Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,339 profile views

Teancum's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Conversation Starter
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges



  1. Likely. But I typically don't start threads. Just respond to threads and comments and ideas that seem to be important to me. As noted above, if there is an issue I see come up worth opining about I do so. Is that rehashing the issues? Perhaps. But I don't accuse others dishonestly of positions and opinions they do not have. And I don't put words into their mouths. But you do and you don't back down. And I don't proliferate my words with loaded hyperbole repeated over and over again, and in a tendentious way. You do this to anyone whose views and opinions you disagree with. Believer and non balivaer alike. It's seems you think if you just bludgeon them with your word salads that they will capitulate. I guess it is a matter of perspective. I find little substance in the attempts to refute criticisms and even desperation. And I think the leaders of the church feel are worried. You have leader saying this like this on a regular basis as compared to what leader used to say. I think the top leaders are worried. What you call stagnating anti-Mormonism has and is taking a toll both in prior strong and active members leaving and in winning new converts.
  2. I dunno. I think you think there is something to be gained by picking three or four descriptive words then repeating them over and over. Maybe it works. I know get tired of it. It is really a tedious way to make an argument.
  3. Yes and noted. You did not disappoint. 😁
  4. And this one. Repeated over and over and over......
  5. I predict we will see these words repeated dozens and dozens of times in any posts Smac makes in this thread.
  6. I read it to state that the ban was a direct commandment of the Lord.
  7. CFR to show the priesthood ban went back to Joseph Smith.
  8. Ah I See. @SeekingUnderstandingreferenced a Tik Tok video from Dan McClellan. He is a pretty good source. My guess is his knowledge of the Bible dar exceeds your own. He is an active Latter-day Saint as well. Used to post here.
  9. The "restoration" includes original writings? Where? Who is arguing that Tik Tok is the end all source on spiritual studies? Hmmm. Bully for you. Their track record ain't all that wonderful you know. Lots of errors, back peddaling, not being sure about who or what God and the Godhead is (a pretty important issue), priesthood ban, polygamy and all that. SOrt of like the November 2015 policy on children of gay marriage was revelation, according to Nelson, then the 180 was as well. Ah but "prophets...."
  10. So you think it is God's pattern to deny women the priesthood but the LDS leaders will capitulate due to pressure? Is this how you feel about the other priesthood ban?
  11. And then you can just forget everything any prior leader ever said about women and the priesthood.
  12. Is that like all the definitive statements Priesthood Leaders made about the priesthood ban? You know-all the ones McConkie told us just to forget about? Sort of like opposing the statement below right? This one by the LDS First Presidency? Is this also included in what McConkie told us to just forget about?
  13. Such a mdless vapid response. Obviously. I don't know that @Analyticsclaims the church does. Nor do I? But when such typical best practices and benchmarks are ignored don't cry when or whine foul when most people view the Church as a greedy corporate entity rather than a Church that claims to be The One True Church and Church of Jesus Christ. One more focused on amassing wealth than using its massive resources to relieve human suffering. Don't whine about being a persecuted religious minority. You look fairly ridiculous when you do so.
  14. Except technically, an owner of a sole proprietorship or and LLC/Partnership, is not allowed to take a salary per IRS rules. But they can take a draw which is like a salary. As a partner in a CPA firm when I tithed, I tithed on my monthly draw plus bonuses paid out at year end. Any portion of earnings allocated to me, that was left in the partnership, I did not tithe on. So essentially I did what you outlined.
  15. Right. Because our discussion was not how and where to give. It was about how much to give. Unlike you I think the church leaders and management are capable of setting up a organization to explore where and how to give more. You seem to think they are incapable in this area. Not sure why because you act like they are nigh to perfect in most other instances. This is not my area of expertise. But there are expert. And you comment that there are to few reputable organizations to give to is what is facile. And the church could set up many of its own charities to manage additional giving if they wanted to. It is odd that you find so many reasons for the church not to do more. Good lord man. Give it a rest. Nobody said that tomorrow the church should go out and just start giving 5 billion more away per year. Neither myself or @Analyticsare arguing for that. And you keep putting words in our mouths. Well we are addressing it now. We both have said it is not easy but it is doable.
  • Create New...