Relentless

Not true? How many scenes are of them WALKING? I think they did more walking than in any one of those movies than the saints did in Legacy.

Dang it NB, I was trying to win

36. Come they told me pa rum pum pum pa 37. Angels we have heard on high 38. Have a Jolly Jolly Christmas 39. Away in a manger no crib for a bed 40. Said the night wind to the little lamb do you hear what I hear 41. Oh the weather outside is frightful but the fire is so delightful 42. Ding Dong Merrily on High 43. What Child is this who lays to rest on Mary's lap is sleeping 44. Oh Christmas Tree, Oh Christmas Tree 45. Go Tell it on the mountain 46. Here we come a-wassailing among the leaves so green

You have got to see this movie, it will make you want to watch it over and over again.

Really? Have you seen the Clerks II explanation of that movie? Randal Graves: Oh, I'm crazy? Those hobbit movies were boring as heck. All it was, was a bunch of people walking, three movies of people walking to a volcano. Randal Graves: Here's the first movie. [walks a few steps, staring blankly] Randal Graves: And here's the second movie. [walks a few steps again, pretends to trip] Randal Graves: You ready for the third movie? [walks yet again, stops, pretends to throw the ring into the volcano. Shrugs his shoulders and turns around]

So I wanted to go see this movie again this weekend, but my wife wants us to take the kids to see Alvin and the Chipmunks II. Really? How am I supposed to sit through that knowing I could be watching the best movie ever made...

I love smiling. Smiling's my favorite!

Avatar; you could draw the comparision to putting off the "natural man" (or in this case, becoming more natural...)

In Biblical times men lived to be hundreds of years old. Women live an average of 5 years longer then men, so it would seem Pam is at least a few hundred years old, right?

Vort, are you suggesting that Avatar can't trust Jesus because he lacked imperfections?

While reveiwing confrence talks today I ran across this talk from Elder Dallin H. Oaks. It was delivered during the Saturday afternoon session in the 179th Semiannual General Confrence. His talk is entitled "Love and Law" The love of God does not supersede His laws and His commandments, and the effect of God’s laws and commandments does not diminish the purpose and effect of His love. I have been impressed to speak about God’s love and God’s commandments. My message is that God’s universal and perfect love is shown in all the blessings of His gospel plan, including the fact that His choicest blessings are reserved for those who obey His laws. These are eternal principles that should guide parents in their love and teaching of their children. I begin with four examples which illustrate some mortal confusion between love and law. A young adult in a cohabitation relationship tells grieving parents, “If you really loved me, you would accept me and my partner just like you accept your married children.” A youth reacts to parental commands or pressure by declaring, “If you really loved me, you wouldn’t force me.” In these examples a person violating commandments asserts that parental love should override the commandments of divine law and the teachings of parents. The next two examples show mortal confusion about the effect of God’s love. A person rejects the doctrine that a couple must be married for eternity to enjoy family relationships in the next life, declaring, “If God really loved us, I can’t believe He would separate husbands and wives in this way.” Another person says his faith has been destroyed by the suffering God allows to be inflicted on a person or a race, concluding, “If there was a God who loved us, He wouldn’t let this happen.” These persons disbelieve eternal laws which they consider contrary to their concept of the effect of God’s love. Persons who take this position do not understand the nature of God’s love or the purpose of His laws and commandments. The love of God does not supersede His laws and His commandments, and the effect of God’s laws and commandments does not diminish the purpose and effect of His love. The same should be true of parental love and rules. First, consider the love of God, described so meaningfully this morning by President Dieter F. Uchtdorf. “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?” the Apostle Paul asked. Not tribulation, not persecution, not peril or the sword (see Romans 8:35). “For I am persuaded,” he concluded, “that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, . . . nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God” (verses 38–39). There is no greater evidence of the infinite power and perfection of God’s love than is declared by the Apostle John: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son” (John 3:16). Another Apostle wrote that God “spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all” (Romans 8:32). Think how it must have grieved our Heavenly Father to send His Son to endure incomprehensible suffering for our sins. That is the greatest evidence of His love for each of us! God’s love for His children is an eternal reality, but why does He love us so much, and why do we desire that love? The answer is found in the relationship between God’s love and His laws. Some seem to value God’s love because of their hope that His love is so great and so unconditional that it will mercifully excuse them from obeying His laws. In contrast, those who understand God’s plan for His children know that God’s laws are invariable, which is another great evidence of His love for His children. Mercy cannot rob justice, and those who obtain mercy are “they who have kept the covenant and observed the commandment” (D&C 54:6). We read again and again in the Bible and in modern scriptures of God’s anger with the wicked and of His acting in His wrath against those who violate His laws. How are anger and wrath evidence of His love? Joseph Smith taught that God “institute[d] laws whereby [the spirits that He would send into the world] could have a privilege to advance like himself.” God’s love is so perfect that He lovingly requires us to obey His commandments because He knows that only through obedience to His laws can we become perfect, as He is. For this reason, God’s anger and His wrath are not a contradiction of His love but an evidence of His love. Every parent knows that you can love a child totally and completely while still being creatively angry and disappointed at that child’s self-defeating behavior. The love of God is so universal that His perfect plan bestows many gifts on all of His children, even those who disobey His laws. Mortality is one such gift, bestowed on all who qualified in the War in Heaven. Another unconditional gift is the universal resurrection: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). Many other mortal gifts are not tied to our personal obedience to law. As Jesus taught, our Heavenly Father “maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45). If only we will listen, we can know of God’s love and feel it, even when we are disobedient. A woman recently returned to Church activity gave this description in a sacrament meeting talk: “He has always been there for me, even when I rejected Him. He has always guided me and comforted me with His tender mercies all around me, but I [was] too angry to see and accept incidents and feelings as such.” God’s choicest blessings are clearly contingent upon obedience to God’s laws and commandments. The key teaching is from modern revelation: “There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— “And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated” (D&C 130:20–21). This great principle helps us understand the why of many things, like justice and mercy balanced by the Atonement. It also explains why God will not forestall the exercise of agency by His children. Agency—our power to choose—is fundamental to the gospel plan that brings us to earth. God does not intervene to forestall the consequences of some persons’ choices in order to protect the well-being of other persons—even when they kill, injure, or oppress one another—for this would destroy His plan for our eternal progress. He will bless us to endure the consequences of others’ choices, but He will not prevent those choices. If a person understands the teachings of Jesus, he or she cannot reasonably conclude that our loving Heavenly Father or His divine Son believes that Their love supersedes Their commandments. Consider these examples. When Jesus began His ministry, His first message was repentance. When He exercised loving mercy by not condemning the woman taken in adultery, He nevertheless told her, “Go, and sin no more” (John 8:11). Jesus taught, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21). The effect of God’s commandments and laws is not changed to accommodate popular behavior or desires. If anyone thinks that godly or parental love for an individual grants the loved one license to disobey the law, he or she does not understand either love or law. The Lord declared: “That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself, and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still” (D&C 88:35). We read in modern revelation, “All kingdoms have a law given” (D&C 88:36). For example: “He who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory. “And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory. “And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory” (D&C 88:22–24). In other words, the kingdom of glory to which the Final Judgment assigns us is not determined by love but by the law that God has invoked in His plan to qualify us for eternal life, “the greatest of all the gifts of God” (D&C 14:7). In teaching and reacting to their children, parents have many opportunities to apply these principles. One such opportunity has to do with the gifts parents bestow on their children. Just as God has bestowed some gifts on all of His mortal children without requiring their personal obedience to His laws, parents provide many benefits like housing and food even if their children are not in total harmony with all parental requirements. But, following the example of an all-wise and loving Heavenly Father who has given laws and commandments for the benefit of His children, wise parents condition some parental gifts on obedience. If parents have a wayward child—such as a teenager indulging in alcohol or drugs—they face a serious question. Does parental love require that these substances or their consumption be allowed in the home, or do the requirements of civil law or the seriousness of the conduct or the interests of other children in the home require that this be forbidden? To pose an even more serious question, if an adult child is living in cohabitation, does the seriousness of sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage require that this child feel the full weight of family disapproval by being excluded from any family contacts, or does parental love require that the fact of cohabitation be ignored? I have seen both of these extremes, and I believe that both are inappropriate. Where do parents draw the line? That is a matter for parental wisdom, guided by the inspiration of the Lord. There is no area of parental action that is more needful of heavenly guidance or more likely to receive it than the decisions of parents in raising their children and governing their families. This is the work of eternity. As parents grapple with these problems, they should remember the Lord’s teaching that we leave the ninety and nine and go out into the wilderness to rescue the lost sheep.11 President Thomas S. Monson has called for a loving crusade to rescue our brothers and sisters who are wandering in the wilderness of apathy or ignorance. These teachings require continued loving concern, which surely requires continued loving associations. Parents should also remember the Lord’s frequent teaching that “whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth” (Hebrews 12:6). In his conference talk on tolerance and love, Elder Russell M. Nelson taught that “real love for the sinner may compel courageous confrontation—not acquiescence! Real love does not support self-destructing behavior.” Wherever the line is drawn between the power of love and the force of law, the breaking of commandments is certain to impact loving family relationships. Jesus taught: “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: “For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. “The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother” (Luke 12:51–53). This sobering teaching reminds us that when family members are not united in striving to keep the commandments of God, there will be divisions. We do all that we can to avoid impairing loving relationships, but sometimes it happens after all we can do. In the midst of such stress, we must endure the reality that the straying of our loved ones will detract from our happiness, but it should not detract from our love for one another or our patient efforts to be united in understanding God’s love and God’s laws. I testify of the truth of these things, which are part of the plan of salvation and the doctrine of Christ, of whom I testify in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. This talk seems to say what BOTH of our sides are saying. That Heavenly Father loves us irregardless of our actions AND that in order to get the full bennefit of that love we need to follow His teachings. Just some more food for thought on this subject...

He is, but only by about a minute...

Happy Birthday

I know that Mark didn't write Mark. I also know that if it was written by an "anonymous" person, then we can't know if they met the Savior or not. Thus rendering your statement; a fallacy (1. a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc 2. a misleading or unsound argument.) Since you do not know who wrote Genesis, Matthew or Mark, you CANNOT know if they met the Savior. You CAN make the statement "I do not believe they met the Savior", but stating "none of which ever met the Savior" is indeed a fallacy. It doesn't seem that way to me. It seems that way according to the Book of Mormon, in particular the examples I gave in 3rd Nephi. Joseph Smith placed a pretty high value on the teachings of the Book of Mormon, maybe you are familular with the quote "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book" The MOST CORRECT of ANY BOOK on EARTH". Seems pretty much like an open and shut case. Heavenly Father wiped out whole cities. Now, maybe there were no babies, or ther innocent people in those cities, but logically that wouldn't make sense, so then we are left with the conclusion that yes, Heavenly Father does sometimes allow innocent lives to be taken because he needs to punish the wicked.

Thats good to know. I would hate to think that WHEN the Chargers lose this offseason, it would be the end of anyone's world. I mean, they have NO Superbowl wins EVER. So if I were a fan, i wouldn't let my hopes hinge on them EVER winning a Superbowl. But that's just me

Good, it will give us something to do besides debate the merits and wording of various scriptures.

I know, but I am not in the position to talk smack on bealf of my own team...

Curious, My wife used to be catholic. When i was getting ready to join the military, we were first dating. She bought me a St Christopher medal, and although it had no religous value to me (I didn't even know who St Christopher was) I treasured it because it came from her and was full of thought. Has your girlfriend told you she doesn't want a cross? While our religion doesn't use crosses in the way that others do, they are not offically (unoffically, if you ask 100 different members, I am sure you will get at least 20 different responses) forbidden. To my understanding, it boils down to choice. We chose not to use crosses because it is a symbol of how Christ died, and we want to focus on His ressurection (so why don't we use an empty tomb?) and His message. I hope this helped.

My partner is a recent convert, she was baptised in July. If she ever gets around to posting on here, her name is MzRelentless. If there are questions you have, do not hesitate to ask. You will get more answers than you will know what to do with...

Oooh! Another fun filled debate for me to partake in!!! I have a question regarding the "flood" In the book of Moses, we read an account of the flood. Does the fact that this was revelation to Joseph Smith (See heading of Moses 1; An extract from the translation of the Bible as revealed to Joseph Smith the Prophet, June 1830—February 1831) give the "global flooding" any more credability? This is direct revelation to Joseph Smith, someone who "saw" the Savior (and Heavenly Father). With regards to other literal or allegorical events; Moses 7:14 "There also came up a land out of the depth of the sea, and so great was the fear of the enemies of the people of God, that they fled and stood afar off and went upon the land which came up out of the depth of the sea." Did this really happen, or was it "a symbollic narative"? What about Shadrach Meshach and Abed-nego? They were thrown into a furnace that was so hot, it killed the men who put them into it, yet they were unscathed. (see Daniel 3) Was it a literal fire? Or is there an allegorical meaning here? What of the story of Moses and the Red Sea? Exodus 14:15-16, 21-22, 26-29 15 And the Lord said unto Moses, Wherefore criest thou unto me? speak unto the children of Israel, that they go forward: 16 But lift thou up thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the sea, and divide it: and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea. 21 And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. 22 And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. 26 ¶ And the Lord said unto Moses, Stretch out thine ahand over the sea, that the waters may come again upon the Egyptians, upon their chariots, and upon their horsemen. 27 And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled against it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. 28 And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them. 29 But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. To me this is a literal event. The Lord performed a miracle. I do not know what the allegorical meaning of this story could be, but I am open to suggestions... Consider Elijah's challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kings 18:21-38) 21 And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. 22 Then said Elijah unto the people, I, even I only, remain a prophet of the Lord; but Baal’s prophets are four hundred and fifty men. 23 Let them therefore give us two bullocks; and let them choose one bullock for themselves, and cut it in pieces, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: and I will dress the other bullock, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: 24 And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the Lord: and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken. 25 And Elijah said unto the prophets of Baal, Choose you one bullock for yourselves, and dress it first; for ye are many; and call on the name of your gods, but put no fire under. 26 And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered. And they leaped upon the altar which was made. 27 And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked. 28 And they cried aloud, and cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancets, till the blood gushed out upon them. 29 And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they prophesied until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that there was neither voice, nor any to answer, nor any that regarded. 30 And Elijah said unto all the people, Come near unto me. And all the people came near unto him. And he repaired the altar of the Lord that was broken down. 31 And Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the word of the Lord came, saying, Israel shall be thy name: 32 And with the stones he built an altar in the name of the Lord: and he made a trench about the altar, as great as would contain two measures of seed. 33 And he put the wood in order, and cut the bullock in pieces, and laid him on the wood, and said, Fill four barrels with water, and pour it on the burnt sacrifice, and on the wood. 34 And he said, Do it the second time. And they did it the second time. And he said, Do it the third time. And they did it the third time. 35 And the water ran round about the altar; and he filled the trench also with water. 36 And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the prophet came near, and said, Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that I am thy servant, and that I have done all these things at thy word. 37 Hear me, O Lord, hear me, that this people may know athat thou art the Lord God, and that thou hast turned their bheart back again. 38 Then the fire of the Lord fell, and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. Here we have another event that I take to be literal, even though I doubt science could prove it happened. My point is this, yes there are some allegories in the scriptures, there are also literal events. Some of these events CANNOT be explained by science, or may even be discredited by science. I am not suggesting that the earth is 7,000 years old, nor do I discount some sort of evolution as a means by which Heavenly Father created life on earth. We do not know how long a "day" was during the creation. We do not know what transpired on earth when Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden. We do not know how or where dinosaurs fir into the story of the creation. But we do know that the scriptures are written by men inspired of God. We believe the Bible to be the Word of God, so far as it is translated correctly (AoF 8). So was it authored by Heavenly Father or Jesus? Not physically, but it is their message. I look forward to having my post thoroughly disected and being told how wrong I am :)

Might I also remind you that the Chargers are on their 3rd NT this season? That their Oline has given up 2 1/2 times the sacks that the Colts has (10 to 24)?

Saints don't have home field throughout yet...

Did you read the theories that he was a high level Mason, and he was assasinated by other masons because the book of mormon is actually masonic teachings that were not to be revealed to non masons? I know he was a mason, but to my knowledge he never acheived a high rank (not that I know what their rank structure is), and I do not believe that he took their teachings and morphed it into the Book of Mormon.

Mythbusters looked at this "rule". They found that there is little if any difference in the amount of transference of bacteria from 2 seconds to 10 seconds. That said, the type of food dropped has a lot more to do with it. They dropped crackers and roast beef. The roast beef collected lots of bacteria, the crackers hardly any.

Not to be the stick in the mud, but you realize that James Cameron's Avatar was around for 7 years before Avatar the last airbender was? Anyways, welcome to the boards!