Snigmorder

I'm betting Tad R. Callister is the next apostle. No particular reason, I just like him. I'm also betting D. Todd Christofferson ends up president, just for fun.

Here's the exact quote. I think I might have misrepresented it. Christ’s Resurrection shows that His existence is independent and everlasting. “For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.”17Jesus said: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. “No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”18 The Savior is not dependent on food or water or oxygen or any other substance or power or person for life. Both as Jehovah and Messiah, He is the great I Am, the self-existing God.19 He simply is and ever will be.

I didn't know that was a term the Catholics used. By the curse of Adam, I'm referring to the state of being cut off from God both spiritually and temporally, because of the fall. I don't know if the church uses the term, or the scriptures.

1. Why was Jesus able to satisfy the Law? 1a. What does it mean that the curse of Adam had no bearing on Jesus? 1b. I've heard it said that Jesus has power because his Father was God. This sounds wrong because it suggests that power is genetic. Therefore, I could have power as well if my Father is also God. 2. Why was Christ able to be the Lord Omnipotent in his pre mortality? Was it his level of intelligence? What was it about Jesus that made him able to be the Lord Omnipotent? God gave him power, but why Jesus? 2a. Did Jesus abtain his pre mortal intelligence by moving from grace to grace by his own obedience and devotion to the Father? Is this how he became like unto God? 3. D Todd christofferson, in his talk titled "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ," states that Christ exists independent of any other person, he has power of himself to exist. How is this possible? Does this mean that Christ's person has power independent of the father? From whence has this power come? Is it a generation of his body? Is it a gift from the Father that the Father can't take away? 4. Why can we call Christ, God? In both pre and post mortality?

It makes no sense because it was worded poorly. And that's what feminism is, a superstitious sense of egalitarianism. One does not reach a political position without first having a morality. They are not separate.

This makes no sense. Politics are determined by morality.

18% might only identify as feminist but their attitudes and values spill over into the wider population. Politics and morality are not separate.

Call it what you want but it's simply the fact of the matter. Intersectional feminists demanding abortions because its sexist that men don't get pregnant is not the same thing as a libertarian being morally opposed to banning something. However, after it's all said and done, the fact will remain that abortion was wrong, and going along with it it was to go along with the those opposed to our God.

What on earth are you talking about?

Negative, I don't like the government or state force. Libertarian support for abortion and liberals support for abortion are different. Neither of which I like, but the way they got to that position is different.

"Freedom from government" is not a useful term in describing what the left-wing is. "Freedom from government" sounds more like a description of libertarianism or anarchism. "Left-wing" opposes the current regime. This says nothing about their motives for such a position. "Human life is a sacred gift from God. Elective abortion for personal or social convenience is contrary to the will and the commandments of God. Church members who submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions may lose their membership in the Church." - lDS.org Aside from this, I don't care what the church chooses to make official or not. God was once a man on an earth, yet this has not been made official doctrine. There are even people in the church who don't believe God was once a man on an earth. They are wrong. The public relations moniker "pro-choice" and the divinely facilitated environment wherein moral choices can be made have absolutely nothing whatever to do with each other. In the former, the choice was already made, and that was to support abortion. There is a whole myriad of immorality which is appendage to abortion. The worst of which being the murder of human beings as birth control for fornication. An absolute ransacking of the holy body and a mockery of the law. Don't tell me this practice has some kind of eternal truth behind it because it makes an evil choice easier "and therefore agency."

I don't agree with characterizing the left as "freedom from government." In politics, the "left-wing" is opposed to the current regime and the "right-wing" desires to maintain or support the regime. In the Weimar Republic, the NSDAP was left wing. In NSDAP Germany, the NSDAP was right wing. Anyone who opposed the NSDAP in NSDAP Germany was left wing. Now, these definitions are meaningless in the United States (unless were dealing with someone trying to compare Hitler to the Republicans because they are both "right wing") Let's get something straight right now, and you're free to point out evidence to the contrary. There's not a single left of center position which does not in someway contradict eternal truth. You could point out a single principal or single position. But these principles and positions are not isolated, they are not in a vacuum. They are part of a Web, a worldview. And this web, this worldview, is synthesized from fundamental principles. Take abortion for example. Take someone who calls himself pro-choice. They might cite principles of freedom or what have you. But follow the web back to the source of this position, this pro-choice, and you will find that it is bankrupt. That it contradicts the most fundamental realities of this universe. And if something is not ultimately true it did not come from Christ for all truth enters the earth through Christ. There's not a single true root or foundation in the American left as it stands today. We know about the Frankfurt school, we know about critical theory, we know how the Marxist have infiltrated academia, and we know their motives for doing so. This is not a mystery, it is not a theory, it is history and it is demonstrable in the left. And these things did not come from Christ. They came from a source of opposition, of contrarianism.

Are you using "Left" in the traditional sense or in the American sense?

My best friend tolerates profanity because "it's not the worst thing in the world!"

If you can name a single truth which could have only been reached by a left of center viewpoint, I'll reconsider my position. You might say the term "left of center viewpoint is too vague." As far as I'm concerned, it's all gradient, it's all gateway. I shall also add that I did not vote for Trump and I am not affiliated with any party.

Oh, they'd call me a racist or something.

Calling it rhetoric gone amok does little to shed light on why it's rhetoric gone amok.

Neither the Democratic Party nor the American left are required to reach any correct position. If they reach a correct position that does not mean they reached it under the correct moral or logical conditions. If you reach the answer the wrong way, you're still wrong. The left is not needed, they offer nothing. The very foundation from which they reason and look at the world is wrong, and is obviously under Luciferian influence in all sectors.

There has never been a time when the institution of marriage was for sex. It does not matter, worlds without end, what any man on this earth ever said about marriage. The everlasting God lives in the family unit and He is the Patriarch, He is the Father. Marriage, the only marriage that has any legal efficacy in the universe, is for the purpose of starting, growing, and raising a family. We call this Eternal Life. Not for sex. I'm not too worried about your friend's brother. Because a sealing does not substitute for obedience. Those who make a mockery of the covenant have theirs. Hopefully it's not a waste of the wife's time in the end.

According to Alma, in chapter 42, the penalties for breaking the law cannot be invalidated or made void. If God says such and such will happen when you break the law, then such and such will happen, guaranteed, ineffable and immovable. If this was not the case, God would cease to be God. (I tend to read "God would cease to be God" as He would have no authority, like a parent who doesn't enforce rules, but He would still exist. However in this case I'm using a different way which I have seen other people use. That Alma is exaggerating to demonstrate the absolute impossibility of God NOT perfectly enforcing penalties.) But it is God's intention that men repent, and this repentance cannot take place unless the penalties are justly satisfied, or else the law has no purpose and is void. These are real laws don't you know. This atonement is brought about by God's Son in the flesh. The problem for Islam comes when they tell you that God does not need a son to forgive sin because God simply needs to say a thing and it is done. This is the equivalent of a child deliberately smashing the prized antique vase with a hammer, and the parent literally forgetting about the whole thing the very instant the child says "sorry." Was there ever really a real risk of penalty and consequence? I would say there was not. Therefore, the Islamic God does not exist because his laws do not exist.

According to Alma, the Islamic God doesn't exist.

Have you ever read the family proclamation to the world and reflected upon how contrarian it is to the American left's social philosophies? The American left, in nearly every facet, goes contrary to the laws given to man from heaven. The American left is so obviously influenced directly by the adversarial force. Here's a quick cheat sheet. 1# If you believe sex and gender are different, you are contrary to God. 2# If you downplay or oppose the heterosexual family unit, you are contrary to God. 3# If you believe there are more than two genders, you are contrary to God. 4# If you reject the divinely ordained and facilitated differences between men and women, you are contrary to God. 5# The uncreated truth of the universe is that the highest calling for a man and a woman is to be mothers and fathers in a family. If you oppose or reject this, you are contrary to God. There are many other leftist oppositions to truth, but these are probably the most egregious.

1# I am a guy. 2# I am a man. 3# I am a male.