Jenda

And you asked her directly in the other thread. If she chooses to answer that post, that is her decision.

I removed all the posts that had to do with trying to find out who Amillia is since it is not pertinent to the discussion. Please remember this board is for discussing topics and not people. Thanks. Jenda

I could see someone being psychotic enough to think they are the Messiah and do the things that Christ did in his last days, but one would have to skip the entire previous three years to do so. A psychotic person can't perform miracles or bring people back from the dead. I mean, there is just so much more to Christ than his last 7 days.

Hey Casi, nice to see you! B) Maybe she only wants a particular view. But go ahead and answer it. She knows who the active Mormons here are. If I wasn't sick as a dog and had the strength to go look up Alma 40 and read it, I'd answer it.

I was just at the doctors and the office TV had this on. It is sad that someone feels they have to run away and claim to be abducted by aliens instead of being upfront about their feelings.

Oh. Oh. Oh. I have not heard about this story. Can someone post a link?

OK, so I was wrong. That's not so unusual.

Amilia is someone who used to post here by a different name and is not an anti-.

But MH didn't play a Vulcan she just fooled around with a Vulcan. M. I won't be questioned or second guessed. If I say that she was a Vulcan then she was a Vulcan, regardless of the facts. Who would she be, if not a Vulcan, if she was on pre-historic Vulcan prior to space flight???

I think Jason was just joking around.

Are you referring to T'Pol in last Friday's episode (the Mirror Universe T'Pol) or the regular T'Pol in 22nd century regular universe? MU characters tend to live darker lives, more aggressive, more paranoid, more sexual. Therefore the attire fits the society. When it comes to 22nd century Vulcans in the regular universe all we can go by is Enterprise canon. If the Vulcans find their attire functional, even T'Pol's attire (which has evolved during these four seasons) who are we to argue about it. M. I am reminded of the TOS where Kirk and Spock went back in time to prehistoric Vulcan where the ancestors of today's Vulcans were ruled by their instincts and emotions. Spock elaborated very eloquently how over thousands (if not millions) of years Vulcans have fought against their instinctual side using logic, instead, to prevent the horrible things of their past. If I remember correctly, they had been relying on logic for a very long time by that point, so what I see in T'Pol (and granted I only saw her in the first season (then they stopped showing it here)), was enough to turn me off of the show.

Snow, regarding the lighting - it could just be your TV set. I've noticed a difference in viewing the show between 2 of my TV sets. Jolene Blalock plays T'Pol the Vulcan. Season 4 has been well accepted by many ardent fans and I've enjoyed this season as well but I have one particular pet peeve. From the ending of S3 to the start of S4 it was very obvious that this particular actress had lost some weight - which irked me to no end. She's suppose to play a very logical person - un-necessary weight loss does not seem logical to me. I have no idea what caused the weight loss in the actress' life but was hoping she would gain it back quickly. IMO, she's still got a few more pounds to go and then her face will fill out and her ripe pomegranate lips will look less ripe. She really does look better with a little more weight under her belt. M. A vulcan, being logical instead of emotional, also wouldn't stoop to wearing revealing clothing. I have never seen a vulcan dressed the way she dresses in any of the other shows.

The 7-of-9 wannabe? She's definitely no wannabe. She's got her loyal fans and her first visit to the GrandSlam SciFi convention in March proved that she's well loved by Trekkies of all shapes and sizes. M. The reason I called her a 7-of-9 wannabe is because I guess Star Trek producers figure they have to include a nearly nude woman in the cast with a great body or the show won't be popular, and 7-of-9 was the original. Anything after her is a wannabe.

You might be right, but my ex-husband would understand since he lived with Dr. Who for the last 5 years of our marriage. LOL.

Ahhh, someone who has his priorities straight. B)

The 7-of-9 wannabe?

On second thought, I think I'll pass. I already have una bella cosa a vedere who's worth almost twice that amount. I'm having trouble with the translation - sans babelfish. My guess is: beautiful hot thing? an attractive thing to see (freetranslations.com)

Hmmm...did you skip the first question? You are supposed to skip the first question if you are a not a member of the Church. I did. I skipped the first question and said I believed the LDS church is in apostasy. Of course, they probably didn't know what to do with those answers and the ones where I said I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet and that I believe in priesthood authority. I re-did it, skipped the first question and answered them all exactly the same, and got the exact same response. I guess you don't need to be baptized to be an obedient latter day saint. Unless they are using Latter Day Saint in it's generic meaning.

Want to see something funny!?! Perfect Mormon 5 Orthodoxy, 6 LDS knowledge, 9 Cultural homogeneity The obedient Latter-day Saint. Temple recommend in hand, you live the gospel every day. Like a city on a hill, you remember the slogan every member a missionary. You beat your peers in seminary scripture chase, and you look forward to (or fondly remember) your beautiful temple wedding. You scored higher than 99% on Orthodoxy You scored higher than 85% on LDS knowledge You scored higher than 99% on Homogeneity

C'mon, Dale, CG is a hit-and-run, he's long gone by now. And Jenda, the BoM is scripture, whether others believe it or not. Just because they don't believe in it doesn't diminish its reality in my eyes. And please correct me if I'm misinformed, but it has been my impression that part of the whole RLDS/CoC name change and shift towards mainstream Christianity has been a result of their diminishing the importance of the BoM in their religion. I think you will find that it was Amilia who made that statement, not me.

That is pure BS! The bible isn't even considered valid scripture by many sects. Amilia, truth is truth. God doesn't change the truth for the different world religions. Please try to understand what I am saying.If we believe the BoM to be the truth, it has to be the truth for everyone. Just because they don't accept it doesn't mean it isn't the truth.

Yet the LDS church is securely tied to the BoM. Ask anyone who knows anything about the LDS what the differences are between us and other churches, and they will tell you about our belief in the BoM. Sure, there are other churches that teach from it and some others that even believe in its truthfulness, including one notable Baptist minmistry in Mo., but they are small in numbers when compared to the LDS. The BoM is one of the main things that sets us apart in the minds of other churches. To separate the LDS church from the BoM would be impossible in my mind. You won't see one without the other when investigating either one. I am not arguing that the LDS church is not tied to the BoM. I am arguing that the present theology (indeed since the 1840's) is not represented in the BoM. And if the BoM is to be considered valid scripture, it must be valid to all the world, not just the LDS or other restoration churches. Just as the Bible.

Brigham Young doesn't enter my thoughts one bit when I think of the BoM. You need to find a way to separate the BoM from the LDS church because the two are not synonyous. If they were, there would be only one church that accepted and used the BoM. So please, don't confuse the two.

Just what is it you think my understanding of the BoM is? I don't recall ever saying.

That might have been true before the Nauvoo era, but once the beliefs of the early church started changing to include things like temple ordinances, etc., the BoM had been left far behind. And from that time on, the BoM is a footnote in LDS theology. It is used as a conversion tool and then quickly discarded, because there is nothing in post-Kirtland LDSism that in any way resembles BoM theology. Are you nuts? The BofM was central to everything taught or done, not discounting continuing revelation. It was taught that the BofM contained events that would correlate with happenings in the latter days and most everything done in early history of the church was founded upon the teachings of the BofM. It is the truest book, not the most complete. Remember it is an abridgment made with a very specific purpose in mind. I don't think you understand what I am saying. I agree with you, in theory, about the BoM, but you need to look at things historically. After BY came into the church and started becoming prominent, the BoM fell out of favor. Nobody preached it, not even Joseph Smith, and other things became the focus. The theology of the BoM, which is very Biblical in nature was left behind and "self" became the focus. What can I do to further myself? to progress as high as I can? That is the whole purpose of the temple ordinances.