impression=true From the article: “Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include: Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? “In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on. “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said.” Does he actually say that they don't need to know more? From the quotes that you've provided, it seems like what he's saying is that there is no good way to deal with the secondary questions until the primary questions are answered. Getting answers to the primary questions is the pre-requisite required to be able to manage/find answers/deal with the secondary questions. I don't see him saying that people don't need to care about the secondary questions, but maybe you didn't put that part up. While a person can disagree (i'm sure most atheists and agnostics would immediately disagree, for example), I don't see that there is anything bad about what he has said, especially not from a faithful/believing perspective. 17 Link to comment
CV75 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, rockpond said: Another general authority tells young single adults to please stay in the ship despite their questions about church history, blacks/women and the priesthood, polygamy, gay marriage, first vision accounts, etc. Similar to the Renlunds’ theme: just stick with the basics, you don’t need to know more. https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-01-22/what-to-do-with-your-questions-according-to-1-general-authority-whos-an-expert-on-anti-church-materials-48843.amp?__twitter_impression=true From the article: “Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include: Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? “In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on. “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said.” I think everything he says is sound. He seems to empathize with the darkness people feel when reading antagonistic material. Of course, this darkness can be manifest in various ways other than just the gloom or stupor of thought he experienced, and it needn’t arise from antagonistic material alone (the secondary questions can arise from a lack of information, social pressure, politics, personal bias, information processing style etc.). I don’t see him saying “please stay,” though the invitation and counsel is certainly to do so through responsible self-management: “The challenge is not as much closing the gap between our actions and our beliefs. The challenge, rather, is closing the gap between our beliefs and the truth.” 4 Link to comment
stemelbow Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 33 minutes ago, ksfisher said: So Elder Corbridge is saying there are some members of the church who do this. When you say that he's wrong are you meaning that there are no members of the church who do this? I"m saying there aren't any members who are trying to do the process of elimination he is attributing to them. They are desperately trying to find reason for their faith--not trying to eliminate doubt. He's misunderstood their intentions, it seems to me. Link to comment
Popular Post hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 2 hours ago, rockpond said: Another general authority tells young single adults to please stay in the ship despite their questions about church history, blacks/women and the priesthood, polygamy, gay marriage, first vision accounts, etc. Similar to the Renlunds’ theme: just stick with the basics, you don’t need to know more. https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-01-22/what-to-do-with-your-questions-according-to-1-general-authority-whos-an-expert-on-anti-church-materials-48843.amp?__twitter_impression=true From the article: “Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include: Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? “In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on. “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said.” I'm not surprised to see more reasoning like this, and I imagine this is quite common for how your average orthodox member processes the cognitive dissonance they might experience when learning troubling things about the church. Trust that the primary pillars about God and Joseph are a solid foundation to build on, and just assume that all those secondary questions don't undermine the truth of the larger pillars. Unfortunately, I see this as a shallow coping mechanism. Can you imagine applying this logic to having a healthy relationship with a spouse. Lets say the spouse is not being honest on finances or flirting with others and otherwise undermining the trust that the relationship were built on. Should a person just ignore these "secondary questions" about the signs they see that their relationship is not what it was originally cracked up to be? To take the relationship analogy further, what happens when a spouse chooses to discuss and address the problems that they are experiencing in their relationship with authenticity and vulnerability. Both parties might learn that the original foundation that they built the relationship on isn't the reality that they are experience. But they might also find out that there is a reason for the relationship to continue and for them to establish new parameters and expectations that are more realistic and more in line with what they've experienced as both individuals change and grow. This might be an example of a healthy compromise. Sometimes relationships can't compromise and may separate. I think the relationship example applies well to a relationship with the church as well. 7 Link to comment
Tacenda Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, bluebell said: Does he actually say that they don't need to know more? From the quotes that you've provided, it seems like what he's saying is that there is no good way to deal with the secondary questions until the primary questions are answered. Getting answers to the primary questions is the pre-requisite required to be able to manage/find answers/deal with the secondary questions. I don't see him saying that people don't need to care about the secondary questions, but maybe you didn't put that part up. While a person can disagree (i'm sure most atheists and agnostics would immediately disagree, for example), I don't see that there is anything bad about what he has said, especially not from a faithful/believing perspective. The problem being that the answers to the primary questions were weakened after learning the secondary questions weren't answered correctly or were dishonest. Link to comment
Popular Post hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 Even worse than his logic about primary and secondary questions is the way he labels the "gloom" he experiences when reading through antagonistic materials. Quote The gloom that came while reading so much material antagonistic to the Church did not come as the result of belief bias or the thought that everything he once believed could be wrong. Rather, “the gloom I experienced as I listened to the dark choir of voices raised against the Prophet Joseph Smith and the Restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ … is the absence of the Spirit of God,” Elder Corbridge said. This is an extremely immature approach to engaging with ideas that you might not know about or agree with. Can you imagine a thoughtful person who is reading materials from different POVs about any subject that they have a strong opinion about, and instead of actually engaging with the material and weighing the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments, the person instead attributes the entire arguments to coming from the devil because it gave them a bad feeling inside. Honestly, this is the shallow kind of approach that seasoned adults are giving us? 5 Link to comment
Popular Post bluebell Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 5 minutes ago, Tacenda said: The problem being that the answers to the primary questions were weakened after learning the secondary questions weren't answered correctly or were dishonest. And I think that might be the point he is trying to make. People are letting the answers to the secondary questions create answers for the primary questions: they are doing it backwards and that's why they are getting such poor results. Elder Corbridge seems to be teaching that there is an order of operations (like there is in math, for example) that one has to follow if they want to get 'correct' answers. If you do it out of order, it doesn't work. You'll get an answer, but it will be wrong. 11 Link to comment
Popular Post let’s roll Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 2 hours ago, rockpond said: Another general authority tells young single adults to please stay in the ship despite their questions about church history, blacks/women and the priesthood, polygamy, gay marriage, first vision accounts, etc. Similar to the Renlunds’ theme: just stick with the basics, you don’t need to know more. https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2019-01-22/what-to-do-with-your-questions-according-to-1-general-authority-whos-an-expert-on-anti-church-materials-48843.amp?__twitter_impression=true From the article: “Elder Corbridge explained there are primary and secondary questions when it comes to the Church. The primary questions must be answered first, as they are the most important. They include: Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? “In contrast, the secondary questions are unending. They include questions about Church history, polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, women and the priesthood, how the Book of Mormon was translated, DNA and the Book of Mormon, gay marriage, different accounts of the First Vision and so on. “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said.” What are your answers to the first two questions? If you answered in the affirmative to both, how would you answer these questions: Do you believe God speaks to His children? If He does, do you believe He speaks to you? If so, what does He tell you about your questions? If you’re not sure about any of the questions, can you see the logic of someone suggesting to you that your time would be best spent trying to get answers from one who is omniscient? I’m a lawyer trained in critical thinking, with an IQ of 140 and a healthy dose of skepticism. My experience has been that all those tools and skills pale in comparison to Divine communion, both with respect to what questions are important and the answer to those questions. The rest spoken of by Christ truly is freedom from fear and doubt. 5 Link to comment
stemelbow Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 The big problem is anyone can answer in the affirmative to all the primary questions and yet still find him/herself heavily perplexed and anxious about the secondary questions. You can answer the primaries in the affirmative and jump ship altogether. He says you can't do that, which is silly. Link to comment
phaedrus ut Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) I childhood friend of mine works for the church as basically a business analyst. He mentioned that in the past few years the church in the United States is starting to see the declines in membership and activity that has been happening internationally for the past decade. Committees are being formed to address the biggest topics causing disaffection. This includes a general rebranding to seem more mainstream Christian, lessening time burdens of meetings, home teaching, and Sunday church blocks, and trying to make the church a better home for women and minorities. Losing the youth is still seen as the biggest problem in the church and the lower missionary age did not help as much as predicted. Inoculating the youth before they begin to have doubts is seen as a preventative measure. One other statistic he mentioned had changed is the benefits of building new temples. Historically when a new temple is being built they would see inactive members return to the church and the increased tithes would help justify the expense of the building. Now temples are seen as more of a international missionary opportunity. I think we should expect to see many more talks about doubts. Also you'll notice the new term is "anti-Church" and no longer "anti-Mormon". Phaedrus Edited January 23, 2019 by phaedrus ut 4 Link to comment
Tacenda Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Even worse than his logic about primary and secondary questions is the way he labels the "gloom" he experiences when reading through antagonistic materials. This is an extremely immature approach to engaging with ideas that you might not know about or agree with. Can you imagine a thoughtful person who is reading materials from different POVs about any subject that they have a strong opinion about, and instead of actually engaging with the material and weighing the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments, the person instead attributes the entire arguments to coming from the devil because it gave them a bad feeling inside. Honestly, this is the shallow kind of approach that seasoned adults are giving us? I remember going through the sensation of feeling everything I read was from Satan when I first started reading discussion boards. It was a very dark feeling but it was because I had been conditioned to believe the church to be true. Before even reading on these forums, I had something pop up on the internet called www.wivesofjosephsmith.org and it was like going through a car wreak, when I first read the list of JS's wives, everything in slow motion, and feeling so strange. This led to the rabbit hole of unbelief. And then feeling all alone when speaking to a couple of people, my neighbor and my visiting teacher at the time, actually finding out that they didn't believe JS had other wives and they told me it was anti. The neighbor's mom was anti Mormon and she said her mom had told her about it and she wouldn't listen. And then having my visiting teacher say she didn't want to hear another word, because she didn't want to lose her testimony, not making this up. All I was trying to do was find out if they knew, and why hadn't I known beforehand. Link to comment
Popular Post pogi Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 18 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Unfortunately, I see this as a shallow coping mechanism. Is there a God who is our Father? Is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Savior of the world? Was Joseph Smith a prophet? Is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the kingdom of God on the earth? I would not label answers to these questions as "shallow". Seems like a very sturdy foundation to me. 20 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Can you imagine applying this logic to having a healthy relationship with a spouse. Lets say the spouse is not being honest on finances or flirting with others and otherwise undermining the trust that the relationship were built on. Should a person just ignore these "secondary questions" about the signs they see that their relationship is not what it was originally cracked up to be? To take the relationship analogy further, what happens when a spouse chooses to discuss and address the problems that they are experiencing in their relationship with authenticity and vulnerability. Both parties might learn that the original foundation that they built the relationship on isn't the reality that they are experience. But they might also find out that there is a reason for the relationship to continue and for them to establish new parameters and expectations that are more realistic and more in line with what they've experienced as both individuals change and grow. This might be an example of a healthy compromise. Sometimes relationships can't compromise and may separate. I think the relationship example applies well to a relationship with the church as well. The problem with your analogy is that there is absolutely no equivalent to the "primary questions" listed above in a human marital relationship. We can't really equate our spouse with God the Father, or Jesus Christ, or the one true and living kingdom of God on the earth... In a human relationship, there is no such thing as a one true spouse that we can use as a foundational anchor to work through other problems from. 5 Link to comment
Popular Post bluebell Posted January 23, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 23, 2019 17 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: I'm not surprised to see more reasoning like this, and I imagine this is quite common for how your average orthodox member processes the cognitive dissonance they might experience when learning troubling things about the church. Trust that the primary pillars about God and Joseph are a solid foundation to build on, and just assume that all those secondary questions don't undermine the truth of the larger pillars. Unfortunately, I see this as a shallow coping mechanism. Can you imagine applying this logic to having a healthy relationship with a spouse. Lets say the spouse is not being honest on finances or flirting with others and otherwise undermining the trust that the relationship were built on. Should a person just ignore these "secondary questions" about the signs they see that their relationship is not what it was originally cracked up to be? To take the relationship analogy further, what happens when a spouse chooses to discuss and address the problems that they are experiencing in their relationship with authenticity and vulnerability. Both parties might learn that the original foundation that they built the relationship on isn't the reality that they are experience. But they might also find out that there is a reason for the relationship to continue and for them to establish new parameters and expectations that are more realistic and more in line with what they've experienced as both individuals change and grow. This might be an example of a healthy compromise. Sometimes relationships can't compromise and may separate. I think the relationship example applies well to a relationship with the church as well. I don't think it's a shallow coping mechanism at all. I think it's actually a coping mechanism that requires a LOT from people, one that can be very difficult, but provides much better results. Walking away when things are hard is not automatically the 'mature' and 'deep' way to handle conflict. Also, can you share there reference where the speaker instructs people to ignore the secondary questions? Sincere question as I haven't seen the entire devotional yet). Even if we use the relationship analogy. I know someone who's husband cheated on her and made some other really horrible choices. It was the answers to her relationship's primary questions that helped her know how to handle the secondary ones (should she leave, could she trust him, what kind of a man was he really) that it was worth staying while he tried to repair what he had done. She did not ignore the secondary questions. She did not think that she didn't need to worry about them. She knew they were incredibly important and that she would have to find answers to them. But she knew that she knowing the answers to the primary questions is what allowed her to view the secondary questions in a more accurate light, and she realized that the answers to the primary questions are what made it possible to be patient as the answers to the secondary questions came. If she had tried to answer the secondary questions first, she would have left (her words), and she would have been wrong (meaning that she would have missed out on what she herself wanted most). 8 Link to comment
CV75 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, stemelbow said: The big problem is anyone can answer in the affirmative to all the primary questions and yet still find him/herself heavily perplexed and anxious about the secondary questions. You can answer the primaries in the affirmative and jump ship altogether. He says you can't do that, which is silly. He is not saying you cannot jump ship anyway: “If you answer the primary questions, the secondary questions get answered too or they pale in significance and you can deal with things you understand and things you don’t understand, things you agree with and things you don’t agree with without jumping ship altogether,” Elder Corbridge said. That is a very different message from what you are relaying it to be. 1 Link to comment
hope_for_things Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, Tacenda said: I remember going through the sensation of feeling everything I read was from Satan when I first started reading discussion boards. It was a very dark feeling but it was because I had been conditioned to believe the church to be true. Before even reading on these forums, I had something pop up on the internet called www.wivesofjosephsmith.org and it was like going through a car wreak, when I first read the list of JS's wives, everything in slow motion, and feeling so strange. This led to the rabbit hole of unbelief. And then feeling all alone when speaking to a couple of people, my neighbor and my visiting teacher at the time, actually finding out that they didn't believe JS had other wives and they told me it was anti. The neighbor's mom was anti Mormon and she said her mom had told her about it and she wouldn't listen. And then having my visiting teacher say she didn't want to hear another word, because she didn't want to lose her testimony, not making this up. All I was trying to do was find out if they knew, and why hadn't I known beforehand. Thanks, I had similar feelings at first and didn't know how to interpret them. With patience, these feelings went away and I was able to overcome my fears only through practice and reasoning. Cultural conditioning is very real. I still get feelings of anxiety when in new places and I try to use self talk and breathing to calm myself down. Also, learning about how other cultures experience these same feelings whenever they encounter ideas or behaviors that aren't in alignment with what they are used to, it helped me to understand better what I was experiencing. Mindfulness has helped a whole lot as well. 1 Link to comment
pogi Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, stemelbow said: The big problem is anyone can answer in the affirmative to all the primary questions and yet still find him/herself heavily perplexed and anxious about the secondary questions. You can answer the primaries in the affirmative and jump ship altogether. He says you can't do that, which is silly. Sure, you can jump ship. Speaking of silly, jumping off the one ship that you believe will get you home... Seems like any anxiety over secondary questions would pale in comparison to the anxiety one would feel about abandoning the ship that they know would get them home. That is like jumping off the ship into the dark blue ocean, because the stewardess messed up your order. Edited January 23, 2019 by pogi 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts