Carborendum

What the other two have already said is true. I will state what the dynamic is in our stake and it may give you a better feel for what is really going on. Pres. Nelson gives guidelines for stakes to administer the sacrament to people at home. The Stake Pres. then decides how that guidance will fit best with the stake's attributes: geography, personnel, activity rate, relative numbers of active priesthood holders, etc. The bishop then provides the house-to-house plan by making individual assignments of which families will have them administered to, and which families will self-administer. The Elders' Quorum then calls various brethren and decides which active priesthood holders will administer to the houses without sufficient priesthood in the home. It goes from general to more and more detailed.

I don't know about you. But I'm just not seeing it.

How many chickens do you have?

From the comments on the article.

Well, you're welcome to come by if they allow interstate travelling. But as I said, they don't seem to show signs of the female flowers yet. I don't know of any plant that does that. So, I'm getting worried. I forgot to take pictures of our chickens. We had covenants that prohibited chickens. But Texas was passing a law that allowed at least 6 chickens provided you had a minimum lot size. Our entire subdivision qualifies. So, we took the proposed legislation to the POA (slightly different/weaker powers than an HOA) meeting. They noted that 6 isn't all that bad. So, they allowed it. Unfortunately, the stores only sell chicks in groups of four. So, we had to get 8. Shhhhh. don't tell. I have a feeling we will have 7 soon. I'm thinking our biggest chicken is getting kind of old. She may end up going in the oven soon. We only get three eggs a day now. The four younger ones are not laying yet.

And here are the two most beautiful flowers of all the garden. My wife and eldest daughter. And... there's also my dog.

Since I'd been talking about my garden on another thread, I thought I'd share some of my garden with y'all. Here is my watermelon patch. These are my two watermelon plants. If they produce well, then I'm going to expand it to four or five next year. For scale, those are 4x8x16 concrete blocks between the two plants. These are the flowers that have developed. They are all male flowers. They're supposed to precede the female flowers by about a week. It has been two weeks since the first male flower and still no female flowers. I'm beginning to get worried. Here is one of my blueberry bushes. This is the third growing season. Producing lots of berries for such a sparse plant. i need to work on getting the branches to be fuller. Here is a shot of the corn bed, the 2nd blueberry bush, and the gourd plant. The corn bed is 4x8. The gourd bed is 4x4. And here is the cucumber bed (4x8). We just put up the trellis with cattle panel and T-Posts. On the back end of the bed is a zucchini plant. You can see the difference in leaves if you look real close.

I saw that and appreciated it. I was not trying to beat you down. I merely tried to give it a scholarly critique. And I thought I mentioned that it could be considered true from a certain point of view. (Thank you Obi-wan). In your favor, we know that the flood was a representation of the "baptism" of the earth. And we know that baptism denotes a covenant. And we know a covenant was made about the earth right after the earth "came up again out of the water." So, that much we can clearly see. We also know that the covenant at baptism also calls upon the Atonement of Christ. So, that much makes sense. The "God undoing all of His creative work" is likened unto us as we are born again (of the water and of the Spirit). And we know that the earth has yet to be born again of the Spirit. Never thought you were implying it. TBH, I still don't know how much of it is literal or figurative. Or Korean Engineers in Texas...

This passage is likening one covenant to another covenant. But I don't see any mention of the promise of a Redeemer. The first covenant (with Noah) is likened to the covenant the Lord is making with Zion, that her stakes shall be expanded (v.2). This is a dual image of Ancient Israel and the Latter-days. This covenant essentially says that even if He chastens us, we will not be left desolate forever. We will still be His covenant people forever. As a dual image, this is true of the Ancient Covenant People as well as the Latter-day Covenant People (or Latter-day Saints). To each covenant people, he gave power that mountains would depart, hills would be removed, and desolate places shall be inhabited, so that we can spread the gospel abroad. Even though He may chasten us to bring us back under His wings, we will not be left desolate forever. The covenant will remain with both the ancient and latter-day saints. The reason Noah is mentioned is that Israel was actually concerned about the coming "flood" of Babylonian rule (so say some sectarian Biblical scholars). So, people being chastened by a flood will also be given a covenant of protection and a promise of expanding her stakes. And like the Deluge, most of Israel was consumed by the flood of Babylon. But some were taken by a boat to the promised land, safe from the flood of Babylon (worldliness). If the mention of the word "peace" is to invoke the Prince of Peace, then why does it say: Now, if you really want to get technical about it, there is always a parallel about how the Lord deals with nations and groups of people as he does with individuals as a type and shadow of the story of man as well as mankind. But such an overarching parallel is evident in almost any passage of scripture. It isn't any different here. But you seemed to indicate there was something more solid and unique than that in this passage.

Mrs. Carb loves to garden. And she really WANTS to milk a cow. But she's really afraid of them. So...

??? I would edit Henry clay a bit:

Self Explanatory.

I don't really know much about this particular case except what you've linked to. So, I can't make an informed judgment here. But speaking generally... Why can't they be both? Just because it's right, doesn't mean it's legal. And adamantly violating the law isn't really a sign of a "good citizen." Sometimes defending liberty means violating the law. In fact, sometimes it may mean overthrowing the government.

Short answer: Personal interpretation of the gospel and pet theories rather than the basics of faith, humility, obedience, and sacrifice. Long answer: From Mosiah 12... This is a very important beginning of the conversation. Abinadi specifically states that they have not taught them the ways of the Lord. They have perverted them. Then asks them what they ARE teaching the people. So, as far as they are concerned, they're doing what they're supposed to do. They teach the Law of Moses, after all. That is the Law of God. Therefore, we're teaching right. But what is Abinadi's response to their claim? It is easy to think that Noah and his priests were simply hypocrites. I don't think so. At some level, sure they were. But the primary thing that Abinadi is giving them a tongue lashing for was the fact that they were not doing their jobs and preaching the word of God. He starts his actual lesson with the Ten Commandments. Pretty basic stuff. Not the doctrine of the atonement or grace, or works, or love thy neighbor, or the value of work... He teaches the commandments of God. And when he does, both Noah and Alma are pricked in their hearts. I'd say because neither of them had even thought about (or taught about) the commandments in a long time. And they were being reminded of them for the first time since their apostasy. We can all have our pet principles (which are true and just principles). But we twist them in such a way that we justify our sinning against the commandments of God. We believe in the "warm and fuzzy things" like "love thy neighbor" and excuse ourselves from ignoring the commandment to stay chaste or to warn our neighbor or to cry repentance to all the world. And to do so, means we're simply creating our own offshoot of the Church rather than staying true to the roots. That was Noah's great sin.

One of my oldest friends is just waiting for Corona to kill both Trump and Pence. And he will feel justified in believing that guy with the "Ezdras's Eagle" theory from the Apocrypha.

I certainly am an apostate. Just ask any evangelical Christian.

I'll get a second whip.

You're getting grey? I thought my black hair was due to being Asian. But I guess it's just me.

I was thoroughly unimpressed by this announcement. Yeah, we kinda knew that.

Sounds familiar. Where does it say they knew all this in the first place? Having hope of a glorious resurrection doesn't mean they understood the doctrine. It is pretty clear that the Jews of the time of Christ (even though they were taught by Christ Himself) did not understand there was such a thing as resurrection. The phrase "hope of a glorious resurrection" doesn't necessarily refer to them holding hope in their hearts and minds (although it may). It could simply mean that their glory was assured whether they knew it or not. You've heard the phrase,"He doesn't have any hope of winning." It's the opinion by the one making the statement. You could ask similar questions of why God's glory alone can cause people to die, yet it didn't happen when Christ was in a mortal coil. Does lack of pain mean we're in heaven? Does "not being homeless" mean that we MUST be billionaires? This goes hand-in-hand with the three degrees of glory. The peace (v 22) is contrasted with the darkness (v 22). One can be at peace without fully being happy. They had been given a promise of a fullness of joy. And while they had peace and hope (not in darkness) they had not yet received their fullness of joy that they were promised. And they longed for it. Compare to the parable of the unwise steward. This would mean that no one can teach the wicked in spirit prison until they've been resurrected. That would mean that those of our dispensation (who have NOT been resurrected yet) cannot go into spirit prison to teach. I don't believe that is correct. But I'm having difficulty remember just where I heard that.

Here's mine.

I'm so glad that we can find such surety about a topic that Christians can admit we have no revelation on and that scientist admit that we haven't really figured it out yet.

About what?

From CDC FastStats: With graphs like these it will be very hard to justify looking at past data to justify an accurate estimate of COVID deaths based on total death numbers alone. It looks like since 2007, we've been seeing a rise in total death rates regardless. And the annual changes are so haphazard, it would be difficult to attribute accurate numbers any changes to a single source when we are well aware of several causes of death that are rising during this same period.