Search the Community

Let's try a different set of numbered points: 1. You passed. You were tempted but you stayed true to your marriage, your vows, your faith. Not only did you not break the Law of Chastity, but you were tested and passed. 2. We men should value the women in our lives more. If we don't treasure our treasures, there are always others who will. 3. It speaks well of you that your husband trusts you take such long journeys without him. His discernment appears to be spot on. 4. Don't allow your desire for more attention to turn to bitterness. Again, we men should do better. Perhaps your husband should. 5. Nevertheless, don't underestimate what you have. 16 years? Three children? Blessings all! You did it together. Love/respect him openly. You'll be reassured.

@mordorbund I'm just asking questions about why we haven't had a single official "thus saith the Lord" type revelation quoting the Lord's words directly presented to the church since 1847 or a single vision from a prophet presented to the church since 1918. I'm not content to merely assume since we sustain the first presidency and quorum of the 12 as prophets, seers, and revelators and we believe in continuing revelation that the brethren are by default still receiving these types of revelations and visions to guide the church, but just aren't telling us directly for some unknown reason. If they are receiving these types of revelations and visions, but not sharing them with the church, I'd like to know why. Because this seems awfully strange to me. And if they aren't receiving these types of revelations and visions, I would also like to know why the church is no longer being directed this way. Because this also seems strange to me, since one would expect prophets, seers, and revelators to being having these types of experiences. I understand that these questions can be uncomfortable, so I don't blame you for being a bit defensive and accusatory in your response. But I would ask you to please do your best not to make assumptions about me or feel like you have to defend the brethren from my "accusations" or something. I'm not accusing the brethren of anything or trying to cast doubt on anyone. That being said, let me respond to your most recent comments: It's not a matter of every revelation of Joseph Smith being "canonized" or not. Many of his revelations, I dare say the majority of them, were published as scriptures for the church, quoting the Lord directly. And the reason that we know that he had other revelations which weren't "canonized" is because they were recorded and made available to the church. This hasn't been the case in over 100 years in the church. There were a few "thus saith the Lord" type revelations and visions recorded by Brigham Young, John Taylor, and some of the other early leaders that weren't added to the scriptures for whatever reason. But we still know about them. This has been completely absent since 1918, at least as far as I'm aware. So with all due respect, no, I wouldn't share the same concern if Joseph Smith were alive today, unless he completely stop presenting any of his revelations and visions to the church. I made no mention of the "strength" of revelation or the "weakness" of inspiration. I think there's clearly a difference, though. Sure, but we also don't know what, if anything, the Lord actually said if there's no text of the revelation recorded anywhere. The apostles testified that they didn't hear the voice of God and didn't see a vision. They said that they felt very strongly by the spirit that their decision to lift the priesthood ban was right, that God had made it know that the time to lift the ban had come. Many members assumed that there must have been a vision for this, like when Peter had a vision to take the gospel to the gentiles, or an actual revelation text. Yet the apostles were very clear that this did not happen. I think you're missing the point. There actually was an official revelation from God commanding that baptisms for the dead be done, that a temple be built for this purpose, etc. So no, I wouldn't have the same concern if things were being done the same way as when Joseph Smith were alive. I think you're once again missing the point. It's not about "canonization" it's about official first person revelations, visions, etc. not being presented before the church at all. Not for over 100 years. It's true that the rate of official revelation dropped off dramatically after a few years, but it didn't altogether cease. He had planned to publish new revelations in the 1844 D&C before his death. The way President Nelson said "[T]he Lord instructed me to..." isn't quoting the Lord directly. All he's saying is that the Lord made such and such known to him. We don't know how it was made known to him. We don't know that he received literal word for word instructions from God, because he didn't quote any literal word's from God. President Nelson could just be saying that he pondered on it and felt good about calling these men to the 1st Presidency and Quorum of the 12 respectfully, and then after praying about it he received the prompting that this is who he should call.

Do you know that the written talks are submitted before hand so that the translators, interpreters, and technical people have a "head start"? That it is far more likely, especially given the video, that the spoken talk diverged from what was written and that the printed version was not edited from what Elder Packer had previously submitted? Just checking. I used to assume that the printed came second, but it turns out, it comes first (per Elder Bednar).

The teaching of additional light and truth to those who have already demonstrated an ability to discern truth from error does not generally cause the sort of reactions that you claim were caused by teaching the Adam-God theory. So that raises a question in my mind as to whether what was taught was indeed light and truth. It doesn't seem to be quite consistent with Doctrine and Covenants 88:40 For aintelligence cleaveth unto intelligence; bwisdom receiveth wisdom; ctruth embraceth truth; dvirtue loveth virtue; elight cleaveth unto light; fmercy hath gcompassion on mercy and claimeth her own; hjustice continueth its course and claimeth its own; judgment goeth before the face of him who sitteth upon the throne and governeth and executeth all things.

You probably know by now, the guy has just been baptised LDS. Does that mean you like him again now @zil2? 😁

I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying. I’m not in any way suggesting that we give up and just consign ourselves to a lesser kingdom. But I do believe that we should recognize that we have to pass through the Telestial and Terrestrial kingdoms in order to get to the Celestial. And we shouldn’t lose hope if we’re struggling to live up to what is expected of us to inherit the Celestial kingdom. We need to pick ourselves up and keep fighting the good fight, knowing that God is not going to give up on us, no matter what. He will always give us another chance to repent and will never cut us off forever. But the sooner we learn to obey him and trust in him completely, the better off we will be.

Hi again Suzie. I was looking through my spiritual journal recently and also discovered this: “The reason why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has not published the entire [Inspired Version Bible] manuscript is not due to any lack of confidence in the integrity of Joseph Smith, or doubt as to the correctness of the numerous additions and changes which are not in the Authorized Version of the Bible. The members of the Church do accept fully all of these (changes) as having come by divine revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The reason that is has not been published by the Church is due to the fact that this revision was not completed. It was the intention of Joseph Smith, while at Nauvoo, to take the scriptures up again and complete his labors, making numerous corrections which had not been made by him in the earlier revision. Due to persecution and mobbing this opportunity never came, so that the manuscript was left with only a partial revision” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Selections from Answers to Gospel Questions: A Course of Study for the Melchizedek Priesthood Quorum 1972-73, page 312). Why doesn’t the current Latter Day Saint leadership, who possess priesthood keys and serve as God’s mouthpiece upon the earth—finish the work themselves? Bruce McConkie wrote that “up to the present time none of his successors have been directed by the Lord to carry the work forth to its final fruition” (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, page 383). However, he promised, “There will be a not too distant day when all necessary changes shall be made in the Bible, and the Inspired Version — as then perfected — shall go forth to the world” (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, page 384).

But just about anything supports possibility. So what -- "O then, is not this real?" Bias does make an appealing possibility a working model us, but that dos not make the model reflective of what is light, good and known. "Real possibility," when it comes to answering spiritual truth, is an oxymoron. Faith in possibilities is not the same as faith in things not seen which are true.

Hmmm, well, when I was younger I was tested with an IQ normally around 155 (IQ can vary in tests given dependent on day, time, personal feelings that day, etc). Normally it was right about that range and with most tests I took in earlier years I was normally in the 99% so I suppose that would match. One of my daughters is much smarter than me, usually having an IQ around the 160 range. On the otherhand, I had a son who always felt somewhat left behind her, even though he constantly wanted to prove himself in smarts. He had an IQ of around 110. What I noticed though was that he turned out to be a MUCH HARDER WORKER than she was. He was much more dedicated to what he did, and in that way turned out much more successful. I also had a daughter who had a much lower IQ, but was extremely charismatic. She dazzled everyone and had boys falling out of the woodwork to try to ask her out when she was younger. In that light, I'm not sure IQ is much more of a way of measuring how fast we catch onto things and how good we are at taking tests. Perhaps there are other forms of ability (IQ of other sorts such as work ethic, people skills, etc) that are just as important but that we don't regularly test for or design tests for. In that way, each of us may be geniuses in different areas. While I may have the "IQ" smarts on paper, I may be the equal of a low IQ individual in the area of computers or mechanics. Fixing cars is definitely not my forte, but there are those who it comes as easy as eating a piece of pie. it is possible that the Lord was talented in ALL of those areas, not just how we measure "IQ" but in personal skills he was a genius, relating to others he was a genius, and many other areas that are just as important, if not more important, in his ministry. How do you rate those? Normally we don't and so I'm not sure how important it really is to give out a number. I may have stated a number above regarding how I have tested in the past, but in real life it has no real bearing to how successful I am or how much of a good person I am (and how good you are is really what TRULY matters at the end of the day/life). In the important areas of life that number is meaningless. It doesn't actually represent anything meaningful, or that has true impact. In that way, I'm not sure if we could measure all the ways the Lord was a genius, but I'm not sure it matters either. What really matters would be that he KNOWS each and everyone one of us, knows what and how we think and WHY we think that way, loves us, and through him and his atonement we can be cleansed of our sins, raised from death and resurrected in perfect form through faith in him and doing the things he has asked us to do to show that faith.

The scriptures do not say that progression between kingdoms is impossible. Many of the brethren have made statements in support of progression between kingdoms (e.g. from telestial to terrestrial to celestial), not just progression from the lower degree of one kingdom to the higher degree of the same (e.g. the lower terrestrial to the upper terrestrial). Some quotes in favor of progression are below: Brigham Young “None would inherit this earth when it became celestial and translated into the presence of God but those who would be crowned as Gods — all others would have to inherit another kingdom — they would eventually have the privilege of proving themselves worthy and advancing to a celestial kingdom but it would be a slow process.” (In the journal of Wilford Woodruff, 5 Aug 1855) Franklin D. Richards (Quorum of the Twelve) The Savior tells us that the terrestrial glory, or kingdom, is likened unto the glory of the moon, which is not of the brightness of the sun, neither of the smallness nor dimness of the stars. But those others who have no part in marrying or giving of marriage in the last resurrection, they become as stars, and even differ from each other in glory; but those in the terrestrial kingdom are those who will come forth at the time when Enoch comes back, when the Savior comes again to dwell upon the earth; when Father Abraham will be there with the Urim and Thummim to look after every son and daughter of his race; to make known all things that are needed to be known, and with them enter into their promised inheritance. Thus the people of God will go forward. They will go forward, like unto the new moon, increasing in knowledge and brightness and glory, until they come to a fullness of celestial glory. (Journal of Discourses Vol. 25:236, 17 May 1884) J. Reuben Clark, Jr. (First Presidency) I am not a strict constructionalist, believing that we seal our eternal progress by what we do here. It is my belief that God will save all of His children that he can: and while, if we live unrighteously here, we shall not go to the other side in the same status, so to speak, as those who lived righteously; nevertheless, the unrighteous will have their chance, and in the eons of the eternities that are to follow, they, too, may climb to the destinies to which they who are righteous and serve God, have climbed to those eternities that are to come. (Church News, p. 3 , 23 April 1960) B.H. Roberts (Presidency of the Seventy) These are the great divisions of glory in the world to come, but there are subdivisions or degrees. Of the telestial glory it is written: “And the glory of the telestial is one, even as the glory of the stars is one, for as one star differs from another star in glory, even so differs one from another in glory in the telestial world” [D&C 76:98]. From this it is evident that there are different degrees of glory within the celestial and the telestial glories; and though we have no direct authority for the statement, it seems but reasonable to conclude that there are different degrees of glory in the terrestrial world also. It appears but rational that it should be so, since the degrees of worthiness in men are almost infinite in their variety; and as every man is to be judged according to his works, it will require a corresponding infinity of degrees in glory to mete out to every man that reward of which he is worthy, and that also which his intelligence will enable him to enjoy. The question of advancement within the great divisions of glory celestial, terrestrial, and telestial; as also the question of advancement from one sphere of glory to another remains to be considered. In the revelation from which we have summarized what has been written here, in respect to the different degrees of glory, it is said that those of the terrestrial glory will be ministered unto by those of the celestial; and those of the telestial will be ministered unto by those of the terrestrial–that is, those of the higher glory minister to those of a lesser glory. I can conceive of no reason for all this administration of the higher to the lower, unless it be for the purpose of advancing our Father’s children along the lines of eternal progression. Whether or not in the great future, full of so many possibilities now hidden from us, they of the lesser glories after education and advancement within those spheres may at last emerge from them and make their way to the higher degrees of glory until at last they attain to the highest, is not revealed in the revelations of God, and any statement made on the subject must partake more or less of the nature of conjecture. But if it be granted that such a thing is possible, they who at the first entered into the celestial glory–having before them the privilege also of eternal progress–have been moving onward, so that the relative distance between them and those who have fought their way up from the lesser glories may be as great when the latter have come into the degrees of celestial glory in which the righteous at first stood, as it was at the commencement. Thus: Those whose faith and works are such only as to enable them to inherit a telestial glory, may arrive at last where those whose works in this life were such as to enable them to entrance into the celestial kingdom–they may arrive where these were, but never where they are. (New Witnesses for God, 1:391-392) Wilford Woodruff (Member of the Quorum of the Twelve) If there was a point where man in his progression could not proceed any further, the very idea would throw a gloom over every intelligent creature. God himself is increasing and progressing in knowledge, power, and dominion, and will do so, worlds without end. It is just so with us. We are in probation, which is a school of experience. ( Journal of Discourses, Volume 6:120, December 6, 1857) Hyrum Smith (Assistant President of the Church, Church Patriarch, Member of the Quorum of the Twelve) Hiram [Smith] said Aug 1st [18]43 Those of the Terrestrial Glory either advance to the Celestial or recede to the Telestial [or] else the moon could not be a type [viz. a symbol of that kingdom]. [for] it [the moon] "waxes & wanes". Also that br George will be quickened by celestial glory having been ministered to by one of that Kingdom. ( August 1, 1843, transcribed by Franklin D. Richards; Words of the Prophet, pg. 24; CHO Ms/d/4409/Misc Minutes Collection) There are many more similar statements from the brethren out there.

There are numerous debates in our society about the need to eradicate (as much as possible) toxic masculinity. Some would hint that it does not really exist while others are certain that it is standard practice though much of our society. I would add to all this my personal opinion that toxic masculinity does indeed exist and that it is a growing problem in our society. First, I would define toxic masculinity as those of that are biologically of male gender that torment and dominate those that are biologically of the female gender, forcing them to be shamed by the masculine dominance over them. What is odd to me is that many that argue about the problem of toxic masculinity are unable to recognize the very worst cases of it. As near as I can determine every definition of toxic masculinity is manifested by masculinity dominating in female (feminine) sports. From depriving women (the biological feminine) from achieving recognition for their athletic achievements to the sexual harassment in the locker rooms where the toxic masculine and their supporters are forcing women to be unwillingly required to undress naked in front of them – often themselves (the toxic masculine) also displaying themselves naked forcibly before women. I cannot think of a greater display of toxic masculinity that what is being perpetrated by certain masculine individuals and their supports in the arena of women sports. The Traveler

In another thread it was suggested that there might be some problems in the church. Maybe there are, maybe there aren't, I don't know. But what I do know is that if there are problems in the church they're not my problems, they're God's problems, because its His church, and its for Him to solve them, not me. I just need to keep doing what I've always been doing, but do it more and better because I still see the occasional hint of an imperfection in myself (an almost imperceptible hint ). I feel no need to get engaged or involved in whatever problems there might be. They're not my problems.

Hi. I’m a life-long LDS member outside of a break from the church from ages 14-21. I’m in my 30’s now, sealed in the temple with three young kids, and have remained very active over the last 12+ years since I came back from my “break”. I have struggled over a multi-year period on the question if God is real. The point of this post is not to try and convince anyone that God is not real, I genuinely want to believe that He is and am looking for people to help me work through this issue. The nagging question that has dominated my mind is if men have made up religion over time to help themselves feel better about, and give purpose to, life. Everyone wants to know why they are on the earth, how they got here, where they go after. I understand logically that religion provides answers to these questions and that these answers (if believed faithfully) give us peace and purpose. What I can’t get out of my head is what if all these things were made up specifically to fill those gaps but is not true. I’m not calling anyone a liar or saying anyone is pretending to believe - I absolutely believe the leaders of our church (and most members) truly do believe it all and are not trying to mislead us in any way. I desperately wish that I didn’t have these doubts, but I do. What is life is just completely random and the bad things that happen to us are not part of a plan? What if all the suffering (a child dying, losing jobs, etc.) has no silver lining and are just random happenings that will make our lives worse. I struggle to see how God could allow a lot of things that happen in the world everyday - there are so many places where people suffer and die from hunger, people are regularly beaten and raped. A family with young children loses a mom or a dad. How can that be a part of God’s plan in any way? There are other more scientific questions about the Big Bang theory, dinosaurs existing, evolution, etc. that seem to be real things and in my mind and conflict with LDS beliefs. A lot of places where the LDS answer is that “we don’t know why these things happen”, but we should believe there is a reason. One of the parts where this messes with me the most is with death (if not obvious from my examples given above). I love my wife and kids more than anything, but what if there is no afterlife? What if I’m one random act (a car crash for example) away from losing a child, and if there is no afterlife then I will never be with them again? If there is no afterlife and I die in a car crash, what happens next to me? Blackness for ever? A natural defense for someone (especially a life-long member) to know that God is real is to think back on the spiritual experiences they have had as proof that God exists. But what if these experiences were figments of our own imagination that we have convinced ourselves of and didn’t actually happen? It is easy for me to see that believing in God / religion results in a better life overall - navigating all of life’s trials and tribulations is 100x easier if we believe that it is all a part of God’s plan; if we believe that all bad things that happen in the world are for a reason and all make sense / work for the best from the perspective of an omniscient God. A few years ago I came to the conclusion that I would not be able to PROVE God was real, but I also wouldn’t be able to prove the opposite. So if I can’t take solace in any spiritual experiences I’ve had to date because I’m worried that they were made up in my head, then since it can’t be PROVEN one way or the other, it’s simply a choice of believing or not. I am trying to choose to believe but it has been difficult to not let these doubts take over. I have tried to pray for confirmation but the thought of spiritual experiences possibly being made up is probably blocking that from happening. On a separate note, I have both lived in accordance with the gospel and have done the opposite, and can say I have a strong testimony that following things like the word of wisdom, our views on family / marriage. etc. will result in a happier life while on this earth. I have not deviated from these beliefs and regardless if I think God is real, I know this is the blueprint for the most happy / successful life on earth. So that is the core of my testimony for now: 1. I am trying to choose to believe that God is real (despite the doubts I have) and that everything the LDS church teaches is true. And 2. That following the gospel way of living will continue to bring the most happiness throughout life. I know this has been a long post and a bit all over the place, so thanks for sticking with me if you have. As I said above, I wish I didn’t have these doubts, but I do, and I’m trying to figure it all out. I would be grateful for any thoughts you have that may help me as I continue to try and work through this.

I honestly don't know what parallel you were trying to draw. That's why I asked for clarification. Can please just explain what you meant instead of trying to read something into my question that isn't there?

I would like to know what you think? Where do you think revelations that quote the Lord directly come from? How are they received? Are they actually what the Lord said or not?

But your proposition, "If what Brigham Young taught was true..." is still a hypothesis, and not presented an example of an documented event or a condition, as textbooks require. We need something more substantial. Jesus and Eder Oaks taught about the Lord permitting divorce without the stain of immorality as an exception to the higher law because of the hardness of our hearts (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/matt/19?lang=eng&id=8-9#p8). https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2007/05/divorce?lang=eng. This is an example of a higher light and truth being excepted or excused, but not taken away. You need to identify a stronger example of a time when a higher law was rescinded by the Lord because of the wickedness or lack of faith among a threshold number of saints or the membership at large. An example from the D&C is the command to build the Jackson County temple was rescinded: (see D&C 124, but also101, 103). Try to identify an example like that which reflects your concerns. What other revelation or commandment has been rescinded because the members couldn't handle it? It needs to be something more substantial than policies, procedures and practices.

This is something that interests me as well. I've always wondered what it would be like to make an error. Sometimes I think about deliberately making an error just to see what it would feel like, but when I actually try to, I just don't know how to do it. (Well, not always )

I've done a bit of research on the wounds. If you wanted to put nails in a secure location without breaking the bones then one would go in-between the 3rd and 4th metacarpal and depend upon the transverse metacarpal ligaments to prevent tearing. The second would go between the distal radius and ulna and depend upon the DRUJ (Distal Radial ulna joint) for support. The side spear wound would have to go into the 9-10 or 10-11 intercostal space and be large enough to drain the plural effusion. In the above x-ray you can see the plural effusion on the left side of the image (the patients right) where the water has totally displaced the lung so that it can no longer inflate. Christ's physical death was likely due to asphyxiation secondary to the scourging & crucifixion. the artist's depiction of the side wound above is way to small and pretty. The soldier must have been pretty good at his work if he drained the effusion with a single thrust. John 19:34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. John 20:27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. This is what we use to drain plural effusions in the hospital. And this needs to be emptied... This is the normal color of a plural effusion. The nail in the foot is also a curiosity. Most of the time you see artists display the Lord with a nail thru the arch of the foot (highly unlikely). This is a heel bone (Calcaneus) that was found in Israel There is ample literary evidence for Roman crucifixions (ie. Josephus, Plautus, Senneca). Archaeological evidence for Roman crucifixion was unearthed in 1968. That year, a construction crew accidentally dug up several tombs in northeast Jerusalem. Inside the tombs were several ossuaries, including one inscribed with the name Jehohanan (Yehohanan), which contained skeletal remains of an adult male, including his heel bone with a nail still embedded in it. The anthropologist who examined the remains determined that Jehohanan had been in his twenties when he was crucified in the first century (ca. AD 7-66). Further study has revealed that Jehohanan had likely been crucified with a leg on either side of the cross and the nail driven in sideways through his heel. https://biblearchaeologyreport.com/2021/04/02/top-ten-discoveries-related-to-jesus/ I have personally placed many calcaneal traction pins. You can do it without breaking the bone. A nail placed from dorsal to plantar thru the arch of the foot would be unstable, likely causing a metatarsal fracture and would cause the ankle to roll over and supinate. Most common use of a calcaneal traction pin nowadays. External fixator for tibia pilon fracture.

The big hurdles I'm facing now: 1. Getting people to understand that because I'm wired differently, I sometimes have a few issues. For example, if I get stressed enough, the muscles in my jaw and tongue will actually seize temporarily, leaving me unable to speak for a brief period. Rather than understand that they need to give me a second, a lot of folks who witness this will just presume what I was going to say and go off of that. 2. The combination of my being on the spectrum and what I've lived through has left me high-strung at times and constantly on alert, which leads to anxiety issues and the like. 3. The assemblage of mental and physical health issues I have mean I have no peace or comfort. Even on a good day I'm usually in some degree of constant dull pain, and trying to be "normal" is also mentally taxing. 4. There is no "my bad!" big enough to magically undo the damage that was done to me, but whenever I try to explain to someone how A led to B there's a non-zero chance they'll flip out on me for how I'm still "blaming" them for what happened in the past and I need to let it go. 5. The combination of my being on the spectrum and what I've lived through has rocked my perceptions of what is "normal". It's to the point that I'm actually having trouble writing fiction because I have no frame of reference for what certain emotions feel like or how someone feeling those emotions would act.

It looks like she had her lawyer on speed dial, same for Pam Bodtcher's husband. When the police told him that they found Franke's children in a state of starvation etc, the guy didn't even flinch. This case is getting crazier by the minute particularly during Kevin Franke's interview where he described himself as the "resident exorcist" trying to help Jodi (who claimed to be Satan's bride). He also stated that paranormal activity was going on in the house while Jodi was staying with the family. The most interesting part is when he said that the Bishop and another Church leader were helping Jodi and they were giving her blessings in order to "cast out evil spirits from her" and because they weren't successful, they suggested Jodi to move in with the family. Really? Hmmmm doesn't sound right. On top of it all, Ruby decided to stay in Jodi's bedroom where they spent hours behind closed doors and they slept on the same bed. No comment on that one! However, here comes a contradiction. Kevin first stated that Ruby "invited" him to leave but then later on he stated that he left after growing tired of this lunacy. So he leaves HIS children in that crazy environment with no one to protect them? He has no contact with them for a WHOLE year??? Just because those are Ruby's rules?? Who is she, God? He worships her like a goddess EVEN though he knows what she did to their children! When he is told during the police interview that his children were found emaciated (let's think about that for just a second!), he didn't ask ONCE how they are doing and if he can see them. Not. One. Question!!!!! The only thing he asked was if Ruby was okay "because I love my wife". What the....And he is seeking custody of these children??? Sorry for the extra question marks but this case has me infuriated. Just like when Jodi claims to be a psychologist when she is NOT! The truth is that both parents have been abusive towards the children way before Jodi came to the picture. I am just hoping justice is served because 4 years behind bars isn't enough for what they did to these poor babies.

I think if a prophet of God quotes the words of God directly in a revelation we can trust the accuracy and preciseness of the words. That's not to say that the wording wouldn't be slightly different depending on which prophet received it. I guess the question I would have is what is being suggested in this comment and other similar ones on this thread? Is it being suggested that the words in the revelations in the D&C quoting God's words directly aren't really God's direct words, but actually the manner in which Joseph Smith decided to convey truths that he had received by the Holy Ghost? Instead of quoting the words of God directly as he did, he could have just as easily said it in his own words, like a General Conference talk, and there would be no difference? Perhaps trust is the wrong word. I would say that we can have confidence that the Lord instructed him. But we should still seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost for confirmation, as Zil pointed out.

This approach, often referred to as the 'soft sell,' is not about convincing or converting. It's about representing our Savior. True conversion is not in our hands. It is the Holy Spirit that convicts of sin and reveals the path to salvation. This is why some may ridicule the call to pray for a 'burning in the bosom,' but I refuse to do so. The witness of the Holy Spirit is the only true catalyst for conversion.

I’m not exactly sure what parallel you are trying to draw here. Are you suggesting that 10% of what has come from the heads of the church over the past 180 years or so has been true revelation from God, 10% completely uninspired, and another 80% somewhere in between?

I was in the military. I saw combat. I've cleared buildings. We had MORE rules as military than what I saw in the video and that was years ago. (Edit: to be clear, I do not know the rules for the Utah police on how they clear buildings, my only experience is with military situations). Those who are NOT military, are civilians. There are MANY civilians who want to claim they are not (for example, today, I am a civilian, I am no longer in the military). Police in the United States are not Military. Most Military forces are prevented from doing police roles in the United States by the Posse Comitatus Act. However, States MAY have military in the form of their National Guard which can act in that role under the direction of the Governor or whoever is over them in the State. They are distinctly identified differently than Civilians in general. Your general Police officers are NOT military, they are a civilian force (which also means there is an easier process for them to be fired in general and they also have certain rights as citizens that military do not have when acting in their official military duties). A military member gives up certain rights in their roles due to keeping good order and discipline in the military which civilians normally do not have to abide by. There are items which a military member can be punished for where as a Civilian may be fired, but cannot be punished. (For example, you lose certain rights to free speech while in your capacity as a military member, you lose the ability to be free from search without a warrant while on a military installation and if you live on base, they can search your quarters without a warrant, in theory adultery is a punishable offense amongst others whereas civilians will not get jail time for this type of crime). There are crimes in the UCMJ which you can go to prison for which are not punishable if you do them as a civilian. Maybe I am (clarification: ignorant of the Utah Police's building clearing tactics when involving little kids sitting on a floor with no weapons or hostility). I was in the military and in the front lines. This means clearing buildings (though sometimes that would be more like huts and holes). There was probably a lot more hostility and enemy combatants at times than what I imagine most police would see in a lifetime. Lots of gunfire. You mistake me as wanting an apology of some sort? I am not after an apology, I was looking for an explanation that made sense. Time stamp of 7:42 with an officer with a rifle approaching a child. There was another officer that seemed to be accompanying them. The child did not appear to be hostile or a threat. They could have had the other officer holster their weapon and approach the child to be less threatening. The entire conversation seemed ridiculous to me as the officer talking was a stranger with a weapon. If nothing else, he could have remained and covered another officer who was less threatening (and later they have one, but not that initial conversation). I don't think you've ever been on the front lines wondering if a kid is being used and is going to blow you up and try to kill you. It's a terrible situation. IF you HAVE to kill a kid, or worse, kill one by accident, it is a scar that you will NEVER get over. It doesn't matter how justified people may say or tell you, unless you are some sort of psychopath, this is a scar you cannot really ever recover from. You will have nightmares about it for the rest of your life. If you see something like this video where I point it out, even if you were just the witness to it, you will (unless, of course, you are the aforementioned psychopath) you will probably have questions. In that light, it would make sense to have a different policy or approach to spell out a situation like this. It protects both the child and the officer. I would rather die than shoot an innocent child on my own accord today, and I can't imagine anyone who would have a different opinion. Maybe you have been in that type of situation, maybe you have not. I can only relate my own thoughts and feelings on it, and seeing that portion made me uncomfortable with how it was dealt with. You can say it's ignorance of police procedures (and perhaps it is, as I stated, I am NOT a police officer in any way, shape or form). I am not anti-police. I've not really followed the case closely, and the video is probably my first real exposure to the case and what happened in it in any great detail. What part of this Did you interpret as being Rather than asking for an explanation?

Actually? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping Filmation used an early form of motion capture known as "rotoscoping" in order to produce He-Man and She-Ra. Filmation's facilities weren't that far from places where athletes, bodybuilders, and weightlifters liked to congregate (remember, this is in California), so what they'd do is whenever new characters were to be introduced they'd send some people out as talent scouts. These scouts would then hire some of these individuals and bring them back to the facilities. The individuals would then dress in costume, pose for reference photos, engage in a series of relative basic & common actions that Filmation expected the characters to engage in quite often, and went from there. So when you're watching the old 1980s Filmation cartoons, you are in fact essentially watching real people.