All Activity

A worthwhile experiment IMO AI is increasingly capable and if apologetics continue to ignore those capabilities, responding reasonably will become overwhelming soon. If not already too late

And how long will that last once some human decides it wants to use it to influence by directing discussions? (Insert pensive sigh) “My roll will be limited to clicking on the box that asks to verify that I'm human whenever the site asks for that verification. ” I hope we come up with better ways to determine AI soon besides box clicking.

I couple of weeks ago I saw this video posted by Dan McClellan: In the video Dan Beecher and Rainn Wilson said they would join the LDS church if they could "be in the Tabernacle Choir". This doesn't quite count as being "in" the Tabernacle Choir, but yesterday KSL news had the following article headline: 'My dream has come true': Rainn Wilson sings with the Tabernacle Choir Rainn Wilson is working on a documentary exploring what God means in the modern world and is meeting with people from different faiths as part of the project. He joined the choir and orchestra for a practice last week and watched their Music and the Spoken Word performance on Sunday. The KSL article mention's Dan McClellan's video and posts a link to it: I presume the video mentioned in the last paragraph of the quote above is this one, posted in July of 2025: There may be a different original source to this video, as this one is framed with a Book of Mormon quote from Enos 1:3. But I thought it was interesting that Dan McClellan got mentioned in a KSL news article as well.

I read the pro version and it is really struggling to be pro. It really doesn't like the idea of the Book of Mormon being a specific location. You can see it being very cautious and not wanting to tie itself to Sorenson's map. It isn't advocating its position very strongly, unlike the previous versions you had done.

It's easy enough. Sort of. The English word "sacrament" comes from church Latin sacramentum, which ultimately derives from the Latin sacer, meaning 'sacred' or 'holy'. In Ancient Rome it was the term for a soldier's oath of allegiance. 3rd-century Christian writer Tertullian suggested that the word was also a sign of initiation into the Christian community, through baptism and the Eucharist. Seems reasonable to me.

Two additional articles with added details: How the woman in the alleged Cornell gang rape case realized she was a victim and launched a push for justice CBS News obtains alleged victim’s sworn statement to Cornell University Police A very troubling story. Thanks, -Smac

The "incantation"? You're equating priesthood ordinances to magic rituals now? And who is this weird cosmic reality you speak of?

If one applies it to the use of meth or bath salts…. Perfect. Mj, opiates etc not so much. prescriptions?? I can’t recall what my wife was given but I had to take a leave of absence from work as it made her certifiably … out there

It still pops into my head frequently whenever dealing with prescriptions, even taking my meds. A very smart ad, but a bit imprecise.

Well-intended hyperbole, but hyperbole nonetheless. And ironically, this is a sort of self-flattering hyperbole, of the "Man, my humility is awesome" variety. Frankly, I think very few of us will ever reach a point where becoming a Son of Perdition is possible: In the Doctrine and Covenants, sons of perdition are described as inhabiting "a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory."[7] However, it is commonly believed that since most persons lack a "perfect knowledge" of Jesus, they cannot commit the eternal sin, and are therefore incapable of becoming sons of perdition.[8] I have known a lot of Latter-day Saints. Some very few have made claims to remarkable spiritual experiences, but people who go around advertising that they have had "the heavens opened unto him" are more likely to be advancing wish fulfillment than actual experience. Again, well-intended perhaps, but still substantively misguided. Yeah, that sounds more likely. Thanks, -Smac

I have run into two or three posters on this board and another one who said their testimony was so strong, that if they left, they would be going to outer darkness. My experience based on many conversations were that they were immature emotionally in a few ways (all adult males, 20 and 30s if they were truthful). They were very much into the attack form of apologetics, seemed to love the fight. Went looking for it on former member or aggressive nonLDS Christian sites and then bragged about it. It came off as more arrogant than realistic. One also thought he might end up as a prophet/apostle. I have heard some LDS worried about it when a youth and young adult. A few former members more recently, hard to know if influenced by nonmembers’ interpretations once they left or that is how they originally understood it. Hopefully the doctrine is clear enough now it doesn’t happen so easily from simple misunderstanding if it wasn’t before. Can’t control intentional misunderstanding though.

I think it’s very inappropriate for LDS family members to make conversion of other nonLDS family members a project. Let it be known they are happy to share info if it’s wanted and then leave it up to the individual to seek them out. Family members pushing religious agendas during family stuff is very different than knocking on a door and accepting a ‘come in and let’s talk about your Church’ and ‘no, not interested’. And yes, some missionaries use too much pressure, not accepting a moderate ‘no’ even. That is wrong, imo. A continual pressure to accept being proselyted towards family is inappropriate. And no, it’s not everything essential for a Christian Church. Faith and charity are essential. A desire to follow Christ and to help others do so are essential. Those can be very present in churches that lack the essential authority and specific ordinances.

After being in Russia (German chocolates) and Canada, I am a snob towards American chocolates. So weak.

Sometimes I am just amazed at how blind some members are at the things the Church encourages its members to do, while criticizing similar behavior of others. Well, let's see what you have in mind. Sure. The Great Commission, the final instruction of Jesus Christ to his disciples to spread the Christian gospel to all nation, is one of the most important tenets of the Restored Gospel. Your missionary efforts were framed to you as encouraging people to "leave their current church?" Your missionary efforts were framed to you as encouraging newly-baptized members to subvert their parents' efforts to raise their minor children relative to religious instruction? What "exact same thing" are you referencing here? If I were your family member, and if I went out of my way to use that status and its associated proximity to your minor children in order to secretly subvert your efforts to raise your minor children as to some important social or religious or other type of issue, I think you would find that problematic. "That" being what? I am not sure what you are referencing here. I have no interest in misappropriating family relationships in order to subvert parents' efforts to raise their own children. I find that a very troubling concept. See, e.g., here: AFPI Urges Supreme Court to Protect Parents’ Right to Challenge Government Interference in Their Child’s Care The brief brings Lee’s experience to the court’s attention. According to her lawsuit, her 12-year-old daughter attended what the family understood to be an after-school art club, where a guest speaker encouraged students to adopt transgender identities and keep the discussions hidden from their parents. Lee alleges that the episode caused lasting distress for her daughter and family. Her case was ultimately dismissed on standing grounds, leaving her underlying parental rights claim unresolved. AFPI’s brief argues that inconsistent decisions on parental standing have prevented courts from addressing an increasingly consequential constitutional question. It urges the Supreme Court to allow the Washington parents’ challenge to proceed so their claims receive a hearing on the merits. This is troubling, heading into "pretty darn creepy" territory. Broadly speaking, I have strong concerns and reservations about people making incursions into the lives of minor children with the intention of subverting the child's parental authority and decision-making. That is very much a "Do Unto Others" thing, not a "It's not bad when I do it" sort of thing. Thanks, -Smac

Yes, muting that person would be much more sane. And I agree with you that the historicity question isn’t THAT complicated. Daniel Peterson would argue that the reason non-Mormon experts aren’t convinced by Mormon apologetics is that they don’t seriously engage with it and thus don’t know how persuasive it is. And he’d also argue that the evidence isn’t strong enough either way, “by design.” I imagine God carefully arranging the evidence so that there is enough to make it plausible, but not so much that belief is unavoidable. And I wonder what “evidence” even means in such a universe with divine beings putting their fingers on the scale. For my part, it’s clear to me that he and other intelligent apologists are suffering from pretty extreme motivated reasoning on this. Yes, this is ultimately AI vs. AI, with a third AI keeping score. But I’m genuinely curious about how AI will do. Historically AIs have been pretty biased towards telling humans what they want to hear. I’m curious if this one will do that and split the difference, and allow these small alleged evidences to compound into something big. I’ve argued with AIs about this and its landed on both sides, both thinking Dale, Dale, & Rasmussen were jokes, and other times thinking that they were really persuasive. For me, what this is really about is getting some insight into how the current releases of AI think, and how humans think. That’s the real issue.

My point is that, in Mormonism, baptism and other sacramental rites have shifted away from their basic utility (covenant initiation into a community) and into magical rites by ignoring the basic utility and instead focusing on precise ritual acts and incantations--such that many Mormons believe that God (or some weird cosmic reality) will not accept a baptism if a toe, some clothes, or hair floated to the top of the water or the priest skipped or misspoke part of the incantation.

Sometimes I am just amazed at how blind some members are at the things the Church encourages its members to do, while criticizing similar behavior of others. Trying to interest your friends and family into joining the church has been a core teaching for at least a half of century, probablylonger.. As a missionary, I remember being instructed to talk to newly baptized members to introduce their family members to the missionaries and encourage them to help convert their relatives to leave their current church and join the LDS church. Yet when a child does the exact same thing to those he loves, somehow it is subversive and interfering with the parents efforts to raise their own minor children. Does that also amount to a (mis)appropriation and use of family relationships?

I'm a wingsuiter

Well, now I'm jealous! That is an awesome piece of machinery! I'm more into cinematic stuff, so it's a bit more than I need, but it would definitely be fun. If you do, make sure to post them here. Thanks!

The guy who called it "magical sacramentalism" was all "who cares, it doesn't matter" about the act of baptism itself. This is called taking Ephesians 2:8,9 and using it to throw out the baby of John 3:3-5 along with the bath water of Matthew 3:15. If you Google the phrase "christians who say baptism isn't necessary" you will find all kinds of claims that say baptism isn't necessary for salvation. Along with a few that say otherwise. This is why the term "magical sacramentalism" came into play. In the view of these folks, when Peter proclaimed in response to "Men and brethren what should we do?" that they should "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost," he was being descriptive and not prescriptive. And you can get into the kingdom of God with or without it. It's just a useless symbol to some Christians and it is highly suspect. Ask a Quaker. Is it magic that baptism saves you? No, it isn't. All baptism achieves is getting wet. What saves you is the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Does He give you His grace if you refuse to keep His commandments? No. Did He not say you can't enter into the kingdom of God without being baptized. Indeed He did say you can't. But who cares what He said? We know better.

This commercial was a good one

I was given the DJI Avata 360 Fly More Combo. It's a lot of fun. I've taken some really fun videos, but I haven't prepared any for uploading to YouTube. I may do that at some point (probably after I retire, which may be in a few months). Awesome videos, by the way!

Oh, dang it. It was @the narrator who said that. Not you. I must have been hitting that pipe myself or something.

When did I say this? Doesnt sound like anything I would have said… mebbe I was hitting the crack pipe rhst day.

It wouldn't surprise me if taking a picture in front of a temple was part of them trying to do missionary work on whatever social media they are in.