Pyreaux

This reminds me of LDS in-joke/stereotype that the bishop’s kids are supposedly the ones who are most rebellious or mischievous despite having a father who is expected to be the top spiritual example. It’s "bishop’s kid syndrome" people theorize is caused by feeling scrutinized because everyone knows who their dad is. A bishop’s calling can consume a lot of family time, which some kids may resent. When a bishop’s child misbehaves, people mostly notice because of who their parent is. The church standards are high for being full of imperfect people acting/trying to be perfect. The wave of disability-bias can fit into that framework too. If the new generation has ADHD, autism, mental-health struggles, chronic limitations, or simply doesn't conform well to the expected LDS developmental template, it can be compounded when we factor in generational change, changing attitudes toward authority, internet, education, sexuality and gender norms, institutional trust, and broader secularization. The child may experience a culture that repeatedly interprets their increasing differences as moral or spiritual shortcomings. Add on the high-demand religious environment can amplify those forces. A lot of the traditional LDS social machinery works differently. It isn't actually equally accessible to everyone. And treated almost Job-like, the difficulty becomes a divine test or burden given to the person we presume is capable of bearing it. Unintentionally making the child into the problem. The Saints continue to struggle to be perfect and Gen Z has a low tolerance for a mismatch between claimed standards and observed reality. Actual humans inevitably produce hypocrisy, favoritism, inconsistency, and struggling members who don't fit the mold. Older generations may have been more willing to compartmentalize those things "The gospel is true even if the Saints aren't." The disability issue makes the same contradiction even more visible. If someone literally cannot meet the expected norm can expose the difference between the gospel's theological claim of grace and the community's practical expectations of conformity. The kids may be rejecting the demand that everyone pretend the imperfection isn't there. It's potentially a crisis of credibility.

Umm... Historically, Catholic theologians did teach the idea of limbo. The Vatican's International Theological Commission explicitly acknowledges that the theory of limbo was a traditional theological teaching concerning infants who died without baptism, as deprived of the beatific vision but did not suffer the pains of hell. But limbo was never defined as a dogma. Today the Catechism does not teach limbo. It says the Church entrusts such children to God's mercy and hopes there is a way of salvation for them. The Vatican theological commission also said there are serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die will be saved, while emphasizing that this is a hope rather than sure knowledge. So, if your point was to dispute Catholics used to teach limbo but the Church has moved away from that position or me calling the modern position a "retraction." I understand its likely more nuanced, like limbo was a common teaching, not a defined dogma, so abandoning it isn't formally the same thing as retracting a dogma. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html "The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised"

You know know a man let his light so shine for all when the world seems darker now without him in it. I don't feel bad for him, I'm sure he's fine, but I feel bad for those of us left behind.

If I recall, the RCC wisely long retracted the fate of unbaptised babies and unbaptised believers. They might be stuck but not doomed forever. They have to wait until God shows them mercy. They don't know when or how, but confident God will eventually do so.

At birth, the "curse of Adam" is understood as the fallen condition that came through Adam, but not personal culpability for Adam’s transgression. Christ’s Atonement removes the condemning effect of Adam’s Fall from little children. They are not required to repent or be baptized because they have not become morally accountable. From birth everyone enters mortality in a fallen world. We inherit mortality, weakness, corruption, and eventually physical death. In that sense, children are born into the consequences of the Fall. A child does not become personally subject to condemnation for sin merely by being born. Moroni's point is that the Fall has no condemning power over little children. Once a person becomes capable of knowingly choosing sin, however, their own sins become relevant and they need repentance and Christ's grace. This is why Moroni immediately contrasts little children with those who are "understanding" and "capable of committing sin." The issue isn't that the child somehow possesses Adam's guilt and then has it removed at baptism. Rather, Christ prevents Adam's transgression from counting against the child in the first place. If by "tainted" you mean born into mortality with fallen human nature and subject to physical death, that's compatible with Moroni 8. If you mean born spiritually guilty, because of Adam, Moroni 8 strongly rejects that idea. So what exactly is the curse that Christ removes from little children? I would describe it as the condemning/spiritual consequence of the Fall, not Adam's guilt transferred to them. Yes, Alma does call Adam's act a transgression. Adam actually transgressed a command, and that transgression initiated the fallen condition. But Adam's transgression isn't identical to our personal sins. Mosiah 3:11 says Christ's blood atones for those people who died without knowing God's will or who sinned ignorantly like baby's that transgress the law before knowing good from evil or Adam before he knew good from evil.

Firstly, you are confused by how we use the term "original sin". The Church has not changed its doctrine on this topic, it has always maintained a distinction between the consequences of the Fall and innate moral guilt/taint of humanity. When leaders use traditional Christian vocabulary, like "original sin" or "taint", to describe physical mortality and spiritual separation, they wouldn't be ignoring that the Book of Mormon rejects the concept of inherited moral guilt and infant damnation. Nor that the Second Article of Faith also explicitly rejects inherited moral guilt, "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression." In classical Roman Catholicism or Calvinism, "Original Sin" carries two components. One, the physical/spiritual consequences of the Fall (mortality, physical pain, spiritual separation from God, inclination toward sin). Two, the inherited moral guilt/depravity (the idea that infants inherit the blame and corrupted nature of Adam's transgression, making them inherently sinful at birth and subject to damnation unless baptized). Therefore, Joseph Fielding Smith and Charles W. Penrose used the term "original sin" were strictly referring to the physical and spiritual consequences of the Fall. They defined the penalty of the Fall as physical death and spiritual death. The "taint" refers to inheriting mortality, physical weakness, and exposure to a fallen world, not inherited moral guilt. Penrose directly noted in the quote you provided that Christ's atonement covers original sin unconditionally. Because no individual is morally guilty for Adam's act, Christ automatically overcomes physical death and spiritual death for infants without infant baptism. Thusly, when President Russell M Nelson and Church manuals refutes "original sin," they are rejecting inherited moral guilt and infant depravity. Traditional Christians historically argued that because infants possess "original sin," unbaptized infants who die cannot enter heaven or are subject to damnation. LDS rejects "original sin" due to historical baggage implying that infants are born guilty or unclean before God, which is why modern LDS teachings generally avoid using the phrase altogether to prevent confusion with mainstream theology. Are you certain you are wanting to argue against the Church, over what is clearly a petty issue over theological precision and definitions, to defend a theology where unbaptized babies are born guilty and spiritually damned?

Or 74.3% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Excusing your customary jabs, because I'm trying to agree you, we shouldn't avoid publicity. It's called the copycat protocal. We stay quiet thinking if a single act of vandalism, arson and apparently nonleathel gun incidents is widely reported, it can inspire "copycats." The theory is publicity gives another individual who is already predisposed to hostility an idea, a method, and a target. However, I posted it because I feel different. When it is a rare, freak occurrence, there might be a need to worry about copycats hearing about it. But when it is constant (endemic), the use of the copycat protocol only prevents us from exposing the inciters to deserved shame. The media's continued use of the "don't give them fame" rule might not be protecting against new crime but protecting the hate group or ideology itself. These radicals may not care about the criminal's arrest or fame, but I think they do care about the narrative turned on them in the eyes of "decent people." If the crimes are only reported vaguely, the original rhetoric by people that created the climate of hatred is never brought to trial in the court of public opinion.

So, your theory requires Moroni to bury the plates, wander for decades, return to Cumorah, dig them back up, add to them, and re-bury them there because they were too heavy? No. The Gold Plates were roughly 40 to 60 pounds. For a solitary survivor accustomed to outdoor survival and travel, carrying a 50-pound pack is entirely plausible. Cumorah was ground zero of the Nephite genocide. It was literally the location where the victorious Lamanite armies were stationed. For Moroni to stay near Cumorah or return to it repeatedly over 35 years would mean rather than keeping it safe, he dawdled in the single most dangerous, heavily scoured region in the continent for a sole surviving Nephite. Scholars argue that Moroni fled the battlefield of Cumorah in Mesoamerica carrying the 50-pound Gold Plates. Over his 37 years of wandering alone, he traveled north toward North America, continuing to write the Book of Ether and the Book of Moroni as he went, eventually burying the single set of Gold Plates in the drumlin in Palmyra, New York. There is not much parallel evidence in New York, Heartlander.

Not yet, though the claim is the leadership is asking people not to report it. I don't know if we'll get any official report anytime soon. Utah security gurus say Anti-LDS wave events are thought to be triggered by a specific news story or reddit activity. But there was no explosive headline on or immediately before July 19, 2026 that correlates directly with the timing of both incidents. Ronald Richards is a 70-year-old man in Orem. Older individuals who display firearms without shooting often turn out to be experiencing severe personal crises or a suicide-by-cop ideation rather than activism. Cache Valley was a young man. Younger ones sometimes engage in disruptive or testing behavior in soft targets, like open church lobbies, simply due to social media trends, local grievances, or antisocial behavior. The motive could simply be the vulnerability of the environment. Latter-day Saints maintain open doors on Sunday and no routine security. A safe space to make a statement or test boundaries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgtv9cPnJXU In this follow-up video, the host Alex addresses viewer inquiries and provides further specifics. The previously discussed Utah incident took place in Orem, Utah, specifically at a Spanish-speaking ward. According to a user comment read by the host, the individual arrested was identified as Ronald Richards, booked through the Utah County Sheriff’s Office records for an incident on July 19, 2026. More incidents The host reads comments from other viewers recounting that bizarrely similar non-shooting security scares have been happening across different locations Arkansas (June 2026) A commenter reported an unpublicized incident where an individual entered an LDS chapel, terrifying attendees without anyone being shot or physically harmed. Following the event, stake leaders instructed local units to have men positioned in lobbies as greeters. Cache Valley, Utah (July 19th, 2026) A viewer reported that on the exact same Sunday as the Orem, Utah incident, a young man dressed entirely in black with a full face covering and hood entered their parents' sacrament meeting in Cache Valley, Utah and sat down next to an escort without taking aggressive action, which the commenter viewed as a probing "test."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xv1CTMyPRQ July 19th Sunday service scare at an LDS meetinghouse in Orem, Utah, told from the perspective of eyewitness "Matt", who was in the building during the incident. An individual dressed all in black entered the church building during the second hour of services (Sunday School) and sat in the west foyer. He pulled out a handgun, set it down beside himself, and kept his hand on it to ensure he was seen. He was not yelling or acting aggressively, and it was later determined/believed the gun was unloaded, leading the witness to speculate it might have been an attempt at "death by cop" or a mental health breakdown. Leaders quietly instructed classes to offer a prayer and calmly evacuate through secondary exits to prevent a panic that might agitate the man. A leader/member engaged the man in conversation to keep him calm while police were dispatched. Law enforcement arrived, entered with weapons drawn, and took the suspect into custody without any shots fired, injuries, or casualties. Lack of News Coverage The host notes that there was virtually no local media coverage of the incident at the time of recording, which both speakers speculate was an effort by authorities or local media to avoid inspiring copycats. Debate on Church Weapons Policy The speakers explicitly address the LDS Church's formal policy banning lethal weapons on church property. They debate the tension between following church rules versus personal conscience, priesthood responsibility, and "following the Spirit" to protect one's family.

Beside the fact they were not delivering any binding revelation on geography, the Book of Mormon narrative itself disproves it. Mormon "hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records... save it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni." (Mormon 6:6) Moroni then wandered for over 35 years after the battle at Cumorah before finally burying his plates in the ground, far away from Cumorah (Mormon 8:1–4, Moroni 10).

There is a distinction between the covenant initiation and resurrected state. An heir to a crown first becomes a prince at birth (in our case through formal covenant adoption by the Lord, "Born-again"). They hold the status, authority, and title of heir long before they sit on the throne to rule the kingdom. Abraham was already a king and a priest, that is what the Everlasting Covenant is, "I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee." (Genesis 17:6). The Hittites explicitly address Abraham, "Hear us, my lord: thou art a mighty prince [literally, 'a prince/king'] among us." (Genesis 23:6) Abraham received his priesthood under the hands of Melchizedek in life (Genesis 14:18–20; Hebrews 7; D&C 84:14). Melchizedek was actively a King and a Priest governing a city in mortality, and Abraham was ordained under his hands to the same order, then the order of King-Priests was an active, earthly covenant institution. Pushing the "Royal Priesthood" into the afterlife fails when you look at how "keys" of authority function among Christians. The Key of David (Revelation 3:7, Isa. 22:22) is an explicit earthly authority. "What he opens, none shuts; what he shuts, none opens." Jesus, son of David, explicitly bestows this key to Apostles on earth, "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven..." If Christians had no priesthood in life, then why did Christ bestow the keys of a royal steward to mortal men to perform ordinances ("bind on earth") during mortality? (Matthew 16:19). If early Christians had no active priesthood or authority in mortality, then the commission to baptize, laying on of hands for the Holy Ghost, and the Lord's Supper had no significance. How are non-authorities remitting sins (John 20:23)? The Aaronic Priesthood is the namesake of the lesser rungs of the Melchizedek priesthood itself for ward-level ecclesiastical duties. Neither men nor women are striving to inherit the inferior Aaronic Priesthood. The Aaronic Priesthood is a preparatory, temporary order (Hebrews 7:11–12). Revelation, D&C 76, and D&C 131 is not promising the Aaronic Priesthood. The Everlasting Covenant of Marriage is the highest order of the Melchizedek Priesthood which cannot be entered by a men alone.

Genesis Rabbah 15:7, Rabbi Nehemiah famously argued that the forbidden tree was a fig tree. Are you wondering if the other trees were symbols, what is the fig tree symbolic of? If the other trees represent things like carnal awareness, agricultural civilization, or temple mysteries, the fig tree carries many symbols related to that. The shape of the fruit, its dense seeds, and the milky latex sap secreted by the tree were widely linked to human reproductive anatomy in ancient medicine. If the "knowledge" gained in Eden represents the transition from a hunter-gatherer existence (living off spontaneous wilderness) to the burdens of agrarian civilization, the fig is a prime cultural marker. The fig was one of the earliest domesticated fruit trees in the Fertile Crescent, predating grain farming. Cultivating fig trees requires a settled life, grafting, irrigation, and long-term planning. Fig leaves are notoriously rough, dry out rapidly, and crumble. In an allegorical story, the fig leaf symbolizes the inadequacy of human-efforts to fix a spiritual breach before God steps in to provide durable holy, white sheep skin garments, atoned (covered) by a lamb, as it were. If the Garden of Eden is understood as a Temple, the sacred trees were in the "midst"/middle like the Menorah tree is in the Temple, the fig tree represents something maybe at the threshold of sacred space, the tree-like pillar or tree wall art of the Temple. The fig leaf apron to poorly recreate the High Priest's Ephod (Exodus 28) that Adam may have lost. "Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame." (Revelation 16:15) In scripture, "garments" are often metaphorical for "works", like in Isaiah. White garments in Revelations are the righteous works of those who were (already) sanctified. Filthy garments are wicked works. Naked is to be void of works. One could, and have, interpret Genesis as the eyes of Adam and Eve obtained a spiritual sight, they saw they did not yet have righteous works.