I learned in church today

[All-American]

If I were God, I think it would bug me to have people publicly tell me how to do my business.

If you're hoping to avoid deification, then Mormonism probably isn't for you after all.

[Sleeping in EQ]

What is especially troubling about those two things is that they tend to be present at most sleepovers.

As I recall, Ezra Taft Benson said that Khrushchev loved sleepovers.

[DU Ute]

Most people's first experience with porn, drugs, or alcohol happens at sleepovers. But this only applies to sleepovers with non family members.

Apparently DNA has magical properties.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

You shouldn't have learned this in Church, this was discussed at length in General Conference. Please try to keep up!

[NorthwestUteFan]

All week my wife and I talked about Easter, taught our kids about Easter, the resurrection, Jesus, etc. We commented numerous times that we hope to have talks and lessons about The Savior.
We were shocked to have talks about the wonderful First Vision, how service brings us closer to God, and what the Primary kids learned about church history, in that order.

In EQ meeting, the instructor gave a solid lesson on Uchtdorf's Import Things talk from last October. He is a military guy who is out of town most of the time, but is a great guy.
He finished with a beautiful, heartfelt testimony of the beauty of the Gospel and the Divinity of Jesus Christ, that wholly redeemed the entire church experience. Made the entire day at church worthwhile. Bravo! Thanks

[FMCoug]

You shouldn't have learned this in Church, this was discussed at length in General Conference. Please try to keep up!

Sadly, that talk was the source for the lesson in which this was taught. The funny part is the teacher and most of the others that my wife, daughter, and I were discussing it with afterwards completely missed the point of the talk.

Sister: I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings so I don't let my kids sleep over anywhere because there are some houses I'm not comfortable with it."

Mrs. FM: There are kids I don't let come play at my house in the daytime because I don't like the influence they have on my kids.

Sister: Blank stare.

Mrs. FM: Wasn't that the point of the talk? To take these situations on a case by case basis and make courageous decisions when we need to?

Sister: Anyway ... <changes the subject>


Sigh.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Sadly, that talk was the source for the lesson in which this was taught. The funny part is the teacher and most of the others that my wife, daughter, and I were discussing it with afterwards completely missed the point of the talk.

Sister: I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings so I don't let my kids sleep over anywhere because there are some houses I'm not comfortable with it."

Mrs. FM: There are kids I don't let come play at my house in the daytime because I don't like the influence they have on my kids.

Sister: Blank stare.

Mrs. FM: Wasn't that the point of the talk? To take these situations on a case by case basis and make courageous decisions when we need to?

Sister: Anyway ... <changes the subject>


Sigh.

I don't get it. What was upsetting to you about this exchange?

[Portland Ute]

All week my wife and I talked about Easter, taught our kids about Easter, the resurrection, Jesus, etc. We commented numerous times that we hope to have talks and lessons about The Savior.
We were shocked to have talks about the wonderful First Vision, how service brings us closer to God, and what the Primary kids learned about church history, in that order.

A few years ago (I want to say it was 2007 or 2008) we had an Easter Sunday on which sacrament meeting was completely dedicated to Joseph Smith. Complete with "Praise to the Man." Very little mention at all about Christ, the resurrection, the atonement....anything. Other than the account of the correlated version of the First Vision there was very little mention of Christ.

I would have been horrified had I been aware of any non-Member in attendance in our "Easter Services."

[LA Ute]

Other than the account of the correlated version of the First Vision there was very little mention of Christ.

The Pearl of Great Price is now "correlated?"

[Portland Ute]

The Pearl of Great Price is now "correlated?"

After all of the discussion here of the multiple accounts, I wanted to make sure that everyone understood that it was the "correlated", accepted version found in the POG and not the 1832 version that only mentioned an angel and nothing of Christ...

[FMCoug]

I don't get it. What was upsetting to you about this exchange?

I wouldn't say it upset me. I just thought it illustrated the "black and white" worldview of so many members. Bad things can happen at sleepovers = all sleepovers are bad. And when my wife brought up having to make decisions that aren't black and white (in a non-sleepover situation) this sister couldnt' see that.

The problem is where do you stop? My daughter is 16 now. I guarantee you there will be guys who ask her out that we will say no way. Does that mean we should't let her date at all? Or come up with some sort of "rule" for each situation that comes up so as not to hurt anybody's feelings?

I find it ironic / amusing that in a religion where personal revelation is supposed to be the basis of everything we do, these black and white sets of rules are what everyone seems to be looking for. And I think that was the point of that talk. Not to come up with yet another set of rules that can be applied without thinking.

[LA Ute]

After all of the discussion here of the multiple accounts, I wanted to make sure that everyone understood that it was the "correlated", accepted version found in the POG and not the 1832 version that only mentioned an angel and nothing of Christ...

LOL. "Correlated" has come to mean much more than was intended.



BTW, I am not sure about the notion that Joseph Smith mentions only an angel in his 1832 account:



More here.

If someone else has more info, I'm all ears.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I wouldn't say it upset me. I just thought it illustrated the "black and white" worldview of so many members. Bad things can happen at sleepovers = all sleepovers are bad. And when my wife brought up having to make decisions that aren't black and white (in a non-sleepover situation) this sister couldnt' see that.

I don't see that at all in the comments from this sister that you provided in your post. Maybe there was more to the conversation.

The problem is where do you stop? My daughter is 16 now. I guarantee you there will be guys who ask her out that we will say no way. Does that mean we should't let her date at all? Or come up with some sort of "rule" for each situation that comes up so as not to hurt anybody's feelings?

I find it ironic / amusing that in a religion where personal revelation is supposed to be the basis of everything we do, these black and white sets of rules are what everyone seems to be looking for. And I think that was the point of that talk. Not to come up with yet another set of rules that can be applied without thinking.

You mentioned above that your daughter just turned 16. Given the logic you have expressed here, it would seem obvious that you have been allowing her to date prior to this time. Because of course, a blanket rule forbidding dating prior to 16 would be black and white and would not allow for personal revelation.

[FMCoug]

I don't see that at all in the comments from this sister that you provided in your post. Maybe there was more to the conversation.

In person conversations can be tough to replicate on a message board. Plus we know this sister well. Suffice it to say she seemed bewildered by the concept of not having a "rule" for every situation (i.e. my wife's example of not wanting certain neighborhood kids over to play).

You mentioned above that your daughter just turned 16. Given the logic you have expressed here, it would seem obvious that you have been allowing her to date prior to this time. Because of course, a blanket rule forbidding dating prior to 16 would be black and white and would not allow for personal revelation.

What is so obvious? Couldn't I have had personal revelation that she shouldn't date until she is 16? Or 18? Or 35?

[UtahDan]

If someone else has more info, I'm all ears.

http://www.boap.org/LDS/History/HTML...c1history.html

If you scroll to the bottom, the page has a side by side comparison of all the known 1st vision accounts.

[UtahDan]

http://www.boap.org/LDS/History/HTML...c1history.html

If you scroll to the bottom, the page has a side by side comparison of all the known 1st vision accounts.

http://www.utlm.org/images/firstvisi...h1832large.jpg

This is a photocopy of the 1832 account which is the only one in Joseph's own hand. It can be magnified and read. Interesting to read it through this way.