MrShorty

At the risk of being inflammatory.... So we will replace, "Maybe our prophets/leaders make mistakes" with, "Maybe God is capricious" (or at least seems capricious to mortal eyes)?
I will have to think more on what I think about this. Is it necessarily either/or? Could it be both/and? Our leaders are fallible and God does appear to make changes for reasons we don't discern? And we won't always know when something happens because our leaders are fallible and when God is exercising His prerogative to change programs/policies/commandments as seemeth Him good?

Growing up Roman Catholic, I miss the ebb and flow of the liturgical calendar.  The 4 weeks leading to Christmas and on to the Feast of the Three Kings and the 40 days leading to Easter with all the activities in Holy Week.  It is even much more nostalgic in the Philippine traditional observations of the liturgical calendar than the American observations.  The cycle of joyous Advent to Christmas being balanced by the sorrowful Lent leading to the super joyous Easter is much more pronounced in the Philippines and encourages faithful people to incorporate spiritual reflection throughout the whole year.

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/re-17-no-3-2016/doctrine-models-evaluate-types-and-sources-latter-day-saint-teachings

His doctrine does not change...
HOWEVER...
What has been taught in the CHURCH as doctrine HAS changed.  Showing the evidence of this may not be accepted in the best way here...however.  When I say what has been taugh in the church as doctrine has changed, it does not mean doctrine itself has changed.  It merely means teachings have changed, which basically boils down to policies dealing with different aspects of faith has changed.
The best reason for those who are believing members is to understand that the leaders of the church are still men.  We do not believe they are infallible.  This means at times that their own personal biases, agendas, beliefs, ideas, and other aspects of their person impact what they present.  If one has a testimony of simply the church many times when they find out the changes that have occurred because of these fallible individuals, they lose all testimony and fall away.  We should not have a testimony in the ideas of men, but in the gospel of Jesus Christ.  A testimony built on Jesus Christ and his gospel will never fail.
The Gospel itself does not change, but the teachings that the church may interpret or consider might be influenced by our leaders personal ideas on the matter.  Some say (I don't, but some) that this is the reason why the Priesthood ban occurred.  The Church has had an essay on it's site which basically blames the personal biases and racist attitudes for the perpetuation of the ban.  This does not mean that the doctrine of the Lord has changed, but how it was taught by various leaders.  In George Albert Smith's time they actually issued a proclamation (similar to our Proclamation to the Family) that the Priesthood Ban WAS official and would not change.
Obviously, we see that it HAS changed. 
We see this in various other aspects of what the church taught previously and what it teaches now.
Another example that has occurred more recently is that the Church taught that women are helpmeets to their husbands.  This also meant that the husband was the head of the home and that he represented the home to the Lord.  In the same way that the Lord represented his family and could bring them to heaven, so could a Father and husband bring his wife and children. 
This has changed (most notably in instances which I am unable to address here) and rather than certain things proceeding through a husband, these specific items are now directly between a woman and the Lord.  This of course is a direct contradiction to many of the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, Joseph F. Smith, Joseph Fielding Smith, and if you believe them, even Paul the apostle from the New Testament (so a VERY LONG history of this thing that was taught as doctrine which has recently changed).
What does this mean?
It does not mean that the doctrine has changed, but the way things are taught has changed as per the biases and ideas of men who are our leaders.  Things of the Lord DO NOT CHANGE...not from the Old Testament to the New Testament (where the laws are not done away, but instead we see a higher manifestation thereof...thus instead of simply no murder, we should not even call our brother a fool, or instead of no adultery we should not even look upon another member of the opposite sex with lust...and many other laws which if we keep we will in no way break the ten commandments or some of the other lower laws)...and not from the New Testament to today.
Thus, the Doctrine, the true doctrine, NEVER changes.
Policies that try to enforce that doctrine or teach that doctrine CHANGE.  They are as erratic as the wind and thus what may be taught by MEN as doctrine three years ago will be changed in an instant.  This is why some talk about policy vs. doctrine.  Even in instances where policy maybe taught as doctrine in the past (such as the Priesthood ban) and things that might be changeable today that is taught as doctrine, are actually simply things based on policies and interpretation relevant to our modern day.
Doctrine itself is hard to define for some.
I personally identify doctrine as that found in the four standard works of the Church.  That is the most immoveable and the sturdiest foundation.  Everything else apparently can change as per the whims of the day.  They are interpretation and policies that work to teach that of the scriptures and the ordinances for salvation. 
Others may have other ideas of doctrine. 
The basic idea I would think Doctrine of the Lord has is based on commentary by Joseph Fielding Smith that has shaped my own ideas.  In this, if something goes contrary to what is taught in the Book of Mormon, the correct translations of the Bible, the Doctrine and Covenants, or the Pearl of Great Price it probably is NOT doctrine.  If it is something that has changed several times in the past of church history, the current item is probably NOT doctrine and more a matter of policy.  Thus, policies change.  Doctrine does not.

Hmmm... $20 grand for 8 hours?  There are a few things I wanna say to all you people...

Speaking personally, I love liturgical Palm Sunday, from the visits I've had there.  I am no fan of the Good Friday services I have attended, as their entire take-home message was "you're a horrible filthy wretched person" rather than focusing on Christ.  
It is possible that any outward tradition (liturgical stuff, Christmas traditions, family traditions, etc) can have the advantage of really hammering home an inward message.  But it is also possible for that same tradition to distract from the inward message and we get entirely caught up in the outward bells and whistles.  So while they can be extremely nice, I see them as being something to be used very locally (like in your specific family) when the time/spirit is right.  Don't feel mandated, but celebrate (inwardly and outwardly) as the Spirit best dictates to you & your family.  
 

As an amateur astronomer, I would say that light pollution from earthbound lights is bad enough. Light pollution from orbit would ruin a whole lot of good observing.

https://futurism.com/pepsi-orbital-billboard-night-sky
No. Just No! Leave the skies alone, you filthy advertisers!
https://elysiumspace.com/product/lunar-memorial/
And seriously?  Have we finally come to an agreement that we've polluted our own planet enough that now it's time to start in on the moon?

I have an affinity for Episcopalian liturgy.  My outsider’s take is that it seems to be more useful in forging sub-cultural identity and cementing ties with the institutional church, than in actually fostering individual communion with deity—but even those can nevertheless be very useful in a faith context.

Have a happy Easter y'all!🐰

Sometimes we think if something is in the Bible or another holy text, it must have actually happened in real life. This outlook makes it a little difficult to explain things like how Jonah survived living inside a whale for a few days (in case you didn’t know, it’s highly unliekly that it's scientifically possible to do so) or why there’s a talking donkey in the Book of Numbers (also scientifically unlikely). So what do we do when the scriptures don’t seem to make any logical sense? Should we just blindly take whatever is in the Bible as a bonafide fact? I would argue no. A lot of us have made the mistake of assuming that scripture is a genre of its own, which is basically equivalent to calling Netflix a genre. The Bible, like Netflix, is a compilation of various different genres. Jonah and the whale, for example, is a satirical story — it doesn’t make sense scientifically because it was never meant to. Once we can pinpoint what kind...
View the full article

Commodore 64? Whippersnapper. I cut my teeth on a TRS-80. One of my best-ever Christmas gifts, my Red Ryder BB gun, as it were, was when I was a teenager and got, as a shared gift with my younger brother, an Atari 2600. You can bet we put a whole lot of mileage on that, starting on Christmas Day 1977.

I'd like to add to my collection a Coleco Adam, which was my very first real computer.  Our first game console?  A pong console.  Never did get an Atari 2600.  I had an Odyssey 2 and then went from that to a ColecoVision (which is why we got the Adam to go with it.)  
Haha I had a Red Ryder too... and I almost shot my eye out with it.

Old school, huh?

I prefer the Uranium Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator, myself, though either is acceptable.  

I just listened to the press conference discussing the upcoming project to restore the Salt Lake Temple.  The link below provides photos of what the update to the SL Temple will look like.  One of the interesting notes that came out of the Q&A with the press is that discussions around this overall project began while Pres. Hinckley was the prophet with the hard core planning taking place over the past 2-3 years.  Some comments I picked up while listening to the news conference and Q&A:
 
The renovation project will take 5 years.  The temple will close December 29, 2019 and reopen in 2024. There will be a public open house prior to a re-dedication at completion of the project.  Historical note:  there was a brief, 1-day tour/open house the day prior to the original dedication where local civic leaders were invited to attend.  It is anticipated the public open house will be HUGE. The foundations of the temple will be isolated from the bedrock upon which it’s built for earthquake protection.  The manner will be similar to what was done with the Santiago Chile temple. Major upgrades will be made to HVAC, mechanical, etc. systems within the temple. The South Visitor Center and Temple Annex will both be removed.  The Annex will be replaced by redesigned entry facilities including a new “Grand Hall” (see photos).  The South Visitor Center will be replaced by two “visitor pavilions”, no additional details given on these as they haven’t really been fleshed out. The large, granite walls along North Temple and South Temple streets will be removed and replaced with fencing and gating that will provide much more open views of the temple.  There will also be enhanced access to the immediate area around the temple.  There was no discussion of whether the walls around the western half of Temple Square would be updated as well. The Main Street Plaza will also be reconfigured.  Refer to the photos for what it will ultimately look like. The endowment will be available in 86 languages following the project.  The ordinance will be available via film as well as continued live presentations. Efforts will be made to renew interior features to their original condition and pallet.  E.g., wall, floor and ceiling colors (much more colorful than now), murals will be refurbished, etc. Slots are filling up fast for sealing rooms for the rest of 2019. Members currently assigned to the SL Temple will NOT be assigned to other temples during the project.  They are invited to attend any available temple. Other temples in the area are preparing for anticipated increased patronage. Sister missionaries will continue to serve on Temple Square during the renovation as Temple Square (think west of the temple) will continue to be open to the public. The temple will be covered with scaffolding for a significant portion of the project. This is the link to the newsroom article with photos and a replay of the news conference:
https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/plans-unveiled-salt-lake-temple-renovation

Except that's not a manufactured argument.  That's really how Jews referred to 3rd day.  That's why the early Christians set the crucifixion to Friday even if we have zero record of it being on a Friday and that's why resurrection was set on a Sunday.  All that is known is that Jesus was took down from the cross before a Sabbath sundown.  They didn't have to set the crucifixion on a Friday and the resurrection on a Sunday.

We say that it fulfills the prophecies because we have to. We have no alternative if we are to (1) believe the scriptures to be the word of God and (2) accept that Jesus was crucified on Friday. If it were to be revealed to us that the ideas given in the TH article are true and that Jesus was actually put to death on Thursday, we would very soon roll our eyes at the whole manufactured "28 hours is actually three days if you know how to count right" argument that has traditionally been put forth.

3 days in the Tomb in the olden days doesn't mean 72-hours in the tomb.  1 hour before sundown is considered THAT day.  1 hour after sundown is considered the next day... so anything that happened 2 hours after the first event that happened 1 hour before sundown is the 2nd day.  Make sense?  So, one hour after the next sundown would be the 3rd day.
In any case... WHEN Jesus was laid in the tomb and arose is not really important, so Thursday or Friday doesn't matter.  What matters is that he rose again on the 3rd day to fulfill his atoning mission.

Now we're talking SCIENCE!!!

Oooh; we can call it G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate.

Or the Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator.

Just need more imagination.  All we need to do is invent some sort of invisible harmless gas or something, which captures and transmits the static electricity to a central location.  Something that needs to be present in our air at 2 parts per billion.   Introduce it into our global air supply, create a couple of thousand receiving stations across the globe that plug into the grid.  Bam.  Free energy.
(I find if you need help with your imagination, just add the word "quantum", and you suddenly see new possibilities.)
As for the moon base, we all know the moon landing was faked.  Proof:

Two-tenths of a milliwatt per square meter, huh?

I still am not sure how directly the Lord controls the day-to-day minutiae of our lives.  Does a father who sends his child to boarding school specifically arrange for his child to have an obnoxious roommate, or to be hazed, or to be confronted with an opportunity to cheat, or to find a lifelong friend, or to make a connection with a particular teacher that will open particular doors, or to be exposed to a particular life-changing class or book or idea?  Or does the father simply send the child to school, knowing that some of these things are likely to happen and that the overall effect of whatever happens will be positive because of—or in spite of—these events?
I’m not really committed to one paradigm over the other.