Another poem: Apparently I like writing longer poems. This one was also written the same as "This Path of Life" for an investigator on my mission who liked poetry:
A mother's love
For her child
Is unlike any other
Or so I've been told
Once I knew a story
Of a Father wise and pure
They say He loves His children
More perfect that a mother (Isaiah 49:15-16)
As we all know, children grow
And oft times go astray
But whenever they wish to come back
We always help them find their way
This Father that I spoke of before
Is mine and yours in heav'n above
But where is He? And why are we
Here on this Earth with pain and grief?
Well here is where the story continues
Our Father raised us, til our spirits grew
But still we lacked a few things
A body like His and our "Master's Degree"
Here on this Earth is college life
Where we have to learn all on our own
A place to learn to be
All that we can and learn to grow
But we haven't been left
With nothing to help
He's given us a few
Very special tools
A Bible and a Book of Mormon
Serve together as textbooks
And prophets today that know
Our needs are our professors.
But this is not all
We have been given
We have two more tools
More special than these
Any time we need to call
And ask for help or guidance
All we have to really do is
Get on our knees and pray
The Holy Ghost He's sent
To answer us, and act
As a tutor in anything
That we might need.
And with all these tools
We cannot fail for One
Has come before us
Christ our Savior.
He's taken all our courses
Knows the answers all by heart
And when we need that extra help
He's always there to guide us.
Now sometimes, by chance or fault
We may hurt another
We aim to please but sometimes fail
To show others how much we really care
But even as a mother
When once child hurts another
You may feel sad, to see one hurt
But still you love them both
And so it is with our Father above
When we by chance mess up and fail
His love is still there, perfect and pure
And to those we may hurt He cares for them
Just as He does for you and me.
While on this path of college life
We make mistakes to learn and grow
But when we pass, no matter how long
He's waiting for you with arms open wide
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
This Path of Life
A poem I found that I had written on my mission, we had an investigator who liked poetry so we wrote poems to put together for her:
This path of life
Is full of strife
Dark clouds can blind
And confuse our mind
Over rocks and boulders
We may stumble
"Oh why this heavy burden on my shoulders?"
I oft times hear myself mumble
Oh why can't I
Find peace? I cry
I can't go on anymore
This life has made me much too sore
And just when life seems at its blackest
Something registers within my soul
"Come unto me and I'll give you rest"
If only rest could be my goal
I fall to my knees
And then I see
This path I've led
Is paved ahead
Someone must have walked before
I look around to see behind me
My Savior stood there and here He bore
Me up and carried me from hence to thee
In all my times of darkest trial
My Savior walked the extra mile
He waited to rejoice in all I could do
Before He picked me up and made me like new
So do I regret these times of affliction?
And why He waited so long to come save me?
Not at all, for my life is not fiction
I learned and I grew to be all I can be
This path of life
Is full of strife
Dark clouds can blind
And confuse our mind
Over rocks and boulders
We may stumble
"Oh why this heavy burden on my shoulders?"
I oft times hear myself mumble
Oh why can't I
Find peace? I cry
I can't go on anymore
This life has made me much too sore
And just when life seems at its blackest
Something registers within my soul
"Come unto me and I'll give you rest"
If only rest could be my goal
I fall to my knees
And then I see
This path I've led
Is paved ahead
Someone must have walked before
I look around to see behind me
My Savior stood there and here He bore
Me up and carried me from hence to thee
In all my times of darkest trial
My Savior walked the extra mile
He waited to rejoice in all I could do
Before He picked me up and made me like new
So do I regret these times of affliction?
And why He waited so long to come save me?
Not at all, for my life is not fiction
I learned and I grew to be all I can be
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Aaronic Priesthood
I used to used "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie as doctrine. Then later I realized some discrepancies between it and other writings of other apostles. To start off, the publisher's note at the very beginning says of the book, "It is a valuable tool but should not be considered an official statement of doctrine." Nowhere does it have any seal of the First Presidency, declaring it as doctrine. In Bruce R. McConkie's own words in the Preface, "For the work itself, I assume sole and full responsibility."
With that, I decided I would slowly, gradually start studying Mormon Doctrine, maybe not on a regular basis, but trying to compare it to the scriptures and other things that have been declared as doctrine.
When it describes the Aaronic Priesthood it talks about how the Aaronical or Levitical Priesthood was conferred by lineage, solely by lineage within the tribe of Levi. In my New Testament class last week someone actually asked then why do all boys receive the Aaronic Priesthood at the age of 12 in the Church? I guess before I address that question I'll tell you what McConkie thinks, "Few members of the tribe of Levi gathered with the fold of Israel in the meridian of time; few have come back to the fold of their fathers in this dispensation; and there were none among the Nephites to whom our Lord ministered. Consequently, beginning in the day of the primitive Church the lesser priesthood was spread out among the body of the people and was no longer confined exclusively to the chosen lineage."
The Bible Dictionary says, "As part of his rationale that the law of Moses was fulfilled, Paul makes a point of the contrast between the lineal requirement of the lesser priesthood and the nonlineal Melchizedek Priesthood, which was not confined to those of one tribe (see JST Heb. 7:1-3; Heb 7:11-14) The lineal restrictions of that Aaronic (Levitical) Priesthood were lifted when the law of Moses was fulfilled, and thereafter the offices of the priesthood were conferred upon worthy men without limitation to the tribe of Levi."
In class my teacher brought up that there was no Aaronic Priesthood before Moses, not as was restricted to only the Levites. The restriction came after that because the people as a whole were not ready for the fulness of the gospel, so they were given lesser laws, and a lesser Priesthood. So if Adam and Noah and Abraham had the gospel then isn't it possible that there was a form of Aaronic Priesthood before that wasn't restricted to lineage? And with the scattering of Israel, isn't it possible that even if the lineal restrictions weren't lifted when the law of Moses was fulfilled that the Levites have intermixed with the other tribes?
The last paragraph in the Bible Dictionary continues though and correlates with two scriptures in the Doctrine and Covenants. "Although the Aaronic Priesthood is conferred in the Church today without restriction to the lineage of Aaron, the keys of this priesthood rightly belong to the firstborn of the seed of Aaron, and in the restoration of all things the office of bishop (president of the priests) will once again be conferred on one of that lineage, as it is designated by revelation to the president of the Church (D&C 84:14-21; 107:13-17"
D&C 107:13-17, "The second priesthood is called the Priesthood of Aaron, because it was conferred upon Aaron and his seed, through all their generations... The bishopric is the presidency of this priesthood, and holds the keys or authority of the same. No man has a legal right to this office, to hold the keys of this priesthood, except he be a literal descendant of Aaron. But as a high priest of the Melchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in the office of bishop when no literal descendant of Aaron can be found, provided he is called and set apart and ordained unto this power by the hands of the Presidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood."
So the rights belonging to the tribe of Levi and also Aaron have not been done away with, the keys rightfully belong to them, but unless one is found, a member of the Melchizedek Priesthood is allowed to officiate in the offices of Bishop- an office belonging rightfully to Aaron and his descendants.
With that, I decided I would slowly, gradually start studying Mormon Doctrine, maybe not on a regular basis, but trying to compare it to the scriptures and other things that have been declared as doctrine.
When it describes the Aaronic Priesthood it talks about how the Aaronical or Levitical Priesthood was conferred by lineage, solely by lineage within the tribe of Levi. In my New Testament class last week someone actually asked then why do all boys receive the Aaronic Priesthood at the age of 12 in the Church? I guess before I address that question I'll tell you what McConkie thinks, "Few members of the tribe of Levi gathered with the fold of Israel in the meridian of time; few have come back to the fold of their fathers in this dispensation; and there were none among the Nephites to whom our Lord ministered. Consequently, beginning in the day of the primitive Church the lesser priesthood was spread out among the body of the people and was no longer confined exclusively to the chosen lineage."
The Bible Dictionary says, "As part of his rationale that the law of Moses was fulfilled, Paul makes a point of the contrast between the lineal requirement of the lesser priesthood and the nonlineal Melchizedek Priesthood, which was not confined to those of one tribe (see JST Heb. 7:1-3; Heb 7:11-14) The lineal restrictions of that Aaronic (Levitical) Priesthood were lifted when the law of Moses was fulfilled, and thereafter the offices of the priesthood were conferred upon worthy men without limitation to the tribe of Levi."
In class my teacher brought up that there was no Aaronic Priesthood before Moses, not as was restricted to only the Levites. The restriction came after that because the people as a whole were not ready for the fulness of the gospel, so they were given lesser laws, and a lesser Priesthood. So if Adam and Noah and Abraham had the gospel then isn't it possible that there was a form of Aaronic Priesthood before that wasn't restricted to lineage? And with the scattering of Israel, isn't it possible that even if the lineal restrictions weren't lifted when the law of Moses was fulfilled that the Levites have intermixed with the other tribes?
The last paragraph in the Bible Dictionary continues though and correlates with two scriptures in the Doctrine and Covenants. "Although the Aaronic Priesthood is conferred in the Church today without restriction to the lineage of Aaron, the keys of this priesthood rightly belong to the firstborn of the seed of Aaron, and in the restoration of all things the office of bishop (president of the priests) will once again be conferred on one of that lineage, as it is designated by revelation to the president of the Church (D&C 84:14-21; 107:13-17"
D&C 107:13-17, "The second priesthood is called the Priesthood of Aaron, because it was conferred upon Aaron and his seed, through all their generations... The bishopric is the presidency of this priesthood, and holds the keys or authority of the same. No man has a legal right to this office, to hold the keys of this priesthood, except he be a literal descendant of Aaron. But as a high priest of the Melchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in the office of bishop when no literal descendant of Aaron can be found, provided he is called and set apart and ordained unto this power by the hands of the Presidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood."
So the rights belonging to the tribe of Levi and also Aaron have not been done away with, the keys rightfully belong to them, but unless one is found, a member of the Melchizedek Priesthood is allowed to officiate in the offices of Bishop- an office belonging rightfully to Aaron and his descendants.
Boyd K. Packer's talk October 2010 General Conference
Alright, so there has been a lot of controversy concerning Boyd K Packer's recent talk. I want to start out by saying the Gospel of Jesus Christ is simple. Let's review some basics. God is our Heavenly Father. He loves us. He wants us to be happy and wants what is best for us. Because of that He calls Prophets. We'll expound on this later. But the fact is, God is unchangeable. He is the same yesterday, today and forever- that seems to be a widely accepted Christian doctrine, and I think Jewish people also believe that. I know that they still have a lot of their traditions (and I think that's great but I think that shows that they also believe God is unchanging). So, God calls prophets to be His mouthpiece on the Earth, and throughout time we see (especially in the Old Testament) times where the people stop listening to their prophets and for awhile there is chaos and no prophetic records of anything. And then another prophet is called- surprise surprise- God STILL cares and STILL calls prophets. As members of the Church we believe in a Great Apostasy. That after Jesus Christ truths were lost because people stopped listening to what the Apostles had to say and decided THEY knew best. In Acts chapter 20 Paul is talking to a group of Elders (in the church) in Ephesus and in verse 30 tells them, "Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them." Men in the church were going to speak perverse things or false doctrine and lead others away too. And as members of the Church we believe that all the MANY different sects of Christianity are a result of this. I mean we see that there was the Catholic Church, then comes Martin Luther, he comes up with his points that he feels aren't consistent with the scriptures- inspired yes. But God didn't call him to be a prophet. And Martin Luther wasn't trying to set up a church- a group of others convinced him he was their leader and then formed a church. Then there were other churches and other break offs, people deciding things should be a certain way- some of them may have even been right, I'm not the judge. BUT then we have Joseph Smith. What makes our Church different from other Christian churches is we believe God called a Prophet in the latter-days to guide us, just like He called prophets in times of old and that a Prophet leads and guides us today. That is what makes us different- we believe we are following a Prophet of God who speaks DIRECTLY FOR God and that the doctrines are His and NOT ours or what we want them to be.
So now back to prophets. What and who are they? For Bible scholars there is Amos 3:7, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." Joseph Smith Translation, which I believe is safe to say all members of the Church at least believe in clarifies and says that it would be "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, UNTIL he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." The Lord uses prophets to guide us. He did not flood the Earth until he warned the people of a flood and gave them a chance to escape. He did not even free his chosen House of Israel from bondage in Egypt UNTIL he had warned the Pharoah. All the Old Testament stories would follow this pattern and we believe it is still the same today.
So now back to prophets. What and who are they? For Bible scholars there is Amos 3:7, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." Joseph Smith Translation, which I believe is safe to say all members of the Church at least believe in clarifies and says that it would be "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, UNTIL he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." The Lord uses prophets to guide us. He did not flood the Earth until he warned the people of a flood and gave them a chance to escape. He did not even free his chosen House of Israel from bondage in Egypt UNTIL he had warned the Pharoah. All the Old Testament stories would follow this pattern and we believe it is still the same today.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
hush, hush
This post is actually more of a book critique than things in my life. (****SPOILER ALERT****) I read a book called "hush, hush" this weekend by Becca Fitzpatrick. I was told that if I loved Twilight then I would love this book. I mean, it was good. I liked it. BUT I don't know that I loved it. When I read Twilight I felt it was pretty original- considering. I mean Meyers recreated vampires- vegetarian vampires? WHAT?! But the whole, innocent girl falling in love with the bad boy type or the forbidden love- that isn't anything new. Juliet falling in love with Romeo, the forbidden love theme has been around for forever. But this book I felt mirrored Twilight too much. There's a transfer student- this time it's not the girl. The boy is dangerous. Acts like he is annoyed with the girl as does Edward in Twilight. Bella and this girl are both annoyed with the guy, and have a love/hate thing going on inside of them. Against their better judgement they fall for the guy (don't get me wrong- I love Edward in Twilight and I actually like the guy in this book as well- but really?) The boys in both books are creepy stalkers, stalking around the girl's bedroom windows. Freak accidents. Even one where there's a car involved in both books. There's even a fateful trip out of town to the "big city" nearby. Anyways, for me there was a lot of similarities that I don't think I could ever call this book original.
What I DID like about it? In this book the bad guy is a fallen angel. He never directly tells the girl but tries to give her hints. He is definitely a bad boy type. But in the end, he overcomes the bad. He overcomes his evil side. He ends up changing his nature. Not just a vegetarian vampire- who is still somewhat dangerous by definition, but he is ACTUALLY changed at the end. The girl has to come to terms with him not being who his past defined him. Key word there was defined being PAST TENSE. In life we go through lots of things- things that help shape us into who we are. But our past doesn't have to define WHO WE ARE. What we learn from it, how we use it, how we change and the choices we make NOW and what defines who we are. That is what I gained from this book. Cheesy at times, and sometimes far from original, I liked the message that based on what we choose to do now, we can change. We can be forgiven. We can start anew. How far we may have come shows our strength and perseverance. What we've learned from it shows our wisdom we have gained. How we live now shows our wisdom and who we are- what we have become.
On one more critical note. I found an error on p. 320,
The girl is trying to call her mom and try to explain where she's been all evening in a way that her mom won't get too mad. I don't know where it should switch over, but it starts with the girl saying, "Here's the deal--" and then going on to say she had to turn back and get a room in Milliken Mills. But if you follow the conversation down, the MOM is the one who is in Milliken Mills, not the girl who the quote is attributed to. The girl is at home and becomes relieved to find that her mom didn't notice she was missing and left in search of her. Anyways, now that I've spoiled some of the story for you- read it if you wish. Just know that you will probably see similarities between this book and Twilight and I might've spoiled the ending for you- though I tried to be as vague as possible. I could only be so vague and still get my points across. So sorry if I have spoiled this experience for you!
What I DID like about it? In this book the bad guy is a fallen angel. He never directly tells the girl but tries to give her hints. He is definitely a bad boy type. But in the end, he overcomes the bad. He overcomes his evil side. He ends up changing his nature. Not just a vegetarian vampire- who is still somewhat dangerous by definition, but he is ACTUALLY changed at the end. The girl has to come to terms with him not being who his past defined him. Key word there was defined being PAST TENSE. In life we go through lots of things- things that help shape us into who we are. But our past doesn't have to define WHO WE ARE. What we learn from it, how we use it, how we change and the choices we make NOW and what defines who we are. That is what I gained from this book. Cheesy at times, and sometimes far from original, I liked the message that based on what we choose to do now, we can change. We can be forgiven. We can start anew. How far we may have come shows our strength and perseverance. What we've learned from it shows our wisdom we have gained. How we live now shows our wisdom and who we are- what we have become.
On one more critical note. I found an error on p. 320,
The girl is trying to call her mom and try to explain where she's been all evening in a way that her mom won't get too mad. I don't know where it should switch over, but it starts with the girl saying, "Here's the deal--" and then going on to say she had to turn back and get a room in Milliken Mills. But if you follow the conversation down, the MOM is the one who is in Milliken Mills, not the girl who the quote is attributed to. The girl is at home and becomes relieved to find that her mom didn't notice she was missing and left in search of her. Anyways, now that I've spoiled some of the story for you- read it if you wish. Just know that you will probably see similarities between this book and Twilight and I might've spoiled the ending for you- though I tried to be as vague as possible. I could only be so vague and still get my points across. So sorry if I have spoiled this experience for you!
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Updates- Phantom
So.. it's been a long time since I've blogged about anything recent, so here goes. The biggest update has to do with a boy. :) There's nothing official, but I do like him a lot. So here's the scoop on him. He's a great guy from Sandy, Utah. He served his mission in my home mission, Spanish speaking- but never served in my stake. He's currently getting his doctorate in Classical Vocal Performance- or at least that's what I think it is- he's an Opera singer- a tenor, and he's getting a doctorate so he can teach it at a University level as a back up to performing.
He's a great guy with similar standards within the Church to mine. There are many people who have different standards on things, even within the Church and he seems to agree with most of all my personal beliefs which is one of the biggest reasons I decided to start liking him. How we met- well I actually had a membership to eHarmony, and I'm laughing as I write this because although I knowingly signed up for the membership I never actually thought it would work or help me find anyone. So side tangent for that...
I have been known for being impulsive, especially when it's late at night and I'm sleep deprived. It was one of these nights when I just decided I would make a profile on eHarmony and see what it was about. I have done online dating services in the past and I feel I am pretty safe with meeting up with people. I don't give out personal information, even when they pick me up- I don't give them my address or let them see my car so they can't stalk me that way. Just wanted to assure any readers who might have doubts about online dating that I am safe about it. Anyways, I went to a Family Home Evening last spring with my Stake Presidency. One of the counselors mentioned priorities. He didn't say anything new at first. God is our number one priority- why? Because we trust that He really does love us and that by putting Him first He will then help us with everything else in life. #2 priority- is our spouse. Why? Because we choose someone we want to be with that we feel we can trust to help us with everything else in our lives. This was the part he mentioned that hit me. If our #2 priority is our spouse- then shouldn't finding that #2 be at least a top priority? So I went home and thought about it and felt I didn't have time in my life right then to really meet more people. So, I decided to pay for the membership with eHarmony and was determined to let IT do the finding for me, so that I just had to be myself, respond and sift through the options. So then Phantom (as my roommates call him) contacted me. Before I had bought my membership I had encrypted one of my emails into the message so people could contact me without me having to pay. So Phantom did that, and we started talking.
That was the beginning of summer. We emailed back and forth sporadically and then started texting almost every day, but mainly small talk stuff. With online dating and all the stuff you can do, I determine not to actually let myself like them until I meet them in person. Well, the summer went by and right before school started I got back to Utah and he had stayed so we would be able to meet up. So we did. The first time he picked me up at the dorms and we went to lunch and then a movie. Then we talked outside for a bit and then he ended up meeting my mom and one of my sisters. My Mom didn't realize this was the first time I had met him and treated him like an old friend. Later she was mortified she had been so open with him, but Phantom didn't seem to mind. When he left we talked about seeing each other again on Friday before he left Saturday morning and I consented to driving up to Sandy so he didn't have to drive all the way down again. But as it turned out, he invited me to dinner on Thursday with his family and I had to decline saying I was having dinner with my mom and sisters before my Mom flew back home, but said he was invited to come with us. So he came to dinner with me, my Mom and two of my sisters. On Friday I drove up to his house and we went to lunch with his family- or his parents and one brother anyways. After each of the dinners both Thursday and Friday we had time to talk and get to know each other better. We did kiss before he left. But honestly I still wasn't sure how I felt about him. Tuesday after he left I felt like I was doing the right thing. Whether it is right to date him for now, or what, I don't know, but all I know is, that was the changing day for me. Still there's nothing official but I know how much I like him and it's definitely more than your average crush. :)
So this past weekend I had bought a plane ticket to fly to Indiana- where he is currently going to school. Thursday I started getting sick and then I didn't get much sleep that night on the plane- so it was a nice, slow, casual, comfortable weekend. :) I had a ton of fun and it was just nice to be there.
Saturday we spent walking around a small town outside of Bloomington, Indiana which was really fun. :) A lot of cute little shops. :) Then Sunday- that was my favorite day. :) In the morning I woke up and briefly talked to the girl I was staying with before heading upstairs. We had a little time before he left for an audition he had for the next Opera season. When he left I started getting ready for church. Then when he came home we had breakfast and then had a few hours before church. It was just a nice relaxing day. We went to church and because the Church makes it such a small ward, I actually knew one person in his singles' branch. He had been in my stake here in Provo til apparently just last month when he started at IU for grad school. But that was nice too. We left Sunday School early because he had another audition in Cincinnati- 2 1/2 hours away. It was kind of nice having a long drive together. Then his audition. Afterwards, we had originally planned on having a picnic at a nearby park, since it was Sunday- but plans changed when we realized how SHADY the area was. It was a drug infested, creepy area... not where you'd really want to stop to have a nice Sunday picnic... So we looked up a restaurant to go to and I found a Cajun one that happened to be across the river in Kentucky- so first time to Kentucky! Anyways, it was a nice little restaurant. :) We ate up on the rooftop terrace where they had a live jazz band and a GORGEOUS view of Cincinnati. The whole evening was very nice and just comfortable. I know I'm using that word a lot, but it really is the best description.. :) Then the drive home. he makes me laugh and I'm able to be myself with him and open. At one point on the way home I was getting sleepy so I was like, "Tell me a story or something so I don't fall asleep." So this was his story.. "Once upon a time, there was a Princess named Jamie. She had many princess sisters and a prince brother. They all lived together in a castle. And the Princess lived Happily Ever After." I was like, "That's boring! Happily ever after? All by herself?" So he responded with, "She's not by herself! She has all her princess sisters and a prince brother!" And I was like, "What about Prince Charming?" And he's like, "Well she has her prince brother, and I'm sure he's sometimes charming..." And I was like, "EW! That's like incest!" And he feigned shock, "Incest?! What?! They're family and they're just living in the same castle!" Anyways, it made me laugh.
So that's my Phantom. Not my boyfriend- nothing that official. We are dating, and we both like each other a lot but that's it for now. I'm sure I'll have more updates another time though, but that's it for now :)
He's a great guy with similar standards within the Church to mine. There are many people who have different standards on things, even within the Church and he seems to agree with most of all my personal beliefs which is one of the biggest reasons I decided to start liking him. How we met- well I actually had a membership to eHarmony, and I'm laughing as I write this because although I knowingly signed up for the membership I never actually thought it would work or help me find anyone. So side tangent for that...
I have been known for being impulsive, especially when it's late at night and I'm sleep deprived. It was one of these nights when I just decided I would make a profile on eHarmony and see what it was about. I have done online dating services in the past and I feel I am pretty safe with meeting up with people. I don't give out personal information, even when they pick me up- I don't give them my address or let them see my car so they can't stalk me that way. Just wanted to assure any readers who might have doubts about online dating that I am safe about it. Anyways, I went to a Family Home Evening last spring with my Stake Presidency. One of the counselors mentioned priorities. He didn't say anything new at first. God is our number one priority- why? Because we trust that He really does love us and that by putting Him first He will then help us with everything else in life. #2 priority- is our spouse. Why? Because we choose someone we want to be with that we feel we can trust to help us with everything else in our lives. This was the part he mentioned that hit me. If our #2 priority is our spouse- then shouldn't finding that #2 be at least a top priority? So I went home and thought about it and felt I didn't have time in my life right then to really meet more people. So, I decided to pay for the membership with eHarmony and was determined to let IT do the finding for me, so that I just had to be myself, respond and sift through the options. So then Phantom (as my roommates call him) contacted me. Before I had bought my membership I had encrypted one of my emails into the message so people could contact me without me having to pay. So Phantom did that, and we started talking.
That was the beginning of summer. We emailed back and forth sporadically and then started texting almost every day, but mainly small talk stuff. With online dating and all the stuff you can do, I determine not to actually let myself like them until I meet them in person. Well, the summer went by and right before school started I got back to Utah and he had stayed so we would be able to meet up. So we did. The first time he picked me up at the dorms and we went to lunch and then a movie. Then we talked outside for a bit and then he ended up meeting my mom and one of my sisters. My Mom didn't realize this was the first time I had met him and treated him like an old friend. Later she was mortified she had been so open with him, but Phantom didn't seem to mind. When he left we talked about seeing each other again on Friday before he left Saturday morning and I consented to driving up to Sandy so he didn't have to drive all the way down again. But as it turned out, he invited me to dinner on Thursday with his family and I had to decline saying I was having dinner with my mom and sisters before my Mom flew back home, but said he was invited to come with us. So he came to dinner with me, my Mom and two of my sisters. On Friday I drove up to his house and we went to lunch with his family- or his parents and one brother anyways. After each of the dinners both Thursday and Friday we had time to talk and get to know each other better. We did kiss before he left. But honestly I still wasn't sure how I felt about him. Tuesday after he left I felt like I was doing the right thing. Whether it is right to date him for now, or what, I don't know, but all I know is, that was the changing day for me. Still there's nothing official but I know how much I like him and it's definitely more than your average crush. :)
So this past weekend I had bought a plane ticket to fly to Indiana- where he is currently going to school. Thursday I started getting sick and then I didn't get much sleep that night on the plane- so it was a nice, slow, casual, comfortable weekend. :) I had a ton of fun and it was just nice to be there.
Saturday we spent walking around a small town outside of Bloomington, Indiana which was really fun. :) A lot of cute little shops. :) Then Sunday- that was my favorite day. :) In the morning I woke up and briefly talked to the girl I was staying with before heading upstairs. We had a little time before he left for an audition he had for the next Opera season. When he left I started getting ready for church. Then when he came home we had breakfast and then had a few hours before church. It was just a nice relaxing day. We went to church and because the Church makes it such a small ward, I actually knew one person in his singles' branch. He had been in my stake here in Provo til apparently just last month when he started at IU for grad school. But that was nice too. We left Sunday School early because he had another audition in Cincinnati- 2 1/2 hours away. It was kind of nice having a long drive together. Then his audition. Afterwards, we had originally planned on having a picnic at a nearby park, since it was Sunday- but plans changed when we realized how SHADY the area was. It was a drug infested, creepy area... not where you'd really want to stop to have a nice Sunday picnic... So we looked up a restaurant to go to and I found a Cajun one that happened to be across the river in Kentucky- so first time to Kentucky! Anyways, it was a nice little restaurant. :) We ate up on the rooftop terrace where they had a live jazz band and a GORGEOUS view of Cincinnati. The whole evening was very nice and just comfortable. I know I'm using that word a lot, but it really is the best description.. :) Then the drive home. he makes me laugh and I'm able to be myself with him and open. At one point on the way home I was getting sleepy so I was like, "Tell me a story or something so I don't fall asleep." So this was his story.. "Once upon a time, there was a Princess named Jamie. She had many princess sisters and a prince brother. They all lived together in a castle. And the Princess lived Happily Ever After." I was like, "That's boring! Happily ever after? All by herself?" So he responded with, "She's not by herself! She has all her princess sisters and a prince brother!" And I was like, "What about Prince Charming?" And he's like, "Well she has her prince brother, and I'm sure he's sometimes charming..." And I was like, "EW! That's like incest!" And he feigned shock, "Incest?! What?! They're family and they're just living in the same castle!" Anyways, it made me laugh.
So that's my Phantom. Not my boyfriend- nothing that official. We are dating, and we both like each other a lot but that's it for now. I'm sure I'll have more updates another time though, but that's it for now :)
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Brigham Young quote
I do not, at this time, have enough time to devote to the whole discussion of Boyd K Packer's talk this past General Conference but I do want to address a quote that has been circulating. The quote is as follows, "If there ever comes a day when the Saints interfere with the rights of others to live as they see fit, you can know with assurance that the Church is no longer led by a Prophet, but a mere man." and is referenced to Brigham Young. I found a group on facebook that loves this quote and has been re-posting it to further their cause in not liking President Packer's talk. Some people on the page have asked for the citation. Only one response followed and it led to this SITE.
I tried looking for any other websites that would have the quote and found nothing. So as far as the web is concerned I believe it is only from this one page. And so on THAT site some people were asking for the source. After reading through it I realized something and I will share it with you, and if you wish to check for yourself, go to the page for yourself. On the right hand side you will notice it says that it is a blog roll, so a blog- posted by an average person. It also has the ability to subscribe to the RSS feed. It also has a place where it says "Email Brother Brigham" Email ME. This blogger's pen name IS Brother Brigham, and dedicates most of his posts to quotes Brigham Young DID say. I haven't read through them, so I don't know that I agree with how he interprets those quotes, but my guess is I don't.
The fact is, the quote people are saying is so contradictory is NOT actually from the Prophet Brigham Young but this blogger. His own comments which you can find on THIS PAGE, but you'll have to expand the comments to read it, says the following:
So in essence, this is someone's OPINION about what THEY feel Brigham Young believed. Brigham Young was headstrong, and may not have been perfect, but his quotes that are doctrine ARE doctrine, and as we can see here, NONE of them actually say what is being posted on the web that condemn the Church's current stance on Prop 8, homosexuality or Boyd K. Packer's talk.
I tried looking for any other websites that would have the quote and found nothing. So as far as the web is concerned I believe it is only from this one page. And so on THAT site some people were asking for the source. After reading through it I realized something and I will share it with you, and if you wish to check for yourself, go to the page for yourself. On the right hand side you will notice it says that it is a blog roll, so a blog- posted by an average person. It also has the ability to subscribe to the RSS feed. It also has a place where it says "Email Brother Brigham" Email ME. This blogger's pen name IS Brother Brigham, and dedicates most of his posts to quotes Brigham Young DID say. I haven't read through them, so I don't know that I agree with how he interprets those quotes, but my guess is I don't.
The fact is, the quote people are saying is so contradictory is NOT actually from the Prophet Brigham Young but this blogger. His own comments which you can find on THIS PAGE, but you'll have to expand the comments to read it, says the following:
Brothers and Sisters, Good Evening,(emphasis added)
I’m pleased the Sprit has directed you to my site.
To answer your questions, the above information is merely words that sum up my doctrine and my teachings. While I never said these exact words (and they do not appear in any of my published works) they express my personal religious convictions and a life time of teachings.
God Bless,
Brother Brigham.
PS (From Brother Brigham’s secretary: Brother Brigham wishes more to express his sorrow that this page of his website has been misunderstood. He wants you to know that all of his real quotes that appear on his website are set off by quotation marks and a citation. Brother Brigham is pained that the words that appear under the “ABOUT” tab of his website have caused confusion.)
So in essence, this is someone's OPINION about what THEY feel Brigham Young believed. Brigham Young was headstrong, and may not have been perfect, but his quotes that are doctrine ARE doctrine, and as we can see here, NONE of them actually say what is being posted on the web that condemn the Church's current stance on Prop 8, homosexuality or Boyd K. Packer's talk.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
