DMGNUT

Wow... when I'm wrong about something I simply say, "sorry, my mistake". But I find that some have difficulties with that simple response. At this point, I am truly sorry to have started a discussion about firearms with someone who knows little to nothing about firearms... Sorry, my mistake. I will politely excuse myself from this discussion.

Thanks bunches for the review... again, I don't disagree with any of the points being made here. So no worries... and very sorry to have ruffled feathers and muddled an otherwise great rant about ignorant liberals and their desire to outlaw guns, with actual information. All to often the libs misquote and misstate basic facts in regards to firearms. For us to do the same (knowingly or otherwise) does nothing to help our cause. I guess it's just a pet-peave of mine when someone (again, knowingly or otherwise), misstates facts about firearms. Fact... the military does not issue a .22 caliber M4... which is what you said. But again, I'm very sorry to have rained on the parade.

I agree with basically everything being said in this thread, but with all due respect, I must disagree with the above single statement. Perhaps you're not a regular shooter (or perhaps you are) and this is simply an oversight, no biggie... But the M4/AR platform, is not chambered for a ".22" round, in the traditional sense. Yes, for all intents and purposes, it is basically a .22 caliber bullet (meaning the diameter is .22 of an inch)... but actually saying the M4 fires a ".22", as opposed to what it actually fires... a ".223 or 5.56", is disingenuous. The muzzle velocity and energy exchange on impact of the ".22" vs the ".223 or 5.56" are vastly different. The .22 has a muzzle velocity of approximately 1,000fps... the .223 is approximately 2,600fps. The .22 has a muzzle energy of approximately 100 (foot pounds of energy)... the .223 is approximately 1,250 (foot pounds of energy). Note: The word "approximately" as used above, is simply to denote that the numbers shown are "averages" based on "standard" bullet weights, powder loads, etc. Can you get a kit to convert, (or buy new) an AR that will fire traditional .22 ammo, yes you can. Does the military issue the M4 rifle to fire a .22... no they don't.

I tend to view things in a fairly black and white manner. I also tend to be less understanding of all the "psychology" behind new things or ideas. After all, I'm a red neck country boy truck driver from Texas, and didn't join the church until I was in my 40s (perhaps that tells you a little bit about me). So, I look at things from a more "tangible" perspective. I don't spend much time on this site, as it seems to be mostly theoretical or theological and sometimes even opinion based discussions about topics, that for the most part, are either way above my pay grade, are I just find kind of pointless. I really wish there were more discussions about preparedness (meaning temporal preparedness). It's just my opinion, but I think that stuff is gonna play a big role and be pretty dang important, in the not too distant future (meaning, in our life times). But... the whole reason I posted on this thread was to say thank you, to everyone who had anything to say. This is perhaps the most interesting and enlightening thread I've read on this site. And despite the fact that much of it was over my head, I enjoyed reading it, and more importantly, I think I have a mildly better understanding of what the church's direction is in regards to this... "phenomenon". I admit I really don't understand what is happening, but I've been aware for a while now, that "something" is happening, and it's effects upon our youth today is profound. For my part, and looking back on what anyone here would describe as me having a pretty narrow minded view of things, I need to be more open minded and accepting of other people's feelings... and in the end, I need to do better in remembering that we're all children of God, and just trying to get by, the best we can.

Excuse me while I put my foot in my mouth, but this sounds kinda like a bunch of old women discussing the pros and cons of stewed tomatoes. Stewed tomatoes are what they are (very good in soup)... the church is what it is (the true church of Christ), and every person on Earth is a child of God (and has their own agency). The Church, by making this statement, has changed nothing. The doctrine is still the doctrine, the leaders are still inspired by God and if that is in question, seek your own inspiration, and then remember we can all repent... and all of this by the guy with the beam in his eye. I'd be more concerned about a hang-nail. PS. My deepest apologies to any elderly women on this site who enjoy discussing stewed tomatoes.

Pam, I wasn't counting, but since you brought it up, that's a little better than 6 posts per year... not nearly as good as my temple attendance, but disturbingly close. 🙂

Welcome, My wife and I joined the church when in our mid 40s... back in 2005. Our 2 sons joined as well (they were 10 & 13 at the time). You'll definitely find lots of good info here. I mostly read and learn from others, when it comes to posting on many of the topics... I tend to swim in the shallow end of the pool. 🙂

Mr. Shorty, Back when my wife and I were in our early thirties (and about 10 years before the missionaries found us), my wife was diagnosed with a brain tumor. It was found to be non-cancerous (sorry I don't recall the proper medical terminology, I'm a truck driver and can't remember most medical terms a day later... so it's especially unlikely I'll remember them 27 years later). Anyhow. the tumor was on her pituitary gland, and she (with my asked for advice) had to decide whether to have it surgically removed, with a roughly 50/50 chance the optic nerve would accidentally be touched, rendering her permanently blind in both eyes... or choose a medical alternative, a medication that she would stay on for the rest of her life, and which would supposedly keep the tumor from growing further, but which also carried the risk that at anytime in the future, the tumor could still become cancerous. With our limited understanding of miracles (although not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we did consider ourselves Christian), we asked for guidance and for a miracle from God, and with a great deal of faith (which we sorely lacked), we received both. We opted for surgery and today my wife is healthy (and has her vision). I know we are not to be commanded in all things, but we can certainly ask for advice and direction, and it will be lovingly shared. As a convert from in my 40s, I often feel I'm walking a few steps behind everyone else, in knowledge, understanding, and even sometimes my ability to have faith. The Lord has proven to me time and again, that even with just a kernel of faith, He can perform mighty miracles.

Chaco Canyon... north western New Mexico.

My final point, the original question is cool and thought provoking. But in the end, we don't need to understand the how or why of everyone being covered by the Atonement. They just are. God's got it covered, regardless of whether we can make heads or tails of it. 🙂

I don't think I'm out on a limb... I'm not presuming to know something that others don't, but you're presuming that since most every time God interacts with us mortals, He is flesh and blood... at least once He was a burning bush. I'm curious why you think our "all" powerful, "all" knowing God, must limit himself to flesh and blood? But hey, lets say that you are correct and there are things that God can not do (like become a form of energy... or light, simply by willing it to be so), and just His mind is everywhere at once (while His flesh and blood body stays put somewhere)... it doesn't change my point... He exists outside of time... He can literally be anywhere and at anytime (again... that's our perspective of time... not His). At this point (in our time-line) the Atonement "has" happened, and it is available to all... equally.

I agree that God has a body. I'm guessing you might agree that God's knowledge far surpasses ours (meaning humans). A lot has been written and theorized, comparing God's state of being to the nature of light... As something approaches the speed of light, time (and even a specific location) cease to exist (at least as we understand it). My point is that when speaking of "when" the Atonement happened, the "when" of it's occurrence, only applies to humans (and only while we are experiencing the mortal part of our existence). Time (as we perceive it) isn't relevant for God. As I mentioned, a lot has been said (written) about the nature of God and light, and our ability to perceive (or understand) it. Parley P. Pratt, David O. McKay, Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Robert D. Hales, Doctrine and Covenants, Daniel K. Judd (lesser known, but the Professor of Ancient Scripture at BYU), and others have had meaningful things to say about "Light". Perhaps I took a bit of "creative license" when referring to light as energy (but I believe it is, in a manner of speaking, a definite form of energy). Light has even been referred to as, "... the law by which all things are governed" (Doctrine and Covenants 88:13). I apologize if I've upset the apple cart. I didn't really intend to be drawn into this discussion. I only meant to point out that in my mind... the "when" of something happening is less important then the fact that it "did" happen. God, (again... in my mind) is more interested in my repenting for a given sin, then when I repented. I believe the same can be said for the Atonement. That it happened, is likely much more important then when it happened. From God's perspective, there is no "how were things before", because right now... the Atonement "is", and it applies to everyone.

Short answer... God is Light, pure energy. He exists outside of time (as we know it). The Atonement only happened at a specific time in history, from our perspective. Not so for God.

Neuro, I guess I misspoke myself... perhaps I should've said, "in my lifetime"... and perhaps I should've also been more specific about confiscation of "guns" specifically, as opposed to other goods. But much of my silver and gold is in the form of numismatic coins, meaning actual currency (supposedly, unlike bullion rounds and bars, not eligible for confiscation). And they can call it whatever they want, and it really doesn't matter what form I have it in... I wish them luck in trying to take it from me by force... even if the beat me, they'll never find it. Ironhold... I agree. And by the way, I like the idea of idiot liberal politicians assuming that the military will be on their side, like assuming that law enforcement will as well. I honestly don't think they realize how far out on a very small branch they are (when making that assumption). And I tend to think their "nebulous" wording is intentional, (in comparing the weaponry available to the average citizen, to that which is available to the military) it adds the implication that anyone who is pro-gun, will at some point rise up to over throw our government. Again... what idiots. In reality, it's the pro-gun crowd who would like to see our government saved (from the bastardisation it is currently under going).

That word "confiscate'... when citizens (of any country) allow "that" to happen, regardless of the "reason" that is offered for doing so... then they have lost. And further more, they have lost something which can never be recovered. If confiscation comes to America (but I doubt it can/will), then it will fail, or I'll end up dead. Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty, or give me death". Yes... that's my final answer.