For the Strength of Youth 2012

[fusnik]

Clueless jogs with a sports bra on the beach in Rio and wears Brazilian cut bikinis. I can only imagine the gossip if it were in the US.

It would depend on how hot / fit she is.

Doubt anyone would really care.

[Viking]

It would depend on how hot / fit she is.

Doubt anyone would really care.

People say the "my wife is the most beautiful woman I know" stuff all the time but genuinely, Clueless is the most stunning woman I've ever known.

She also happens to have a severe eyesight problem.

[Green Monstah]

People say the "my wife is the most beautiful woman I know" stuff all the time but genuinely, Clueless is the most stunning woman I've ever known.

She also happens to have a severe eyesight problem.

This post is worthless without pics.

[RobinFinderson]

I like the Rambam's reading. As a literal reading or forced one, I don't really care (though it doesn't seem all that forced to me), it just strikes me as exactly the kind of thinking I would have really appreciated at the point in my spiritual evolution when I was trying to find a way to make Mormonism a church that I could really respect. So I enjoyed reading his thoughts in this thread.

I also like DDD's question about why we need to rank sins in the first place. From a religious vantage, I just don't see the point of it. Does God think that stealing a car is worse than stealing a candy bar? It makes sense to rank these crimes differently from a social perspective, but from a religious perspective, I can't figure out why they would be different. Sin is really complex. There is the act itself, and then there is the motivation, and then there are the consequences, and then there is the person's measure of accountability. If one were going to develop a ranking system, it would have to, at the very least, consider all of these factors. But then it would be absurd to make blanket statements about what sin is second to murder.

So if Alma's implied sin-scale is absurd, maybe no such thing exists in God's mind, and maybe this was just some old-grandpa advice. Prophets today are full of all kinds of old-grandpa advice. That doesn't make it scripture. It isn't even necessarily scripture when it is in the scriptures. Why would the BOM not contain Old-Grandpa advice? The church publishes volumes of Old-Grandpa advice today. I'm not sure why it would be different in BOM/JS's time.

People can think what they want about the gravity of sexual impurity, but the Mormon church's take on the issue is just a bunch of Old-Grandpa advice -- some of it is useful, and some of it is very dated. There might be more contemporary and, to put it bluntly, more thoughtful ways to arrive at similar or better standards as those contained in Old-Grandpa advice. The Mormon leaders seem like nice enough men, but even back when I seriously wanted to believe in the church, they never seemed to be the sorts of remarkable men from which I would expect to hear some really original or inspirational moral thinking. They seem more like good caretakers of a religion rather than prophets. And there is nothing wrong with that. But I think it is also appropriate to recognize that these caretakers are going to have a lot of Old-Grandpa advice. Take it for what it is worth, but don't make the mistake of putting too much stock into Old-Grandpa advice.

[Mr. Mcgibblets]

Mormon dominated message boards have introduced me to an interesting segment of Mormons. If this segment is correct then the Celestial Kingdom will be one big circlejerk where they all pat each other on the back for not really needing Jesus that much to get there because they were so obedient in this life - all while taking subtle self-righteous jabs at others. There are assholes everywhere, but I think the celestial kingdom is going to have the highest ratio of them.

[The Rambam]

Disobedience limits the influence of the Spirit.

You would think after thousands of years and a wide variety of different rules at different times it would become obvious that the issue isn't what the rules are specifically, it's whether or not someone has the willingness to be obedient.

I believe that all things being equal, if someone deliberately chooses not to follow the standards, there is a greater likelihood (however small or great that might be) that they are deliberately choosing not to be obedient in other things. So the issue isn't the number of earrings, it's the underlying motivations and attitudes that led to the number.

This is obedience for obedience's sake. If your goal is just so show how far down your throat you can take the man's package, then great. I have a higher hope, I want true love. You want to be the man's gimp--willingly taking all he can dish out, being obedient to whatever standard imposed. No thanks.

If God appears to you and tells you to slit your son's throat, just say no. If Pres. Monson calls you and tells you to deliver your wife to his bedchamber for a celestial sealing, hang up the phone. If your bishop tells you, in the context of the Friends of Scouting drive, that all your assets are at his disposal under the law of consecration and he wants $250, walk out of his office and keep walking.

You are right in your final comment above. I think there is a correlation between those who give to Friends of Scouting and those who only wear one erring; those who run in sports bras and those who don't go to Church when on vacation. Etc.

Of course, birds of a feather flock together--you probably want to spend your life surrounded by those who contribute generously to Friends of Scouting and go to church when on vacation. So you train up your family to be this way. Good on you. I would rather spend my life around those who spend Sunday mornings on vacation running on the beach in a sports bra. To each their own.

But don't think you are happier than me in your subservience to random standards. You aren't.

[Moliere]

This is obedience for obedience's sake. If your goal is just so show how far down your throat you can take the man's package, then great. I have a higher hope, I want true love. You want to be the man's gimp--willingly taking all he can dish out, being obedient to whatever standard imposed. No thanks.

If God appears to you and tells you to slit your son's throat, just say no. If Pres. Monson calls you and tells you to deliver your wife to his bedchamber for a celestial sealing, hang up the phone. If your bishop tells you, in the context of the Friends of Scouting drive, that all your assets are at his disposal under the law of consecration and he wants $250, walk out of his office and keep walking.

You are right in your final comment above. I think there is a correlation between those who give to Friends of Scouting and those who only wear one erring; those who run in sports bras and those who don't go to Church when on vacation. Etc.

Of course, birds of a feather flock together--you probably want to spend your life surrounded by those who contribute generously to Friends of Scouting and go to church when on vacation. So you train up your family to be this way. Good on you. I would rather spend my life around those who spend Sunday mornings on vacation running on the beach in a sports bra. To each their own.

But don't think you are happier than me in your subservience to random standards. You aren't.

Attempted :threadjacked:

[The Rambam]

Attempted :threadjacked:

???

Is there a history on here regarding Friends of Scouting I don't know about? It is just an example from my life about being "obedient" (or not) to Church leaders. Just like wearing one erring.

Which things Indy supports.

[Mormon Red Death]

Mormon dominated message boards have introduced me to an interesting segment of Mormons. If this segment is correct then the Celestial Kingdom will be one big circlejerk where they all pat each other on the back for not really needing Jesus that much to get there because they were so obedient in this life - all while taking subtle self-righteous jabs at others. There are assholes everywhere, but I think the celestial kingdom is going to have the highest ratio of them.

[DrumNFeather]

Mormon dominated message boards have introduced me to an interesting segment of Mormons. If this segment is correct then the Celestial Kingdom will be one big circlejerk where they all pat each other on the back for not really needing Jesus that much to get there because they were so obedient in this life - all while taking subtle self-righteous jabs at others. There are assholes everywhere, but I think the celestial kingdom is going to have the highest ratio of them.

Oh, I don't know about that...there seems to be equal amounts of back patting and assholery on both sides of this particular issue.

[ERCougar]

This Indy-Rambam debate raises a point that I have struggled with for a long time--how important is obedience? Is it "the first law of heaven"? Are all blessings really predicated on obedience? I find both of these tenets really problematic, unless I define obedience as an obedience to conscience, and not obedience to authority figure for its own sake. But Indy seems to feel there is an intrinsic value to simply obeying, even it is wrong counsel. Why?

[Goatnapper'96]

This Indy-Rambam debate raises a point that I have struggled with for a long time--how important is obedience? Is it "the first law of heaven"? Are all blessings really predicated on obedience? I find both of these tenets really problematic, unless I define obedience as an obedience to conscience, and not obedience to authority figure for its own sake. But Indy seems to feel there is an intrinsic value to simply obeying, even it is wrong counsel. Why?

I think he thinks there is inherint benefit whenever one subordinates their will regardless of what it is being subordinated to. Essentially that the act itself is the subordination of our desires and as such is as benefitting by leading us away from selfishness.

For the record this post has nothing to do with fake hooters.

Edit: I am often reminded of this concept whenever I hear or sing "Keep the Commandments...in this there is safety and peace..." I do believe that when one accepts a belief system such as the LDS Church and comes to the conclusions and devoted practices that Indy indicates he ascribes to, there is a certain amount of peace. It removes stress and in many ways it makes life easier. Making decision is not always an easy thing to do.

Back when UtahDan still had the Holy Ghost it put forth one of the best thoughts I had read that did not include any references to Jenna Jameson, manatee mating habits or the reasons why Rick Parry keeps a steroid induced oversized Gerbil Ranch in the backwoods of Texas, in which he indicated he believed that when Lehi taught about opposition in all things he included gospel principles. The inherint internal stress between reason and blind faith is something each one of us must individually come to grips with. I don't know if I am headed to the CK and I am convinced I am one hell of an asshole, but in my world finding the proper balance that makes each one of us comfortable is an enormously important individual journey. I, personally as one seeking for CK inclusion and to continue my real world assholeness, think that balance is found by not wholeheartedly seeking to be a unwavering disciple to either perspective but by making them work together. I don't accept that we can go through this life working out every issue and there will be things we have to accept on faith. I also believe that God expects us to reason out as much as we should and not use blind faith as an excuse to ignore that process.

[Goatnapper'96]

Oh, I don't know about that...there seems to be equal amounts of back patting and assholery on both sides of this particular issue.

I thought that was Mickey G's point. The high degree of self-assuredness of being "right" from both sides.

Saying that I have not read the entire thread and don't plan to.

[ERCougar]

I think he thinks there is inherint benefit whenever one subordinates their will regardless of what it is being subordinated to. Essentially that the act itself is the subordination of our desires and as such is as benefitting by leading us away from selfishness.

For the record this post has nothing to do with fake hooters.

Ok...but why is that a virtue? When Christ said "not my will", he was submitting to God's will, which is obviously a virtue, and why I can see value in learning to submit our will to God's. I can also see value in cases where we don't have the information--but wouldn't a loving God who cares about us developing into something greater give us that as an answer?

It's strange--to me, it seems like we focus on obedience more than any other religion, yet it seems the least important to our theology. If you just believe in a Heaven and Hell, then I can see "just do it" as a virtue. If you believe that God wants us to develop into something more than man, then the teaching and understanding that go along with reasoning through ethical decisions are valuable. It's the difference between telling my kid "Don't play in the street. Just because" and saying "Don't play in the street. Here is why..."

[UtahDan]

This Indy-Rambam debate raises a point that I have struggled with for a long time--how important is obedience? Is it "the first law of heaven"? Are all blessings really predicated on obedience? I find both of these tenets really problematic, unless I define obedience as an obedience to conscience, and not obedience to authority figure for its own sake. But Indy seems to feel there is an intrinsic value to simply obeying, even it is wrong counsel. Why?

ER, you are so close to a break through here. Just apply Occams razor!