LDSGator

Love it. My favorite part was at the end in the footer:
It took all my powers as a typist not to write, “Winter is coming.” 

Papa Joe has a chance to do the funniest thing ever.

 

I don't think I can have any empathy for you getting speeding tickets in this case.  If you can't slow down by 10 miles between Texas and Minnesota...well....
🤓
 
PS:  Can't understand why you'd make such a wide detour going from Texas to Utah, but I suppose that explains why you wanted to speed.  Even going 120 MPH would make it a longer trip than going direct.
PPS:  Yes...if one cannot tell by now, this is a humor post.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/27/is-the-journalism-death-spasm-finally-here-00138187
 
re: our mainstream media talk. This was in Politico today. 

That’s awesome. Lol 

Most married men would disagree with you.

A few things I've noted that critics of the church tend to overlook - 
1. The Extermination Order wasn't officially repealed until 1976
2. The last European power didn't relinquish its last colonial claim in Africa until early 1978
Could it be that, simply put, these two things needed to happen first before humanity was ready for it all to happen?

I joined the Church in 1975, and I recall a mixed bag of reaction (I lived in New York), but the vast majority welcomed it as a sign that the Restoration was advancing and a sign of the times, maybe "end times" even. I think most members at the time pretty much believed in / accepted the curse of Cain explanation and saw this as a positive sign.  At no time did I hear anything like, "The Church isn't bigoted anymore." And I never heard the removal of the ban being touted as a social justice victory within the Church.
This confirms to me that there are fundamental principles founding our Church and religion, and policies like the ban aren't one of them. But we live with them and are patient with them.

Absolutely, which doesn't mean the dead one was a bad guy, just a prophet for his times whose views did not interrupt the kingdom moving forward in the least (and may have even averted unintended disaster!).

Speaking of speculative speculations... I recently came across a new one (at least to me). It was in a youtube video put out by some seminary teacher or similar grass roots CES person. I doubt I could find it again (you are welcome to search if you want). In a nutshell, this theory alleges that this prophecy is fulfilled by Patriarch Eldred G. Smith, the last Smith (and, allegedly, a descendent of Abel) to hold the position of church-wide patriarch. The theory claims that, when the church decided to discontinue the position of church patriarch in '79, that was the point when Abel's descendants had fully received their portion of priesthood and so the curse on Cain's descendants could be lifted. As noted in the church essay, the church has disavowed (whatever that really means) the theories proffered to justify the ban -- including theories based on ancient Biblical lineages -- but these theories persist.
I think I've said before that perhaps the most interesting part of the history of the priesthood and temple ban is what it shows us about how the church receives revelation. In this vein, I find Elder Petersen's '54 talk to religion teachers (available from Fair, if interested) an interesting data point. In this talk, Elder Petersen expresses the belief that any of these "prophecies" about the removal of the curse were pure speculation unsupported by scripture. A quarter century before the lifting of the ban, one of the apostles who would live to see it seemed skeptical that the ban could ever be lifted, based on his understanding of scripture and these alleged "prophecies." Clearly something changed in that quarter century, and I'm unaware of anything that details how Elder Petersen's opinions changed, but Ed Kimball's history (focused on Pres. Kimball) provides insights into when and how his views might have changed. Whatever conclusions and speculations there are about the priesthood and temple ban, I find it interesting that somewhere in the process of revelation to the church is a process where an apostle can be skeptical of "prophecies" given by "early brethren" to later change and be part of fulfilling those same prophecies he was so skeptical about years earlier.

No matter how we try to spin it, it’s obvious the church has drastically changed from the prior stance. I vaguely remember last year* when Brad Wilcox got himself in hot water for saying something racially “questionable”. The church made him issue an apology several times! 

*my bad, it was 2022. 
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_R._Wilcox

I think the church wrote an essay on this, if that helps:
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
 
 

I think the church wrote an essay on this, if that helps:
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
 
 

disavow: deny any responsibility or support for

I think the church wrote an essay on this, if that helps:
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
 
 

Did anyone hear about this?
I guess he got a bit too excited to have his dream fulfilled.
Tough breaks.

@Vort, as a basketball fan, do you remember Bryant “Big Country” Reeves? Shaq said Reeves was hardest to guard because he (Reeves) was so awkward. I think it’s the same with the Diaz brothers.  

The Diaz brothers were crude, vulgar, and uncouth. But they seem very genuine, which gained my respect. And they were outstanding fighters. Lots of fun to watch. If you're into that sort of thing. Which of course I am not.

Played again last night.  Lots of trolls, evil treants, weird plants and ghouls.
 

 

 

Thanks for that. I had never noticed that Foreman's fighting style proceeded from using his extended arms to control and set up his opponent. Funny thing is that that is exactly what the Diaz brothers did in the UFC, especially Nate. Really unorthodox fighting style, looks more like tai chi than boxing, but really super effective. Probably helps if you're significantly taller than your opponent, which Nate usually was.

No, but it’s like George Foreman in round 8 of the Rumble in the Jungle. Taking a serious beating and we all know the inevitable outcome.  

@Vort, @Ironhold

One of the best boxing analysis videos out there. 

All that said, (and you are right) the rope a dope was a brilliant strategy. Foreman was maybe the strongest fighter in history. Ali took a massive beating and managed to still win! 

There's also the fact that due to the extreme heat in Kinshasa that day the ropes were incredibly loose; Ali's manager had actually *tightened* the ropes just hours before the match and they were still loose due to the heat having softened the materials. 
This made rope-a-dope even more effective as the sagging ropes took even more of the force than anyone expected them to.