person0

this one

This Church manual sums up my belief on the matter fairly well.

I find this political cartoon applicable to the topic of discussion, and one that establishes an important truth:

Were The Nazis Left-Wing? Dinesh D’Souza Reveals the Stunning Truth There is an entire book by this author establishing the truth that Fascism and Nazism is rooted in left wing politics. The link above has a brief interview laying out some of the principles behind this.

This is what your response looks like on the activity feed: Hilarious!

This just in: I rest my case.

I suppose I should mention that I told my left handed cousin that you would probably have a stock pile of extra gloves when he cam asking for some. He and his 8 left handed children each took one of the left handed gloves. I told them you were right handed so they figured you wouldn't miss them.

Racism is not 'the' problem, racism is a problem, but the growing racist influence in our country is the result of the problem of evil leaders and the destruction of the family unit. Racism in our modern culture has less to do with people actually being racist, and more to do with people being trained, led and guided toward racism, on purpose.

White supremacy is evil, but so is white suppression, which I believe if we are honest, is probably the bigger problem in modern US society. I venture to guess that in the past few years, racist, anti-white attitudes have resulted in more deaths than racist, white supremacist attitudes. All evil, but only one is in the national headlines.

Unfortunately @prisonchaplain, today is the first day of the new Like Redistribution policy. At the end of each day all likes will be equally distributed among everyone who posted that day. This way there will be no winners and no losers, and no one's feelings will be hurt. If you have any questions or concerns about the new policy, please send all complaints and inquiries to @Vort who was graciously quick to sponsor this policy upon realizing he had attained the most likes of all time and that he probably should be giving them away since it was really the people who liked his posts that did all the work; 'he didn't build that'.

What if they added a new leader board metric. . . highest ratio of likes to posts? As of this post my ratio is 1.52 so I'm not doing too shabby on that front! They could even make a minimum # of posts to start qualifying like 250 or even 500 something, so that it doesn't get overrun with brand new folks. You could have a daily, metric for it as well as the other metrics just like the current leader board!

No silly, it's 'boren' like Bourne. Like Jason Bourne . . . Car Bourne End em'! The real question is whether or not we should be afraid?

I've only ever won once so far. I suppose I don't post enough. Or perhaps, everyone else posts too much?

Yes I am admitting that. Sorry to disappoint brother. Here's the thing, as I hinted in my initial response, there are plenty of 'reasonable' theories out there. My main problem is that I tend to find holes in all of them. For example: A number of years ago I liked the theory that our earth might have been organized from remnants of other planets, and that dinosaurs and neanderthals and the like could all have been decaying and fossilizing for thousands to millions of years somewhere else. This would resolve the problem of death before the fall on this earth because those remnants would not be from this earth. But then, a couple of other problems come into play - why are those dinosaurs and neanderthals not resurrected (unless they were also awaiting the resurrection of Christ)? Also, since our earth is a spiritual entity, would the other planets be missing chunks that they would need in order to receive their own paradisaical glory and eventual celestialization? All kinds of holes. My current thought is that everything we find on this earth pertains to this earth and lived and died on this earth. The time frame, I'm not so sure about, however, I believe that everything involving death and decay must have happened after the fall. I reconcile this with the text in D&C by believing that the time since the fall is indeed only in the thousands. I lean toward the belief that the earth started out in a form like Pangaea as scientists have postulated and that it was moved over time. God changed language at the tower of Babel, why not shift the earth at some other point. The only way to reconcile all of this scientifically is to assume that there is something missing from the scientific dating methods. This missing piece would have to be something that directly affected the half-life of elements used in dating (which scientists have been unable to significantly affect in a controlled lab environment). Anyway, I simply don't have a complete answer, and I haven't heard anyone else who does either. I believe that eventually all real truth of God and all real truth of science are one and the same and will match up and be made known to us. Unfortunately, I just don't know when.

Once again, a reasonable belief, a logical conclusion based on the current state of human scientific knowledge, but not in keeping with scripture and modern prophets as it pertains to this particular earth. If we are to believe the scriptures, and more importantly the prophets, ". . .there was no death on this earth before the Fall of Adam." That is literally what the Church's bible dictionary declares. I am excited about further light and knowledge to shed light on this issue, but in the meantime I will not accept what I believe to being the philosophies of men, mingled with scripture. I am 100% confident that the real answer lies in a correct resolution of both of these principles. Whether dating mechanisms are incorrect for some reason (I am aware of the specificity and accuracy with which they are calculated), or whether there be another answer. Either way, I'm sure there is a reconciliation, I'm just glad it has no bearing on our salvation or else this disagreement might be actually important! Eating fruit does not have anything to do with death. If Adam ate an apple and dropped the 'core' on the ground, rather than decay, it could spontaneously grow into another plant. One can certainly resolve eating and using plant cells from vegetation without death being required. Besides, do you not think there is fruit in the celestial kingdom? Is there then also death there when we eat the fruit? I would say 2 Nephi 2:22 is pretty clear and non confusing, I don't think any liberties are taken to interpret it the way I interpret it.

Do liberal democrats who vote in congruence with antisemitic liberals and policies count? If so, I've never met him, but I'm fairly certain Harry Reid would count. If you consider the number of people who agree with or espouse antisemitic policies, there are probably plenty of members of the Church who would fall in that category. Although, to be 'fair', they do so unknowingly. I would postulate that most of them do so because they are foolishly not paying enough attention to politics or the possible repercussions, and are lacking in understanding the importance of the Jews or of Israel. Possibly in some twisted way are trying to hurry the second coming? I think self-described is the key word here. They are self-described communists because they have never lived under communism, and have developed a fantastical idea of what it would be. They are, for the most part, not 'real' communists. However, someone who claims to seek or agree with the destruction of the Jews, is by default a real 'hater'. A member who believes abortion should be discretionary is wrong, but can remain in good standing; a member who advises someone to get an abortion would generally be considered to be under condemnation. In this same vein, I suppose a member who believes in neo-Nazism is very, very wrong, but might otherwise be able to remain in good standing, whereas a member who joins or promotes or participates in any antisemitic group will not truthfully pass their temple recommend interview.

Okay I'm officially having fun with this! Here is my rebuttal to your rebuttal : 1) When you were born you gained a physical body. Before the moment of birth on this planet, you did not have a physical body. Your physical body today is extremely different from your physical body at birth. You have changed physically, spiritually, and mentally, and yet, are you not the same being? Your appearance has changed, your intellect has advanced, but you are the same intelligent entity that you were even before you were born. Likewise, Christ, in scripture is noted as being the same, yesterday, today, and forever (different context - same principle). Definition - The World: The planet on which mankind currently resides and has resided from the time Adam was placed in the Garden of Eden. The spiritual entity, now physically clothed, which was created as the planet where Jesus Christ would accomplish His Atonement. The other 1) You might have to link me to another post because I think I'm missing something. However, I interpret 'all things' in this context to at least mean: All things in existence, which were created by God, and which are within the 'sphere' (domain) applicable to this earth. 2) I think the context makes it clear that 'end' signified termination or death, not purpose. Congruently, Adam ate fruit, and fruit came forth spontaneously. At a minimum, the edible vegetation in the Garden of Eden would have still had a purpose.

I have these, except I use the compact version. Real leather, real button.

Latter-day revelation teaches. . . I have said it before in this forum, and will say it again. I have no problem logically with the various seemingly rational conclusions/speculations people both within and without the Church tend to make about evolution, creation science, dinosaurs, neanderthals, etc. However, to actually believe anything that would require physical death to have occurred anywhere on this earth prior to the fall of Adam, while potentially logical, is clearly contrary to the established doctrines and current teachings of the Church. It might not conflict with Genesis, but it conflicts with the teachings of the Church and with 2 Ne. 2:22: That part is 100% true! EDIT: As do you, I also accept the idea of an old earth, but it and evolution are not mutually necessary events.

I'm going to share two passages. Hope that's not against the rules. I love this passage because it indicates purpose. Receiving a remission of our sins is a powerful motivator, knowing that it comes through Christ is key. I love this passage because it highlights the truth that our sincere efforts to live the gospel and keep the Lords commandments count just as much or more than what we are able to achieve, and it can be personalized to help us see and remember that. @Anddenex @Snigmorder @clbent04

I busted out my handy dandy Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (this version). Which happens to be a favorite resource book of mine, purchased on my mission for a near steal of only $5.00 at a used book store. Upon a brief 30-60 seconds of verification research I have determined that you are indeed correct. The Greek word which is translated as meat, 'brōsimos', translates more correctly as 'eatable' (reference link). With an additional 5 minutes of research, I was able to verify that, although some of the words imply actual meat, every word translated as 'meat' in the Bible can in fact be used to reference other types of food. Nevertheless, and clearly important to the original question, Jesus did in fact eat the fish, which is actual meat, when he asked for and was presented with food.

Jesus ate fish as a resurrected being. Fish is meat. I find it interesting that one of the very first things Jesus asked for as a resurrected celestial being was meat. Blows a hole in that theory.

I only shave completely about once every few months. I generally just trim down to stubble when I cut my hair (do it myself). However, for my wedding day I was clean shaven, although I did forget to get a haircut and had way too much hair on top. If I were to have another wedding day, I would be clean shaven or beard, whichever the misses would prefer. Perhaps his wife wanted him to have the stubble? This linked website suggests that stubble is in style for 2017. In fact it gives 25 different 'hot' styles of stubble with accompanying images. Perhaps it's a thing these days.

E) Say only the word 'sorry' and keep walking. It's not lying, nor helping.

They married in the United States. Virginia to be specific, but they don't live there. Not illegal, no sterilization requirement. I suppose they found a work around!