Senior Moderator
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Just_A_Guy last won the day on September 9

Just_A_Guy had the most liked content!


About Just_A_Guy

  • Rank
    Senior Moderator
  • Birthday December 2

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Utah County, Utah, USA
  • Religion

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just_A_Guy


  2. Hmm. We do disagree somewhat; as I think the “patriarchal order” primarily revolves around the way various generations are linked to one another and the way blessings and legacies and kingdoms and glories pass forwards and backwards between generations—the fitting of an individual family unit into a much greater whole. In that paradigm, I see the gender roles you describe as being to the patriarchal order, similar to what the “united order” is to the Law of Consecration: a temporal (and, I hasten to add, wholly righteous and appropriate and even necessary) application of an eternal principle; but one that may apply very differently in the eternities. (What, exactly, is Heavenly Father protecting Heavenly Mother—and us—against at this stage of Their existence; and why don’t we see Heavenly Mother helping Heavenly Father in a more visible way?)
  3. Agreed. The patriarchal order doesn’t exist to exalt fatherhood; it exists to exalt parenthood. It would be perhaps more accurate (though certainly more cumbersome) to use the term “patriarchal and matriarchal order”, rather than simply “patriarchal order”.
  4. Just_A_Guy

    Perished if they had remained

    Ok. As I understand it, professional historians (and the Bible itself) tell us that Zedekiah reigned for about eleven years, beginning right after the Babylonians’ first sack of Jerusalem and ending with the second one. If the Lehites leave during Zedekiah’s first year, then by necessity the first fall of Jerusalem would already have happened (else Jehoiakim/Jehoiachin, not Zedekiah, would have been on the throne) and the next fall of Jerusalem would still be at least ten years off. The alternative would be that Lehi actually spent about ten years preaching in Jerusalem (all of which would be covered by 1 Ne 1)—but I’ve never seen anyone in LDS circles make that suggestion; and as you note, even Mormon himself (who wrote the header to 3 Nephi that you’re referring to) didn’t read it that way. As I mention in my preceding post, in what would be the eighth year of Zedekiah’s reign Nephi says he doesn’t know if Jerusalem has been destroyed yet. About twelve years after Zedekiah’s coronation, Lehi announces that Jerusalem has indeed been destroyed. Jeremiah 39 tells us that Babylon besieged the city in Year 9, and that the city fell in Year 11. (It’s also worth noting that Jeremiah had several brushes with the law in his lifetime, some apparently even before Zedekiah was on the throne; so Nephi’s referring to Jeremiah’s imprisonment could have been made early in Zedekiah’s reign. See https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/how-could-nephi-have-known-about-jeremiahs-imprisonment) Furthermore, because we know that Jerusalem was under siege for at least a year and a half, there’s absolutely no way that Jerusalem could have been destroyed “immediately” after the Lehites’ departure, unless they left after the siege was already well under way (which doesn’t jibe with Nephi then slipping in and out of the city three more times, including with Ishmael and his entire household). That’s why I don’t take Nephi’s use of the word “immediately” thirty years after the event in question, very seriously.
  5. The patriarchal order is far, far more than gender roles. It’s thrones and kingdoms and inheritances and legacies passed from parent to child, from now to infinity both backwards and forwards through time and eternity. I happen to think that traditional gender roles, righteously applied, tend to strengthen the patriarchal order. But men in LDS families not enjoying quite as many prerogatives as perhaps they once did, does not constitute the “death” of the patriarchal order.
  6. Just_A_Guy

    Perished if they had remained

    In 1 Ne 17:43 (tentatively dated around 592 BC), he states he doesn’t know whether Jerusalem has been destroyed yet. In 2 Ne 1:4, dated around 588 BC, Lehi announces that it has indeed been destroyed. Nephi’s use of “immediately” in 2 Ne 25:10 (dating to 559 BC at the earliest) should be granted the latitude we’d ordinarily give to someone rehashing a thirty-year-old memory. I don’t see a reference to Jerusalem’s “immediate” destruction either at late 92 of the manual you cite, or the chapter heading to 3 Nephi 1. But we know it wasn’t “immediate”, because the boys went back to Jerusalem twice after Lehi left and apparently found business was going on as usual. By the way, Gale, I notice you tend to pick up on threads started by @theplains a lot, and either repeat or expand on his arguments/implications. Are you two acquainted?
  7. Just_A_Guy

    The covenant land

    1 Nephi 15:8.
  8. Just_A_Guy

    Dealing with trauma

    I’m currently reading “The Body Keeps the Score”. So far, I’d recommend it.
  9. I quite enjoy cross-examining inebriated people. On the other hand, about a month ago one of my witnesses turned up high. Not a good day . . .
  10. Just_A_Guy

    Canadian election

    1. Ok, so let’s put that back into the discourse of race that opened the topic. Are there any moral considerations about (white) first-world outsourcing these alleged burdens of declining population to (brown) third-world countries that would find depopulation even more economically devastating—particularly when the first world has created its own population crisis through selfish family choices? Isn’t that sort of immigration policy just another form of racist oppression? And if the Canadian economy is suffering so much from depopulation, then why are people willing to spend thousands of dollars to come halfway around the world to settle there rather than in Europe or any one of dozens of non-war-torn nations in Africa or Asia? Also, I note you didn’t engage with the rest of my original question. Will any people do for your economy/society, regardless of the relative function or dysfunction of the cultures from whence they are drawn? 2. Sounds like the assertion here boils down to “We made this law, but we won’t enforce it. Honest!” Winston was a free man, as soon as he declared he loved Big Brother. The existence of Room 101 didn’t matter; because people who played nice didn’t have to worry about going there. 3. As @Vort says, it sounds like your position is that anyone who has concerns about the Canadian immigration status quo is per se racist. Given your statements, the only alternative interpretation I can think of would be the absurdity that a pro-immigration-reform poster must contain *only* illustrations of US/European immigrants who represent (if the numbers you cite are accurate) fewer than 10% of the people who are actually immigrating to Canada.
  11. Just_A_Guy

    Canadian election

    Thanks for the breakdown. Some responses: 3. What’s wrong with an empty country? What, exactly, does it mean to be “desperate for people”; and will any people do, regardless of the relative function or dysfunction of the cultures from whence they are drawn? 2. Fair correction. OK, not threatening to jail Peterson specifically; just passing laws that allow for the jailing of others who insist on doing what Peterson does and refuse to submit to government re-education. 1. Helpful stats, thanks. So, going back to the Tory ad: it would have been OK so long as it had depicted an Arab rather than an African?
  12. Just_A_Guy

    Canadian election

    What is the racial breakup of the current crop of Canadian immigrants? (Not trying to be rhetorical here; I sincerely don’t know.) If they are 4/5 black, do any portrayals or the crisis nevertheless have to use a white actor in order to avoid being accused of racism? Or are complaints about a broken/unsustainable immigration regimen racist per se? I don’t think the ad is particularly effective; but this jump to “if I don’t like it, it’s racist” is getting quite silly. But, par for the course for HuffPo, Vice.com—and apparently, for a country that seriously contemplated throwing Jordan Peterson in jail. :shrug:
  13. Just_A_Guy

    Why Women Don’t Wear Pants to Church

    Question: What should an LDS bishop do if a kid turns up to mutual wearing a Pepe the Frog T-shirt?
  14. Just_A_Guy

    Why Women Don’t Wear Pants to Church

    I rather suspect that MGF wants us to care. They did their initial Facebook link as usual, but just a week or so ago they came up with a new poll that referred back to the same article. MGF has sort of morphed into Mormon Clickbait Central, in case you haven’t noticed. I daresay they know what they’re doing.