Calm

It’s a thing for me because of working in a privately owned church bookstore and having one too many people (young adults typically) come in thinking everything in the store was vetted by the Church. My guess is given what I have seen at times in Deseretbook stores, the Church doesn’t even vet stuff in bookstores they own. Leave it up to employees who sometimes err in judgment, imo. The Church tends to stay in its lanes it has already designated and doesn’t get too adventurous. Avoids discussion that involves a lot of speculation or labeling/categorizing outside the basic. Iow, they don’t promote anything that hints at ‘iteing’ (Masonites, McConkieites, etc).

That happens a lot to me. You were probably very focused on the movie. Sometimes very uncomfortable. Used to be more fun when younger because it didn’t interfere with getting necessary stuff done.

Whatever this is, do you know this of your own personal knowledge or from someone who says they were involved or is it third or fourth hand? If so do you know the original source? I trust you and I suspect I could trust those you trust as you come across as very sensible to me ….but people those you trust trust…. 😛

How would an infinite loving being, who embodies not only justice, but mercy benefit from punishing other beings that are so much less than him in knowledge and power?

What purpose would there be to suffering for our sins, paying the debt by ourselves or Christ so to speak (I believe ‘paying our debt’ is an inaccurate shorthand of a redemptive relationship that is currently beyond our understanding) if we continued to commit them throughout eternity?

Who is squirming? What you have said in your more recent posts aligns fine with what I have said from the beginning.

But the Bible itself, can you be safe spiritually by treating the entirety as textbook Word of God, no explanations needed, just straightforward formulas for behaviour….a+b=c?

I don’t actually disagree with Elder McConkie when he says this: I just don’t think it needs to be taught because I have a difficult time comprehending what could possibly be a fair and just opportunity given mortal conditions, especially due to the limits of communication and the massive dependence of our thoughts and feelings on biology. And that does mean D&C 76 is confusing to me. Many interpret that to say those who Noah preached to had a just and fair opportunity even though it sounds to me that they never got baptized and had a chance to live the Gospel.*** Given the conditions back then that often get described as justification for God destroying all of mankind save a few (they could no longer progress they were so mired in sin and corruption, repentance would not be possible in that state…or so I have heard), how would that be just? Isn’t it like teaching someone math who has a mental block against it and thinking they should have been able to get A+ in class just from the teaching? Without working with them to remove the block? ***Elder McConkie’s quote has that in it:

I was taught in church when young they were destined for the terrestrial kingdom at best. In church lessons. They were defined as those who were not valiant. Sunday School and seminary. (My parents had much fuzzier lines drawn, left it up to God, but I was too shy to debate back then, so I don’t know if they were actually more nuanced in some cases.) There was also debate over what was meant by died without law and if that meant never receiving the Gospel, never being baptized (though most said they had to be exposed to it and reject it, but that might be as little as not being interested when missionaries came to the door). There are good reasons why some LDS parents were heartbroken, even panicked, over kids leaving the Church, being “wayward” back then, imo.

What is odd to me is that we believe he can redeem them in mortality; after all he redeemed Alma the Younger who was probably taught the gospel and possibly even lived it when he was younger, but for whatever reason, then became someone who persecuted the Saints. Likely an apostate then, or how we would define one if in the modern Church. A child of one of our prophets who became an antimormon and not just any antimormon, but one of the worst kinds apparently. We have an extraordinary description of his redemption…not triggered by his own repentance even, but by the faith and prayers of his father. Yet for children of modern Saints we can’t see the same thing happening just because they died before they get the angel experience?

Agreed. A serious student won’t treat the Bible like a textbook, but make distinctions between the different genres, etc.

And if it’s a response he doesn’t like?

Looks like people are having fun creating language for it (deciding the meaning of the symbolism). So far my favorite is it about the internal self in crisis and each animal is a different part of the Self. Got interrupted watching it (got to go make rescue waffles), so have no clue if this will help (if you want help with it, lol). Looks like a stunning movie, but not sure I could watch it.

This explains what you see as a normal level of caution. I think it also explains the differences in interpretation of “potential rapist” and how you and I have different expectations of response to that premise With bugs identification is relatively easy. It is wise imo for someone at risk of an allergy to bees to have a moderately heightened awareness of bugs when bees are more likely to be present so that when one becomes aware of a bug close by (whether by sound or seeing it), one takes the time to identify where possible if it is a bee or not. No need to panic or to be fearful, that would be counterproductive in fact, interfere with realistic appraisal. Better to have a level of vigilance similar to when one checks one’s rear mirror and side and glances around one’s car periodically assuming all will be well, but knowing there is potential for it not to be and so there is a need to check so one has an opportunity to respond in a timely manner. Vigilance can vary based on location…winter time and indoors or in areas with no vegetation, no real need to check for red flags unless a red flag gets shoved in one’s face…bees sometimes do fly indoors after all. And my son got stung by a bee in the winter time because he stepped on a dead bee on our balcony. We should have swept it as there was a lot of debris, might be something else he could have step on to that was painful. Phrasing “every bug is a potential bee” doesn’t necessarily mean imagining every bug is a bee, it can mean one withholds any conclusions until one makes the appropriate effort to identify whether a bug is a bee or not and therefore requires action. One does not need to act until one knows for sure except in areas of high risks where bee encounters are highly probable. It definitely doesn’t mean one is assuming bees will be frequently be inside homes or around at night. That is for one thing against the stats dealing with bees. It would be irrational to spend time thinking on and planning anything beyond the bare minimum for these because such encounters would have a very low occurrence and in most cases once encountered, there’s easy solutions to control the situation (bees stuck indoors somehow hang around windows or doors, one can therefore remove oneself and get another to deal with the wayward bee). An epi pen covers the very rare occurrence of getting stung by a bee at night in the winter, such as occurred with my son. You can tell me if you have any problem with the above, it sounds to me much the same as what you wrote that I quoted. It would be helpful too if you explained why you went to extreme irrationality as if someone using ‘every man a potential rapist’ is imagining situations comparable in being fearful of bees at night, etc. I don’t understand when most of us are talking about taking realistic, rational measures for safety, you have jumped to being focusing on irrational, anxiety disorders attached to predators. Back to bees….sort of. Using your response to bees, I would like you to explain how one can prepare for assault in the same rational, realistic way you and I describe above for bees because I see those as good standards for preparation and caution for most (all?) things in life. These are serious questions as your answers will help me see how you and I view the risk differently (if we actually do) and what is appropriate to do about the risk (separating this from how to discuss it for now). 1) Someone would be unwise to imagine a bug is a bee when they identify that it lacks the distinctive identifiers, correct? What are the distinctive identifiers of a predator so that we can immediately know in the same way that someone is not a predator (not limiting this to only men or adults as predators can be women and juveniles? 2) Someone would be unwise to worry about bees in places they don’t typically appear, such as in our homes and anywhere indoors or times such as at night. Where are the places and times predators don’t appear? I agree those with allergies to bees should assume others who do not have that allergies are not at risk. At the very least it would be wasteful for those not allergic or likely around those who are to carry an EpiPen. That is better to go to those who know they need it. 3) How can you tell if someone is not at risk of being targeted by a predator? What is unique about those who have been victims of assault and harassment that we can use to identify those who they should not project the possibility of assault or harassment on? For those of us who have been victims and are now survivors, how do we know when it would be unreasonable to project the possibility of what happened to us onto other women or children or anyone for that matter? What shows who is safe and who might not be? If you could answer those 3 questions along with the previous ones, it would help me and hopefully others quite a bit in understanding your view of what is a realistic approach to safety in this area.

I thought they were just prepping the property.

That is great and all, but such nuances as you added are neither in the Bible nor in our lessons manuals that point to Jephthah as a man of God. Which is why we shouldn’t look at scripture like a textbook….which was the point I was making and the point your comment that added nuances, offered additional information ended up supporting. The Church curriculum department missed a great opportunity imo here to add nuance to our instruction of scripture study.

God is a god of order. It makes sense to me there is this exchange between us. It aligns in my mind with the kinship based patron-client relationship that the Bible portrays exists between man and God, imo. I believe God let us know in detail what we could expect and what he expected from us. The veil has removed much of the awareness of those details and covenant, but I believe that knowledge and the covenant itself, our commitment with God is embedded in our soul, functioning similar to the Light of Christ. One of the reasons “Be still and know that I am God” makes sense to me (when we manage to quiet the noise—not always possible unfortunately—we may grow in internal awareness and be able to connect in stronger ways with that awareness of who God is to us, though there’s so much noise internally as well, so being still is not just removing oneself from the external chaos).

I think that may be the only truth we don’t need to unlearn in some way. I am looking forward to the fun myself.

It’s great you find movies you can enjoy that much. Do you think it makes a difference to see it in theaters rather than the large screen at home? (I still am bewildered by how big even the ‘typical’ size is).

It sounds like a passive aggressive threat. My preference would be that the Church find a city in the area that wants it, move over there and then encourages its members in the area to go all out in volunteering as well as humanitarian projects sponsored by the Church, etc., temple visitors spend significant money there, etc and in the end the town that accepted the temple as is grows better and more beautiful and gets a better reputation for quality living. Just a dream, but a good one.

So glad to hear that?

Definitely not. Never assume anything is put out by the Church unless it’s on the Church’s website and/or it has the logo. Also good idea to check the bottom of the page to see if it has the copyright notice.

It didn’t register with me that he “reenacted” his friend’s singing the first time I read it, I think because I would not expect that in anything but a casual conversation or comedic routine. It’s easy to miss stuff because of our expectations. I try to remember to read things twice before reacting, but sometimes I have read things several times and still missed something crucial. I find my spelling is sloppy these days, too much reliance on autocorrect.

No, I understand what they are, I just see the topic as political and so didn’t spend time being as precise as I usually try to be.

There are parts of the scriptures I find to be wonderful examples of how we should live our best lives (the parables of Jesus, instructions to care for those in need, the poor, love and forgive our enemies). There are other parts that if followed like a how to book of obedience would lead to disaster imo. Jephthah is not an example of commitment to covenant making I think we should be modeling (and it’s jaw dropping for me to see him pointed to in a church lesson as such without any warning attached). Do you believe we should be so committed to any covenant we make with the Lord, personal or public, that we will harm others or ourselves to fill them? That we should never question if our covenants are actually what God wants us to do? Jephthah even places the blame for the outcome of his stupid vow not on his own impulsive foolishness, but on his daughter…who obedient to her father’s desires goes to her death willingly and he follows through ‘obediently’ with his vow and sacrifices her. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-seminary-student-study-guide-obs/the-book-of-judges/judges-11-12-the-story-of-jephthah?lang=eng