5 Things the Missionaries Are Too Nice to Tell Members to STOP Doing

Too often we as members tend to treat missionaries like children. Because we assume many missionaries are immature goof-offs, many members do and say things that denigrate the missionaries, their work, and their devotion to building the Kingdom of God. We aren’t always willing to do our part to help the missionary work go forward. The missionaries are often too nice to tell us what we are doing wrong, but there are at least 5 things the members do which many missionaries wish they would stop. Changing these attitudes and habits would do much make their lives easier, and help the work to progress unhindered.

One: STOP Treating the Missionaries Like Children

Members generally love the missionaries, but even the ones who love them the most can occasionally be kind of patronizing. They often forget that the missionaries they love so much are legally (and also in terms of emotional, and intellectual maturity) adults. They often just want to joke or play around with the missionaries, and they can’t understand why a missionary may not always want to goof around with them. Many who have children who go on missions often forget that their child is in fact no longer a child. They send them care packages filled with candy (which they love) and toys, which they cannot use and they don’t have the space to store or transport. Moreover, certain toys are often banned in the mission because they tend to distract missionaries from the work. However, my main objection has to do with the fact that sending toys to a missionary just shows that many people do not truly consider their missionary to be a responsible adult, and in their minds he or she is still a kid.

How the Book of Mormon Contains the Fullness of the Gospel

The introduction to the Book of Mormon states that it "contains the fulness of the everlasting gospel," a concept and phrase that is also found in a number of scriptures in the Doctrine and Covenants (see D&C 20:8-9). This phrase occasionally causes some confusion among those who read it. Many suppose that a “fulness” must mean that the Book of Mormon must contain a comprehensive catalog of all LDS doctrines, beliefs, and teachings.  This often leads some to wonder why the Book of Mormon does not deal with certain key doctrines of the faith, such as baptisms for the dead, celestial marriage, or exaltation. Others assume that this statement about the fulness must represent some kind of exclusivist truth claim, or a shot at the truth of the Bible. I believe that this confusion stems from a misconception concerning what the gospel actually entails, and a misunderstanding about what the Book of Mormon is actually supposed to do.

A Deeper Reading of Paul's Epistle to Philemon

          This article is a follow-up to an earlier one in which I argued for an allegorical reading of Philemon, which you can find HERE. In this piece I evaluate my earlier claim, and also consider alternate readings of Paul's Epistle.

Evaluating An Allegorical reading of Philemon

Several years ago, I applied my own allegorical reading to Paul’s Epistle to Philemon.  I did this without any real understanding that allegory is just one “sense” in which scripture can be read, and moreover that there are different types of allegory within the overall “spiritual” sense.  In order to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of my allegorical reading of Philemon, I will employ the four senses of scripture as outlined in classical (medieval) exegetical thought.  In the process, I will strive to answer the following three questions:  What other meanings have been (or can be) gleaned from the text? Do the other senses or readings of scripture play a meaningful role in the text? Finally, does my allegorical reading of Philemon lead me to neglect certain dimensions of the text?  In answer to these questions, I assert the following: First, that the most common meaning that has been gleaned from the text generally relies on a literal sense of the text.  Philemon is most often held to be exactly what it appears to be on the surface: a letter from an apostle to a Christian slaveholder, designed to persuade him to be reconciled to a runaway slave.  However, more recent interpretations point out that Paul may have intended a moral reading concerning the equality of Christian brotherhood.  Second, while the literal sense of the text has been accepted in the past, newer commentators have posited that the moral sense ought to be applied to the text instead (or at least as well) (as in the case mentioned above).  Third, an exclusively allegorical interpretation of Philemon has some drawbacks, including the fact that it may lead one to neglect or overlook the valuable moral sense of the text.