Duncan

I'd be interested to know how does Greg Matson know that the Church will release a new statement next week? he isn't anyone to tell that information to-i.e he doesn't work for any news organization, isn't involved in this or any legal authority.

The 4 missionaries sent to the Lamanites in Nov. 1830 said that Joseph had seen God "personally". The newspaper that reported what they were teaching came out in Feb. 1831 and used "God" and "Christ" and the "Holy Spirit", as if Joseph knew who they were and that they were different. Lorenzo Snow and Edward Stevenson knew that God and Jesus appeared to Joseph by at least 1831 and 1834 respectively, besides of which section 20 is a passing reference to the First Vision. It was known for sure, how well and by whom I dunno.

it looks like the Church has commissioned a new bio on Joseph Smith to be written by Richard E. Turley Jr. and others. It'll take a few years to complete but I am sure it will be worth the wait https://www.thechurchnews.com/history/2023/9/15/23871359/first-presidency-commissions-new-biography-joseph-the-prophet-joseph-smith-papers-conference

There wasn't any work for the dead in OT times. Christ hadn't organized work for the dead until he himself had overcome death and had organized it to be done, see DC 138 specifically verse 58

Smac 97 talks about how BYU is for everyone and the rules apply to everyone yet look at how many talks there are about marriage, and I am quite certain they are only talking to heterosexual couples or potential heterosexual couples-not to gay couples https://speeches.byu.edu/topics/marriage/

one word that Smac 97 originally quoted from Dan and then now has taken out repeatedly when quoting him from Dehlin's thing is the word "probably" Dan said he is "probably" in a sweet spot and is probably giving reason for others to leave or whatnot but Smac 97 is pepetuating the idea that Dan is always doing that not probably

are you kidding? Dan saying that the name Jesus doesn't mean this it actually means this and it accords to what Elder G. Homer Durham, who used outside LDS scholarship, to show what it actually means. Dan showed that yes, what Elder Durham said was true. Elder Durham used 4 sources to prove his point about the meaning of the name of Jesus-One could say that Dan and Elder Durham were one and the same https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/04/jesus-the-christ-the-words-and-their-meaning?lang=eng

try this!

I am a member of the LDS religion, although what that has to do with the "intellectual society of man", I have no idea. It isn't self proclaimed, my dentist is proclaimed by her Dental society and not by herself. I have never heard of "New Mormonism" and I don't know what Leonard Arrington or Richard Bushman, who are historians, have to do with anything. History is just one angle on the church FWIW

if people want to be taken seriously I think people should educate themselves and with that though someone with a Doctorate or a Med. School degree who works with Trans people and say performs trans' surgery, I think their opinion holds more weight than someone who doesn't even know a trans person. It doesn't have to be anything connected to LGBTQ issues. I brought up Walsh and Shapiro because Smac97 brought up Shapiro and he criticized Neil Degrasse Tyson on his ideas outside the realm of his Astrophysics specialty. Shapiro or Walsh have no education on trans issues, and Shapiro is a lawyer so LGBTQ stuff is outside his realm, unless he works directly with them which I doubt. Smac 97 is dismissive of Dan and Neil for talking outside of their specialties and yet doesn't dismiss Walsh and Shapiro, who also talk outside their specialty. I find that hypocritical and he plays these fallacy games' stuff and try to show off how smart he thinks he is. If he was chocolate he would eat himself

a consensus on medical authority

"despite your lack of credentials or authority. And I do." and I you as well. I think you are enamored by this Shapiro guy, as you keep bringing him up, and want to be like that and further your own ego within the online LDS world. It's strange that you posit that Walsh asked "pertinent questions of people with all sorts of academic credentials" and yet you can't even identify, "What is it about this PhD that qualifies a person to speak on, say, the merits of trans ideology?" Why don't you ask Matt Walsh, he seems to know "I don't repose much trust or confidence in Dan's conclusory declarations on matters outside of his area(s) of expertise" why is this not an ad hominem fallacy? besides of which it's a good thing he doesn't speak on matters outside his area of expertise. You don't seem to know very much, so good luck to you

which is why people shouldn't listen to him, why take seriously someone who isn't an authority on a subject? I couldn't care less what my lawyer's opinion of the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905 is. Someone who has a PH.D. in Psychology or Psychiatry. Walsh and Shapiro uneducated hacks, they want the likes, the stroking of their egos, otherwise they would be just be another blogger or a lawyer, they want to stand out. They are no different than Reel, Dehlin or some other exmo of the week with a youtube channel or instagram, otherwise they would be just another inactive member that no ones knows are cares about, they want to make a name for themselves. you don't sound convinced so I am dismissing the logical fallacy stuff because you can convince someone to believe in something you don't even believe in yourself and good thing I didn't do that then and you agree with me too , you aren't convinced.

well, I do so. I don't care for people's opinions on gum disease who have never been to Dental School. I don't care for Walsh or Shapiro just like SMAC97 doesn't care for Neil or Dan's opinions and I don't care for his either. I think Dan's opinions are, to use Smac97 words "I think people are listening to folks like [Dan] because what they have to say makes a lot of sense, and because they regularly defend and explain the rationales for their perspectives."

I see that Matt Walsh, who has no education, is opining on trans issues, what his authority on that is who knows so why would anyone should pay any attention to him? It's the same with Ben Shapiro, he's a lawyer, why anyone should take his uneducated opinion on LGBTQ issues is also beyond me. These men aren't educated in LGBTQ issues and so have zero authority but yet they want people to take their opinion seriously.

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders/2023/8/15/23832205/new-general-authority-seventy-called-alexander-dushku

This is definitely old news and he apologized for his remarks https://www.thechurchnews.com/2022/2/14/23218935/brother-brad-wilcox-offers-second-apology-for-insensitive-hurtful-comments

I've heard and it's probably jus a rumour but in Lethbridge Alberta about 20 years the Bishop committed adultery with 8 women in his ward. The person that told me this is the husband of the wife's who's father replaced the Bishop. I have had bad Bishops in the sense that they were either bad people or poorly organized, didn't care, didn't know how to relate to others etc. I knew of a Bishop here around 2000 cheated on his wife and got exed.

https://mybighornbasin.com/cody-planning-and-zoning-board-approve-site-plan-for-proposed-lds-temple-with-conditions/?fbclid=IwAR3YCIC64pKkGYXWlNYKSDguoDuxlDvE9uM6ndjVrilLdbjcBkWuQUCiZpw it would seem there's been a development

I just got called to be EQP for the 3rd time round. I agree with you it's a moving coordinator/teaching/ministering. One thing that I don't want the calling to be is I odn't mind helping the Bishop but I refuse to enable the Bishop, I am not doing his dirty work for him.

One thing about those training videos isn't, for me, so much the video but teachers get substitutes for primary and youth classes, who is to say these subs have had the training?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-home-and-church-book-of-mormon-2024/03?lang=eng

my sense is if they did it's long forgotten

I think it's a good thing. I have never heard of "Nemo the Mormon" but I checked his FB page and he is an activist, I wonder what he'll do next to prop his name up or will he fall by the wayside like other activists like Sam Young, Kate something, Bill some or other et al. It's been my experience that you fail the gift of discernment, the gift of discernment doesn't fail you I wonder though if the "two deep" policy plus the online course wasn't working in the UK? is child abuse at church an issue, it isn't here. Is this "nemo the Mormon" et al solving problems that don't exist?

Joseph Smith corrected Elder Erastus Snow in regards to the "stone cut out" "I will correct the idea in regard to the little stone rolling forth, as foretold in Daniel, chapter 2.This is not so. It is stationary, like a grind stone, and revolves. (He made a motion with his hands showing how it turned.) When the Elders go abroad to preach the gospel, and the people become believers in the Book of Mormon and are baptized, they are added to the little stone. Thus, they are gathered around it so that it grows larger and larger until it begins to pinch the toes of the image, and finally breaks it into pieces to be carried away like the chaff of a summer’s threshing, the stone will keep growing until its fills the whole earth." Andrus, They Knew the Prophet, p.100 SLC Bookcraft.