Runtu wrote: I've felt a moral obligation to help those who are in pain and struggling over the loss of their faith.
You're a good man, Runtu.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
You're right in what you say. I just wish there could be a way to stay jovial through it all.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
Frequently people like to share their life changing decisions. It always seems prudent for the listener to be supportive and avoid trying to change their minds, unless it involves something like criminal behavior or suicide.
I wonder if it's possible to be jovial about the fringe stuff with long time defenders around here. Stem, Nehor, DCP, Ttribe, etc, do you think it's possible to speak light-heartingly about abs and smoothies in heaven? I don't think I would have considered that offensive or negative as a TBM. Of course, I never considered the smoothie idea before...
What about discussions of Abraham's current god status? Would that be offensive to you? We could discuss the possibility that Abraham (being the god that we know he currently is) is at this very moment assembling matter into a moon to rule the night...
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
zeezrom wrote:I wonder if it's possible to be jovial about the fringe stuff with long time defenders around here. Stem, Nehor, DCP, Ttribe, etc, do you think it's possible to speak light-heartingly about abs and smoothies in heaven? I don't think I would have considered that offensive or negative as a TBM. Of course, I never considered the smoothie idea before...
What about discussions of Abraham's current god status? Would that be offensive to you? We could discuss the possibility that Abraham (being the god that we know he currently is) is at this very moment assembling matter into a moon to rule the night...
Well we know that trying to be lighthearted about "the good ol' days of MDB", where DCP and Scratch battled it out is a no go. :)
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman
I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
zeezrom wrote:I wonder if it's possible to be jovial about the fringe stuff with long time defenders around here. Stem, Nehor, DCP, Ttribe, etc, do you think it's possible to speak light-heartingly about abs and smoothies in heaven? I don't think I would have considered that offensive or negative as a TBM. Of course, I never considered the smoothie idea before...
What about discussions of Abraham's current god status? Would that be offensive to you? We could discuss the possibility that Abraham (being the god that we know he currently is) is at this very moment assembling matter into a moon to rule the night...
I think it's possible to be "jovial" in our discussion here, which is what I'm usually aiming for. What I've been talking about is one-on-one discussions with family members, ward members, other church members, friends. That's a much stickier issue, if you ask me.
Let me be clear: we should not have to tiptoe around people all the time, but Mormonism should not be the central topic of our lives.
Runtu wrote:Let me be clear: we should not have to tiptoe around people all the time, but Mormonism should not be the central topic of our lives.
Is it now?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Not for me, but I wonder about those who suppose that the church will or should come up in our conversations with friends and family. I talk about the church when I feel like it, but it doesn't dominate my thoughts.
Not for me, but I wonder about those who suppose that the church will or should come up in our conversations with friends and family. I talk about the church when I feel like it, but it doesn't dominate my thoughts.
I never bring it up when talking with non-member friends, although they will sometimes ask questions. We certainly don't have deep churchy discussions around the dinner table either (that's mostly baseball and whose turn it is to cook or do the dishes). I may have a deep discussion a couple of times a year with my oldest daughter if we're in the car headed somewhere, but that's the closest I come, and it's rare... definitely not the norm.
There are too many vastly more interesting things to discuss than the church. I'd wonder at those who bring up the church in everyday conversation... like maybe they need to get out more?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.