Rain

It would especially work if the church quit the nice, neat in a box 4-year rotation and taught for as long as the books are needed. The OT has 1184 pages, the NT has about 400, the BoM has 531, and the D&C/PGP has about 375, yet each of them is taught for a year each. I never noticed it till I was teaching OT how much we were racing through it and missing so much. Would it really matter if it took, say, 2 years and 7 months to go through the OT and 14 months to go through the BoM? I know there is a big deal about starting over so many things on January 1st, and sometimes that can be motivating, but I think sometimes we do ourselves a disservice by always doing things that way. So many things in our lives don't start over on January 1st and are just fine. I think it might be worth a try with the church and the books of scripture. Note: I am NOT saying the church is wrong on this. I haven't even thought about praying about it - even when I was a believing member. At this point, I don't care all that much about it. I just think it would be something to consider and would help with a better understanding of what people are reading and discussing.

Is this at the beginning before the different lessons?

Good question. If I remember right it did handle it differently in the home version (the one I quoted was the Sunday School version) though also, if I remember right, it just skipped over discussion of it in the home version.

" I can also withhold judgment on the weird stuff especially in the Old Testament until we get the whole story someday. But I also trust the God won't allow His prophets to lead us astray today. " @gopher Just saw your quote in MrShorty's post. I missed it somewhere. You asked where the church could do better. Here is one place. I was at a place where I felt the same when I was teaching Gospel Doctrine. The problem comes with things like this - during that time when we came to the OT lesson in Come about God commanding to kill all the men, women and children. Out of all churches this would have been a great place in Come Follow Me to talk about the bible being translated correctly or precious things being taken away etc. allowing people to "withhold judgment on the weird stuff." Or a great place about how to deal with what seems to many to be contradictory to God's will. But the church didn't do that. It put this in the manual: "While we don’t know all the reasons Saul was commanded to kill all of the Amalekites and their animals, there are lessons to learn from his response to that commandment. To help class members identify these lessons, you could write on the board To obey is better than … and invite class members to ponder this phrase as you review together events from 1 Samuel 15. What are some good things we do in our lives that we sometimes choose instead of obeying God? Why is obedience to God better than those other good things?" https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-sunday-school-old-testament-2022/25?lang=eng Just an assumption that killing of innocent adults and children was the right thing to do plus the idea that it is better to obey God directly with it. No witholding judgement of the weird things. Just an assumption that this was right and good.

I no longer believe that the church is the only one with authority. I'm unsure that any have authority, and I am unsure of prophets, but I am open to most church leaders speaking for God to some extent. Most of what I have been saying on here is that I see how people faithful to this church, specifically, and trusting of its prophets, could believe that those prophets are not perfect and could make some mistakes. I don't have to believe to know there are spaces between 100% trusting and being disloyal, as I understood long before I ever thought about the church not being "true". I understand this and have understood it all through this thread. I don't really see anyone here doing that. What I see is people who have tried to know the will of God and done what the Lord has asked of them in finding answers, and feel they got a different answer on certain subjects. Maybe you see that as the same thing. I see a subtle, but important difference.

If everyone had spouses they could trust to be 100% true there wouldn't be rules/ideas like husbands and wives should share social media accounts, RS presidents and bishops shouldn't ride together to meetings, women shouldn't wear skimpy clothes because it might tempt a man - all things church leaders have put out because they find that humans can't be 100% trusted. Yet, most of the people who follow those ideas don't feel a real lack of trust in their spouses. They just recognize that no one is perfect. And that includes the prophet. He is human. He can make mistakes. You can have a ton of trust in a prophet and still understand he may make a mistake. That doesn't mean you find the prophet untrustworthy.

Many people who accept they are prophets of God also accept they are not perfect in all that they say. It isn't a binary thing for them. It's not "accept they are a prophet and trust everything they say" or "don't accept him as a prophet". For many of them it is "accept he is a prophet, trust most things he has to, and when you're not sure, do what the church has taught and pray and study it out while being sincere and humble and doing your best to be a good receiver of inpiration." No one here has said that or shown that. Some of the people who don't feel the process is always either trust the prophet or don't may feel their moral compass is the same as the prophet or may feel that that the prophet's compass is better overall, but still not perfect which is why they pray to know if the prophet's compass is in line on certain matters. Right. Which is why many people read and pray sincerely and often read and pray more when they don't line up with the prophet. And more. But sometimes in following the prayer process as the church teaches those answers are going to be different than others who will be praying. I think you are right, but I think you might be wrong if you think that those who think the prophet can sometimes teach a wrong thing don't trust orr are not loyal. Yes! The church often acts as a parent. When parents are willing to tell their children when they are wrong, the children trust them more.

We had 2 of our kid's and spouse/girlfriend for our traditional appetizer grazing dinner. They left earlier than expected because 1 couple is headed to her parent's house a couple of hours away. Tomorrow it will just be me and my husband as the other couple is going to his parent's. Traditionally since moving to AZ we have done Chinese, but with just us I don't know if I want to call around to find one open - I called quite a few last year before finding one. My husband will probably work on our bathroom cabinets that he is building. I'll probably organize a room. We are good with that as Christmas Eve is the night I really like to have family things. I light up the plac with Christmas lights and it just sets the mood.

I understand. I just wanted Navidad to know that I agreed that the chapter did not explain that part well. It's pretty bad because I always was pretty aware of making things simple for those who were learning and aware of when things weren't, but I had never noticed how much my other learning affected how i saw things that were there or not there in this chapter before.

You are right - I just read chapter 41 does and it does not do a good job in explaining how I understood and understand the doctrine to be for anyone who is either not a "wicked" person or a "righteous" member. By using the Book of Mormon scripture first it gives the impression there are only those 2 groups not 1) people who have never heard of the gospel or 2) good people who don't accept the doctrine and 3) good people who may accept it at some time. So later when it teaches about Spirit Prison being basically split between wicked and those being taught it leaves the impression that while being taught they are still going through what the scripture above says. It just doesn't do a good job with explaining what happens to people who are good or learning and are not then currently believers of the doctrine.

Yes, I was talking specifically about missionaries.

I think the apostle idea and missionaries only works if elder missionaries are working the same way as sisters, but it doesn't. Here are some differences: ● Elders are called by their priesthood office (Elder Smith). Sisters are called by their church membership (Sister Smith - all women members are called "Sister" whether they have been endowed or not, on a mission or not.) ● No woman ever baptizes, confirms or ordains the people they have taught like the elders do ● When sisters are put in leadership positions it is never over men. Elders in leadership positions are always over women if women are in that group. ● In the New Testement apostles went out to teach, but others who were not called apostles went out as well. Going out to teach didn't make the others an apostle. There was something more to being an apostle.

There is another option though besides speculation and being persuaded by someone else and it is doing what the church teaches: study and pray about it sincerely and humbly. So if one does that and the answer they get is that polygamy was wrong then I think that's a whole lot different than speculation or persuasion. I know that many will then say that if it doesn't align with what church leaders say then your answers didn't really come from the Spirit, but if that's the case then we are back to people saying church leaders are not infallible even when they don't believe it.

Those exceptions are frustrating. The sealing, which I attended, of one of my nieces to her parents was a big exception, but afterwards the church told her parents no one should be telling others what happened. So was that sealing ok or not?

I have never heard this before. I definitely have heard you are not supposed to be putting in non family names to be done, but never heard you are not supposed to look them up.

The agreement is just for Holocaust victims, not all Jews and those with relatives who are members of the church can still have work done by them.

I believe he is not wanting to debate, but is speaking from a place of pain now.

I hope the best for you as you think these things through and that those around you will respect you and your dear wife.

This does not bode well for me!

I'm not one to have favorites overall. My husband is my favorite person. Green is my favorite color, except that it is not when I think about how I like green as a supporting color rather than as the color I like as my favorite. Mostly, I just like green plants to complete what an indoor or outdoor space looks like. That's it, all the favorites I have. It's kind of weird thinking about my favorite prophet as someone who has lost my faith, since I don't believe they are prophets, so how can one be my favorite? And there are things they have said that once might have been encouraging to me, but now are quite painful. Can a prophet be your favorite if you don't believe in his position as prophet and feel pain from things he has said? So I have to think of it more as "what is something you liked about a Mormon church president?" I loved how President Monson encouraged people to serve others by example and word. I didn't connect with him at all with most of his talks because of his way of speaking and use of poetry, but I loved that he so often shared to help others. I like how President Nelson used his profession to guide people not only spiritually, but mentally and physically. I liked how McKay and Hinckley were known for their love for their wives.

It did not look like you implied that. I read your post several times trying to find something that looked like you implied that and found you did not. I only found evidence showing it was some victims (the word "may" and not "every".)

But the mouse

I probably need to make what I said more clear. They kept the passports, not the missionaries. You could say he kept the missionaries since, depending where they are, they couldn't travel without the passport, but I have not been told by anyone who actually knows why these MPs were keeping passports.

I saw Rental Family last weekend. Ended up going 3 Saturdays in a row to see it lol. The first Saturday I didn't catch that it wasn't that week and arrived to find it not theaters yet. The second Saturday I figured this time I would reserve it online despite paying the convenience fee, only to arrive again and find I reserved for the next Thursday morning. Luckily I was able to cancel it, except for the fee, and managed to actually buy tickets for the next Saturday. Anyway, overall I liked it, but didn't love it. I really like Brendan Fraser and there just are not many non cartoon, non superhero, non violence and sex movies so I really wanted to love it.

Did you end up still liking it when you got done? I've just started listening (it has been on hold this entire time) to it with kindle assisted reader so I am hearing the digital reader and not the author's voice.