Calm

Again, not having the Gift of the Holy Ghost is not not having any direct influence of the Holy Spirit. That is not authoritative doctrine of the Church. The Gift of the Holy Ghost is one kind of direct influence, not the only kind.

Someone announces the data has all been collected from an experiment and that stage of research has been finished; the lab has been assigned to someone else and the students helping out have moved on to their next project. While preliminary findings may have been released, more in-depth examination may still result in additional or even different findings. That isn’t functionally the same as the experimental part of the research still continuing even if new conclusions can be arrived at by either new data collected or new examination of old data. In this case, public revelation is equivalent to experimental data where further knowledge can come from additional examination of that public revelation. Or look at it like a painting that has hidden features in it. It’s not a new painting just because someone finally figures out how to shift their attention to be able to see those previously hidden features.

I think it’s Stargazer who has written a book. Maybe he will show up and share some advice with you. My sister is writing a book, she is a retired, occasionally substituting elementary education teacher/former English lit university professor who writes daily for an hour or two first thing after breakfast iirc. It’s a deep dive version of one of her classroom adventures she would create to anchor the lessons to, which creation was something she greatly enjoyed. Writing about something you love and catches your attention seems to be the key to success of staying with the project.

I am sorry you didn’t get the time desired. That hurts.

This seems like it would happen if birth sex rules are put in place as well, if not more (see my previous posts).

This is what I have been wondering about. How would birth sex rules improve safety without ID checking becoming an issue?

I don’t believe it is selfish to want to say goodbye or want to be able to take one’s time and make more memories to hold on to…and if he is still able to give you meaningful answers, that’s not unselfish either to want to get some resolution or family history or just complete the picture of your dad, filling in the gaps that might be left that you weren’t aware of because it takes you experiencing life to realize you don’t know something or whatever those questions are about. It sounds like you have thought about it carefully and it’s not just an emotional refusal to accept their new reality as can happen when death approaches even when one wants what’s best for our loved ones. I hope and pray that you get your time and answers that you need. I would have loved that for myself.

Is there a reason why you want it delayed or are you just not ready yet to let go (a valid reason and I am not telling you praying for this is wrong, but as someone who has an excellent chance of facing dementia and having seen my mother and grandmother experience it, my belief for me and my family is sooner is better).

I wasn’t even a twinkle in my grandfather’s eye, I am guessing. 😛

Isn’t saying or is saying?

I don’t think you have actually established these two positions are opposing and cannot both be true, but simply assumed it. Work on that first.

Lovely.

Interesting idea. Please document this claim. Should be easy to do so if it’s the dominant view. Plus even if those in the afterlife can’t deny this knowledge, the knowledge is learned/newly experienced. That means the book isn’t closed on mysteries yet. The beatific vision, the ultimate purpose of man’s existence for many nonLDS Christians, will be a new and essential experience of what is now mystery, a spiritual and intellectual contemplation of God, for example. https://www.vatican.va/content/catechism/en/part_one/section_two/chapter_three/article_12/ii_heaven.html I do not believe you have demonstrated that nonLDS Christians who believe public revelation is closed means what is still unknown is unimportant because it doesn’t logically follow that we fully comprehend all that has been revealed yet, thus more knowledge, important knowledge, may come. Also, if something is the ultimate purpose of mankind, even if it comes in the next life, how can that be labeled unimportant knowledge? Or not actually a mystery? And that’s because even if God has revealed and mankind can comprehend all that is necessary for salvation, that any other knowledge is unimportant or unnecessary for us to learn. If you believe that nonLDS do believe we can fully comprehend all that God has revealed, document this please. If you believe that nonLDS do believe the only knowledge worth having is that necessary for our salvation, document that as well. I am not claiming nonLDS Christians believe the above, I am simply claiming it is illogical to close out the possibility of further knowledge even if God has revealed all already (a library has so much knowledge available but who comprehends it all just because the books are there?)

Anticipating something in the next life doesn’t render it unimportant in this life or we wouldn’t be caring about the afterlife at all. Just because someone believes something will always be a mystery in mortality doesn’t mean they believe God will keep the doors closed on more revelation in the next life or when Christ establishes his Kingdom on earth, however they imagine that.

That isn’t logical. There can always be mystery if there is something that is never intended to be revealed in this life. You will never know what’s in a room even if you have opened every door in a house if that room was not built with a door.

I believe it’s a Jewish prohibition as well, though not as encompassing as I thought. https://aish.com/destroying-statues-and-judaisms-prohibition-of-making-graven-images/

I don’t see it that way as I agree with him (at least as written here). But I suspect I have a different view of what the Gift of the Holy Ghost means than you possibly understand it to mean for us. For me, it is one vehicle to facilitate our relationship with the Spirit. It is only available in the here and now through receiving the specific authorized ordinance performed by an authorized priesthood holder, where authority and priesthood is defined by LDS standards. I don’t equate it, for example, with what happened to John as described in Luke 1:15 or the Pentecost.*** https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 1%3A15&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts 2&version=NIV However, there are many, many other vehicles out there to facilitate our relationship with the Spirit and I suspect some are not available to LDS (I think a monastic life is one, living as full time clergy with no other career besides serving God’s children in a devotional way is another). I believe doing volunteer work, prayer, scripture reading, caregiving, study of faiths, meditation, sacraments of many faiths, walking in nature and many more all can function as vehicles. The most important factor imo (and there may be LDS who think otherwise, but I think they are wrong and I know other Saints who agree with me) is the individual, not the vehicle…how open they are to experiencing the Spirit; how strong of a drive they possess to seek out God; how willing they are to be humble enough to accept what they hear, learn, or feel; how physically or emotionally they are prepared for the experience; or if they then use such knowledge to grow closer to God or help his children. I am sure I could come up with more variables that affect our experience, ones we have control over and others we don’t. To say another does not have the Gift of the Holy Ghost in my head isn’t any more offensive than saying someone is not LDS. Either they haven’t had the opportunity to receive either membership or the Gift or for what is likely a very reasonable reason, they have chosen not to take the opportunity. Neither of those means to me they are rejecting God or his Spirit in any way. Nor does either tell me how strong their relationships with God or the Spirit are. Analogy alert… Your wife chooses not to become a member of this message board to communicate with you through this medium. No one in their right mind would assume she has therefore rejected a relationship with you or believe that somehow I have a better relationship with you because I can communicate with you through posts here while she cannot. There are many vehicles of communication these days, email, message apps for texting, phones, face time, snail mail, DVD recordings or audio recordings, painting or sculpture for a more abstract form, body language, sign language, touching, and then face to face verbal communication. I have probably missed some. Each of these might be superior than the others for a specific purpose, but none of them tell us how well someone communicates or understands us and the choice of medium in no way tells us how deep or shallow that relationship is. There are people on this message board I know better and care more about than the neighbors across the street. I probably know some better here than I know a certain close in blood relative who separated from the family decades ago. I can’t think of a non superficial conversation I have had with them that I walked away from feeling good about since they were a teen. One could use a message board like this or email or even snail mail to open up with someone in a very deep and intimate way while barely talking to someone they see across the office every work day of their life. We make all sorts of assumptions about relationships based on the how a relationship occurs, but they may have little to do with reality. I don’t know if that member who told your wife that was judging her relationship as inherently less than any active member of the LDS faith or if to him it was a simple observation of her not experiencing one form of encountering the Spirit…a form that many members don’t make much use of, btw, I would suspect, but hope I am wrong. The Gift is certainly a blessing from God and I think it would be great if everyone had access to it, but it doesn’t appear to be high on God’s priorities in mortality given how few of his children he has ensured they have that opportunity. I believe the Light of Christ is another vehicle for a relationship with God and the Spirit and God made sure to give that to each of us. Those who make full use of that gift of the Spirit are going to have much deeper and stronger relationships with God than someone who has received the Gift of the Holy Ghost, but ignores any promptings of the Spirit. From your comments, it sounds like your wife is a deeply spiritual woman, someone any LDS would do well to learn from. She is not less spiritual or less valuable in that way just because she never partook of that specific ordinance. BTW, I am not telling you or your wife not to be concerned with what that LDS member said. I wasn’t there, you are likely to have a much better impression from tone, facial expression and other body language as well as their past behavior how he meant it. I am just sharing why some of us might agree with the words that he said. ***The dedication of the Kirtland Temple was described as a Pentecost, but those experiencing this would have already received the ordinance of the Gift of the Holy Ghost, so this must have been something different to that Gift. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-109-prayer-of-dedication-for-the-kirtland-temple?lang=eng

Do you find all statutes an issue, just religious ones, or just ones outside or inside worship areas. What do you think of the Christus or the Angel Moroni statues on temples? (Apparently the sculptor intended them to be Gabriel, thus the horn, but then an apostle suggested Moroni (think it was Marinner Merrill as I just looked this up yesterday as we drove by Provo’s temple) and that’s what stuck. I never understood the horn before, book was obvious.

I sense sequels coming….

Most do not accept the Nicene Creed or the Apostle’s Creed? Do you not define “Confessions of Faith” as creeds? I don’t or I would have to define the Articles of Faith as a creed, I think***, but I remember one Protestant I discussed this with did view their church’s confession as their creed as well as saying they accepted the Nicene Creed. Can’t remember their view on the Apostles’ Creed, but I remember discussions where declared Protestants did state they accepted both. (Perhaps what you mean is it is not a requirement?) How would you define “creed”? As I understand it, it’s a formal statement of essential beliefs. ***Some do see the AofF as a creed or creedish, so imo LDS need to get over our inclination to be pejorative about creeds in general and be more precise about why the Lord condemned creeds in the First Vision as reported by JS. https://rsc.byu.edu/literature-belief/confessing-belief-thoughts-language-articles-faith https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination

I’d vote for you as our next apostle.

Yes, I have needed to make a checklist for everything I do daily that must be done because memories and anticipation both create the belief I have taken my meds, etc when I haven’t or in tracking I get convinced that I have exercised, tidied a room, etc more than I actually have. I used to be really good with my lists, but now I forget to check them.

I love you I hope you know. (For those who think this is weird, we have known each other a long time and every now and then he says something that reminds me how great it’s been. And I need to let him know that.)

Indiana is a place name meaning Land of the Indians according to google. Recognizing that Native Americans originally lived there is different imo than calling people Indians who are not. One is recognition of a past, the other appropriation of identity. Add to that the racist caricature that got paired with the baseball name, historically it was insulting. “Indiana” as far as I know never got couple with racist imagery, etc. It would be odd for a baseball team that had no association with the RCC to call themselves the Popes just because they were centered in Rome, Georgia. If the mascot was also something one might find in an anticatholic screed and this gets put on all sorts of merchandise as well as team uniforms, advertising, etc, wouldn’t many actual Catholics get offended by that? I know I would be annoyed if Utah or someplace else had a team called “the Mormons” and used a ridiculous looking missionary as its mascot.

It should be pretty obvious why they are different. For one thing, people are not completely removing clothing in restrooms and they are in changing rooms. Plus there is a difference in how space is divided for privacy…or the lack of it. Women’s restrooms all have stalls with doors on them. Women are allowed full privacy in terms of exposure if staying within current laws. Stalls are also not curtained off where a breeze from a door being opened or just a person walking by could result in an unexpected opening, but rigid metal frames or even actual walls with a regular door. Even in the men’s, no one without a working penis will be using urinals, so biological men won’t be force to unexpectedly see female genitalia on someone who presents as a man, but is biologically female and lacks bottom surgery. I assume their stalls have doors as well. Anyone who is exposing themselves for a purpose other than urine into a urinal is violating current laws, are they not? And it’s pretty obvious the argument ‘I had to show my lady parts!’ is nonsense when the only legal purpose for exposing oneself in the nonstall area of a men’s restroom is to use a urinal….unless there is something going on in men’s restrooms I am not aware of. Changing rooms are often open concept, where partial or full nudity is a common occurrence, thereby requiring a less inclusive rule to avoid seeing unexpected genitalia.