Jump to content

stemelbow

Limited
  • Content Count

    10,157
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,144 Excellent

2 Followers

About stemelbow

  • Rank
    Creates Man & Woman

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,828 profile views
  1. Sounds fair. I'm enjoying your discussion with Benjamin and Robert, by the way. Thanks.
  2. Narrator did put it better than I ddi, so I"m glad you responded. I'm happy to see your responses and they are helpful. Thanks.
  3. That feels a little awkward. I like the article overall but there are some parts that I question and this is one. Each of the items she mentions should stand on their own. Everything the Church produces has a goal of making the Church at least possible. That unfortunately brings this dogmatic statement into question, even if perhaps I'm being a little picky on this. That is say, for instance, if someone has an issue with the DNA issue related to the book fo Mormon. That one likely is not fond of the seemingly dismissive and maybe incomplete handling of it in the Church essay on the topic. It may even be a little propaganda-ish. So it's not very helpful to say that this essay is an exception to the lack of trust in Church sources. It feels like this paragraph of mentioning exceptions was thrown in after the fact, as if it was needed in some other person's view. It honestly doesn't even really fit. It's saying to members who are trying to communicate with their family or friends who are leaving or have left to try and give these members or ex-members these exceptional resources as if they each are pristine in their handling of the issues. I'm not sure that's a helpful approach. Ah well. The article is ok. I like some of what is said. I'm not sure it'll resonate with most active members, as when I deal with members they hardly treat me anywhere near what this suggests for the most part. But it's an important topic, I think , and will likely be a topic for forever.
  4. Fair point...the contradictions within the BooK of Mormon are perhaps less common then the contradictions in the bible. neither are univocal, I suppose, or at least not intended to be, but the BoM comes off far more so than the Bible.
  5. The notion that pacifism is preferred to national wars and pride is a good one. The teachings on racism are a bad thing. \ The notion that leaders in any society should lead by serving is a good teaching. The notion that magical events will save special people while destroying others is a bad thing. meh...there's good and bad to get out of it, I guess.
  6. Well I jumped the gun. I see the point I wanted to raise was already raised. Well stated, narrator.
  7. It doesn't appear to me that any of the scholars you mention, are qualified to comment on the type of issues Bokovoy has mentioned is likely referring to when he says "There is simply no way to sustain Elder Callister's reading that the text refers to a people who will be destroyed like Ariel/Jerusalem. And we can do the same thing with every single example he provides of the Book of Mormon fulfilling biblical prophecy. " That's quite an indictment if you think about it. In every single example he provides, Bokovoy is saying there is simply no way to sustain his reading. If you all availed yourself, one must wonder how they were all missed. With that said, and before I give off the entire wrong impression, I'm certain there are scholarly perspectives that each of you were able to contribute to his work. of course, none of those contributions, it seems, really address the issue and further issues that Bokovoy is himself addressing.
  8. yeah...go ahead, throw your money away. 😀
  9. I got that. What I’m getting at is these suicidal or psychological problems could be present whether they take hormones or have surgery. You wouldn’t know if any problems as you describe would be better or worse if no hormones or surgery. You’re making a guess and that’s what I took issue with. Nah you got me wrong. I don’t get the need you seem to have to conclude all of this about a whole population without seeming to grasp the issue in the first place. That is they may have a far better grasp of what they need than you. How could you possibly know? Because you saw a few studies and really want/need to conclude that which your biases have already decided?
  10. Are you trying to say, with this distaste for the T in LGBTQ, that if the people who so suffer from suicide, depression, ongoing psychological issues and way too much regret, would not be suicidal, depressed, have ongoing psychological issues nor have regret if they did not become transgender? I mean, perhaps it is that you simply don't realize that those who are transgender suffer the suicide, depression and all of that not because they are transgender but because they are treated poorly and it messes with their heads? The problem with your "it's better if they were never transgender" position is, you'd never know. The results you are seeing are for those who are transgender--you can't rewind history and make them replay it differently. It doesn't sound like you have any interest in dealing with reality but seem more interested to push on others some weird view of you know what you're talking about because you guessed you are right about what other people are feeling, thinking, and doing.
  11. Hmmm maybe it was the fall played out over millennia as represented by the story of Adam and Eve. The species of human that went extinct were more perfect, perhaps.
  12. Looking forward to the day when the other human species get their ordinances done. Cant' wait to see how that plays out. Since non-African sapiens have some traces of Neanderthal DNA I wonder how their species relates to God's species. God must have known beforehand that their species would go extinct. It makes me wonder if their species represented something that God was against in the world before. Did God create them in his image too? Or did he and another of his wives create them and he didn't like them as much, or got tired and stopped producing them as much?
  13. I didn’t say one thing about believing her accusations against the church. I don’t care to back and re hash details because at this point it’s all memories for me now and I’m not interested to get all caught back up. Again my reason for responding was surprise at the smugness.
  14. I’m not getting into it. Surprised to see what appeared to be some partisan smugness but really not interested but n arguing it. All the best
  15. I’m confused by much of what you say. I’ll start by wondering why you throw out his admissions. I don’t think drugs nor fear was expressed in that initial interview. Surprised to see you dismiss him on those bases. Im surprised to see you reject the notion that her bishop was a representative of the church, at least for her and her fellow congregants. Of course it was crap but it was his role as representing the church in which he made that. Other than that I didn’t mention coverup or abuse. I thought the case for porn was obvious but am not really willing to go back to find out. With all of this I think there are plenty to question but a big part of me would like to see this die so not sure I’ll go beyond memory.
×
×
  • Create New...