• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Vort

  1. Mordorbund Elucidates The Answer Maybe you can provide some pointers.
  2. Does Charmander evolve into Stringmander or Charmeleon?
  3. Seems like the kewl kids left Twitter a few years ago. Not sure the platform can be saved (or should be saved). If anyone can reform it, though, it would be Musk.
  4. This is not possible in the way the Church is organized today. A bishop is also the presiding high priest of his ward. In order to be a presiding high priest, one must be, well, a high priest. In any case, this appears to pertain to the office of the presiding bishop, as I believe JAG pointed out.
  5. As much as I hate to align myself with the American political Left, I don't see how this law can possibly withstand scrutiny (assuming the Politico writeup is basically factual). The irony is that de Santis appears to be trying to use the Left's sociopolitical playbook against them. Silencing evil by evil means is still, um, evil. Lord, come quickly.
  6. The horrors visited upon my mother-in-law by the Nazis have had far-reaching and profound effects on her daughters, which inevitably affect the next generation. So for me, this is a personal thing. People who lightly compare Nazis to whatever they dislike do violence to the memory of those who sacrificed to defeats the Nazi horror. One very quick way to get Vort to ignore your opinion is to drag Naziism into the discussion as a comparison with what you don't like.
  7. I suppose this is good news, given the alternative. I wish I had reason to feel excited or hopeful about it.
  8. Count me as a stony heart. I find the story discouraging. This young man is an idiot, yet is typical of many of his generation (probably of all generations). Why are people like this? Why must some people be jerks, openly threatening the lives of others (whether or not they actually intend to murder someone, which is somewhat beside the point)? Some seek to destroy society from the inside, by corrupting the laws, the courts, and the hearts of their fellow men. Others seek to destroy society from the outside, like this young man. In truth, he probably does not want to destroy society; it is only the order and structure of civilization that allows him to bully others. In an actual anarchy, such a man would quickly find himself strung up on the nearest elm or with a spear through his eye and cranium. It's easy to be Bad and Hard when society actively encourages everyone else to be non-aggressive and conciliatory. Jerks like this bother me. I understand the satisfaction of seeing him get what he has coming to him, but I find it more discouraging and pathetic than funny.
  9. My wife and my sixteen-year-old each asked me about this. I put a bit of a happy face on things, but fundamentally I believe like you stated. I don't really understand it. I do trust my Savior, and I do trust those he has called to lead his kingdom. If the above Church statement is a misstep, which it may be, I trust that it is not fatal and that it will not prevent justice from eventually prevailing. But like a portion of all Saints throughout history, I want to divide the world into black and white, right and wrong, and then cling to the right. If I don't, then I'm to blame, not God. But when precepts are taught as fundamental truths and then, later, those same supposedly fundamental truths are called into question by the same authorities (at least the same positions, e.g. First Presidency) that originally taught them. that's not a confidence builder. In pre-radio days, which is to say, throughout the entirety of human history until maybe 100 or so years ago, battlefield communication was done using a loud, piercing instrument that provided a signal in the form of an easily recognized tune. Thus in the heat and confusion of battle, the troops could be told to assemble, charge, retreat, mount cavalry, etc. An example of such a battle instrument is the bagpipe, as in the lyric from Danny Boy where troops are being mustered: "Oh Danny Boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling / From glen to glen, and down the mountainside...It's you, it's you must go and I must bide." To us, a more familiar example will be a bugle, whose piercing calls are taught even today to Boy Scouts and Army recruits. The ancient Hebrews must have used a brass instrument like a bugle for such battle calls. The apostle Paul asks in 1 Corinthians 14:8, "For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?" Sometimes it seems the trumpet is giving an uncertain sound or a mixed signal. Do we charge? Do we muster or actively arm? Do we hold the line? Do we retreat? Is it simply too unbelievable childish and naive to ask for plain speech for the signal, rather than trying to feel our way and interpret the lead based on current circumstances and how the mob is feeling this week? I am not spoiling for a fight. At the same time, I do not care to back down or cower from the self-proclaimed enemy. I have been taught since birth that I have certain rights, and as a free man I intend to exercise those rights. If the Lord or his kingdom would have me do otherwise, I will comply, but I must be able to understand the direction. At the present moment, it looks like maybe I don't.
  10. I'm a bit torn. On the one hand, Biden is a stereotypical Democrat politician, shortsighted, venal, small-minded, and so utterly convinced of his own virtue that he literally believes it's okay when he lies, because it's a holy lie--the old "Your poop stinks but my poop smells goooooood" line that Democrats know so well and believe so freely. He is a male, slightly less repulsive Hillary Clinton, only stupider. In that sense, he fully deserves any and all criticism that comes his way due to his stupidity. On the other hand, he's an old man, and mocking an old man for being old is uncivilized and repulsive in and of itself. Those who take pleasure in demeaning Biden for his stupidity curse their own spirits by their spiteful hatred. I do not want to be one of those. If the alternative to being a Democrat is being a partisan Republican, I refuse to make such a Hobson's choice. Enough of shadow puppetry masquerading as sophisticated entertainment. Enough of choice between evil alternatives posing as noble liberty. I long for Zion. Though I am not worthy of it, yet I want it and would go there if I knew how. I fight literally every day against the slow (or maybe not-so-slow) slide into paralyzing cynicism, but what hope can I find in the modern US or worldwide political landscape? Very little. Every day I become more convinced that hope lies in Jesus Christ, and that outside Jesus Christ, there is no hope. This gives me some comfort.
  11. To October, eBot coot! But this means I'll live until I'm 110. That's not a palindrome. (But stat's a palindrome.)
  12. Here's a link to a self-referential post.
  13. In the same sense that Neville Chamberlain can take credit for having postponed hostilities with Germany.
  14. That's actually kind of funny. Probably qualifies as criminal activity, but I still find it entertaining. People are soooooo stoopud. Present company included. We believe whatever we're told. That's one reason I'm not particularly upset about the lack of a "Red wave" in the last election. I would be quite upset if I believed Republicans as a whole were honest and filled with integrity. But when they're just a slightly less offensive type of Democrat, it's just not that great of a loss.
  15. I met an Issachar once. As I wrote previously, my father was from Joseph. He didn't know until he was in his late 60s that Joseph constituted a different tribe from Ephraim and Manassah.
  16. Apropos of nothing, my father was of the tribe of Joseph. FWIW, his wife and children were all from Ephraim.
  17. Would it be that difficult to put the edit button back on the bottom? Just asking.
  18. As a faithful Latter-day Saint, I ask in all sincerity: Why did the Lord withdraw the commandment for plural marriage? Why would he have allowed our enemies to destroy the very kingdom of God in revenge for the Saints living the very law that God himself had revealed to them, commanded them to live, and assured them that it was the true order of eternal marriage? (NB: I am asking sincerely, but I do not expect a public answer.) To be clear, I believe: 1. That God revealed the principle of plural marriage to Joseph Smith some time in the mid-1830s and commanded him to live it; 2. That God's commandment to Joseph was extended to others of the leading brethren, and eventually to the Church as a whole (though not by absolute constraint); 3. That God revealed to the prophet (Wilford Woodruff) that the Church, the very kingdom of God on earth, would be uprooted and effectively destroyed if the people did not cease living the principle of plural marriage. I confess myself utterly befuddled. In my (mortal, ignorant, highly imperfect) view, #3 looks to be in conflict with #1 and #2. It can't be, but it looks like it is. I do not know the solution. Apparently, even though God promises to fight our battles for us if we but obey him, and even though God is faithful and cannot lie, the mind of God is very different from the mind of man. Or at least the mind of Vort. We want to know what is right and then be able and allowed to live that right-ness from then on, regardless of its effects on others. Perhaps that's the key. We have seen changes in emphasis in our leaders' teachings, changes in doctrinal emphases, and even changes in our most sacred rites. Most of those changes have been minor, but not all. I personally have no issues with these changes in sacred rites; I believe I understand why they were changed, and have no doubt that the underlying principles remain intact, even if faithlessness and unbelief among those who are called Saints have caused certain elements to be hidden or removed. (Worth noting that the word "saint" has the same etymology as the word "sanctify". To sanctify something is to make it holy; likewise, a saint is one who is made holy. We are to be the Saints of the Most High; that is, we are to be sanctified--made holy--by him. I am distressed that I fall short of that literally every day of my life, but hope and believe that my Savior's strength can make up for my weakness.) Had I been a Saint who had emigrated to Utah and was living in the West in the late 1800s, with two or maybe three wives*, having gone to prison and/or fled to Canada or the Mexican colonies to continue pursuing my eternal path, I would surely have been sorely grieved to have read President Woodruff's proclamation. I surely would have felt, at least a little, that the kingdom of God was literally turning its back on my families. I could hardly but have wondered if President Woodruff had listened to the wrong spirit and was leading the kingdom astray. Would I have obeyed? I like to think I would have, but I honestly do not know. When you're so much smarter and more faithful than God's anointed, it can be hard to humble yourself and do as you're told. *How could some men have supported more than three wives, financially and emotionally? I love my wife dearly, better than anyone else in the world, but I do not see how that intensity of relationship could be sustained between myself and more than one woman. Wives are not children. Although I think it's instructive to consider the nineteenth-century plural marriage having of several wives simultaneously in the same mindset as having several children simultaneously, where your love for each child is not diminished by the presence of and love for the other children, I think it must be recognized that the actual relationship between man and wife is simply a different ball of wax from the relationship between parent and child. But back to the topic at hand. Perhaps our situation today is not so different. I think that at least our choice is not much different. Do we hold to the rod of iron and follow God's anointed, who surely speak the words of God to us? Frankly, I would feel a great deal better about the whole situation if I felt like I were in a good place spiritually, with my standing before God strong and sure. Alas, such is not yet the case, and try as I might to repent, repentence often eludes me. Anyway, as usual, I'm oversharing. I'm glad I have a measure of anonymity here, where I can make a fool of myself without too much personal repercussion.
  19. I see nothing there that I overtly disagree with.
  20. Semitic ignorance. But perhaps anti-Canaanite, which would be anti-Semitic.
  21. I agree totally with you that the belief Kyrie is throwing around is a delusional conspiracy theory. What I find fascinating is how we would react if someone tried to dismiss what we believe as “delusional conspiracy theories.” One man’s version of truth is another man’s version of delusion. I think you misread my post, which attempted to state that the idea of black Jewry was not merely a paranoid conspiracy theory. That is to say, it is a conspiracy theory, and it is most certainly paranoid. But it's not only that, just some fringe idea. Rather, it appears that a sizeable number of African Americans believe it. Or perhaps not; MOE is not convinced. But in any case, that was my point. And I think we know the attitude toward us of those who loathe Joseph Smith, or for that matter Russell Nelson or Dallin Oaks. I care as much about their opinions as I expect most "black Jewry" believers care about mine.
  22. Being a resident of that mission, allow me to clarify that this is not widely accepted. The vast majority of black Christianity in this area is still heavily influenced by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. That form of black supremacy doesn't fly around here. I think you'd be hard pressed to find practicing black ministers that perpetuate that belief. My impression from living here is that those who are most likely to subscribe to that idea are those that are working political angles. Allow me to clarify: By "widely accepted", I didn't necessarily mean a majority believe that. I don't know the percentages. Rather, my point was that this is not some cockamamie idea dreamed up by Kyrie Irving or his friends, or even believed only by a tiny minority of paranoid conspiracy theorists. This at least was my son's impression. I know that pictures of "Black Jesus" are common in that area, even in the LDS meetinghouse in Chicago that, until recently, my son attended with his family.
  23. If anyone here is considering buying Vort a Christmas present, let it be known that base model AirPods are plenty good enough.
  24. God's definition of charity is Godly love. The world's definition of charity is giving stuff to needy people. (And if the truth of their hearts were known, many or most of the world's "givers" would candidly, if privately, define it as giving stuff to unworthy people who are beneath them.) There is a world of difference, in many senses of the word "world". If others consider you uncharitable, you have Vort's official permission to not care.