All Activity

Sorry here's the link. Chapter 16: The Church of Jesus Christ in Former Times https://share.google/crr086laJhZPiZdLP

Your own manuals teach that because of wickedness and apostasy, authority and priesthood keys were removed from the earth. The link below spells it out, says the organization that Jesus established here on earth no longer existed after his death and confusion resulted. Error crept into church doctrine and soon dissolution of the church was complete. It goes on to explain that the period of time that the church NO LONGER EXISTED on earth is called the great apostasy. It goes on to explain pagan beliefs dominated the thinking of those called Christians. Explains that the Roman emperor adopted FALSE CHRISTIANITY. Then says that the church the emperor adopted was very different from the church Christ organized. Finally, if you read the link to the end, the article explains that traditional Christianity was the church of Christ NO LONGER; it became a church of men. Why are you trying to say Christianity has two distinct histories?

I have a question. How do you go about learning to do that? It seems like a situation where the mother bird pushes her chicks out of the nest and wishes the best for them as they fall to the ground Is there a way to train for the falling with wings part of the dive without killing yourself?

I did see this, but I'm kind of waiting for the other shoe to fall, like the promotion of a documentary that has to do with the church focused on our lifestyles and in that sense positive and our good will goes a long way. The real lifestyles of the ideal Latter-day Saint would do well. I can see he remaining impressed but otherwise he may not stick with it if there isn't more to it. Dan McClellan is at the very least a lifestyle Latter-day Saint, and I'd imagine could have laid down positive facts of the church and made a secular case for being a member. I don't know if that includes faith in the spiritual truth claims, because those seem to be things Dan seems to keep private from the public, but who truly knows one on one. I've seen many popular podcasters promote the Christian lifestyle and wants society to be more Christian despite personally not even believing in God, like Asmongold.

It is when God the Father (the God of gods) appoints you to rule and reign with him, correlating with what it says in Revelation 3:21 and others.

Maybe it was struggling to be pro, or maybe it was playing at a different level. In this exercise, the problem with tying down the BoM to a specific location is that it constrains further evidence. For example, if we say the big Mayan cities were Book of Mormon cities, then that means for the Book of Mormon to fit, the language clues should match Mayan, not Hebrew. But I agree with you. The model should be doing its very best to sound like a real apologist and be something that apologists would embrace. And the critical response should be pretty blunt, also: if the BoM were an authentic historical record, is this what we'd anticipate seeing? At this point, I'm not going to edit the prompts--I'm going to see how it responds to your comment and to what people post here. I really appreciate your feedback in this experiment.

When is the moment you are first considered a god and/or have a divine nature?

What about a horse just born?

Mormon doctrine separates Christians from Mormons. It seems you want to have two separate Christian histories. On one hand you want to claim nearly 2000 years of Christianity as part of your own Christian history. But on the other hand you want to claim Christ's church was removed from the earth and then had to be restored. That claim is two distinct and separate histories. One here on earth and one somewhere else, wherever the priesthood was taken back to. Restoration means according to Mormon doctrine, necessary power and authority were removed from earth. That means Christianity was removed from the earth according to Mormon doctrine. Let's remember, the gospel you follow is taught on other planets, so God apparently has the ability to remove the "true" gospel from a planet whenever he seems it necessary. If that's true, then traditional Christianity isn't part of your gospel. Your gospel was removed from the earth apparently to protect it? So my question is, during the 1800 year apostasy, was Christ's authorized church here on earth? If not, was his authorized gospel being taught on other earths during the 1800 year apostasy? Because if Christ gospel is taught on other earths and Christ has the authority to remove his gospel from an earth as Mormon doctrine teaches, then Christianity wasn't on earth during the 1800 years Catholicism and Protestantism was established.

Faith and charity are not enough for entrance into the Spirit Paradise. Faith and charity alone is a path to Spirit Prison/Hell. We discussed to his a few weeks ago and with all my studying I haven't found any doctrine that says Spirit Prison has a "subsection" I think you called it, that is considered to be hell. Everything I find says Spirit Prison is hell.

If there were any serious and convincing evidence, academic non-Mormons would treat the subject seriously. But there just isn't. I mean just the fact that New Testament books are quoted hundreds of years before they were written is obviously disqualifying from the perspective of historicity. There are hundreds of such problems, and each on its own is completely disqualifying. One can of course always retreat to the idea that God is intentionally trying to obscure the evidence so we have to ignore the use of our critical faculties, but you could use that kind of reasoning to argue for literally anything, up to and including flat earth and a 6,000 year old universe. But of course it's not the case that "the evidence isn't strong either way." There is no serious case to be made for BOM historicity. It's one of the most one-sided historical questions I know of.

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.

A 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