All Activity

You may want to check that. Marrying age for women at the time was 20-25 years old.

Or they thought the word sounded vaguely biblical and went with it and then didn’t think about what it literally meant.

I find this an odd question since Nehor has only limited violence against one type of ideology that he sees (correctly imo) as inherently using violence as a political tool. I suspect he sees more than just fascists as ideological opponents, but he has only advocated punching fascists in general, not any ideological opponent. Killing fascists in a war they most likely started or at least triggered with violence…don’t you yourself see that as a moral response?

I think with better technology that will be able to produce plant based food of all types and textures that fulfill all nutritional needs in healthier ways, animal products for food, clothing, furniture will likely fade away…maybe some for the very rich and decadent. The cost of using animals will become considered to be too inefficient, impractical for most. Once we move long enough away from being carnivores, I can easily see that turning into a general cultural morality issue given where the typical reaction is disgust since we are already partway there.

My mom and I solved the problem over lunch. ditch Sunday school. But implement more scripture study into the second hour lesson. We don’t need a whole hour re reading a talk we already heard and can read again anytime

I presume, that there maybe things that are considered, the normal in this day and age, but in, maybe a hundred years people may consider in someway not the thing to do in future generations. People's viewpoints tend to change over time and generations.

I'm assuming you forgot to put a "not" in there. Because I don't believe D&C 132:61 refers to women who never had sexual relations. As for why, D&C 132 was either revealed to Joseph, invented by Joseph, or invented by Brigham. So, how they practiced would indicate how they understood it. And both of them were sealed to women who were already married and already had kids.

Thanks for sharing.

Just wondering if there is any moral constraint against killing ideological opponents. Thanks, -Smac

Context. What other meaning (metaphorical or otherwise) would justify using the word “virgin” here?

Why do you believe Doctrine and Covenants 132:61 refers to virgins as being women who have never had sexual relations?

Now that we have settled in, is the new program meeting the need? Reason I ask is the SS president cornered me after church to ask how I was doing with my calling (she’s pretty intense- so I kept it short. But I’ll expand here) My experience: 1. As a Sunday school teacher, prep is way easier for me. It’s also going well for my husband who is teaching deacons- mostly very autistic boys so the shorter time is a big relief. 2. My most significant observation is less evident emotion or depth. At my day job I’ve noticed in my therapy sessions that the real meat of the session begins at 40 minutes, as it takes about 10 settle in, 20 to separate from life’s distractions, and 30 to really start to open up. When I was a kid my mom always left RS with puffy eyes, I doubt that happens now in the 25 minute whiz class- I personally haven’t yet felt a big heart tug in class, Sunday school or RS. 3. I don’t find myself studying “more” than I did before mid week- that was the intent, as it was directed to us in our multiple trainings. Reduce the amount of time, put the emphasis on class discussion, expect people to become prepared. Which will require more study at home. As a teacher, I’m not experiencing the class coming any more prepared than they were before. The same people are showing up with comments. The class is basically run by the commenters. In my class, I take the final five minutes to share a principal because the comments in our class are generally people just sharing their random thoughts. I know I’m not supposed to “teach” anymore but I just can’t let the class be run by class members who just talk about their pets every week lol- Anyway- I’m not expecting anything to change. But after months of weekly training , which was excessive, here we are doing the thing and I’m wondering if it’s doing what it was supposed to do.

Odd that that Jesus never said one word about abortion. Not while alive. Not in an canonized modern revelation.

Thank you very much for your thoughtful answer. I appreciate you taking the time to clarify your beliefs.

It, rightly so, makes us uncomfortable now but 'teenagers' as a concept didn't even exist until the early 1900s. You were pretty much an adult once you weren't a child anymore. The past was what it was and there isn't really any benefit to trying to fit it into our modern culture and current beliefs about minors. It doesn't change the past or how people in the past saw the world. We get more out of understanding the past correctly (so we can hopefully do better in the future) than we do trying to judge it.

He lied about his age because he was marrying so late (43 is very late to get married). And the book says "it does not appear that Arcadia's own youthfuless was the issue here". So her age was not the problem. Add a few more years to her and his age, and he would still be worrying about the age gap and his age at marriage (probably even worse since he would be near 50). The man does worry about ridicule, but not because of how young she is. Here's another quote from the book:

The Savior's More Sure Word of Prophecy gave Him the assurance that He was the Son of God. Peter, James and John received the assurance that they would have Eternal Life; receiving the Holy Spirit of Promise.

So, Jesus received the more sure word at baptism and Peter, James, and John received the same experience at the Transfiguration? They received the more sure word, the more sure word means being sealed unto eternal life in D&C 131:5, and Jesus went into the wilderness because He received this assurance? I'm not sure it all connects personally but maybe. Some of the psalm passages have a royal and temple-oriented framework rather than simply as isolated statements about Jesus' identity. Psalm 2 is commonly understood as a royal enthronement psalm. Hebrews 1:5 and 5:5, where Psalm 2:7 is applied to Christ is because he is also an anointed Davidic king. "Eyewitnesses of his majesty" is initiatory expression in 2 Peter 1:16 epoptai is a term associated with the highest level of initiation in the ancient Greek mystery traditions.It could refer to someone who had been admitted to witness sacred mysteries after passing through their own stages of initiation. I say, it was Jesus' endowment ceremony. Maybe not their own endowment, but a revelation of Christ's transfigured glory could force a transfiguration on to them and knock them out, like Daniel and John the Revelator passed out. They'd be initiated the rough way.

About Honour and glory: God's Honor is His Power. The Declaration from Heaven: (An Old Testament Messianic Prophecy) The Savior was probably aware of this verse from the Old Testament. (New Testament Fulfillment) The Mount was the Mount of Transfiguration. (Reference Matthew 17:1-9, Mark 9:2-9, and Luke 9:28-35) "We have, also, a more sure word of prophecy' The "also" in this instance means likewise. (Meaning that Peter, James and John received the More Sure Word of Prophecy on the Mount, while the Savior received it at His Baptism) The pronouncement from On High at Jesus' baptism was the first indication of The Father's personal acknowledgement of His Son. The Savior received the more sure word and prophecy and this knowledge sent Him fasting and praying into the wilderness. It should be noted that Lucifer's temptations begin with "If thou be the Son of God . . . ' (See Matthew 4:1-11, Luke 4:1-13)

Them being a fascist. Sometimes that could make them a hero so usually not as good a thing. Do I endorse shooting the guy? No. Do I endorse the statement as a way of rhetorically disarming a fascist and putting the pathetic twerp on the defensive? HELL YEAH! By being the kind of fascist that would use that as a response. She wasn’t doing this in a vacuum to a random person. This was a Christian nationalist fascist provocateur that came to her school to provoke a reaction. She hit harder than he expected. Good for her. “Talk ****, get hit” Like I said, the poem was pretty mediocre. It should have had another editorial pass. It is a passive aggressive rhetorical tactic to try to claim a moral high ground and condescendingly condemn the other person while pretending to be pious. You think that is “good”? Gross. That is what fascists do. It is part of their ideology. That they get so upset when they realize that abandoning civility and tolerance means they don’t get the protection of it anymore……that can be funny. No, not in just my view. He just is a fascist. His whole reactionary worldview and white supremacist rhetoric is classic fascism. It is just that a lot of people in this country don’t know what fascism is so they don’t recognize it. Or worse, they really really like it. Live by the gun, die by the gun. I do find it somewhat satisfying that a staunch opponent of gun control got shot that time instead of some school kid. In that sense he was much more deserving of it happening. Not fully deserved but more than a lot of the actual victims his rhetoric perpetuates. Add in the ongoing suffering that the fascists we are dealing with inflict on minorities at then hands of unaccountable government agents that runs on the kind of rhetoric Kirk spewed and I do not mourn his death. Nothing of value was lost.

Nope, make them a martyr (not saying I endorse any for of violence or even ridicule, just saying)

I have posted this to share insight into why Satan tempted the Savior by saying, "If you are the Son of God . . ." Too, I desire a knowledge to be had as to what the More Sure Word of Prophecy is.

I'd written a response but it got sent into the void. Rather than rewrite it here, I'll probably start a new thread soon about the Harris/Anthon meeting

Okay. So war with a fascist state is a prerequisite for killing fascists. Are there any prerequisites for physical violence against people you deem fascists? If so, what are they? Because fascism is a shallow ideology based on racial superiority and a tough guy aesthetic. I'm not sure I understand, but I'll leave you to it. Would killing a fascist also do that? At first I did not but then he did the “I will pray for you” bit and I decided he had it coming. By way of clarity and confirmation: Do you endorse this statement? Also, she made her comments, including that he was "brave to be out here with no protection, no neck brace," before he told her he would pray for her, so how did he "{have} it coming"? Also, from the article: Are there any parts of this woman's remarks that you do not endorse? I think it was a good response. I am troubled that there are so many people out there who endorse violence in response to ideological disagreement. So you would endorse physical violence against him? Because he is, in your view, a fascist? Do you think Charlie Kirk "had it coming"? Ah. Hadn't seen this. Thanks, -Smac