Carborendum

I had originally made the claim that he's attending a different church as a sarcastic accusation. But I'm beginning to wonder if he really does attend a different church.

I have no idea how he concluded that from the Essays. It repeats multiple times that the Lord had commanded many throughout history (many including Biblical figures) to submit to the practice to raise up seed unto the Lord. Further, it says: Where on earth is this implying that it is "uninspired"?

Well, I still have hope for him. But you're right. He says things that make one wonder.

I can't tell if you intended to tease me (joking) or if you know the individual that I'm talking about.

It cannot be fixed. We're beyond the point of no return. That means that our full annual federal revenue is less than the annual obligations (including interest on the debt) or at least, we're pretty close to it. And we show no signs of stopping our deficit spending. The only hope is if the Fed simply "forgives" the debt and move forward from there. But even that route will have repercussions that no one can predict with a reasonable level of certainty. And pretty much everyone believes that whatever those repercussions are, they will not be pleasant. Buy crypto.

Hmm... You have to know him. I still think he may be on this side of the line. On the other hand, you may be right. Yes. He actually addressed that briefly. Basically, he said that Joseph did it within proper boundaries. But Brigham went beyond boundaries. I have to wonder how many of his "documents" were genuine. He certainly believed them. I don't doubt his honesty. But whoever gave those documents to him or who originated them may be suspect. Yeah. His exact words were just shy of actually doing it. But his attitude was definitely, totally, and completely critical of the man as much as the words. Yup. The thing is that he's pretty much held these same positions for as long as I've known him. And I met him (virtually) in 2008 or so. He's never moved a single step either way. He's standing right next to the line and is not moving an inch.

Rogan said something that piqued my interest. Trump may say some crazy things and seems to not have a filter. But he actually preferred that to all the phony politicians who have rehearsed addresses and always tip-toe around issues to make sure they don't offend anyone other than their opponent. etc. etc. With Trump, you know exactly what you're getting. Warts and all. No politician is perfect. We all know that. But we know exactly what we're getting with Trump. With Biden, we couldn't even figure out when he was lucid or not. With Kamala, we can't even figure out what she's saying or if she actually answered the question at all. How on earth are we supposed to know what to expect from her?

I love reubens. I almost never buy them because they are usually among the more expensive sandwiches at restaurants. We usually don't have the right ingredients to make them at home., so, I rarely get to eat them. And it is the rare sandwich shop that even offers them. The contrast in flavors of all the ingredients make for a dining experience that is unparalleled. But I don't like Russian dressing. So, when I make my own, I leave that out.

LoL! I'm a fairly typical male. When I still had youth, for virtually any physical feat of strength or speed, I could probably beat over 80% (maybe 90%) of women. Gina Carano could wipe the floor with me. I would never win medals in any sports from College level or above. As for martial arts, I have taken lessons in four different arts at different points in my life. Not a single female (no matter their training level) could defeat me in any sparring match. But none of them looked like Gina Carrano. So, I think you're exaggerating your weakness... unless that woman was Gina Carrano. (Can you tell I'd be no match for Gina?)

I wonder at what point the principle of "evil speaking of the Lord's Annointed" becomes a concern. I had a friend online who appears to be a fairly faithful Saint. And he doesn't easily fit into a political mold. So, that's refreshing. We haven't spoken directly in many years. So, I don't know what he's been doing for a while. But he has published some very useful books for educating children about the founding of the nation and about how to participate in the political process. I've read them and gave them to my children to learn. He now has a Youtube channel that is picking up subscribers. The latest lecture he gave was about how Brigham Young was basically a fraud. He didn't actually say that Brigham was a fraud. He said that Brigham did some fraudulent things. And he backed it up with his interpretation of records from the time. He lays polygamy and the priesthood ban squarely at Brigham's feet and says that they were clearly uninspired. They should never have happened. It was completely wrong to include them in our doctrines. And he also gave a scathing criticism of Adam-God as proof that Brigham was a false prophet. He stopped short of calling Brigham a false prophet. It seemed that he was going for setting up all the information for the listener to believe Brigham was a false prophet. But he never actually said it. From everything I know, he's still a faithful Saint. But after hearing this, I wonder how closely he can walk up to that line and not step over it.

So, the Lord just smacked me on the side of the head. And He did it in the form of an 18 y.o. boy. A young man in our ward is getting ready to go on a mission. And he was asked to give the sacrament talk. He quoted (I can't remember the GA) saying, "We serve others to lose ourselves." (paraphrase). It hit me that I've been looking for some sort of bonus. But I've been missing the point. Service itself is a chance to lose ourselves, and along with it, I can lose all my pretensions and selfishness. Thing is, I've heard this many times throughout my life. But it just sounded like a platitude. Now I understand it. This realization comes at a time that I've been reading a book on neuroplasticity. And I've marveled at how this lines up with the principle of humility (being teachable). One puzzle I've been working out is how we can become "plastic" and hope to come out better instead of worse because of that plasticity. And I've been looking for something completely different. I haven't been plastic (humble). Service is the perfect environment to ensure that whatever plasticity can come will most likely result in a better outcome than a worse one. That young man who gave that talk was quite impressive. I asked if he wrote it by himself or his parents helped him. He wrote it by himself. I gave him a heart-felt "atta-boy."

Well, we had the conversation. Thanks to @Manners Matter for fantastic advice. From the response I got from the mom and dad, everything seems to be ok. I hope real life works out according to plan.

What if someone has poor social skills because her mother continually told her that she's incapable of being normal? I had thought that autism was an innate condition. I never thought it was a trait that could be taught or nurtured into someone. Just be being around people who treat her as normal, she's beginning to act normal. Does that mean she's autistic when she's with her family, but she's no longer autistic when she's with my family?

Not so. I specifically base my votes on Liberty as outlined in the Constitution and Declaration. Whether you agree with my evidence or reasoning on who does it better/worse, I would definitely be repulsed by a candidate saying he wanted Nazi generals to be his joint chiefs of staff. That said (and I have not heard the purported exact quote) if he was simply saying (as Ironhold said) that Rommel was a very effective general, that is simply a statement of fact. Doesn't mean he liked the fact. But he'd like to have generals who were as effective in battle as such a historical general, then I don't see the problem. Example. I really don't like Bill Maher as a human being. But I appreciate his thought-out process in approaching his positions. He at least tries to look at facts (sometimes he gets bad information). And he does things based on a reasonable rationale with some level of consistency. He's not shifting judgments based on whether it is politically expedient. And he doesn't do it out of an abundance of ignorance. He at least tries to research stuff. Do I wish we should all try to be like him? Heck no. I think he's a jerk. But do I wish more leftists would have some of his characteristics when engaging in political dialogue? Absolutely.

My children show no signs of autism... except that now Tourettes is included, one of my sons definitely has tics that qualify. I'm adopted. So neice on either side wouldn't apply. And she's from my wife's side of the family. No history.

I'm kind of in between the two of you on this matter. I've indicated a few times the problem I have with reading. With technical writing, I usually don't have a problem. It is precisely written with proper punctuation, grammar, and elements of style make it easy to read. Scriptures usually have similar traits. With fiction/prose, the problem I have is that I can't really understand the sentence without proper emphasis, dynamics, pauses, and variation in pace. And my brain can't seem to put it together until I properly figure all that out for the whole sentence. So, with a sentence with any complexity, I read it and immediately go off into la-la land because I really have no idea what I just read. But once I slow down and figure all that pacing, I can read it faster than anyone. But with more understanding. Other people easily/seamlessly interpret all that after they've read the whole sentence and move immediately onto the next sentence. I can't. I have to read it "correctly" or I can't move onto the next sentence. So, it is certainly something that slows me down in my reading. Some might consider that a handicap/disorder. Labels being what they are... But at the same time, I tend to get a better understanding and I retain more than others who've read the same book. -- My son both reads faster than anyone I know, and also has my level of retention or better. Color me jealous. Yes, I'd really like to read as fast as my son. But I'm the slowest reader in my family except for my 13 yo.

Let me tell you exactly what happened when I tutored her in math and I hope you (and others) will get an idea of what's happened. She said that she was having trouble with math. I began to instruct her. With my instruction she was fine. I was there as a security blanket when she had some questions of clarification. When she came to the summary question for an entire unit, we read the question together. She said she understood it. I walked away to go to the bathroom. By the time I was back, she had done it. When I pointed that out (that she had done it all by herself) she was surprised and happy. But immediately she fell into the victim mindset. "But I'll just forget it tomorrow." "So? Everyone forgets." I explained that repetition and review are a natural part of study. She was surprised at this knowledge. I explained to her that she doesn't forget because she's stupid. She forgets because she's human. She just needs to review multiple times to get it. That's how people learn. A realization dawned on her. We continued in conversation. Once she realized that she's allowed to forget, and she's allowed to review, she found a new world in front of her. The week before, she was absolutely convinced that she was stupid. This past week, I asked her every day if she needed any math coaching. She didn't. She's doing fine now that she knows how to review material and refresh her memory. The kicker is that she isn't really reviewing much. She remembers it. But now that she knows she's not retarded (which was what she interpreted when people told her she had autism) she now knows she can learn. And guess what? She doesn't display any autistic traits anymore... until she spends time with her mother again. It was the very placement of a label on her that prevented her from learning on her own. I have known people who were clinically diagnosed as autistic. And they were extreme cases. It is obvious that when some extreme conditions exist, we all have a sense of "that child ain't right." But it is the application of that label to virtually everyone where I have to raise an objection. It used to be that (to put some conceptual numbers to it) that of all the behaviors, they needed to be at least a 6 out of 10 to qualify as a "disorder." But today you "have a disorder" if it is at a 0.1 level. That just ain't so. When we introduce a spectrum, we need to be careful just what we define as inside that spectrum. The circle graphic you posted is exactly what is wrong with it. When everyone is autistic, then no one is autistic. The label becomes meaningless. Basically, we need to apply an analog of the Overton Window to medicine/psychology. And the window has become too big. Interesting. That was true for me as well. But I got an 1170. You beat me. That's exactly what I think has been happening. My daughter jokes around that whenever she mixes up something (spoken, read, or seen -- or even if she behaves in some strange way) she says, "Oh, I'm sorry. I'm dyslexic." This is because she's seen just how wide a net has been placed around the "autism spectrum" to the point where it is ridiculous. So she (jokingly) figures that she can blame any negative trait on any "condition" and it will be perfectly acceptable. Based on how we treat things nowadays, she's not entirely wrong. When I compare that to my niece, I realize that she needs to learn some social graces and interpersonal skills. But she is fully functional in all other ways. That isn't autism.

I just learned about the objection to the stick this morning. I'm formulating right now. But yes, I should bring this up. We've told them about her scholastics. But it seems to be just white noise to the mom. I guess I'll try to emphasize it more and we'll see how it goes. The father and my wife are siblings. My daughter will graduate soon, possibly early. This might very well be a good talking point. We truly are tight on space. The mom and her entire side of the family don't understand what it means to live within their means. ...yeah... We recently had a family reunion. After five minutes with her mom, she went from the happy, energetic girl we'd become accustomed to, and turned into the sad victim who can't do anything without her parents. Interestingly, when she came back home, she became the determined go-getter. She doesn't even need my help with math. I'm not sure if that is it. I had even considered that she has the psychological equivalent of Munchausen by Proxy syndrome. But it is not quite that. It's more like she's drunk the cool aid that every child needs to be medicated because everyone has a condition of some kind. Part of it is that she does actually have a truly handicapped child (a younger brother). So, that has made her extra observant for any symptoms of anything. And she immediately jumps to the worst possible conclusions. Instead of a simple misunderstanding of instructions... she must be autistic. Thanks. I'll try to include that as part of the backdrop of the conversation.

Surprise to absolutely no one on this board, I'm not the most tactful person in the world. But at least I am trying to approach delicate situations with a little more caution. So, I'm asking for advice. We've taken in a niece into our household. This was an agreement between my wife and me with the niece's parents. The intent was to give Niece an opportunity to make new friends. In her home ward and school, they don't have a whole lot of people her age. This means that she has zero social life. Since she's less than a year younger than our younger daughter, we all thought it would be great to have her spend some time with us and to experience our ward and school. We all had a discussion and figured out finances and other arrangements. Blah-blah. Bish-bam-boom, she's here now. For the past couple of months, I've seen her bloom socially, spiritually, and intellectually. I had no idea why she was labelled as autistic. I had no idea why she was given a lot of other labels that chained her down. It seems that her parents have basically told her that she "can't". So she believed she couldn't do anything. She was talked into believing she was autistic and mentally retarded and a bunch of other stuff. After about a month, she was able to do schoolwork on her own. She was learning to drive a stick. She's learning how to cook. She's learning how to start a business. A whole lot more... But now her mom has decided that she can't learn how to drive a stick because it is too complicated. She doesn't realize that she's already gone through about 30% of the regimen that I've developed to teach the stick. And she's a really fast learner. But her mom is convinced that she can't learn to drive a stick. So, she wants me to stop teaching her. Then I had to point out to my wife that if she doesn't learn, then she'll have to return home because we're not going to dive her to school. That's why we teach our kids to learn to drive. I was then informed that they are going to buy her a car... ... They absolutely cannot afford it. They are going to go bankrupt. I don't know if I can be part of that plan. Options: They go bankrupt trying to keep up with us financially. Have her go back to her parents and believe that she needs to be dependent on them forever. I'm looking for another way out. I'd like to have a talk with her parents. But I need to make sure that it is done as tactfully as possible. Help?

Ok, I've listened to Skousen's take on the dating of the language of the Bom. I'm afraid I can't properly comment on it since he's specifically talking about the 1st edition BoM. I've never actually read the 1st edition. I'll have to look that up and give a report later.

First, I do not believe that it is because "we worship the Living Christ, not the dead one." Sectarians also believe in a Living Christ. That's no different. It is also not because we celebrate the resurrection more than the death. That's kind of like saying that I like fresh baked bread, but I wish we didn't have any bread dough. One has to precede the other. The Atonement of Christ was not an event. It was a process. We believe it was ALL important. In this admission, I don't completely discount those ideas. They are true. But they are more about public relations as a soft and cushy justification to shy away from the cross. But I believe the more doctrinal and more significant reason is less rainbows and unicorns and a bit more...fire and brimstone. History: During the days of the apostles, the cross was known as an instrument of death. And it was a gruesome one at that. It took 300 years for that imagery to become unfamiliar to common men (and I'm not entirely sure that it was unfamiliar until much later). And the idea of the Cross no longer carried the generational trauma (yes, I'm borrowing woke language here, heh-heh) of earlier centuries. The cross was not adopted as a Christian symbol until after the death of the Apostles. The apostasy was not achieved in one day. It took hundreds of years before the "foundation of apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ being the chief cornerstone" was finally dissolved. As Elder Holland said,"The once blazing fire of the Gospel had been reduced to barely glowing embers." (paraphrased). The cross was finally adopted around the time when the creeds were written. So, really the cross was the symbol of the "creedal Christians." It was the symbol that was raised as soon as the last remnant of Divine authority was cut. So, to us, the cross doesn't symbolize the sacrifice of the Savior. It is a declaration of belief in the creeds and acceptance that the foundation was no more. It was embracing the great apostasy. Restoration: As the Restored Church of Jesus Christ, we now have the authority that was lost. The First Vision told us the creeds are an abomination. We cannot embrace them. And through everything that was restored through the Prophet of this Dispensation, the Lord has formally ended the apostasy and restored lost truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As such, we are distancing ourselves from the creeds. That includes ditching the cross as an icon. We agree on the Bible. But their interpretations are guided by the Creeds which included no prophets or apostles in the writing thereof (by their own admission). Our interpretations are based on Divine Authority through apostles and prophets, and additional divine words which the Lord provided to us through those prophets (Standard Works). We either believe they were true prophets, or we join the Creeds. We don't believe the authority of their Creedal authors. They don't believe in the authority of our prophets and apostles. We do still, of course, have paintings of the crucified Christ in some of our churches. There is nothing evil about having such paintings. And today's Creedal Christians are not evil for including a cross as their iconography. But we simply cannot in good conscience adopt that symbol because of the history I have outlined. There is a reason why the paintings of Christ on the cross are in hallways and foyers, not in the Chapel. Icons & Idols: The minister did mention that we have icons like Moroni, stars, and other symbols borrowed from many cultures around the world (both Christian and Non-Christian). But there is also another thing about the Cross that separates it from any other symbols commonly used in Christianity. Worship. We would never bow before a statue of Moroni. It's decoration. It is a reminder. But we'd never kneel before it. We'd never place a Moroni figurine in our rooms or closets to pray by. If you're doing that, STOP IT! (Thank you, Elder Uchtdorf). But with a cross or crucifix, that is exactly what many Creedists do. In their minds, they're not worshipping the object. But from an outsider looking in, it sure looks that way. And it is just a very slippery slope on a very short hill to idolatry. There was a reason why the symbols of Baal, Ashera, and Moloch were cleansed from the temple. Simply having them around was too great a temptation to place faith in an object rather than the Living God.

Well, it looks like it has been over a month now. I've thought about this question a lot these weeks. And I believe I have an answer. I tend to still have the carrot and stick attitude about service. I do it in hopes getting a reward. The only reward I want is to see that I've made a difference. Everyone wants to achieve things. Everyone wants to know they have contributed to the world. That doesn't seem too bad. But I've realized that it's a bit worse for me. In whatever I do, I tend to want to "be the hero". It's not necessarily about notoriety. It is about simply feeling good about myself for having done some good. And when I'm not the hero, I'm disappointed. I do things hoping for a great result. But when it turns out that it's "just another day" I feel like a failure. Imagine how I feel when something bad happens. Well, the Lord doesn't "reward" for selfishness. He rewards for selflessness. And I somehow believe that the Lord is preventing me from seeing good results because I'm doing it for selfish reasons. Yes, the psychoanalysis in NT's brain is working. I have no idea what this condition is called. I have many talents that most people don't have. Yet I feel inadequate unless I'm doing something grand and magnificent. Part of it is that I feel "To whom much is given, much will be required." So, I need to do more because I have been given much. Yet it still tends to come back to selfish motivations. I have to admit that I tend to care more about my own sense of accomplishment than about helping others. Yet, if someone were to observe everything I say and do during hours of service, they wouldn't know the difference. Because at the end of the day, I really do care about the people I help. So, why can't it be both? I want that reward for me as well as for others. Is that so bad? I still don't see any "mighty change" in anyone's hearts, including my own. And that is disappointing to me. Tom Peters would have a field day with me.

A lot of what I thought were hard and fast rules as a child turn out to be not so hard and fast. So, I have no idea other than: Pray about it.

No way, man! I was there! I swear it's absolutely real!!!