Stargazer

FWIW, here's a recent review of a debate on the Trinity between Dan McClellan and Joshua Sijuwade. The reviewer is Metaphysics Mike, an opponent of the Trinity. So you get some of Mike's thoughts as well. This video is close to 3 hours long, so...

No. If I were Secretary of War, I might want to see that LDS-oriented services were conducted, and leave other denominational services to those who wanted them. And you better believe that if I did that, there'd be complaints about that, too. Hegseth is an evangelical Protestant. If he wants to see to it that his own variety of Christian has occasional worship services, it doesn't bother me. Some have complained that he has seen fit to reserve an actual meeting hall, not a small chapel, for the monthly services. To which I say: if he can fill the space, what's the big deal? They should find something worthwhile to complain about. If he were interfering with other denominational services, that would bother me. Has anyone said that other denominations aren't holding worship services in the Pentagon? In fact, there a number of military chaplains actually assigned to the Pentagon. There is a special memorial chapel, the Pentagon Memorial Chapel, which is located at the crash site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Throughout the week, services for various faiths are held at the chapel. It's open 24 hours a day for prayer and meditation. Besides those, there are religious services for many different faiths held in other places in the Pentagon. You can see the schedule of services held HERE. LDS meet in the memorial chapel on Tuesdays 0730-0830. Muslims meet there on Fridays, 1400-1500. Possibly ironically, since the memorial chapel was created to memorialize the victims of the attack committed by their coreligionists. Do we have information that black evangelical chaplains were excluded from those evangelical services encouraged by Hegseth? I don't quite see the logic. Yes, the government is supposed to represent all its people. But there is no national religion. Thus it's difficult to have a generic all-faith worship service. And what about the atheists? They of all people don't want to worship with all the rest. You have to keep in mind that Pete Hegseth is a divisive figure in the public eye, because his policies rub some people quite raw. What this means, is that if he did something truly great, certain people would find it to be troubling, no matter what it was. And heaven forbid someone actually believe in their own religion, and act accordingly.

I can at least partly agree with Dan that there is zero empirical data for those things. What is "empirical evidence"? It is evidence obtained through sense experience or experimental procedure. Now, I have sense experience of both Jesus's resurrection and the divinity of the Book of Mormon. Meaning, the Spirit of God has testified to me that they are both true. So I do have personal empirical data for them. But I cannot demonstrate either of them via an experiment that can demonstrate to anyone else. They have to experiment upon the word for themselves. I don't agree that there is zero empirical data for the historicity of the Book of Mormon. There is some empirical data for the Lehites' journey down the Arabian peninsula: things Joseph Smith could not have known about, but are found in 1st Nephi. That one valley that Lehi named "Laman" after his son is described as a desert dweller might describe it, and there are valleys similar to that in that place; the city of Nahom, whose ruins and name were discovered in reasonably close proximity to where the text suggests it is; and the place Bountiful, whose description and characteristics comes close to a couple of actual locations along the southern coast of the Arabian peninsula, and in the right direction of travel from Nahom. It's not enough to prove anything; but its not zero empirical data.

You're on Reddit? Wow! I drop in there from time to time, too.

That's kind of "stunning and brave," I guess. I spent a few years in camo, and wow guess what we had chaplains who led worship services every Sunday (or Saturday). There were dedicated buildings on post that were specifically intended for religious services. So what is Marcotte all hot and bothered about? Hegseth having worship services in the Pentagon is not some glaring change.

Ah, I see. I missed the turn. Not unusual. Like many other children, I grew up in a non-religious household. My parents taught me to obey them. Since when does a responsible parent tell their children "Oh, you can stand up to me, be independent, no problem! If I tell you to not jump off that cliff, feel free to disobey and take the leap!" Do you know what happened in my household when I told my non-member father that I was going to serve a mission? Wow, it wasn't "next to anarchy," it was anarchy to the max. My non-member mother didn't say a word, but dad definitely had things to say. In my family, I was the quiet obedient one, who always did what was expected. Until this mission thing came up. I was 18, and when dad saw he couldn't force me to change my mind, he kicked me out of the house, and I was on my own. He even got physical about it until mom told him to cut it out. I lived with my grandmother for a few weeks until I got a job and my own little apartment. After I got back from the mission he seemed proud about it, though, and was impressed I could speak German fluently. I disobeyed him a second time after he died, because I went through the temple for him myself, even though he had told me not to do it. I had turned into a true rebel, you see, and my life of crime has continued until this day. I hope you don't take this in bad part, but that sounds incredibly whiny and immature. And I don't get the point. I don't know what you've seen in non-LDS peoples' lives, but I've heard similar things from plenty of children growing up in totally non-religious households. "They won't let me stay out past 10 at night!" "They make me do my homework before I'm allowed to play with my friends!" "They make me take piano lessons! I hate it!" "What? I have to be back from my date by 11 pm? What monster control freaks!" "They grounded me because I stole some cigarettes from my Uncle Tom!" "My parents won't let me play Grand Theft Auto XX all night long! What losers!" "Why do I have to pay for my own gas?" "What do you mean I'm not allowed to hang out with [insert local dubious crowd here]?" "Get a job? What are you, nuts? That's no fun at all!" As for other communities who are not LDS, take my extended family. We were (and still are) flag wavers to the nth degree. Practically every male in the family has volunteered for service with one branch or other of the US military. My two brothers both served. I don't know if there was any family pressure involved, but if there were no direct pressure, there was a huge expectation that we would serve. Was it wrong? Evil? It didn't get down to the point of shame if you didn't enlist, I don't think, but that isn't the way it is in all LDS households either, as far as I'm aware. Your experience notwithstanding. A friend of mine is the 2nd counselor in the stake presidency, and his son is giving signs that he doesn't want to serve a mission. He told me that he is trying not to pressure him, and if he chooses not to, that's his choice. None of my sons served missions, either, and I still love them. A bit disappointed, but the only person I blame is me. Here it is: from time immemorial, parents and communities have had expectations, sometimes serious ones, for what their progeny would do with their lives. You can stop imagining that the LDS are particularly heinous about this. When a parent tries to steer their children away from self-destructive behaviors, SOME KIDS flip out. We did pretty much all that, and I guess we weren't strict enough. And never felt any judgment from our fellow ward members. If they judged us secretly, we never noticed. Where'd you grow up, anyway? I've been a member of the Church for 60 years and I've never lived in a stake where this kind of crap was going on. If you're talking about Utah Valley, well, then OK. Just stay away from them Mormons. Power families? Most of my church life was in western Washington state, and while we had some families many of whose members were extremely faithful and as a result many were in leadership positions, the kind of toxicity you seem to be talking about just wasn't happening. Jeeze, it IS a dumb question. If you have a testimony of the gospel, it's definitely a dumb question. I suppose that if you don't have a testimony, then you should see if you can get one. And if you do, then it's definitely a dumb question. My current ministering companion, who is from South Africa, due to some social pressure went on his mission without having a testimony, but got one while serving. This isn't particularly unusual. If you don't want to serve a mission, then fine, don't. But if you're PRAYING whether you should serve a mission, then what do you think GOD is going to tell you? "No, I'm going to make an exception in your case. You're perfectly healthy and capable, but you, my son, can just stay home." I'm sure that's going to happen. Not that there aren't some who really shouldn't serve a full-time mission. There are those whose capacity or lack thereof make a mission quite iffy. I wasn't going to serve a mission, initially, because as a relatively new convert I didn't think I measured up to the standard demonstrated by the missionary elders who taught me, and by the others whom I met over time, who had the benefit of years of Primary, Seminary, and all that. But when I got my patriarchal blessing I realized that even I needed to be about my Father's business. Although I did try to pray about it to get a confirmation. As it happens I didn't get a confirmation, but after some thought realized that the Lord had already answered me. And so I went, and the rest of my life has been blessed by that decision. Oh, Mormon Stories Podcast! I'm sure they'll be quite neutral and open-minded on the subject. My apologies, but I have a tendency to disregard whatever it is Mr. Dehlin has to present.

I take it you reject the Big Bang, then? You're a Steady State Theorist?

Ryan McBeth had something to say about all this.

Weren't they? Maybe not in Zion, but that's because they were surrounded by fellow LDS all the time, and had no need for it. But I feel that you're misjudging matters a bit. One of my long-term home teaching families took their five younger children out of public school in Washington state when their oldest child started going "the way of the world" due to what she was being force-fed in school. They home-schooled all the rest, and you would have said they weren't learning any kind of independence to be able to stand up to pressure. But all of them who were home-schooled turned out marvelously strong in the gospel. All married in the temple, the boys all serving honorable missions, and every one of them are strong, independent, and productive members of society. Out here in the "mission field" our youth grow up surrounded by Gentiles and get their opportunities to stand up every day. It's home where they find their respite from the pressure. As for me, I grew up in a largely unreligious home, joined the church all by my lonesome, and so my independence was learned at home. And I think my father regretted giving me permission to be baptized at age 14, because he was NOT happy that I decided to serve a mission four years later, instead of going to university like he wanted. Would I have done just as well in a 100% TBM family? I have no idea, but I suspect so. It isn't always the environment or the nurture. It is sometimes the nature of the individual.

I love that song! Does Christianity need some special privileged status in the US? Nah.

I think they're cautious about teaching it because there's no specific revelation (or canonical revelation) regarding it. The whole plural marriage thing is another third rail issue. But how can there not be multiple Heavenly Mothers given that President Nelson is sealed to two women, his wife who predeceased him, and Wendy, his widow? If there aren't multiple HMs, when Pres. Nelson is exalted, which one of his wives gets tossed out on her ear? So, things are complicated enough without delving into speculations over things we have no revelation for. Not that this stops anyone from commenting.

The confusion comes about because the entire region (including both Bohemia and Moravia) has been changing hands between polities for centuries and millennia.

Not my question, but I have an answer. For the fun of it! And for @Nofear Nope, one cannot travel to God. This is because He is outside the Universe. Sort of. In his last book, Stephen Hawking wrote that "As we travel back in time towards the moment of the Big Bang, the universe gets smaller and smaller and smaller, until it finally comes to a point where the whole universe is a space so small that it is in effect a single infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense black hole. And just as with modern-day black holes, floating around in space, the laws of nature dictate something quite extraordinary. They tell us that here too time itself must come to a stop. You can’t get to a time before the Big Bang because there was no time before the Big Bang. We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in." My answer is In order for a Creator to have created the Big Bang, He could not possibly have been in the universe He created, because it would have required that He create Himself. Which is an absurdity. So that which is the Cause of the universe had to have caused it from outside that universe -- and thus the argument that "there [was] no time for a creator to have existed in" fails. Because He is outside the universe, and created it, He can see all of it from one end to the other, and from time 0 to its end time. That's how I conceive it, anyway. Doctrine and Covenants 131:7,8 7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; 8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter. One aspect of this, which perhaps some might argue with, is that God rules over the universe because of His virtue. When He commands, He is obeyed because of His virtue, which flows from His perfection. What obeys Him? Matter itself. And this includes spirit, as well, in accordance with D&C 131:7. He has set all the laws of the universe, from gravitation to any and all other laws of physics. And because He set those laws, matter obeys them. This should imply that God or his authorized agent can modify one or many of his laws in a local frame, and thus cause things to happen which appear to be supernatural. Or He may command matter/spirit to do something other than what it would otherwise do in a given situation. Walking on water. Creating loaves and fishes. How? By operating according to the principle of D&C 131:7,8 and His own virtue, by His command. Note that this is my own idea, not anyone else's.

I can relate to what you say here, because I have intensely disliked some of what Dan has said/written. And unfortunately, I have a rather negative personal experience with him that I find it hard to shed. On the other hand, I myself have found that some of what I have had to say about certain subjects seems to elicit dislike and derision from people in my own church, so maybe I need to be more understanding with him. He actually makes sense, occasionally, so there's that.

Yeah, I found some of those comments to be very amusing. In a eye-rolling kind of way.