Calm

What of Christ’s appearance to Nephi or the Brother of Jared before he was born?

Can we not shift the subject to personal too much until teddy explains what he sees the behaviour of the First Presidency and the Apostles implying during the past two years, especially the silence from Elder Ballard? He has mentioned this possibility a number of times before, but has never clarified how he sees this as happening in the greater context of Doug Anderson being under the supervision and working for these men (threads have often been locked because of getting personal or political and since this is a really important part of the narrative, I don’t want that to happen again). So perhaps others can wait to comment until teddy gets a chance to fill out his idea on how this could have happened given what we know of how the Church operates plus even we accept TB’s narrative, Elder Ballard was fully aware of the announcement and was committed to resolving problems when he first heard about it. So what came next that there was silence from him and other leaders and Doug Anderson retained his job? And what does that mean about the characters of the men leading the Church if you think they participated in a coverup for Doug Anderson (TB states there is a coverup and that seems to imply to me that top leaders are going along with it, but perhaps teddy sees a different possible scenario). This isn’t my thread, so I am just asking as a favour because I am very curious. I can’t imagine a situation where the leaders don’t come off as incompetent or corrupt and that doesn’t seem to be how Teddy views our First Presidency and Apostles, so I am very sincerely very curious about how he imagines this. At the very least his explanation may help me understand other faithful members who accept Tim Ballard as possibly telling the truth.

There are currently two different types of sealings, a parent child relationship and a marriage relationship. I may be wrong in my understanding of adoption sealings, but I believe the language was the same or very similar to how they would seal parents and children (for parent child sealings originally—until the revelation commanding our sealings to our actual parents, both had to be living as far as I know, though marriage sealings were done by proxy quite early on).

But Saints believe spirit is a material and can be seen if not touched***, such as Christ’s spirit before his birth. ***which may have to do with the type of material rather than being no material…we can see our warm breath in cold air or smog for example, but in day to day experience we typically would describe it as not being able to be touched, the shape felt by our hands though we might say we feel it when the air currents move

Can something have unending numbers but not unending creation?

Or he may hear a lot, but who knows how much is help with administration of God’s Church and the greater stewardship over all humanity because that has to be an awful tangled mess of a balancing act.

Or that they all ignored a valid (rather than misguided and uninformed, though based on common perceptions of the time) appraisal of Satanic rites taking place with the structure of the Church for 35 years. I was in Canada during in the 90s and still heard of the Utah satanic claims then and many times since. They must have had really good cleaning crews at their beck and call for these sacrifices and literal bloodbaths in the temple or chapels such that no one ever noticed unexpected blood drops on the carpets from these murders.

I hold everyone to a high standard to be open. I typically report those who break the rules, especially calling someone’s faithfulness into question. I don’t always report teddy when he breaks the rules because I skip his posts when he starts to take an unreasonable position in my view and sometimes miss when it goes personal or obviously judgmental. I admit I assume it’s his default position these days, but am occasionally surprised by him coming across as more open and loving/inclusive at times (which is why I am still open to the idea his behaviour off line is very different to what I would assume if I didn’t know others he reminds me of). I actually held you to a lower standard this time by not reporting and instead choosing to discuss it with you in hopes of discouraging you from breaking board rules and more importantly likely contributing to polarization because I figured you were open to suggestions on being more persuasive, less divisive . I know the delay of reporting isn’t a great feedback system, but people are intelligent here and know when they break the rules, imo. I have probably gotten teddy at least thread banned a number of times, though since I can’t see others who report, it could have been a joint effort. I listened to a very thought provoking commentary the other day on some of the reasons why youth tend to swing right and left in cycles, which is why your finishing comment after a thoughtful, persuasive imo discussion struck me as problematic and to be blunt, self sabotaging.

Sure, but what about Spanish, Chinese, Aramaic, Coptic….etc, etc. My nitpicking mind goes to drawing a judgment on all translations when someone is semi familiar with only four seems presumptuous to me. Plus given the thread, what’s more important to me is he wouldn’t be able to give an opinion on any translations made after his death (which is why I started with “at that time”), so is Joseph’s opinion that relevant to the question (interesting side note of course and maybe that was all that it was meant to be since Rod is unlikely to know German to be able to use that translation)?

Ben, I love your posts for the most part…always feel like I am learning something that is based in solid research and experience in almost every case, but every persuasion technique analysis I have seen says making it personal in the way you did is more likely to lead that person to dig in AND possibly more important to you, lead to those who lean towards Teddy’s understanding (or even just identify more with him than you for whatever reason) to dismiss you because you paint him as extreme and they don’t see him as that extreme, if at all, so they lose trust in your ability to judge, see your agenda as driving the info, etc.. People are complex and while Teddy might come across as uncharitable in his ideas online where it’s a more abstract discussion, he could be the first one helping his neighbours move, taking ward members to doctors’ appointments, paying the largest percentage of his income to fast offerings in his ward, willing to stop on the road to help a stranger, etc.. If he is this type of person in his face to face relationship, a great example of a disciple of Christ, anyone who knows this side of him will roll their eyes and think you are the extreme one, the poor example because your comment is unreasonable to them based on their own experIence. And maybe some don’t know Teddy himself, but they know someone like Teddy and that person is very charitable in their actions (I knew someone like this and he was at every service project, volunteered for more and could always be relied upon as could his wife as well, they were neighbours around the corner; I do admit I would at times phase out when he was speaking, but he didn’t talk that much, was more a doer…but definitely felt more like he would better fit in Brigham’s time rather than Gordon’s). Judge people’s words that are written, sure….condemn the words as unkindly, wrong, etc….but given there is only so much that on screen interaction like this can actually show us of a person, it is better imo not to judge someone’s discipleship in this way, imo. I think I have in the past and nothing happened so I gave up. At this point I care much more about readers being persuaded by your ideas than I care about readers being persuaded by Teddy’s….in fact I would prefer for many of his ideas that they do not see them as appropriate interpretations.

TB mentioned this in the video that got posted not long ago, iirc. He said he gave the Church 2 years to clear his name (apparently the kids getting abused and sacrificed during those two years matter less than his reputation to him) and since Brother Anderson still has his job, TB has decided they need to be called to accountability with a lawsuit.

Can you explain how you think this could have happened with Elder Ballard going along with it? This turns Elder Ballard into part of the corruption since he had time to correct it and instead participated in destroying an allegedly good man’s reputation….apparently for political purposes. I think I asked you before and you didn’t have a chance to answer (thread was locked?). You seem to be able to assume Doug Anderson is corrupt and acted without direction from church leadership and still managed to keep his job after exposing the Church to massive liability and reputation damage if TB is accurate in his claim it was Anderson and not Elder Ballard who claimed the betrayal.

The comments were frustratingly buying it unfortunately.

https://interpreterfoundation.org/knowhy-otl04b-was-adam-meant-to-rule-over-or-rule-with-eve

This is the original source for them, I believe: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2007/08/crossing-thresholds-and-becoming-equal-partners?lang=eng There is just the claim, no footnote unfortunately.

Neither of them are scriptorians or Hebrew scholars. Do they mention where they learned this? https://fhssfaculty.byu.edu/directory/rick-miller https://vmrhudson.org I like Hudson’s stuff I have read, but I see this as likening the scriptures to us rather than explaining original intent. Hopefully we are ready as a culture and a people to for both the husband and the wife lead our families together. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2013/04/equal-partnership-in-marriage?lang=eng Their source is Brother Bruce Hafen, another good writer: He may be a Hebrew scholar amid his other efforts, but not seeing any credentials documenting that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_C._Hafen

At that time…and he may not have been familiar with other nonEnglish versions.

That’s kind of impossible not to since no language is equivalent with another (all the words having identical meaning) plus so much background context wasn’t said that one would have to know about. Think about reading a talk that referred to following the example of the Founding Fathers without knowing anything about who the Founding Fathers were or what they did. You would have to guess from what was given what their example was supposed to be. Dan McClellan recommends the NRSV for a study bible, but that may be for more academic readings. I have their cultural backgrounds study Bible and it’s packed with footnotes. But perhaps you mean changes it the least.

Of all the idiotic….. Like no one else has known about this for 30 years and investigated? Obviously the “deep church” (I would be laughing my head off if I didn’t know this could become a thing now) somehow controlled every law enforcement officer who saw this all over the internet….

Him volunteering is not him being considered by God as a candidate, just by himself.

That was my reaction to the idea. Those titles seem to place them in equal roles, but perhaps I don’t understand Catholic use here.

He was having some issues signing in. I don’t know if he gave up or not.

Looking forward to it.

Painful….